Top 5 Tuesdays (T5T) Argues For Zodiac
This is my last Oscar post, I promise.
It occurred to me yesterday that Zodiac got blanked at this years Oscars and damn if that didn't make me angry. Of course by including it, the overall awards race is pretty grim, filled with Sweeney Todd's and Anton Chigurhs and the Zodiac killer, but that's not how we should look at it, right? We should look at it as what were the best pictures of the year. And I would argue that Zodiac would be/should be among them. So give me your Top 5 reasons Zodiac should have been included in this years Oscar race.
It occurred to me yesterday that Zodiac got blanked at this years Oscars and damn if that didn't make me angry. Of course by including it, the overall awards race is pretty grim, filled with Sweeney Todd's and Anton Chigurhs and the Zodiac killer, but that's not how we should look at it, right? We should look at it as what were the best pictures of the year. And I would argue that Zodiac would be/should be among them. So give me your Top 5 reasons Zodiac should have been included in this years Oscar race.
Here are mine.
1. David Fincher shows us his most mature direction yet.
2. Robert Downey's journey from flamboyant reporter to washed-up alcoholic is brilliant.
3. The writing of Jame's Vanderbilt and Robert Graysmith shows us that great storytelling does still exist.
4. The supporting cast of Mark Ruffalo, Jake Gyllenhaal, Chloe Sevigny, Brian Cox and John Carroll Lynch rivals the cast of No Country For Old Men.
5. Jason Reitman as best director nominee.
![[Valid Atom 1.0]](valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom 1.0 feed")
8 comments:
I don't understand the Ivan Reitman bit.
I will be seeing Zodiac in a few weeks so, I look forward to it even more now.
I'm guessing Piper meant "Jason Reitman," the director of Juno.
I agree that Zodiac was snubbed, even if I think it's a TAD overrated. It's still a great, great film, and have you seen the behind the scenes video about the visual effects in the film? My goodness, I was pulling for it to be nominated in THAT category!
Damn. Sorry guys. My bad. Meant. Jason Reitman. Shit.
Piper,
I loved ZODIAC, but a couple of your reasons make no sense as they are written.
1. Should we really be giving Oscar nominations because a director shows vast improvement?? Of course not. We give them to the ones who produced the best work, regardless of their past.
5. So, because the CAST was IMPRESSIVE, the film and/or the actors deserve noms?? Not at all. The noms should go to the best in each category, regardless of how they stack up against the casts of other films.
Ray,
It's a well directed film. I don't mean to suggest that he deserves it because he shows improvement, I'm just skinning the phrase "it was well directed" another way.
And yes, when you consider a movie as a best picture I think you need to weigh all aspects of the film. One of the reasons No Country For Old Men was considered a great film was because the entire cast all delivered great performances.
Thanks for remembering Zodiac. It was like "All The President's Men" with a serial killer.
I'd replace "Atonement" for "Zodiac". I might also replace "Juno" for "Into The Wild," except Penn took the death scene and milked it for 20 minutes.
I agree man...but I have a sneaky suspicion that Fincher has no real interest in golden statues. BUt you are right.
How to choose a suitable target in cable and the cabal online alz? You should compensate him by giving him some cabal alz, Normal monsters; you have to lure a handful of monsters with cabal gold so that switching between them can be easier. There are many benefits to guild in cabal money. When you buy cabal alz, it is not still deal high amounts of damage.
Post a Comment