Not dramatic. It's just in my mind, being one of 5 films nominated is a LOT better than being one of 10. You say "potentially deserving" films. My position is that Nebraska, Philomena, Wolf of Wall Street, Captain Phillips, and American Hustle were not "potentially deserving" films, and I'd say the total of 0 statues for all five films backs that up. They may be fine films, with fine acting performances in them. But that doesn't make them Best Picture material.
Totally. In fact, much like Paul Newman, I think he'll win one for a more understated performance rather than the over-the-top, shout-at-the-top-of-your-lungs type.
Hollywood has shown time and time again they have a weak spot for movies about the oppressed and downtrodden. Twelve Years a Slave and Dallas Buyers Club were fantastic movies, but I don't think either deserved all of the awards they received. My best actor nod goes to Leo (although I'm really stoked for McConaughey), with Christian Bale coming in a close second. Although, my favorite leading actor role this year was Christian Bale in Out of the Furnace. As far as best supporting actor, I think that was easily Jonah Hill. Sorry Jared, but throwing a dress and some makeup on doesn't make an Oscar winning performance. Jonah Hill played one of the more memorable characters in recent movie history. Best film was easily Wolf, as was best adapted screenplay. Wolf was robbed, and Hollywood has shown that pulling on their heart strings garners far more votes than being daring. I'm fine with Marty not winning best Director, that isn't a nod they give to people more than once very often. I fully expected Leto and McConaughey to win going in, and it isn't a travesty that they did... however, I think Wolf is the most truly imaginative and entertaining moving to hit Hollywood since Pulp Fiction.
American Hustle won the golden globe. How often is that winner not even nominated? Additionally, if you have an actor/actress nominated along with your director/screenplay nominated, chances are you're one of the best pictures of the year. All the films mentioned above had that, and it wouldn't have been a stretch if they had won individual awards...and yet you say its a stretch for them to be nominated for best picture? Remember, the academy originally nominated 9+ films at the inception of the awards. They went back to that. Again, did not cheapen my perspective of any of the nominees which were all great movies.
I agree with you about Wolf, as Leo and Jonah were outstanding, but I think you're trivializing Dallas Buyers Club a bit too much. I see your point about the Academy tending to fall in love with the oppressed and a man who acts like a woman, but what Matthew and Leto accomplished in that movie was undeniable. Apples to Oranges really, but in no way do I think Leo deserved it over MM.
As for Cate Blanchett, that was more good natured ribbing among peers. She's got a caustic wit befitting of her talent. I doubt Bullock was offended.
It was a FAIL. Originally, she intended to have Merryl Streep take the photo after touting that it would break records if they both were in it. Ellen then asked everyone to join in, and then after a big group gathered, she asked Merryl repeatedly to take the photo but Ms. Streep wouldn't budge, so it just became an all-around actors (and Bobby Brown) "selfie." FAIL If you ask me.
I'm pretty sure she planned it exactly that way to get as many peeps in the picture as possible. Start slow, make it seem unplanned, then ask Julia, and slowly more...and others just in. I think Ellen knows a wee bit more how to get mega stars to volunteer to take a cheesy photo together, than you.
