The Red Circle

photo-Illustration by Ryan Brlecic

Why does Dave Karger have a job? He’s just written an article for Entertainment Weekly that not only consists of one sentence summarys of film, but dares to call itself an analysis of the Oscar Race. For those not in the know, The 82nd Academy Awards will feature an expanded selection of nominees in the Best Picture Category. Instead of the usual five nominees, the field has moved up to an almost obscene ten films. So I guess it’s rather fitting of EWs crack writing team to mention the 10 film field, and then promptly give us a rundown of… five films.

There is not a face and a palm large enough. I’ve included scans of the article here and here. Follow along if you dare.

This article is supposed to, I imagine, give some insight into how the Oscar Race will pan out this year. The problem is, aside from the complete lack of insight into anything, a vast majority of the films being mentioned and fawned over are films THAT NO ONE ANYWHERE HAS EVEN SEEN.

When you position Invictus as a Oscar frontrunner with the phrase “judging from the trailer” in the description, a problem happens. Why does this article exist? It’s more of a Winter Movie Preview than it is an Oscar rundown (Editor’s Note: We are aware that this piece ran as PART of a Holiday Movie Preview. This does not excuse it). From the flicks that actually get face-time in print, three of them are already released. Only another two have been making festival appearances where a journalist could make judgment calls on their quality and awards potential.

A vast majority of this is pure speculation. Speculation based on trailers. Why is this happening?

2009 has been a FANTASTIC year for film. There’s some legitimate awards-worthy flicks that actually came out in the summer and spring of this year. Is it too much to ask for some leg work and thought when an article has the world analysis above the byline? How about a comparative piece about the gems from earlier in the year stacking up against the loaded holiday season? How about a discussion dealing with… well… anything? How does a 3 x 4 grid with pictures and one sentence describing the film further anyone’s understanding? How about not putting Quentin Tarantino on your “longshots” list of Best Directors? How about not even considering Avatar as an Oscar movie? How about watching the movies you want to nominate for an Oscar? How about not making Tom Nix want to hurt himself.

Hell, maybe EW just had two pages to fill. Maybe the complete lack of any interesting commentary is just as well. It’s not like they have any loyalty to providing readers with any real opinions or insight. They’re simply there to provide me with an aneurysm while trying to deduce why anyone would pay anyone else to produce worthless, opinionless, spineless writing like this.

Star Trek is listed with the same likelihood of getting a Best Picture nod as Where The Wild Things Are. The Cohens the same likelihood of winning Best Director  for a pounding character study as James Cameron’s 20 minute sizzle reel for Avatar. Morgan Freeman’s ability to turn Nelson Mandela into gentle, caring, inspirational black man #56 overmatches Jeremy Renner’s career defining turn as a bomb technician sweating it out in Iraq.

I hope this upsets people as much as it upsets me. This is a largely opinion based entertainment mag that is as far away as possible from giving one that means a damn thing. We have so many flicks floating around this half of the year that were worth talking about that its such a shame to see such a huge missed opportunity from one of the best selling publications out there.

I should stop being surprised at EWeekly’s constant failing uphill. Their articles are by and large filler, their reviews are aimed at the lowest common denominator. Hell, as CHUD.com’s head honcho Nick Nunziata pointed out in his recent blog about the mistreatment of The Men Who Stare At Goats, they gave Terry Gilliams Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas a D Minus. It is now open for debate whether there is any good left in the world or not.

This magazine is both unacceptable and unnecessary. This magazine and all the others like it is why The Red Circle exists. I hope we have provided you with all of the things that you aren’t getting elsewhere. I hope you’ll continue to let us for years to come.

Tom Nix // 11.08.09

Share