Here’s the thing: I’m generally lousy at them, because I always overthink these things. So I suppose since everybody and his brother are saying No Country for Old Men is going to win, it probably is — and since everybody is saying there’s a backlash against Juno, I guess there is.
But here’s the rub: I talk to a lot of people who actually just go to the movies rather than write about them. And most of these people didn’t really like No Country. They thought there were wonderful scenes but found the last 15 minutes baffling in a particularly off-putting way. I haven’t met a single person who doesn’t love Juno. People who write about movies twist themselves into knots thinking about these matters so much they decide Juno is meretricious and the end of No Country doesn’t matter.
What I’m saying is, evidently it would be an upset if Juno won. But why? Would would a universally liked, enormously popular, and very affecting film be considered an underdog against a brilliantly made but bloody and unsatisfying existential thriller? There are only 6,000 Academy Awards voters. None of them is a critic.
Last year, when The Departed beat Little Miss Sunshine, it did so in large measure because people really loved The Departed – and it was a slightly bigger hit. Nobody really loves No Country for Old Men. Juno is the movie this year that knocked people for a loop, a happy loop.
So it just seems to me the smart money being on No Country is a result of overthink. Based on what we know about the Oscars, the only obvious choice is Juno, except for the fact that it’s a comedy. Which is a big except. All of this only goes to show that if Atonement — epic, romantic, with English accents — had been better, it would have walked away with the award.
Daniel Day Lewis will win for best actor. Nobody knows who will win Best Actress — although if Ellen Page takes it for Juno, that will be a serious indication that the movie is going to win the big one. And while everybody says Javier Bardem is a lock for supporting actor in No Country, supporting is where the surprises always happen. Nobody knows about supporting actress either, though it strikes me as weird that the Academy might give Cate Blanchett a second Oscar for impersonating a famous person (the first was Katharine Hepburn in The Aviator; this would be for being Bob Dylan in I’m Not There).
But I’ve never won an Oscar pool.
So nothing is changed. Good.
From the point of view of sensible policy, it is good. But, is anyone else beginning to get the feel we are about to get the President with the least integrity ever? Is there anything he says, anything, which can be trusted as what he really thinks, or really intends to do?
Mike,
Q1: Yes
Q2: No
Maybe Obama already imagines getting tired or even a little sick of those frightful daily threat assessment briefings so he proposes banning the tough intelligence gathering techniques in order to minimize the really scary stuff from actually being gathered to be included in the threat assessments in the first place. Smart to leave himself a little classified loophole “out” just in case something horrible happens and he actually has to start getting serious about the threats and, God forbid, even knowing what they are. (Sorry to be so cynical, but what can one do after such a cynical presidential campaign.)
NO waterboarding…… until you need to do it….
But I am sure the media will say that the Obama administration does it differently, in a more humane way…
Just remember this: Everything O! says comes with an expiration date.
In time we will learn the extent to which President Bush’s anti-terror policies prevented attacks on the homeland. The fact that we have not been attacked speaks for itself. We do not know, however, how close we have come to being attacked and were saved by President Bush’s dedication to protecting us. He, of course, has been vilified by the anti-America crowd and their accomplices in the Democrat party and the MSM for these efforts.
We can only hope and pray that Obama, when faced with the reality of the threats against us, will have the courage and intelligence to do WHATEVER it takes to keep us safe.
For anyone to think that aggressive interrogation is not justified in order to save thousands of American lives is an absolute moral moron.
It is a shame to think that those of us who question Obama’s integrity and dedication to the safety of this country will only be proved right at the cost of great tragedy. I hope we are wrong!
The Yoo Clause.
I never thought that the run up to this presidency would be so enjoyable, at least in a schadenfreudey, ironical sort of way.
More of the same failed policies of George Bush.
I’m glad of this reversal, but it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. If this were just about campaign rhetoric it would not be as bad, because everyone understands you campaign in poetry and govern in prose. But for Democrats who have contributed to an eight-year bout of Bush-bashing on these points to now quietly concede that it was good policy all along is an act of unforgivable cynicism, and demonstrates a willingness to put politics before security.
Let’s see…What was it Obama said about lipstick on a pig?
How about the CHENEY DOCTRINE. It sounds more authoratative.
#11 The Realist:
I agree, but there’s always part of me that’s relieved when I see evidence that Democrats aren’t really stupid enough to believe the things they say.
Unfortunately in combating terrorism coercive techniques such as waterboarding are the lesser of two evils. Waterboarding is very unpleasant. But being subject to unpleasantness is an occupational hazard of being a terrorist. This has never been an argument on the merits, but an argument based on throwing around a scary word, torture, on the presumption that people would run away from it. The world looks very different when you are no longer just a critic but are charged with the responsibility of actually governing.
Realist:
You are surprised? Welcome to reality.
The only thing that surprises me is the open admission that they will ignore their foolish policies when it is convenient to do so. I expected something more along the lines of: “You realize, of course, that in the event your operation is detected, the Secretary will disavow all knowledge of your actions.”
And the media wonder why they are losing audiences and circulation. Even Helen Keller would mark the difference in how the same essential policy is covered when it is Bush’s, and when it is proposed by Obama.
Sorry. Not impressed.
Obama is all spin, all the time.
Will he be willing to make the hard calls when he learns of terrorist threats? Maybe. But probably not. He will under-estimate the threats, knowing that, if he gives proper weight to the threats and undertakes action, he will be criticized if the threats do not materialize. And there is nothing worse than the wrath of the self-proclaimed guardians of our civil liberties. Shredding the Constitution, and all that, don’t you know.
Given his political self-preservation propensities, the concerns that his subjects — we, the people — have about our literal preservation will, I’m afraid, just have to be down-graded by the Man.
One further thought: Obama might be persuaded to promote waterboarding, if Nancy and Harry can convince him that there is some Democrat contributor out there somewhere who wants a grant to start up a waterboarding service. Then it will be justified as part of the economic stimulus. Tough decisions have to be made in these tough times.
Since Bush and Obama are both for waterboarding, what’s the difference? The headlines:
“Bush Tortures”
“Obama Ready to Ban Harsh Interrogations”
#9,
So much failures, in fact, that there have been no terrorist attacks against American interests in eight years. If that’s failure, I gladly accept it.
How about the “I’m THE ONE” clause?
There certainly is a rich irony. Obama’s “classifed loophole” would, in effect, become whathad in the first place when exactly what happened to some al Qaeda prisoners was not publicly known! Maybe there will also be a classified loophole for setting up a “secret prison” if one’s needed. And of course, extraordianry rendition will remain a tool to be used, er, in extraordinary cases. Finally the FISA court has taken the Dems off the hook on “domestic wiretapping” by giving them the green light with judicial schmaltz on top.
The big remaining question is whether Panetta will have any clue about how to run CIA. We haven’t yet heard anything further about that plan to keep Kappes and a bunch of other top guys on, which is a point to worry about.
http://thepurplecenter.blogspot.com/
There certainly is a rich irony. Obama’s “classifed loophole” would, in effect, become whathad in the first place when exactly what happened to some al Qaeda prisoners was not publicly known! Maybe there will also be a classified loophole for setting up a “secret prison” if one’s needed. And of course, extraordianry rendition will remain a tool to be used, er, in extraordinary cases. Finally the FISA court has taken the Dems off the hook on “domestic wiretapping” by giving them the green light with judicial schmaltz on top.
The big remaining question is whether Panetta will have any clue about how to run CIA. We haven’t yet heard anything further about that plan to keep Kappes and a bunch of other top guys on, which is a point to worry about.
http://thepurplecenter.blogspot.com/
There certainly is a rich irony. Obama’s “classifed loophole” would, in effect, become whathad in the first place when exactly what happened to some al Qaeda prisoners was not publicly known! Maybe there will also be a classified loophole for setting up a “secret prison” if one’s needed. And of course, extraordianry rendition will remain a tool to be used, er, in extraordinary cases. Finally the FISA court has taken the Dems off the hook on “domestic wiretapping” by giving them the green light with judicial schmaltz on top.
The big remaining question is whether Panetta will have any clue about how to run CIA. We haven’t yet heard anything further about that plan to keep Kappes and a bunch of other top guys on, which is a point to worry about.
http://thepurplecenter.blogspot.com/