My Oscar Diary

My play by play account of tonight's Oscars, unedited for your amusement:

I never knew Hugh Jackman could sing and dance?  I guess he was famous on Broadway, but I just think of him as Wolverine.  Dancing doesn't suit the X-Man

Too much self-serving aggrandizement by the Academy, not enough time for the minor award winners to talk

Bad form showing shots of Brangelina while Jennifer Aniston is presenting.  Very bad form.

What was with the caveman skit with Ben Stiller before the cinematography award?  It is a major award - show some f-ing respect.

What was with the "Comedy" skit they did?  I don't think half the movies shown were comedies.  Maybe in the classic sense, in that nobody died, but come one - "Doubt?".

At a minimum, you should be able to pronounce the names of the people who are nominated for your category.  Shame on you James Franco and Seth Rogen.

Nice speech by Heath's family.  Thank goodness they didn't ding them with the music.

What was the music they were playing during costume design and art direction?  If that was the signal to speed up the presentation of the names, you failed miserably.  They had to talk over the music, slowing things down even more.

Can it Bill Maher.  You are fricking wanna be.  Your best role ever was in "DC Cab".  It has been downhill ever since then.  Zip it.  

Nice impromptu magic trick and speech by Man on Wire.

What is with Philip Seymour Hoffman's hat?  He ain't in Minnesota.  

I didn't know Kevin Kline won an Oscar for "A fish called Wanda".

I really like the retrospective on all the people who died in the last year.  I think that is my favorite part.

Jerry Lewis - I don't like him, but he gave a good acceptance speech.  A damn good speech.

Nobody seems to like my pick of Robert Downey Jr over Mickey Rourke for "Comeback Award winner".  Maybe I did miss the mark on that one.

Slumdog is rolling.  Unbelievable.  What happened to the Wrestler?  I said it before, Oscar likes happy movies.  Must be payback for last year's wins by "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood".

I am digging the all the Japanese acceptance speeches.  It is tough to pull of humor when you don't speak the language, but they are 2 for 2.

They screwed up my favorite part of the Awards - the "in memory" section on everyone who died in the last year.  What was with the fricking moving camera angles (got me nauseous).  Plus, the shot was so far away and moving, you couldn't see half the names.  And this was a big year for death - Paul Newman, Roy Scheider, Sydney Pollack, Ricardo Montalban, Issac Hayes, Charlton Heston - plus many, many others.  And why didn't they mention Heath Ledger?  He died in 2008?  Tip to the producers, pick a stationary angle and let us reflect.  Plus - clue to the audience, you applaud for people who died, you don't cheer (Yeah!  They're dead!!  Woo Hoo!!!).  Frickin morons.  

Too much self serving promotions by the Oscars, taking too much time away from acceptance speeches.

What is the deal with having more than two presenters on stage at a time.  It was good when they had Stephen Speilberg, George Lucas and Francis Ford Coppola present the Best Director award to Martin Scorsese, but that was an exception.  Guy had been nominated so many times, and he was the clear favorite.  Now, they will have multiple presenters just to kiss the @ss of whoever is hot right now.

What is with Sophia Loren?  Is she made of plastic?

Jeepers - now they are doing five presenters for Actors.  Oh great - DeNiro is talking about Penn's political activism.  Why don't you tell everybody about his support for Venezuela's Hugo Chaves?  Don't mix entertainment with politics.  

Sean Penn wins best line at the Oscars "I know I make it tough for you to like me."

What happened to "The Wrestler?"  Wow - no love for this movie?  I thought Mickey was a shoe in for Best Actor.

After many years of screwing up, the Academy finally gets it right:  Best Director-Best Picture-Editing went to the same movie.

Just being nominated is an honor!

It's time once again two of my favorite things in this world:  (1) The Academy Awards and (2) my chance to bitch about them.  Last year, SeaBass and I had so much fun coming up with new awards, I thought we should do it again this year ("...and the Oscar should go to...").

Sadly, he was not as into it as much as I was - somehow we got off to talking about how much of the stimulus bill funds that were going to Minnesota would be used in the recount lawsuit between Franken and Coleman (our guess was somewhere around half).  I think we did most of our best work last year and made the changes that we thought were necessary, but I still feel there is some work to do.  So with that, I give you my expanded list of Oscars for 2008:  

The "It" Girl Award:

Every year there seems to be one up and coming young actress which all the tabloids and media idolize.  It is the same pattern - the actress starts off as a relative unknown, has one or two good parts and her popularity expands exponentially, consuming everything in its path, feeding upon it self to the point where she can not be avoided.  Past winners would have included Julia Roberts and Renee Zellweger.  This year had a clear winner in my book:  Anne Hathaway.  This process started for her last year, and has steadily grown, unchecked.  

Just Shut the F-up Award:

This is slightly different from the "We won't ever award you anything again because you won't shut up" Award (given to Michael Moore - every year he will win it).  Instead of banning someone who likes to use the award stage to preach, this award is given to someone who uses his movies to preach his particular views, passing off fiction as fact.  It was a tough call, but this year the "Shut the f-up award" goes to Oliver Stone, narrowly edging out Bill "wanna-be" Maher.  His movies have moved from entertainment to becoming faux-documentaries.  The worst part is, I can't tell if he really believes his lies, or if he is just doing it for money; I'm not sure which is worse.  I shudder to think that the youth of America might actually learn their history lessons from watching his lies.    

The Controversy Award:

What would the Academy Awards be without a good controversy?  Well, it would be just like it is today.  The Academy tries to make this a feel good event, and hide any unpleasantries away from the public's view.  But still, they manage to come up again and again (Who could forget the the Best Director award in 2002. "Mr. Polanski will not be accepting his Best Director Oscar, as he would be arrested for statutory rape the moment he steps foot on American soil.")  This years controversial award winner goes to Heath Ledger.  If he wins the Best Supporting Actor award, there will be controversy on who will accept the award on his behalf (are they really going to make his daughter pick it up).  If he doesn't win, the Academy will be accused of not giving him the award to avoid this controversy.  Basically, no matter what happens, there will be controversy.

The Comeback Award:

This award is so simple and obvious, I can't remember why it didn't make the list last year.  The requirement is simple:  give an award to an actor that everyone thought was done and that there could be no way they could every act, much less be a box office draw, ever again.  But somehow, they make a comeback.  The clear winner this year goes to Mr. Robert Downey Jr.  Welcome back!

Best Comedic Support Award:

This award goes to someone who provides the best comedic assistance to a movie (which might have really sucked without it).  Ideally, the part is small, memorable, and unexpected.  John Candy deserves a lifetime achievement award in this category.  This years winner, goes to Tom Cruise for his work in "Tropic Thunder", narrowly edging out Robert Downey Jr.  Mr. Cruise won primarily because it was so unexpected and so out of character (I can't really think of anything he has done previously that was even remotely funny).  He was so good, I was actually willing to start paying to go see movies he stared in (like "Valykrie")

These are my suggestions for this year.  And yes, the George Clooney Award goes to George Clooney again this year for his work in, oh, lets say "Leatherheads".

Southdale Mall can bite me

So last night we went to the movies (saw "Taken" at Southdale. It wasn't bad. The daughter was annoying, but good besides that), and I spend a good 15 minutes looking for a parking spot. When going to the movies, I go for the first spot I can find. I am cool with walking; I want to get in and see the previews.

Anyway, I finally find a spot (a good one, too), but it happens to be next to a spot with this sign posted. I am not making this up: Southdale Mall in Edina has now added a new restriction for parking - you must have 4 shoppers to park here.

Before I start my rant, there are a few qualifications I would like to make. First, I understand and support handicapped parking. As someone who used a temporary pass  (after one of my ankle surgeries - i can't  remember which) it really helped.  It is a small accommodation, which vastly improves the quality of life for many of our fellow Americans and I fully support the program.  

I also don't have a problem with parking spots designated for expecting mothers. Although there is no legal reason for them, and the opportunity for abuse can be rampant, I can accept those spots based on the same quality of life argument. Minnesota parking lots can be very icy; I don't like the thought of 8 month pregnant women falling.

So with that covered, Soutdale Mall can f-ing bite me.  My money is as good as anybody else's.  You can take it or f-ing leave it.  Why do groups of 4 or more get higher priority?  Is it because they are going to spend more? Who is to say that a car of four is more likely to buy more then a car of one?I dropped quite a bit of change in your mall; in the last 15 months, I have bought a computer here, done the majority of my clothes shopping here and have seen countless movies here.  Is there something wrong with me or my money that makes me unwelcome?  Please explain, iceholes.  Single folks typically do not carpool in groups of four to the mall, so this was designed for families.  Families typically are more cautious in their spending that single folks, who have a greater percentage of disposable income to throw around.  I would be very curious as to how your retailers would react to enacting policies which discourage people who are willing (and able) to spend money.

I am also curious how they are going to patrol this asinine policy.  Are they go to have someone in the mall checking to see that the rules are being enforced?  Are they going to ticket, or boot, cars that don't have enough shoppers?  I would love to see the retailers reaction when they find out that one of their customers, who just spent several hundred in their store, got booted by Southdale because they illegally parked in one of these spots.  You can kiss that customer goodbye.  Maybe that is their next policy - parking spots only for people who buy stuff ("if you park here, you must spend $50 in the mall").

I think they should have parking for quick shoppers.  Profit is a function of two things: margin and turns.  Selling high margin items is only half the equation; the other half is the velocity and speed it goes out the door.  I think there should be priority parking for those of us who shop quickly.  We go in, we buy, we leave fast.  I think that should get a special spot, too.  And what about people who drive eco-friendly cars?  What does it say about your mall for you to encourage large, multi-passenger, SUV type gas hogs to your mall, over smaller, fuel efficient, or hybrid vehicles.  We should have Green spots too.  And what about the elderly?   Are you saying you don't want old folks at your mall, too?  What type of discriminatory policy is that?  Or what about families who only have one kid?  They are not welcome?  Sorry - you must procreate more in order to be welcome here.  Asinine.  Just asinine.  

Southdale is supposedly the first indoor mall in the world (according to "The Economist", Dec 19th, 2007).  They are the first mall that I know of that has enacted this policy.  I hope it will be the last.  Until they change the policy, they can go f-themselves.  I'm shopping elsewhere.  

The Jamesification of Jim

For some reason, I have undergone a name change here at work. I have gone from being called Jim to James. I don't know how this happened. I didn't ask for it, I didn't encourage it, but it is happening.

The only place at work where I have "asked" to be listed as James is in the Lotus Notes eMail system. When I joined, there was already a "Jim Miller", and a "Jim G. Miller" (my middle initial is "G"), but there was a "James G. Miller" available. So, for Lotus Notes, that is whom I became, and I have been apologizing for my parents lack of creativity every since.

Because that is how I am found in eMail, that is how my name is listed on my business card. Those are the only two places it is listed as James. But, whenever I give a card, or sign off on an email, I have always gone by Jim. I answer the phone as Jim. I introduce myself as Jim. The name tag on my office says Jim. It is well know, both in the division and the company that I go by Jim.

This all makes it very confusing as to why I am being called James.

The first person I can think of who called me this was my former Director. He did it more as a joke, I think. It was a mock-formality, that I think he was doing to me because, whenever he would ask me a question or interrupt me in a presentation, I always called him "sir" (Southern upbringing - it's ingrained). But then others started doing it. More and more folks. People who I have known for years have started calling me James. It is starting to bother me. Not so much the change in the name, but that this unwanted name change is being forced upon me.

The other day, I went to get my mail (and make sure my name tag was on the opposite side again - the glorious Revolution continues!). I found my name tag moved to the wrong side and my name tag changed to James. This worried me. There is little difference for someone to say "Jim" or "James"; in terms of effort, there is virtually no difference between the two. But for someone to actively go and change one of the official name tags for the official mail slots, that shows some serious commitment someone has to this conversion. I have to say, I am scared. Very scared.

Who knows what my name will be changed to next....