So, "The King's Speech" won...

One of my favorite time of years is the Oscar season. I'm not sure why, but ever since I was young, the prospect of betting on movies has been a fun concept. However, I only feel like betting in something that legitimately recognizes movies. Okay, nothing legitimately does since it's majority opinion, but the idea that I'm supporting people I like and celebrating any victories is exciting.

This year was no exception. One of my favorites, Christian Bale FINALLY won a much overdue trophy for Best Supporting Actor for the Fighter (go.see.it.now.if.just.for.Bale.). His new doo and accent freaks me out, but damn, is that guy good. Also, congrats to Natalie Portman for the much deserved Best Lead Actress for Black Swan.

The night was hit or miss for the most part. I don't hurt myself over technical awards because, I couldn't tell you every aspect of foleys and sound mixing. I'd love to, but I need to get making movies before I take that more seriously. However, giving them to Inception felt much deserved, as I felt that's the aspect that made me like it the most.

I wasn't even upset when my favorite James Franco lost Best Lead Actor for 127 Hours to Colin Firth for the King's Speech. To me, it seemed plausible. True, I liked Franco better, but stammering is something I felt is hard to pull off (now I wish Bob Newhart got something for making a career out of it). Maybe he should have gotten it for what is probably his better A Single Man, but then again, Jeff Bridges got his honorary last year disguised as Best Lead for Crazy Heart.

I guess most of these can be seen as favoritism. That is essentially what made this year so exciting. I had seen majority of the pictures, including all ten Best Pictures. I knew them front to back and felt strongly about who should come out on top (and as much as I liked Inception, I was willing to admit it's lack of potential).

However, it still seemed that there were those few performances based on my favorites that drew me in. Nothing wrong with that. That's why they're nominated (supposedly). Portman. Franco. Bale. I wanted them all to win... though 2/3 ain't that bad.

However, what did I want for Best Picture? I have analyzed the nominations carefully and I felt out which I felt the most passion for. I decided on the Social Network, notably because of a documentary on the 2-Disc DVD that made me fall in love with the director David Fincher as well as a new appreciation for it.

Also, I was overly confident because... well, it was highly praised (something that took me awhile to get over, as I felt "Generation Defining" was a daft term that should be saved for the next decade). Also, I enjoyed the overlooked Andrew Garfield and the recognition of Adventureland's Jesse Eisenberg.

And while I argue Hans Zimmer deserved to win score, I still am finding it awkward to say the phrase "Academy Award Winner Trent Reznor." I mean, that guy was Nine Inch Nails. The guy behind "Pretty Hate Machine" and "The Downward Spiral." I guess composers are becoming less conventional (okay, I guess it should feel weird to say Johnny Greenwood's clout, too... but I'm not big on Radiohead). I think the score was okay, though my only issue involves the piece used during the rowing competition, which I felt was distracting.

In the end, it's more personal opinion than actual wins. I mean, generations will pick what movies they want to remember. I choose Network and Taxi Driver over Oscar winning Rocky, but it was still a decent competition. This year was no exception. Any year that gave us Black Swan, 127 Hours, and Inception will probably be a noodle scratcher from Wikipedia searchers doing their Oscar nominated homework.

But I was soo confident that the Social Network would win. True, it was always at neck with the King's Speech, but the edge was that what was going on in Fincher's movie was something different. It was fresh and the script was mind bogglingly coherent that they could speak gibberish and still sound profound.

This is where personal bias comes in. The King's Speech may have been a good movie, I'm not denying it there. I just don't care for the overall basis. For one, I am not thrilled about movies featuring stories about kings and royalty. Another, period pieces seem droll at times.

I saw the trailer before the Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest and I wasn't sold. I mean, Made in Dagenham was shown in the same group, and that was more sold on me. Stammering kings wasn't that appealing. If anything, it kept my brain linked with the Tropic Thunder rant about Simple Jack. Sure, he wasn't mental, but the disorder seemed like a "Hey, gimme an Oscar!" gimmick.

Okay, I dug older Helena Bonham Carter movies, but other than that, when I went to see it, I was just going to see if it was good. It was. Good. Actors Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush had great chemistry and the script seemed rather quirky. Still, the story didn't feel to me to be more than a king needing to give a speech to the public.

I don't know if I was expecting too much, but as time dragged on, preferences showed which I cared for. I personally didn't get the higher praise, but I thought it was okay. I just was bored with movies about royalty winning Oscars. It felt bogus and if you were either a king or a war vet, you seemed guaranteed some nomination.

I hate that, personally, but I'm not in the voting group. However, I'm glad they recognized Michelle Williams (Blue Valentine) and Jennifer Lawrence (Winter's Bone). Even if they lost, they seemed a little hip to acknowledge newer faces.

So, the night is going well, then the category for director comes up. My money is on Fincher, because the lock is usually Director-Best Picture. They were interchangeable on majority of occasions. When director Tom Hooper won for the King's Speech, doubt began filling me. I didn't feel the direction in Hooper's was all that noteworthy. I also assumed, though naively denied, that the King's Speech just won Best Picture 20 minutes before they said so.

Like most people, I hated being wrong, and I just held out hope. Oddly, my defense is to backlash the King's Speech and the general academy for bitching out. I still feel it's a safe choice that will not hold up to time. I mean, would anyone know How Green Was My Valley if it had lost to Citizen Kane? Safe choice.

Then, sure enough, it won.

I was furious. I don't know why. This wasn't the first year it's happened. I lost Up in the Air to the Hurt Locker and Milk to Slumdog Millionaire. To say, I just go with what I like. Oddly, neither of these upset me that much. I still love Up in the Air, but appreciate the Hurt Locker if just because it gave us exposure to Jeremy Renner's acting abilities (thank god Avatar lost).

However, my initial reaction was to say fuck you to the Academy. Sure, they voted Bale and Portman, but somehow that seemed irrelevant to the Best Picture.

It can be argued (heavily) that it had to do with politics. The voters were all older and tended to vote for mature, safe choices. It rubbed me the wrong way when it was discovered that James Franco and Anne Hathaway were hosting notably to appeal to a younger generation.

I guess they did their job. But for me, the King's Speech seems too safe and obvious. It was good enough to be nominated, but I don't feel good enough to win. I guess there's something inspirational about it that I am just missing. Maybe my boredom with royalty and war vets (though that's not all true since I saw Apocalypse Now and the Deer Hunter) is another reason.

Again, it's all preference. I didn't like many of the winners the last few years, but I learn to live with it. They don't rule my life. I just wish things went my way every now and then, notably at an event that I have held such respect for since I was a kid.

But when this all cools off, the King's Speech will be Best Picture winner and I will have started more conversations about the Social Network with my friends. To me, that's more interesting and shows the promise for the future of movies. I mean, Fincher is legendary by now and Andrew Garfield... watch out for that kid.

It's just like Rocky beating Taxi Driver, which is one of my all-time favorites. Consider it blasphemy. However, just be glad it was considered, back when it was 5 slots.

True, I am sure because of this logic, I am going to miss some other nominees from years I didn't research (and may feature more better than the winner choices), but at least they're in the books as being the five recognized.

The trick is to get the public to remember them for more than just Oscar winners with pretentious stories. There's a lot of politics, kids. Can't win them all. Jeff Bridges and Martin Scorsese will tell you that.

As for now, I congratulate those who did win, for it makes me very happy to know my support has met fruition. I hope there's another crop of good names coming next year, and until then, I'll continue to watch whatever it is that's good, bad, or just on.