The Best Picture

 

Tonight the Motion Picture Academy will present its awards for the 2025 films they choose to honor.  In truth, all the nominated films have received their honor; this is about the show, and I have to admit that I am a total sucker for it. Somehow, the drama of this entertainment vehicle that has a little entertainment (Conan O'Brien this year) and a lot of tension and time-wasting gets me emotionally involved.  I know, not everyone feels that way. 

Anyway, the scuttlebutt this year is focused on the award for Best Picture, which is deemed to be a battle between voters for Sinners and those for One Battle After Another (hereafter OBAA).  It's gotten serious lately with lots of invective thrown around by backers of one against the other.  It seems to boil down, among the litigants, to some questions about which is more cool, more hip, more woke.  OBAA is accused by Sinners-backers of cultural disrespect of blacks and, well, Sinners is, in part, what they say it is, a violent celebration of vampire culture. 

Sinners is more than that, and in fact is worthy of serious attention in many ways.  I abhor the vampire trope and have had more than enough of it, and I'm not going to make allowance for Sinners' attempt to humanize or celebrate it.  It's simply not part of actual human experience, and never will be. On the other hand, Sinners is drenched in the blues, which I can always handle, and in the reality of Depression Era South.  The acting performance as Smoke/Stack by Micheal B. Jordan in it is profound, Oscar-worthy to be sure, much different in its complexity than his supposed main opponents for Best Actor, the rogue table-tennis freak played by Timothee Chalamet or the burnt-out rebel freak played by Leonardo DiCaprio. Remember, we're supposed to be voting for the skill of the actor, not the fame of him, the unusual nature of the charactor, nor the incredible lengths to which Chalamet goes to perform a role.  Though Chalamet's is the kind of role that wins, at least in the old days. 

No, back to Best Picture--that award-upon-award can not be reduced to two films; ten are nominated, including some foreign ones, and even ones not in English..  Spreading the candidacy among so many worthy films will water down the numbers, so that voters are not all funneled into one camp or another.  The result, in the modern days, is that the award for Best Picture has become one that can be unpredictable, even so unanticipated that it was read incorrectly off the card once.  That uncertainty has made that particular award less anticlimactic (usually). along with its going to some extremely unusual recipients lately (Parasite, Moonlight, Childhood, Everything..you know the rest). 

My choice, and it is unambiguous, with due regard both for Sinners and OBAA, is Hamnet.  I will give credit to Adam Baidawi, in an article about the film that focused on its lead actor, Paul Mescal, that it is "a body blow of a film"*.  That understates it--it goes through the heart, deep into the soul, and pulls it out.  It is unquestionably "best", in the sense "more good than any other", because it is about being a better person, about love, in a way that those two leading movies fail to represent. It will make its viewers better, and thus the world. It is only accessible to anyone who has been a father, a son, a daughter, or especially, a mother, or any woman, not to mention fans of The Bard. It is not out of bounds to claim it to be at least on the same film-making level as the other two (maybe not box office, or special effects). In particular, lead actress Jessie Buckley, in an unforgettable series of careful, fetching nature and close-up shots, is considered by most to be a sure bet to win Best Actress.  Chloe Zhao, the director, has won an Oscar before (though that's not a positive), and she has worked magic with the story of Hamnet, which I can't wait to read.. 

I don't guess Chloe will win, and I will grieve for that, but we can only celebrate the successes of the eventual winner, who will be either Paul Thomas Anderson for OBAA (often nominated, never a winner) or Ryan Coogler for his incredibly creative realization of a bizarre, but in its own way,  grounded story. That Best Director winner usually lines up with the aforementioned overall winner.  Sinners is the favorite, because there is a strong historical correlation between nominations and winning (and Sinners has a record 16 of them).  But just remember also this:  there is no best picture--we're talking about art here.   

 

*Really an excellent article in GQ magazine--something I'd never see--that came to me out of the blue on my phone.  Mescal is a highly-trained and awarded actor who was superb in his role as "Will" but was not even nominated for Supporting Actor.  That is an extremely competitive category with, besides Mescal's, four "sure thing" kinds of performances:  both Benicio del Toro and Sean Penn for OBAA, Delroy Lindo for Sinners, and the unheralded possible winner (he won the Golden Globe) Stellan Skjarsgard (sp).  

Forza Italia!

 The sponsors of the World Baseball Clinic breathed a sigh of relief when the Italy team defeated Mexico in their final game of group play, though Italy had already qualified to go through.  

That result saved the USA team from being eliminated in the first round.  USA had already suffered embarrassment when they went down to that Italy team, 8-6.  DreamTeam 2.0 was in great danger, but fortune favored the team.  They'd better not take their eye off the ball again, you could say. 

The "Italian" hero of the team was Vincent Pasquantino, born Richmond, VA and first-baseman for the Kansas City Royals.  That's OK:  Vinnie wasn't going to be the USA 1B--that honor goes to the renowned Bryce Harper--but he got three homers in the game that got the USA through, and then voiced positive statements about his Italian teammates (a mixed bag) and his "patriotic" feelings. 

Japan is probably the favorite at this point, if the travel bug doesn't get them. I saw the bracket briefly, the USA team will play Canada next. 

College Hoops (Men's)

Gearing up for some formidable March Madness this year.  What I like is that there are at least six teams that have proven themselves repeatedly against the best competition, coming out ahead 80% of the time or more.* To name them in order:  Michigan, Florida (defending champion), Arizona, Duke, Houston, Connecticut, and Michigan State.  That was seven, but one should never sell Michigan St. short in the NCAA.  All of them except UConn are in the big four of basketball conferences (Big 10, Big 12, Big SEC, and Big ACC) that have absorbed the best programs nationally regardless of their traditional regional concentrations. +

Because they have proven themselves so many times in conference play, even on the road,  I would expect six of the above to make the last 16, 5 of the last 8, and both of the finalists.  These teams should be relatively immune to upset-itis. 

It's not like that beyond the top two or three seeds in each of the four regions.  The two teams I have long followed, Louisville and Kentucky, are both going to be middling seeds, ripe for mild first-round upsets. On the other hand, they have enough talent to make it through three wins to the "Elite Eight".

The brackets get announced Sunday after the last of the conference championships.  The conference tourneys this week are just a warmup for real thing that begins next week. Most of the teams on the air in the big four are going to be between teams whose positions in the tournament are assured and almost fixed already.  So, the coaches would just as soon the team have its bad game now, if there is one, and mostly stay away from injuries. 

That is, unless your team is "on the bubble" of making the field of 68, which is where my newer team, the University of New Mexico Lobos, currently lie.   In the predictive analysis of Saint Joe Lunardi, who does Bracketology throughout the season, New Mexico is currently one of the first four teams out, spots 69-72 if you will # They are not likely to move back into the at-large selections, if Lunardi is right, so they need to win their conference tournament, to be sure, or at least win a couple of games to make the final, to give them a chance, of making "the Big Dance". I'd say they are "under the bubble", and there's not much air there.  It's all so Big!

NBA 

Victor Wembanyama is the story of the league this year, and the networks are taking every opportunity to show him nationally.  He is 7-foot-4 with highly developed ball skills, both ball-handling and shooting. He's a good free-throw shooter, a good passer.  He looks a little like Ralph Sampson, if you remember him, but he has French poise and better shooting touch. Mostly, though, he's 7-foot-4 and able to block lesser players' shots without leaving his feet.  

Wemby missed quite a few games early in the season, but since he's been back, it's just like old times for the San Antonio Spurs, one of the most successful franchises over the last 30 years.  The Spurs announced their challenge to the reigning champions, the Oklahoma City Thunder, in the NBA Cup, which they won.  They have won the majority of the games against the Thunder, and thus would get the tiebreaker in seeding if the teams finished tied, which they currently are very close to doing.  

The Thunder started the season seemingly unbeatable until they ran into the Spurs in that game, then after a poor stretch  their star Shea Gilgeous-Alexander got injured, and they seem almost vulnerable.  Almost.  They are still the favorites.  SA-OKC is indicated for the Western Conference final, though there are several other serious contenders. 

The Eastern Conference is not at all like that, in that there are no clear favorites.  Maybe the Celtics (my preseason pick for the finals, contrary to most predictions), who now have their star Jayson Tatum back, with his teammate Jaylen Brown among the top candidates for Most Valuable Player for keeping them in the running until now.  After that, though, the Pistons, Knicks, Cavaliers, and now the Hornets and Heat all look like they could make some magic in the playoffs.   

FIFA World Cup 

There are still several berths yet to be finally determined in the tournament, to be held in June and July in the USA, Canada, and Mexico. These are among the second-place teams from the group competitions, so they get another chance, in the interests of fairness, in the case they were just unfortunate in their initial groupings. 

I'm not sure if that's the case for Italy--they finished second to a worthy Norway team, in a tough group--or just that they underperformed tremendously. At any rate, they are in a delicate spot.  They need to defeat--in single-game combat--Northern Ireland, and then the winner of Wales and Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It may sound easy, but success is not certain, and the repercussions if Gli Azzurri fail to qualify will be tremendous. 

(Start with Italy, end with Italy) 

 

 * That works out to winning all of them at home, and 60% on the road or in neutral sites.  A high bar, one that bodes well for the tourney.  

+ For the Big 10 (now 18 teams) - originally the upper Midwest, now coast to coast; For the Big 12 (originally the Big 8, now 16 teams) - originally the lower Midwest; or the SEC ("Southeastern Conference", originally 10 teams, now 16, the Southeast, yes, as far as the Ohio, but now including the far side of the Mississippi; and the Big ACC ("Atlantic Coast Conference", originally eight teams, now 18/17 with teams at least 1000 miles from it).  Connecticut is in the Big East, which has 11 teams, but half are newcoming refugees from lesser conferences in the Mideast.  

#That's not strictly accurate, in terms of the rank order of the teams.  There are 20-30 colleges that are in because of their conference tournament victories that wouldn't otherwise be there, so the at-large selections are something like the 30 or so runner-ups or worse.  The Bigs get as many as ten teams in, or even more.  

Obit Dept.

Jesse Jackson- I remember the '84 Democratic campaign, when he made his most serious run at the nomination. As usual, I backed the wrong horse, John Glenn, who had the resume (first US man to circle the earth in space, elected twice senator from Ohio) but not the campaigning chops. I was young, but I think my instinct that the idea of a Democratic hero for President is more valid than ever, and it was always good.  

As for Jesse, I never believed he would win, in the way I did believe in Barack Obama as a viable black aspirant to win the White House. I appreciated Jesse's arguments, his classic ministerial manner of speech, though.  In the end, it was between Mondale and Hart, both obvious losers to Reagan.  Mondale was the won who ended up winning the loss.  

There was a lot more to Jesse, though, than his political candidacy.  He was a public moral goad to our country, ever since the days of MLK's assassination.  So he gets a lot of credit for the progress that has been made, and his loss signifies the tragedy of this moment. *

Robert Duvall - The most professional American (US) actor you could ever find. Acted in countless films, sometimes starring, sometimes in minor roles.  Always filled the role admirably; it seemed that he was that person, which left his true nature and feelings hidden. Most memorably put his stamp forever on the role of "consigliere"--counselor at-large--in the Godfather films. 

Lee Hamilton - a role model in so many ways, he personified characteristics like humility, wisdom, integrity, in his decades in Congress and in public service.  He may not be well-remembered anymore; I must do a little to deal with that and give my thanks. 

I followed his career from his earliest days in Congress in the '60's--he represented a part of Indiana of farms and medium-sized towns, and including Columbus, where I had politically active relatives.  He was a moderate Democrat who managed to get elected, by large margins, time after time as the political needle in Indiana moved steadily to the right.  (When he left Congress, his seat went to Mike Pence.) The area prospered, so that may have helped his ability to stay in place, but his specialty was foreign affairs and national security.  He was chosen to co-write the official review of 9/11 and its causes, which was and remains authoritative. 

Sonny Jurgensen - There was a time when I was a fan of the Washington Redskins.  That was the time when Jurgensen was their.   quarterback.  He made their team exciting, and that was the team we would normally get on our local game telecast (CBS, Virginia TV stations).  After him came George Allen as coach and Billy Kilmer as quarterback, and I walked away from them and their patriotic pretensions.  I have not turned back. 

Bill Mazeroski - Just slightly before my time as a conscious baseball fan, Maz's 9th-inning homer won the 1960 World Series for the Pittsburgh Pirates in a riotous seventh game against the New York Yankees.  He was more renowned for his fielding than his hitting, but he did have that one forever-memorable bomb, and it defeated the Yankees.  I respected that enormously; the next year (my first as a conscious baseball fan), the Yankees resumed their position on top against the team I follow, the Reds (preseason forecast coming soon). 

Mickey Lolich - I can't say that much, but I have a clear memory of that 1968 season.  Denny McLain won 31 games during the regular season, an incredible feat that may never be approached, let alone matched or exceeded.  Lolich was the #2 starter for those Tigers, but it was he who won three World Series games against the Cardinals, and their stud pitcher, Bob Gibson, who bested McLain.  Lolich had a better career than McLain.  

 

*I procrastinated on this post to the degree that I am finishing it while Obama, Biden, Clinton, Rev. Al et al. are commemorating Jesse (and tying it in with today's Drumpfenreich situation) so much better than I could.  Glory to Jesse!