Rants and Ramblings: random commentary about culture, media, politics, technology and whatnot.

bill wuz robbed

I didn't get to watch the Oscars last night because I was on my way back from New York (but I TiVo'ed it!). However, walking from the bus drop-off spot at McPherson Square to my car at GW's University Garage around midnight, I caught glimpses of the only award I really cared about through the windows of buildings I passed. A television screen in a darkened gym on 19th Street showed Nicole Kidman at the microphone, ready to announce the winner of the Best Actor Oscar. The TV over the bar at Lindy's Red Lion on I Street revealed the winner: Sean Penn.

And it made me sad.

Granted, I haven't seen Mystic River (and I hadn't really planned to), so I can't comment on the strength of Penn's performance. But I did see Lost in Translation, and I connected with the film and with Bill Murray's character so much that I was really rooting for Murray to win the trophy. The cynical, spiritually lost Bob Harris seemed nakedly real, a world-weary amalgam of Murray's movie roles and public persona. I can't really explain why, but this was a film where I had a surprisingly difficult time separating Murray's performance from my own perception of Murray the actor. To me, Murray wasn't just playing Bob Harris, he was playing himself to some degree (or, at least, what I think Murray is really "like").

Totally irrational, but there you have it.

Outside of Murray's Lost in Translation performance itself, I agree with conventional wisdom that Murray should have been nominated for Rushmore. And I agree that the man has become something of an institution, and it's surprising that Lost in Translation was only his first Oscar nomination. (Although, is it heretical of me to wonder just when Murray became the underappreciated elder statesman of comedy?)

But I'll say it again. Bill should have won.