Among the curiosities about Benjamin Button:
- That it was news when it earned a predictable 13 nominations. Why? Because it is a lavish, technically-proficient studio production that marries one of the world's most popular actors with themes of love, loss and mortality. It was born to be Oscar's baby and would have had to have been a stunning flop -- on par with Australia or Miracle at St. Anna -- to have been snubbed. Remember, it is also the highest-grossing picture of the nominees.
- That it will be news when it goes home (mostly) empty-handed tonight. Why? Because, frankly, director David Fincher kneecapped Button's chances. How so? For all his cinematic acumen, he is not a shameless wringer of tears. And the film lacks the jokiness of its structural cousin Forrest Gump, the movie to which it is most closely compared. Interestingly, Button might have had a better chance at victory if it was less artful. Fact is, for all its sumptuousnessw, it is too methodical, too opaque and too dark for the same voters who have lauded riches onto Chicago and Crash. If they were any more out of touch -- or doomed to irrelevancy -- they would be running the auto sector.
- That anyone is bemoaning Benjamin Button's multiple nominations. This is a field of five films that includes The Reader, a movie nobody really saw and nobody who saw it really loved. Maybe next year the Academy will nominate a film nobody really made.
- That the mixed response Button has generated from some should be viewed as a flaw or weakness. Actually, isn't it more a strength? Isn't being liked about the same by everyone a sign you might be a tad mediocre? And doesn't everyone (myself included) like Slumdog Millionaire? Just asking.
