Did you know Saturdays have a 9am too?

I am now aware.

Ok, in the midst of catching up on my Football Free Agency ESPN Sportcenter updates (BTW – A certain prognosticator who called Ben Roethlisberger Despicable for a certain reason – well, Gina, your right) i am considering my picks for best supporting actor and actress.

Best supporting? Shouldn’t the best person in the movie be the star? Yes – generally. But If Mark Wahlberg is the best part of a film, I will never watch it. But it goes deeper then that – the best supporting help make the lead(s) look better by comparison. It is my feeling and belief that this is the film definition of chiaroscuro, giving the lead in the film additional depth and elements. To help those who didn’t take Comm 110 as a freshman at Fitchburg state – another shameless plug for my Alma Mater – chiaroscuro is contrast between light and dark, usually bold contrasts affecting a whole composition, typicized as depth through shading.

Man – that last line was pretty cool. And very applicable to the Best Supporting picks.

Since I have literally 10 to get through here, I am going to group together the ones I don’t think will win, and only focus on the top 5 total. Why? Because I am writing this, and your not – so I can do as I please.

Why shouldn’t Matt Damon win? Other then François Pienaar is 6″ taller, 60 pounds of muscle heavier and dominating in a sport that most Americans do not comprehend… well, thats reason enough there. What About Penelope Cruz? in A musical film full of an all-star casting – she did not get enough screentime to warrant a win. Both Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick in “Up in The Air” did nothing to really wow me. And Woody Harrelson showed as much dramatic range as any other character he has done, but wasn’t quite enough to move you emotionally.

So who is left?

Col. Landa – Christoph Waltz’s Character in “Inglourious Basterds”. I was in awe of him, his transitions character wise from Italian to French to German to English, all while having a strict, strong confidence, depth of character within a proper gentlemanly context of a Nazi Officer. Even after I learned he was from Vienna (making his German Accent authentic) and studied acting in New York (making him 100% fluent in English) I was still impressed.

The same can be said for my impression of the chameleon that is Stanley Tucci. Just go back and read his resume. Go. Now. Ok – how many times did you see a movie, Like Deconstructing Harry, or America’s Sweethearts and go – Wait? He was in that?! Oh Yea.. I didn’t recognize him! Thats part of the chameleon aspect of him – instead of blending into the background, he blends into the person on the page, and creates something so believable in the shadows that you feel it IS him. Don’t believe me? Go watch Julie & Julia again – and see if you can pick him out.

The comedienne that is Mo’Nique ranks head and shoulders above the rest of this group, in a weak year for female supporting nominations. In fact – I would have to go back to the 70th academy awards in 1998 to find a Supporting actress class that is as weak as I feel this one is (Judi Dench won for Shakespeare in Love – Totally deserving) and Mo’Nique for “Precious” takes the cake on this. Her haunting, troubled mother on welfare ranks the highest praise from me out of this group.

So – Who Wins?

MY PICK: Stanley Tucci
ACADEMY AWARD GOES TO: Christoph Waltz

MY PICK: Mo’Nique
ACADEMY AWARD GOES TO: Mo’Nique

I avoid Film/Musicals.

I avoid them like the plague – like watching one will infect my genitals with syphilitic boils and give me the voice of Donald Duck. If you want to watch a musical, watch a musical; with a little research and the glory of the internet, there is probably a playhouse within a hundred miles of you with a fine musical coming up (if not currently running!) that could probably use your money. If you want to watch a film, there are thousands of cinematic treasures out there to feast your eyes upon – again, a little research can go a long way.

Combine the two – I find it to be as awkward as combining DR Pepper and Mountain Dew. Yes, it can taste good if carefully done – try it if you don’t believe me – but if not perfect you will end up with a gut-wrenching cup of crap that, once started, you know you must finish. That is my feeling on film/musicals, and I group the following in together: Moulin Rouge, Chicago, Mama Mia, and Nine.

On paper – this film is KILLER. An aging Italian film director suffers from writers block. It is as strong a cast as you could EVER ask for – Daniel Day-Lewis, Marion Cotillard, Nicole Kidman, Penelope Cruz, Judi Dench, Kate Hudson, Sophia Loren, among others. Ok, the plot has promise, the cast is strong, the writing is good… then we hit the accents – everyone is supposed to be Italian in this, right…? DD Lewis pulled it off, but the rest – well they just distracted us by fading in and out… except when singing. Amazing that the characters kept dropping their accents, then, suddenly they sing and belt out these perfect accents. AMAZING!

That, by the way, was sarcasm.

Daniel Day Lewis can do little wrong. I have yet to see him in a role where I do not 100% believe he is what his character is. One of the greatest and most deserving male talents alive. Now, on the other hand, Penelope Cruz as a supporting – she does nothing extraordinary in this. With so many stars, her screen time is limited to the first half of the film, and 1 musical number. Was she the best supporting actress in the film…? Possibly. There are a ton though. I can only figure she has been nominated as this is a weak year for supporting actresses.

My advice, should you choose to sit down and watch this film: watch Daniel Day-Lewis and be awed. Look at the art direction, and look at the cinematography – both are beautiful. Watch the musical numbers and ponder this thought: would this break be better as a flash back, a day dream, a nightmare, or a mental break from reality? Because, in all honesty, they could have left the music at home (and about 20 million of the 80 million budget, which on a side note, this has only made 38 million worldwide, making this a huge flop) and made a much less frenetic, much easier to watch, much more dynamic film.

Bill Simmons (Page 2 writer for ESPN.com) equates different game situations to what he calls “Levels of Losing”, each one is a different level of loss that your own sports team goes through now and again. Specifically, there are (in his most recent update) 16 levels of loss, Ranging from the “Princeton Principle”, when your team is expected to lose the big game against a vastly more talented foe, all the way to “Stomach Punch” (The sudden gut punch situation that leave you breathless, in writhing pain with no idea what you do next) and The “Goose/Maverick Tailspin” (taken from Top Gun, it is when you are watching terrible things unfold with no power to stop them, yet you’re along for the ride because your a part of this en masse).

The reason I bring these are up is because I see a personal connection with the people Ryan Bingham (Played by George Clooney) meets with daily face one of those two inevitable ends. I have been there in both – One job I watched it for 2 weeks going down the drain and could have possibly stopped it by begging and pleading for my life, the other was as harsh as a straight shot of moonshine down a sober man’s throat – harsh, burning, gut wrenching to the core. Your job is your relationship, for better or worse – sometimes it leaves you, sometimes you leave it. Sometimes it is amicable; most of the time, someone is left in pain.

Clooney plays a Termination specialist (Jokingly referred to in the office as “Terminators”) flying around the country firing people from their jobs for companies he is contracted to do terminations for. He spends 300+ days a year on the road (he states that the previous year he spent only 43 days in his apartment). he keeps everything separated – the people he sees in a day he will never see again, never stays in the same city 2 nights in a row, is always on the move isolated from the rest of the world, even a stranger to his own family.

I sat here, enthralled by all this and moved by my own sense having been on the other side of this and wondered: Why is Clooney nominated for an academy award? I wondered this for exactly 45 minutes and 30 seconds. Finally I see – Clooney gives a speech about how having relationships with anyone can weigh you down. Funny and impassioned (in a presenter-esque way) my first instinct was this was George Clooney’s “Greed” Speech (Parallel between Michael Douglas in his Academy Award winning role as Gordon Gecko in 1987′s “Wall Street”)

It was as if my eyes had opened.

I felt like I looked at Clooney differently for the rest of the film. Finally, for the first time, I can see his solace, his vulnerability, his sorrow, his sweet and poignant side that I have been waiting for years to see. I have known he has has a role like this in him, and I simply cry out for “More!” – though his role didn’t change much begining to end, it is instead you change perceptions for the better.

Jason Reitman has a touch as a director not often seen in this day and age. Young, Still evolving, he is learning how to let the seen grow on his own – the screenplay is the seed, the talent is the water and fertilizer, he is simply the gardener, letting the flower bloom. He adds a soft touch and grace to this, allowing it to take you emotionally through the story, not just being wrapped up in the characters.

Vera Farmiga (as Alex Goran) and Anna Kendrick (as Natalie Keener) do well sharing not only the screen but occasionally stealing the spotlight from Clooney (not an easy task) but they are not academy worth in these roles. Though both strong and capable, neither is true an Oscar worthy performance.

Those of us (and I certainly hope I am not the only one) who can remember when Planes, Trains and Automobiles came out, remember the follies of travel well; this film takes up back with fond memories to that time. 23 years later, we finally have a film worth to live up to that. A finely woven story, with solid to superb performances with only the hint of touches needed by the director.

Even now, 1 hour after the film ended, I still have these swirling emotions inside, and a tear in my eye – I might need to watch it again just to try to figure out why.