Tuesday, March 08, 2005

GOODBYE, CHARLIE: TERESA WRIGHT 1918 - 2005


Teresa Wright, wonderful actress, Yankee fan

Actress Teresa Wright died Sunday of a heart attack at the age of 86. Wright's introduction to Hollywood was of the storybook variety. Samuel Goldwyn saw her on Broadway in 1940 and asked her to play Bette Davis’ daughter in William Wyler’s The Little Foxes, a role for which Wright was nominated for the Academy Award. The following year she was nominated again for her work as Lou Gehrig’s supportive wife in The Pride of the Yankees, directed by Sam Wood, and again in 1942 for a role that would bring her the Oscar itself, the love interest of Greer Garson’s war-bound son in Wyler’s Mrs. Miniver. Her three-year relationship with the Oscar would mark the first and, to date, only time an actor of either gender has been nominated for the first three films of their career.

She would go on to star in The Best Years of Our Lives (1946), again for Wyler, and The Men (1950; Fred Zinneman), which also marked the film debut of Marlon Brando. But her eschewing of the Hollywood game, and the contractual demands she insisted upon which prevented Goldwyn from promoting her career with glamour girl publicity photos and planted romantic rumors for gossip columnists, would eventually lead the producer to terminate her contract in 1948. She would soon move back to the stage, where she felt she could more productively pursue her craft rather than her image, and then back to smaller roles in TV and movie productions. Her final film performance would come in 1997, in Francis Ford Coppola’s adaptation of the John Grisham novel The Rainmaker.

And according to the New York Times, she became quite the baseball fan as well, albeit for the wrong team, though her allegiance and interest is certainly understandable:

“In 1998, Miss Wright was asked to throw the first pitch at a Yankees game in honor of the anniversary of Lou Gehrig's famous farewell speech to fans in 1939, the climax of Pride of the Yankees. She said it was her first game. But after years of ignoring baseball, she then became a fervent fan herself, raptly following the Yankees on television and at their stadium.

‘The whole thing is pure theater to me,’ she explained.”

But for me the Teresa Wright performance is found at the heart and soul of Alfred Hitchcock’s Shadow of a Doubt, ground zero for every postmodern “things are not what they seem” indictment of the undercurrent of evil in suburbia from Blue Velvet to American Beauty and well beyond. Wright’s portrayal of the guileless Charlie, whose family welcomes her beloved namesake Uncle Charlie (Joseph Cotten) for a visit, not knowing that he may be a serial murderer on the lam, is a beautifully modulated experience of violated innocence, of a girl who is forced to confront the world in all of its horrific implications in one fell, debilitating blow. And Hitchcock counters Wright’s glowing presence with a refreshingly unironic portrayal of small-town life (the film was cowritten by Thornton Wilder) that makes Uncle Charlie’s creepily pervasive influence seem all the more viral and evil for the kind of (now lost) communally receptive atmosphere that it threatens to destroy.

For all of her Oscar nominated performances, this is the role Teresa Wright seemed born to play. I’ll always remember her as Charlie.

Monday, March 07, 2005

NETFLIX, TAKE ME AWAY!

I’ve taken the plunge.

I’m now a Netflix man. And if my first experience browsing through their selection is any indication, those of you who know me are likely to be seeing a whole lot less of me from now on.

In just a breezy hour or so, I had no trouble lining up about 40 selections for my queue. The Netflix way is to allow you to build up a list of up to 500 titles you’d like to see and rank them from 1 to 500, 1 being “next on my list to rent,” and 500 being “I wanna see it, but it’s my lowest priority.” You get three at a time, and as soon as you send one (or two, or three) back, Netflix ships the next three from your queue, keeping you constantly engorged on a plentiful DVD smorgasbord. All for $17.99 a month, whether you rent three or 30. No late fees. No shipping. My God, says most everyone I know who has the service, it’s like a dream come true. And now I can be counted among the dreamers.

My first three movies ship out tomorrow. I should have them in my sweaty, pudgy hands by Wednesday. And there are so many movies to choose from-- I feel like I barely skimmed the surface of the Netflix catalog while browsing last night. And each click on something reminded me of another title, or linked me to a page that had three or four other great ideas listed on it. I feel like I’m rediscovering the feeling of moving from Lakeview, Oregon, a many-horse but just a one-cinema town, to the relatively bustling college environment of Eugene, where a whole new world of campus screenings and revival theaters and bookings of foreign language films on some of the city’s many movie screens were a regular occurrence. Only now I’ve got a major percentage of what’s available on DVD at my fingertips, an incredible opportunity to fill in the glaring holes in my cinematic education and experience. It may not be the same as being a too-young college freshman (freshly 17) getting in to have my eyes opened by In The Realm of the Senses or Seven Beauties at the old Waco Theater behind the Williams Bakery (and my dorm hall) on Franklin Boulevard, just off the University of Oregon campus. But at age 44 it is close, and I’ll take close at age 44.

There are some lurking out there who may make me live to regret ever positing this idea, but what I’d like to do is now is take advantage of the cinematic experiences of anyone out there reading Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule and solicit suggestions for titles to put on my queue. I’m open to any genre, any language or subject. If there are films you’d like me to see, I probably wanna see ‘em, and I’d really appreciate either the reminder that they exist at all or the heads-up about a title or director with which I’m not familiar. So please feel free to either drop off suggestions in the Comments section below, or fire off an e-mail.

And now, because I know you’re just dying to know, may I present the first 40 position holders on my Netflix queue. I will go so far as to admit that of the 40 titles listed I have seen only three. Embarrassment about the holes in my tattered and incomplete history of film-watching prevents me from revealing which three films on the following list I have seen, but I will not discourage guesses, as long as they are submitted in a good-natured way not intended to further expose me as a sniveling cinematic philistine. I cop to a certain degree of sniveling philistinism, but I’m hoping that liberal application of Netflix two to three times a week will help clear up that unpleasant condition. Here’s my current queue:

DEAD MAN Jim Jarmusch
SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW Kerry Conran
THE MISFITS John Huston
THE TREASURE OF THE SIERRA MADRE John Huston
ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13 John Carpenter
ICHI THE KILLER Takashi Miike
IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE Wong Kar-Wai
COMPANEROS! Sergio Corbucci
MASTER OF THE FLYING GUILLOTINE Yu Wang
ROAD HOUSE Rowdy Herrington
BRANDED TO KILL Seijun Suzuki
THE CRIMSON PIRATE Robert Siodmak
THE FAR COUNTRY Anthony Mann
THE BIG COUNTRY William Wyler
BEND OF THE RIVER Anthony Mann
FLESH + BLOOD Paul Verhoeven
TIME AND TIDE Tsui Hark
DEAD OR ALIVE Takashi Miike
RETURN OF A MAN CALLED HORSE Irwin Kershner
FASTPITCH Jeremy Spear & Juliet Weber
24 (Season One)
DEADWOOD (Season One)
TANNER ON TANNER Robert Altman
KANSAS CITY Robert Altman
OUTFOXED—MURDOCH’S WAR ON JOURNALISM Robert Greenwald
TO BE AND TO HAVE Nicolas Philibert
THE SON Jean-Pierre Dardenne & Luc Dardenne
FAT GIRL Catherine Breillat
I’M NOT SCARED Gabriele Salvatores
MALENA Guiseppe Tornatore
ALL ABOUT LILY CHOU-CHOU Shunji Iwai
DR. AKAGI Shohei Imamura
THE PORNOGRAPHERS Shohei Imamura
FLOATING WEEDS Yasujiro Ozu
THE DISCREET CHARM OF THE BOURGEOISIE Luis Bunuel
SULLIVAN’S TRAVELS Preston Sturges
Z Costa-Gavras
LA GRAND BOUFFE Marco Ferreri
MABOROSI Hirokazu Kore-eda
Z CHANNEL: A MAGNIFICENT OBSESSION Alexandra Cassavetes

Let the overstimulation begin!

Sunday, March 06, 2005

HAPPY FIFTH BIRTHDAY, EMMA-CHAN


Our oldest, Emma, turned five years old today.

Seven years ago we'd have thought such a thing unimaginable.

And now we can't remember what life was like without her.

Thursday, March 03, 2005

OUT OF THE GATE AT VERO BEACH


Dodgers beat the Marlins 4-2 in Grapefruit League play Wednesday.

Spring training. Wise men know not to get too excited too early.

So I'll just be glad that Ricky Ledee hit a home run...

Wednesday, March 02, 2005

"GOODBYE, DRAGON INN" AND THE GHOSTS OF CINEMA



Shadows and Light in a Haunted Palace

Sometimes events just magically fall in place…

I normally don’t like to patronize the big video chains if I can help it, but my neighborhood Blockbuster has suddenly stocked five or six non-mainstream titles that even my relatively adventurous Mom and Pop video store doesn’t carry. So I felt somewhat justified last week when I decided to pick up a two-day rental that I knew I wouldn’t be able to see for at least three days and test Blockbuster’s new “end of all late fees” policy. The gist of it is that you’re given a week’s grace period after the original return date has passed. Once that grace-period week has passed and you still haven’t returned the rental, your credit card is magically charged for the full purchase price of the DVD. At that point, you can just say “Great! I loved the movie! I’ll keep it!” or return it to the store, at which point Blockbuster credits the card on your account, less a $1.25 “processing fee.”

So it was that, six full days after it was officially due back to the store, I found myself finally able to sit down last Sunday afternoon and watch Ming-Liang Tsai’s Goodbye, Dragon Inn. Around 1:30pm I had gotten my youngest daughter down for a nap, and my oldest agreed to lay down in bed and rest as well, in preparation for the friends we had coming over to watch the big Oscar telecast later that evening. I had finished most of the house chores I needed to do in order to make the house look presentable to those who aren’t used to the kind of high-density clutter we scurry around in day after day (parents of toddlers will no doubt understand). Patty had gone out shopping, and I found myself in a quiet house with about two hours to kill before doing one last load of dishes. I suspected it might be the perfect afternoon to experience Tsai’s meditative film, one I had heard so much about in year-end top ten lists from film critics who have much more access to relatively obscure foreign films, and much more professionally funded time in which to take advantage of that access, than I do.

But I couldn’t have guessed just how perfect. Goodbye, Dragon Inn takes place in a grand old Chinese cinema on the night of its final performance before being permanently shut down. There is a torrential downpour happening outside, perhaps one reason (but not the main reason) why there are so few patrons inside. But there are patrons inside— among them, a Japanese tourist who stumbles in out of the rain looking more for shelter than entertainment; an old man and his grandson, the teacher giving his young student a lesson in the power of movies; a woman slowly, methodically chewing on peanuts as she gazes, mesmerized, or perhaps bored, at the screen; and another man who seems drawn to the images in the film unfolding before him in a much more personal way. These few filmgoers are dwarfed by the cavernous auditorium and the multitude of empty seats surrounding them, and the film’s sound, with no significant amount of bodies to soak it up, rattles and echoes off the bare walls, taking on a ghostly quality, as if it was being projected from another dimension.

And in a way it is. The film on screen is the classic martial arts drama Dragon Inn (1966), directed by King Hu (A Taste of Zen) and starring, among others, Tsao Jian and Shih Chun. We’re never told why this 39-year-old film is being shown as this cinema’s swan song. But the sights and sounds of the blistering, razor-sharp action scenes of Dragon Inn contrast with the emptiness of the theater and the stasis of the deliberately drawn-out takes in Tsai’s film to metaphorically illuminate the chasm between the modern-day audience and a film whose images of reflected light and meaningful shadows cry out and attempt to connect that audience to the past, to its reality, a reality frozen and unchanging on celluloid.

Tsai’s design is to create an eerie poetry of stillness from which the meaning of associative memory can well up and inform the apparent emptiness of what it is he shows us in his frames. Many of the film’s takes last two, three, four minutes, and document events that are certainly, on a cosmic scale, of a trivial or routine nature, in real time. The woman in the box-office, ready to sell tickets to customers who never come in, sits and observes the empty lobby while preparing a dumpling in a tiny electric pot. When she finishes making her food, she slices off a piece to share with the projectionist. It’s only when she emerges from the box-office to deliver the dumpling that we realize that she is handicapped-- one leg is shorter than the other-- and Tsai’s camera never looks away from her slow, difficult journey from the lobby downstairs, outside and back in through a door on the second floor, to the projection booth. She discovers the projectionist is away from his station, leaves the dumpling, and begins a long, arduous tour around the inside of the cinema, making final preparations for the final closing of its doors.

There are other long sequences in which, on the surface, very literally nothing seems to be happening— Tsai allows us to become absorbed in shots of the empty auditorium, of the woman methodically eating peanuts, of a man weeping at a martial arts drama that was never intended to provoke such emotions. Through such intimacy Tsai evokes a longing for the sounds and smells found only in cinemas, the touch of fabric of the cheaply upholstered seats, the chill in the air, the reverberating acoustics, the communal experience, even when that community is comprised only of five or six people, a form of experiencing art and entertainment that he quite literally shows us as passing away before our eyes. And he does so without resorting to the sentimentality that one might expect from a director depicting the ghostly evaporation of a beloved cathedral, a cathedral less ornate than impassioned and possessed by the reverberating sounds and images of all the films ever reflected by its silver screen.

There are ghosts within its walls, of light and celluloid, but also of flesh. And after those ghosts have passed through the cinema’s doors for the last time, they take with them the memory of seeing Dragon Inn's images projected here once again, as well as the memories of being those images in another place and time. Ming-Liang Tsai’s Goodbye, Dragon Inn comes to its quiet, uneventful close in the hours after those doors shut. There is no conclusion, no narrative wrap-up. Instead, the film drifts away, and we’re left to remember and reconstruct the cathedrals of our own moviegoing past, to ruminate on their meaning, to welcome our own ghosts back into our memories, to contemplate the changing experience of the movies, indeed, to contemplate the difference between Dragon Inn and Goodbye, Dragon Inn, and the chasm between a celluloid past experienced collectively and a digitized present that is more often, and often more satisfactorily, experienced alone.

Color bars. I shut off the TV and made my way to the kitchen. Dishes still had to be done before the Oscar show started. Imagining the upcoming excesses of that big back-patting session cast the evocative poetry of Goodbye, Dragon Inn and its unique embracing of cinema (and cinema) history in even more potent carbon-arc illumination. Here is a movie that somberly elucidates the art of film, and the art of experiencing a film in the kind of environment that is fast becoming enshrouded in the ghostly mists of the past. And I saw it on a DVD exhibited on the big screen TV in my living room. Later I would watch the royalty of Hollywood on that same big screen as they filed into a grand new theater that will itself likely never be used for the presentation of a motion picture, all to coronate Million Dollar Baby as the year’s best, and many of those who considered voting for it likely did so based on an industry screener DVD they watched in their own home, rather than using their Academy passes to see the film on a big theatrical screen. Goodbye, Dragon Inn understands the power of a place, a temple devoted to the worship of a multitude of gods, which cannot be replaced by convenience and cheap technology. For those who hold the experience of such places as important, as continually relevant, the movie extends beyond nostalgia, beyond a flight of fantasy, or of depressive reality. It inexorably finds a path directly to our core of being, where cinema connects most directly with those who would be rendered rapt with possibility as we face the screen, light playing over our faces, sound echoing and caressing and overwhelming our ears, immobile and inexpressive to the outside world, but churning with all the connections that the light and sound is making on the inside, an interior which, when it all comes together and the lights go down, is as big and welcoming as any grand old movie palace.

Tuesday, March 01, 2005

DODGER THOUGHTS' JON WEISMAN ON "THE MISFITS"


I started this blog site with the intention of writing about movies, baseball, baseball movies, and the ways the two fields of interest can unexpectedly intersect. But up to this point, though I've written plenty about film, I haven't devoted a whole lot of space to baseball, primarily because my enthusiasm for the sport far outstrips my knowledge of its intricacies and history and my ability to write eloquently and intelligently about it. And I've yet to visit and explore in print that special connection that binds baseball to some of the most important events, people and works of art in my life.

So I was really pleased when I checked in on Jon Weisman's Dodger Thoughts site this morning and found this well-written and thoughtful piece on the 1961 John Huston film The Misfits, a film written by the late Arthur Miller starring Marilyn Monroe, Clark Gable and Montgomery Clift. Some might wonder why, beyond his general enthusiasm and appreciation for it, the editor of Dodger Thoughts would give over so much space to an article about a film apparently unrelated to baseball or the Dodgers (he cites The Misfits as his favorite film). But, as Jon wrote to me in an e-mail this morning, "The Misfits is all about the human condition, and my love of baseball is secretly all about my human condition, so even though baseball is nowhere in that movie, I see a thread."

Jon weaves that thread eloquently in his article today. I intend to take it home and read it again tonight, when I can kick off my shoes, experience it (and reimagine the film) all over, and be inspired by some good writing. Enjoy.

2004 OSCAR RECAP: The Good, the Bad and the Beautiful


Well, wasn't that a kick in the head?

The 77th Annual Academy Awards are in the books-- the mighty triumvirate of Eastwood, Swank and Freeman emerged victorious, despite the best efforts of Michael Medved and his goofy pals; The Incredibles snuck away with two statues, not just one; producer Gilbert Cates' attempts to corral the natural ebullience of the night's honorees were mocked and denigrated by several people appearing onstage, mostly memorably Adapted Screenplay winner Charlie Kaufman, who was rattled by the countdown clock placed in the winner's sight line and denounced it as "intimidating"; Sideways was not entirely denied, taking home Original Screenplay honors, nor was The Aviator, which dominated the technical categories, even allowing for Ray's "surprise" win in the Best Sound category.

But once again Martin Scorsese was not included in the glories of Oscar, except within the acceptance speeches of the honored technicians who helped create his film. He must now face the realization that he is the Academy Awards' very own Susan Lucci. Unlike the soap queen, however, who broke her losing streak at 19 Daytime Emmy nominations, he is unlikely to live long enough to make 14 more films, let alone be nominated another 14 times in order to get the gold on this masochistic, long-term plan. Indeed, if the Academy cannot find it in their hearts to hand him the Best Director award for a film like The Aviator, which is practically tailor-made to suit Oscar's tastes in epic stories filled with opulence, production values, bold acting and attempts to deal with historical figures, then Scorsese ought to stop pursuing the golden carrot as rabidly as he has with his last two movies and concede that the most likely avenue for his being awarded his very own Oscar is the lifetime achievement route most recently and enthusiastically traveled by Sidney Lumet. Speaking of Lumet, critic David Edelstein, wrapping up Oscar observations for Slate online, summed up the connections between the evening's three big directors best:

"It occurred to me that whatever his lefty New York politics, (Lumet) now had more in common with Clint Eastwood than with someone who might have been his natural heir, Martin Scorsese. Once upon a time, Scorsese took his camera into the streets. And even though his technique always bordered on Expressionism, he thrived on real locations and on actors who were clearly digging into themselves. Perhaps he needs to forget that he's a virtuoso, pick up a little Lumet, and go back to that original place."

Or, as my pal Cruzbomb wondered in his caustic piece on Oscar enthusiasm and the lack thereof, why would a director of Scorsese's caliber and originality care to so desperately seek admission to a club that has bestowed its highest honor upon the likes of Ron Howard, Mel Gibson and Kevin Costner?

The fact of the matter is, as Edelstein alluded, Martin Scorsese doesn't really make "Martin Scorsese" movies anymore-- Casino (1995) was an entertaining, if relatively hollow and overwrought attempt to revisit the milieu of GoodFellas (itself more hollow and overwrought than its reputation suggests) in a different context; 1999's Bringing Out the Dead was a paralyzing, flat-out unwatchable attempt to rejigger the existential doom of Taxi Driver, with mawkish undertones and uselessly hyperbolic style replacing the chilling first-person isolation that informed every word of Paul Schrader's 1976 screenplay (Schrader also wrote the screenplay for Bringing Out the Dead, adapting Joe Connelly's novel, and he feels like he's repeating himself too); and Gangs of New York was a misguided attempt, not without its own commendable qualities, to personalize, or Scorsesefy, if you will, a bloody swatch of New York City history, in which the director's own grotesque and grandiose tendencies ended up smothering his natural abilities as a storyteller. Movies like A Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese Through American Movies (1995), Kundun (1997) and Mio viaggio in Italia (My Voyage to Italy) (1999) are much more recognizably Scorsese movies in their themes and obsessions, but they're not the kind of movies that will launch the director onto the stage at the Kodak Theater. Whether Scorsese will continue the pursuit of the Oscar is an unanswerable question. But his next movie, an announced remake of the Chinese police trilogy Infernal Affairs, starring Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson and Mark Wahlberg, doesn't look to be a move back toward a more inexpensive, intimately scaled canvas.

As for the Oscar show itself, it seemed to me, despite the efforts of journalists like Variety's Brian Lowry to put a predictably positive spin on it, to be near disastrous. The decision to gather the technical nominees together onstage behind the award presenter, with the winner emerging from the pack and walking toward the podium, didn't result in too much crushing embarrassment for the viewer, but it sure looked like some of the losers-- I'm sorry, some of those who were not honored wanted to be anywhere but on camera directly behind the winner, all nervousness and disappointment helplessly on display. Fittingly, they were hustled off the stage like Squeaky Fromme getting manhandled by Secret Service agents once their names were not announced. And lowly nominees in the makeup and short film categories weren't even allowed the dignity of taking the stage. In a move that was perhaps designed to kiss up to one of the event's most prominent attendees, these presentations, done mid-auditorium, the presenter, nominees and eventual winner with their backs toward most of the audience in the theater, lent the affair the quality of a very expensive installment of Oprah. Maybe Cates' thinking was that if the idea panned out well this year, they could talk the Richest Woman Alive into hosting next year's awards entirely in this comforting and inviting format that is most familiar to her.

(And what about those empty seats visible directly behind Cate Blanchett during the presentation of the Best Makeup award? Some wayward seat-filler, out grabbing a smoke at the time, hoping to run into Charlize Theron in the lobby, is undoubtedly paying dearly at this very moment for this ghastly transgression.)

How Cates and the Academy can ignore the obvious elitism and drawing of class lines that this sort of marginalization of "below the line" talent represents is beyond me. I only hope that he and his whole brain trust are raked over the coals for senselessly straitjacketing deserving nominees and their big opportunity to bask in a little of the kind of glory that stars like Tom Cruise and Gwenyth Paltrow take for granted. But, as Edelstein observed, instead he'll probably be toasted and lifted to the mountaintops for shaving 15 minutes off the show, and Lowry's glowing Variety review may be the first indication that Edelstein is right. (Okay, that's the last prop Mr. Edelstein is getting from me; you can check out his acidly funny observations on the show for yourself right here.)

By the way, the show did clock in 15 minutes shorter than usual. That's right, 15 minutes-- the difference, in ABC's and Cates' eyes, between stultifying boredom and breezily paced exuberance, perhaps? Maybe. The reality ended up being a race to the microphone whenever multiple winners were announced. By the time the first honoree finished speaking there was only time for a couple of syllables from the second before that familiar eruption from the orchestra pit signaled their unceremonious abduction by a force of mysterious, sinuous, very tall and well-dressed women presumably hustling them off to the press room. That's the presumption, anyway. But seriously, has anyone heard from the special effects team that won for Spider-Man 2 since their attempt to shout down those overwhelming musical cues last night?

Chris Rock looked genuinely flabbergasted at the kind of rude stubbing-out of acceptance speeches that became routine as the night wore on, and his joke about Oscars being handed out next year at a drive-thru-- "Get your Oscar and a McFlurry and just keep on goin'!"-- was a highlight of his raucously funny and relatively fearless commentary as this year's Oscar host. His hilarious, and good-natured, skewering of the ubiquity of actors like Colin Farrell and Jude Law (which itself inspired a sober retort from presenter Sean Penn, whose sense of humor seems to have been relegated to the past along with Jeff Spicoli) was like a spiky tonic, as was his intro to Halle Berry (the "star of the eagerly awaited Catwoman 2" was visibly not amused). And the taped interview segment in which patrons of the Magic Johnson Theaters were quizzed by Rock on their cinematic preferences was five minutes of pure Letterman-style genius (in the bit, Alien vs. Predator and The Chronicles of Riddick are held up for much praise, to Rock's very entertaining amusement, by star-struck popcorn munchers who haven't seen Sideways and wouldn't know Vera Drake from Shinola, and at one point a strange man who looks a lot like Albert Brooks shows up to extol White Chicks as "the best movie of 2004, bar none!"). Rock was just caustic enough, particularly about the new wrinkles in Oscar's format, to make me wonder if he would be asked back, or whether he'd even want the gig again (my guess: no). But if the ratings are up in any significant way, you can bet Scorsese's upcoming lifetime achievement award that Cates and the other Academy ratings whores will suddenly care a whole lot less about getting publicly tweaked by their bitterly funny host a second time.

Some other highlights of the evening:

Joan Rivers on the red carpet asking Imelda Staunton if the actress had met the character she played in Vera Drake, "or is she dead now?" The obviously embarrassed Staunton was forced to point out to Rivers that Vera Drake was, in fact, a fictional creation.

Jamie Foxx's emotional evocation of his dead grandmother, who he claims still speaks with him in dreams-- "I can't wait to go to sleep tonight, 'cause we got a lot to talk about."

Adam Sandler arriving onstage without copresenter Catherine Zeta Jones, for whom Rock ends up as a last-minute substitute. It was a joke-- right?-- and a pretty sly commentary on badly scripted stage banter as well.

Thelma Schoonmaker offering tribute to her director: "You think like an editor when you shoot."

Best Song winner Jorge Drexler, passed over by Cates to perform his own composition in favor of Antonio Banderas' Broadway-scaled version, getting the last laugh by singing an a cappella verse of the song in accepting the award.

Hilary Swank: "Mr. Eastwood, you are my mo cushla."

Most Beautiful Women of the Red Carpet (in alphabetical order): Sandra Oh, Sophie Okenedo and Kate Winslet. For those of you with a penchant for acronyms, that’s OOW! (Close, but no cigar, huh? If she’d only been Kate Hinslet…!)

An errant shot of the audience during the presentation of the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award revealed Louis Gossett Jr., head cocked back and visibly fast asleep in his plush Kodak Theater seat.

Charlie Kaufman being encouraged to take his time, in defiance of Cates' 30-second time clock: "I don't wanna take my time. I wanna get off the stage."

Those "four presenters," Penelope Cruz and Salma Hayek, who took the stage together to dispel suspicions in some quarters that they were actually the same person. I closed my eyes, listened, and became convinced that the same technology that allowed The Incredibles' Edna Mode to share the stage with Pierce Brosnan had been employed to split one of these lovely, English-mangling Latinas (but which one?!) in two, thus doubling Chris Rock's pleasure.

And, of course, the lowlights:

Beyonce is undeniably beautiful, but three songs was way too much Beyonce, especially when it was clear that, during her phonetic French number and the Andrew Lloyd Webber atrocity, she had no idea what to do with her body when she wasn't singing. The dull inspirational ballad “Believe” from The Polar Express was more her speed, unfortunately, and she undulated appropriately while dueting with Josh Groban, but ultimately the song was no less crappy for it. Instead of scraping the bottom of the barrel in order to come up with five nominees, can’t this category just be scrapped altogether, as the dearth of worthy candidates dictates? How’s that for a time-saving measure, Mr. Cates?

Drew Barrymore looking as though she was channeling Cesar Romero.

Johnny Depp’s bizarre Waiters of the Caribbean couture.

The director, Louis Horvitz, defining the evening along racial lines at every opportunity. Chris Rock makes a crack about a black celebrity— Quick! Where’s Oprah? Where’s Jamie? Where’s P. Diddy? They'll be cracking up, for sure! The Sea Inside wins Best Foreign Film— Quick! Where’s Antonio Banderas? Where’s Penelope Cruz? Where the hell is Javier Bardem?! And how did Horvitz resist the temptation to repeatedly cut to Sandra Oh during Yo-Yo Ma’s solo performance accompanying the annual necrology?

Separated at birth: Counting Crows Adam Duritz and Sideshow Bob.

And, finally, the return of a hallowed tradition of Academy Awards broadcasts, one that hasn’t been paid much tribute since its halcyon days in the 1970s: the untimely and very loud dropping of large objects backstage, creating ungodly crashing sounds sure to unsettle even the most centered of AC-tors, such as “comedy superstar” Jeremy Irons. Backstage personnel bounding out from behind curtains, during the live broadcast, to supply the host with a missing microphone-- another treasured subcategory in this tradition that also was on display Sunday night. Thank you again, Mr. Cates, for not keeping those stage hands on as tight a leash as the artists you have gathered together to ostensibly honor.

And for those interested, my name ends up not being Mudd after all. My online predictions were pretty good, but my Oscar Pool ballot turned out even better. I did vary slightly from the published list, as I suspected I would, but this year doing so didn’t fatally screw me up. In fact, I ended a 17-year losing streak and took the big prize in the Oscar pool for the first time. I feel like the Boston Red Sox, for God’s sake. Speaking of which, if I can finally win the damn pool, I wonder if I could be so bold as to take that win as a good omen for the 2005-model Dodgers...