Into the Fire

Passionate thoughts about the world of writing and the Power of God

I used to faithfully watch the Academy Awards, eager to see which actors and movies won awards. Now it’s rare when I’ve seen two or more of the nominated films. To quote the ending credits’ line from “Bones”: “What’s that mean?”

 

What it means for me is simply for the most part there are less appealing movies selected than there used to be. This year I didn’t see any of the Best Picture nominees, having watched a half hour of District 9 and abandoning it. I will eventually see (on DVD) Blind Side and Crazy Heart. What pleased me about Hurt Locker winning Best Picture and Best Director was that Avatar didn’t. And I was glad the female director (Kathryn Bigelow—ironically one of James Cameron’s exes) gave credit to the troops “who protect us”, although I heard that the actual bomb defusers she interviewed and researched got no credit, payment, or honorable mention from her. Not sure if that’s true or propaganda. I’m fairly sure my “boys” will eventually view Hurt Locker and give me their evaluations.

 

Today, however, I must comment on the fashion statements made by most of the celebrities that I saw since I didn’t tune in to the Awards until they were half over. What in the world?! If nothing else, usually the Awards provide some elegant gowns with maybe one or two horrendous faux pas—think back to Cher’s famous dress, but she certainly isn’t alone. Plus there are usually some gorgeous hair-dos and lovely examples of perfect makeup. Um, not this time. This time it looked as though the designers decided to wash out the actresses in steel grays, dull silvers, or crimson colors to electrocute the eye sockets after seeing all that gray, silver, and vanilla whites.

 

There were huge ruffles which protruded like giant waves seeking attention. There were gowns that clung to the wrong places wrapped too tight like cellophane. Charlize Theron’s dress looked like someone drew circles around each breast to amplify their normal size and draw the eyes to them like targets. Sandra Bullock’s gown washed her out so all we really noticed was her dark brown hair and bright reddish-pink lips. Unfortunately, her real beauty seemed hidden and her mouth reminded me of the Red Queen’s.

 

The hair on some of these lovely women made me wonder if the hairdresser decided he/she could make them wear anything and so sought to design something horrific as a joke. Truly there were some corrupt uses of beautiful hair.

And so, as usual, it became a spectacle with fans and critics of all sure to give their commentary just as I’m doing. I have no problem with awarding films and actors. Politics (of all kinds in this case) play a part in the selections just as they do in nearly every category of dispensing awards. People have their favorites, and those who run the awards establish the criteria which must be met to be eligible. Subjectivity enters and infiltrates the entire process. The dispensing of awards follows whether it is an Oscar or a publishing contract.

 

I guess it just seems to accentuate a certain foolishness when the pomp and circumstance of these respected awards presented to talented actors and other people in the motion picture industry display such expensive gowns which do nothing to accentuate grace and beauty but rather seem to point out how decadent and wasteful such extravagance can be. One fashion critic called the gowns “muted” for the most part, but some were so unattractive they shouted “Fool!” The same or similar colors worn by most did nothing to distinguish the dresses or those wearing them. The bright colors served more as neon intrusions with crazy whirls or ruffles. Hair seemed either stuffed up and sticking out or down and lacquered so as not to be moved by hurricane force.

 

With the exception of Jeff Bridges’ rambling acceptance speech, apparently the recipients were strictly forewarned to keep their thank-yous brief and adhered to the rules for a change.

 

The “human video” dance interpretations to the nominated songs proved only that something was lost in translation.

 

I missed the entire first half so I couldn’t tell you if the chemistry worked between the emcees—they were all but absent in the second half of the ceremony.

 

All in all the spectacle of the massive glittering stage décor outdid all of the other razzle dazzle, even though many who won awards seemed to lose track of where they were supposed to approach said stage to receive their little golden man.

 

Much of the frou-frou looked foolish not glamorous. Truly one of the most unattractive Oscar ceremonies I’ve ever seen.

Lord, so much of what we do here has so little value. Please help me to listen to you so I can accomplish something of eternal worth. Apart from you, I can do nothing. In the Name of Jesus, Amen.

Posted in

9 responses to “Fashion or Foolishness?”

  1. Kristen Torres-Toro Avatar

    Glad I missed it. :0) I was watching Alice In Wonderland at the time. I did google Sandra Bullock’s speech last night because I love her. I’m so glad she won for that movie. She did a great job!

    Like

  2. Nicole Avatar

    Alice in Wonderland was the much better choice, believe me. Hard not to like Sandra. I thought her minor role in Crash showed her skills well, too.

    Like

  3. Dayle Avatar

    Well, I had to watch since Sandra was up for the biggie.
    I really hate the whole dress up thing celebrities do. Sandra never looks bad, but she, like most women, looks better dressed down.
    At least there were no wierd speeches, except Bridges’s.
    I love when a millionaire wears a $5000 dress or suit with a $500 hairdo and $10,000 worth of jewelry, arrives on a $20,000 flight on a private plane from the city of one of their six mansions to tell me I should donate $10 to the latest Haiti-like disaster.

    Like

  4. Nicole Avatar

    The Haiti commercials fried me, Dayle. Most of the stars shilling for donations are mutli-millionaires. In light of their president’s ridiculous decisions, no one has 10 bucks left to give outside of what they’ve already given in their taxes which are paying for the 100 million or so Obama pledged for Haiti. And, Dayle, those gowns cost a whole lot more than $5000 each in spite of how pitifully ugly some of them were.

    Like

  5. Dayle Avatar

    You’d think it would occur to them to ask themselves: How many people can you feed with one of those dresses?

    Like

  6. Nicole Avatar

    I don’t begrudge them their dresses or their bling. They’ve profited from their unique careers. But for some of them to make a commercial to compel those who don’t have even a portion of what they do to give is arrogant and disgusting. Most people don’t have to be told by anyone to give to disaster aid.

    Like

  7. Dayle Avatar

    I begrudge them wholeheartedly. It is one of the greatest sins to store up treasures on earth while people around you suffer. You know “eye of the needle and all”. I’m an evan Conservative, but this is one area that Christians, especially evangelical americans endowed with the new-conservatism, fall short.
    I know they have a right to do it, but it doesn’t make it right.

    Like

  8. Nicole Avatar

    Dayle, what I mean is they have the right to earn their wage. It’s similar to the parable about the hiring of workers.
    For what they choose to do with their wages they will be held accountable. Lots of them donate their dresses to charity events. Many of them give benevolently to disaster aid and other programs–some in anonymity, others pointing to themselves.
    But for them to urge their fellow countrymen to give when people are facing real economic woes thanks to the man most of them campaigned or voted for is ludicrous. Or for them to assume that Haiti should be the focus of someone else’s charitable choice because they who could give to many tragedies think it is the place other’s money should go is nauseating.

    Like

  9. buy viagra online Avatar

    thanks for the information so important!
    good blog!!

    Like

Leave a reply to Dayle Cancel reply