Freeze Face
I have a lot I could say about the Oscars last night, which is surprising given how boring they were. I liked Ellen Degeneres and some of the montages, but I think it is dirty pool to move the supporting actor and actress awards away from the start of the show. While I am apparently the only person in America who enjoyed the Will Farrell song, I think those shadow people should have been sent to the showers (hot ones, with antibacterial soap) after they made the Oscar statue. The sound effects choir? Clint Eastwood (who can do no wrong in my book except for this one instance) translating from the Italian without his glasses? And isn’t this the third or fourth year in a row that Jack Palance was among the honored deceased? However, I’m going to limit this to a discussion of what annoyed me most about the Oscars - the pre-game show.
What is with the unquestioning adoration of Nicole Kidman? I admit that in the past she has looked great on the red carpet. But now, no matter what she does, everyone thinks she looks “incredible†even when she look ridiculous. And I’m not even talking about last night’s dress, although I thought it looked reminiscent of Sadaam Hussein’s last photo (at her height, if she’d bumped up against the purse hook in the bathroom stall, she could have been an Oscar tragedy). She looked like a mannequin. Maybe a person can’t be too rich or too beautiful, but she can definitely have too much Botox. And she looked like her fake eyelashes were so heavy that she couldn’t open her eyes completely. Naomi Watts (her best bud who is about the same age) looked about 10 years younger than Nicole Kidman, and her face moves when she smiles. I saw the two of them interviewed together by Ryan Seacrest (is he related to Jason Kennedy?), and while Nicole Kidman still seems to have a relatively pleasant personality, it is now firmly encased in plastic.
Speaking of Botox, Jada Pinkett Smith, back away from the needle. When a moronic red carpet interviewer kept referring to the Smiths as the “first family of Hollywood,†over and over again, as if saying it would make it so, I appreciated that the entire Smith family looked like they had no idea what he was talking about. I’ve always liked Will Smith, and honestly have never had any ill will toward Jada. But the past few times I’ve seen her, she’s had the same immobile, confused/slightly pained expression on her face, no matter what is going on. I think the less successful half of a celebrity couple owes it to herself to look engaged in the proceedings, and an important part of looking engaged is making facial expressions: the raised eyebrow, the smirk, the occasional grin. When she stands off to the side with that strange look on her face, I feel a small pang of pity. (Also, while I would never say anything critical about someone else’s child - you know, unless he/she was a huge punk - I feel that I need to suggest that the Smiths and their son keep a sharp eye on the razor thin line between the adorable smart-aleck and the precocious snot.)
Neither Nicole nor Jada is afraid to look unglamorous in the movies, so I don’t understand what distresses them so much about wrinkles (which at their ages could probably still be camouflaged by their makeup people) in real life. Aren’t they less likely to get roles if their faces are unable to “keep it real?†I like actresses that look like actual people because, right or wrong, they seem more likeable to me. If it ever happened that I somehow had the opportunity to go to a movie theater and see a non-animated, non-G-rated film, I’d rather see an idealized version of reality than a plasticized version. So let some of that Botox wear off girls, until you can move your forehead enough to look adequately puzzled and confused when Ryan Seacrest is asking you moronic questions.



