At my Oscar ballot party on Sunday night I will not be voting for Naomi Watts for best actress in her role as the tsunami survivor in “The Impossible.” She did a splendid job, but it’s not in the cards that she will win -- and I like winning the pool.
I will probably be checking off Emmanuelle Riva for her riveting role in “Amour,” thinking that Jennifer Lawrence and Jessica Chastain will split votes. At least youngest nominee Quvenzhane Wallis has years to be up again.
Every year I tell my party guests that I am looking to hear a political statement spoken at the Oscars. After all, a winner has the undivided attention of millions of viewers. What better place to declare a cause. Of course, no one will ever outdo Marlon Brando when he plotted to have Sacheen Littlefeather accept his 1973 Oscar for “The Godfather,” protesting the treatment of Native Americans. As a filmmaker I always fantasize about winning an Oscar so I could dedicate it to “voting rights to the citizens of the District of Columbia.”
A win for Watts in “The Impossible” would satisfy my need for high political drama at the Oscars. In my imagination she would have the perfect opportunity to declare to the worldwide viewers that we need to prevent global warming and counter the predications there would be more tsunamis. She would go on dedicating the Oscar to the thouands who died in 2004, and plea that we all join forces to combat global warming.
But this scenario is only in my dreams, as I know in my betting heart she is not going to win. Nor is there any guarantee she would declare the need to join forces to fight global warming.
The least I can hope that millions see “The Impossible” and commit themselves to fighting the good environmental fight. Even without a speech at the Oscars we have this powerful film to motivate us.
