Sidenote: Little Miss Sunshine pwn3d Juno at the Oscars with TWICE as many awards, and that includes the matching Original Screenplay award. Nicely done.

But to say No Country won only as a result of their collective work, is a gross downplaying of the movies chops. I agree maybe with your take on the director scenario, clearly this was a bigger leap for Paul Thomas Anderson, and no doubt his film was incredible, a sure winner in any year but this one. But there is something to be said for for the sheer tightness of No Country. There Will be Blood was sweeping, but at times, i felt myself bored, even lost. No Country was a one two punch, in a year that needed a one two punch.

Also, how can you even imagine a world in which Paul Thomas Anderson does not eventually get his career acheivement Oscar?

Swinton should not have gotten the Best Actress award. I do not even understand that decision.

Also–I kind of get tired of really obvious things winning in categories. I don’t usually pay a lot of attention to Art Direction unless you’re supposed to (a la Sweeney Todd), but I have to admit that I noticed it and marveled at it in There Will Be Blood. So that win would have been nice to see vs. Sweeney Todd winning.

Really, there were only 2 things I was dead set on as winners–like seriously, heads would have rolled, there would have been blood, etc if they hadn’t won–and they both did win. They were Daniel Day-Lewis for Best Actor and Glen Hansard/Marketa Irglova for best song. I heard the music for Once and thought it was good. Then I saw the movie and thought the movie was good. Then I let it sink in and listened to the music again. It is really fantastic, and it works so well in the movie. If anyone else had won, I would have been really sad. The two of them are just so great. And huge kudos to Jon Stewart for bringing Marketa Irglova back out on stage. I get so mad when they cut the winners off. Come on now, it’s their moment in the sun!!

That said, while you can quibble over whether NCfOM was better than TWBB or Juno, I just think we’re lucky to have, for the first time in a while, a year in which there were enough good movies for people to argue about! (and for the record, my biggest disappointment was Ratatouille not winning Best Original Score.)

Here’s a good take on Jonny Greenwood’s score and some explanation as to why he was “disqualified” (BS) from a nomination:

http://meetinthelobby.com/there-will-be-blood-the-brilliant-score-of-jonny-greenwood.html

I’m not arguing that past efforts haven’t helped win certain Oscars. Russell Crowe winning for Gladiator a year after he lost The Insider comes to mind. But I think all of your examples are bogus.

Sure, you could argue that Scorsese won in 2006, but The Aviator was no way near his best work, not even close. Maybe you could say that they were finally paying Scorsese back for snubbing his work on Goodfellas in 1990 for Kevin Costner, but I think that The Departed was as well directed as any of the other nominees. Paul Greengrass for United 93 or Frears for The Queen?? C’mon.

The 2004 Director nominations were much weaker than the 2003 nods. Just look at the pool. Maybe you could argue that Mystic River was a better directing job than Million Dollar Baby, sure. But 2003 was a much harder year across the board, making it easier for Eastwood to win in 2004.

Jackson did a fantastic job with the trilogy and maybe you could argue that they were all sort of the same quality but the third really drew it all together. What are they going to do, give him three straight Oscars?

just a few examples of the mis-placed Best director awards:
For 2006 Scorcese won for The Departed when The Aviator (2004) was a superior film.

For 2004 Clint Eastwood beat The Aviator with Million Dollar Baby when Mystic River (2003) was more deserving for Mr. Eastwood.

For 2003 Peter Jackson best Mystic River with Return of The King, obviously an award honoring the trilogy, not just the film.

Now can you guys please turn off that motherfucking Army advertisment?

you bring up great points. i think for me (and maybe alot of people) i get stumped with what i want to win, and what should win. i’ll totally give you that swinton was good as a person who is in way over her head, i just cant agree that she was stronger than blanchet’s bob d. also, no way was she more troubling than bardem, he was a shark, who created the tide the rest have to deal with - imo. i guess when i think of a supporting role, its someone who steals scenes and someone we are excited to see when the main players are gone. while swinton was able to do this for some, for me she just felt like a good plot mover, but nothing spectacular. also, i’m not mad that the coen’s won, they deserved it for making a classic. i just felt that PTA really carved out something special, hand-in-hand with lewis.