If there is one thing that has continually annoyed me throughout the decade I’ve been covering the Oscar race it’s people who pretend to know more than they actually do. So a lot of huffing and puffing over at the Huffington Post about that Avatar screening. “It wasn’t how I saw it,” crows Robert J. Elisberg, columnist and screenwriter. This was the only IMDb info I could find for that name but it looks like he’s a regular writer for the Huffington Post and the WGA.
That isn’t to say that reactions to screenings aren’t to be trusted – I think I’ve done a good job warning you readers about this very thing – to take it with a grain of salt. But that’s a long way from Elisberg’s Huffington soapbox that takes apart Pete Hammond and Steve Pond over their reporting.
Again, let it be said that reports from Academy screenings aren’t a reliable indicator – people behave differently at screenings than they do in their own homes. Who knows how Avatar will play with the Academy. I think it’s premature to see its Best Pic win as a done deal. WAY premature. It is much more likely the Academy will vote for Up in the Air or The Hurt Locker, in keeping with their history, their patterns and their tastes. Avatar is Sci-Fi – it may be the best film of 2009 but, but, as we all know, the best film of the year is rarely the Best Picture winner. Anyway, whether it is or it isn’t is beside the point.
I was annoyed with Robert J. Elisberg’s a-day-late-and-a-dollar-short column on that screening because it goes so ferociously on the attack that its message is ultimately lost. I don’t trust anyone’s word coming out of Academy screening. I don’t trust people I know who were there and I certainly don’t trust Robert J. Elisberg — his opinion, his take is just that: HIS. I’m sure my own interpretation would be very different too. We see what we want to see. We hear what we want to hear.
