And the nominees are

As the Jewish Journal points out, three of the 10 films up for best picture this year have Jewish themes or undertones. I haven't seen "A Serious Man," but I saw both "Inglourious Basterds" and "An Education" in theaters.

When I heard about "Inglourious Basterds" last summer, I was uneasy. It was historically inaccurate, sarcastic and funny. A lighthearted film about the Holocaust? I was willing to keep an open mind, but I waited for the controversy. A few months and several Google searches later, I was surprised to find virtually no backlash.

I ended up loving the movie, as did Jeff and my parents. My brother thought it was tasteless and that it put Jews on the same level as the Nazis. I can see his point, but the movie is so unrealistic that it hardly seems fair to compare the fictional "basterds" to the horrendous brutality of the very real Nazis.

With the exception of the opening scene, Tarantino avoids tragic scenes where Jews are senselessly murdered. There are almost no innocent victims. Nearly everyone who dies in the movie has killed someone in a previous scene.

There is no message conveyed in "Inglourious Basterds." I think it's just meant to be taken as a fun, "what if?" work of fiction.

I also enjoyed "An Education," which portrays the naive seduction of Jenny, a school-aged girl, by David, an older, perverted Jewish criminal in 1960s London. Peter Sarsgaard, one of my favorite actors, plays David.

There isn't much emphasis placed on David being Jewish. It is only utilized in a few brief moments to create tension between Jenny and her conservative parents. But if it wasn't that important, why make him Jewish in the first place?

Unlike, "Inglourious Basterds," there was some question of anti-Semitic undertones in "An Education." I personally don't think that was the intention. I think the choice to make David Jewish is more about creating a dynamic character than it is actually a commentary on the religion.

I thought the Jewish angle makes David more sympathetic, because he has few redeeming qualities. He's a criminal and a pedophile. Being Jewish in 1960s London doesn't excuse him, but the desperation and social scorn he must've faced makes his behavior easier to comprehend.

I don't think it's a coincidence that as the last generation of Holocaust survivors dies out, the media becomes bolder in their portrayal of Jews. You worry a lot less about offending someone in a fictional depiction of a moment in time when no one is around who was there. It's also a lot easier to make an argument for putting a segment of society in a bad light when that "segment" is portrayed in the news as thriving, and not as overcoming a tragedy.