When a major film is being made there is a certain amount of hype behind the project. For instance, let's take a look at this summer's upcoming The Avengers. The first news about the film came in 2008 with a 30-second scene after the end credits of Iron Man. A few days later, as the box office totals for Iron Man grew, Marvel announced that they would be releasing not just Iron Man 2, as expected, but also a movie for The Hulk, Thor, and Captain America. Then once those films all made them massive amounts of money they would all team up together to make the aforementioned epic The Avengers. Time passed and more hints about the film were placed within the releases and a writer/director was announced; Buffy The Vampire Slayer's Joss Weedon. Time continues to elapse and more news slowly leaks to the press. Suddenly the cast is confirmed including Robert Downey Jr. Scarlett Johansson, Chris Evans, and Jeremy Renner. Skip a few months and pictures from the set surface. Captain America: The First Avenger is released and there is a mini trailer for The Avengers attached to the end. This is followed by TV spots, more trailers, new posters, you name it and it's out there. The whole system is a hype machine building the movie up so when it is released in May the only thought in your ("your" being the beloved 18-35 year old male) head is that you must see this film. You go, you spend your money, the film makes over $100 million opening weekend and everyone is happy right? The real question is did you enjoy the film? Hopefully, but really how could you? You have spent FOUR YEARS thinking about how amazing The Avengers will be. Four years thinking of plot lines and story arcs. Four years of building expectations. That is an impossibly high bar that you have set. I understand why studios do it, they make more money this way. Heck, I even fueled the beast in December when I spent $20 to see Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol just because the first six minutes of The Dark Knight Rises was playing in front of it. And we all know I have been reading every bit of information that has been released about it both before and since the viewing. This type of marketing is effective and will continue to be as long as there is an internet.
How much do expectations really alter your outlook on a film? Back in 2002 plenty of movies came out over the summer that I wanted to see. Two in particular were Minority Report and The Bourne Identity. I wasn't driving yet and I made minimal money so the easiest way to see a movie was to talk my mom into going with me. This wasn't a hard task as long as she wanted to see the movie. When I mentioned my want to see both of these films she decided on Minority Report because she had heard a great review of it on her beloved, trusty NPR. She came into the film with some pretty hefty expectations. She was a Tom Cruise fan (remember this is before the couch jumping incident when most of the world liked Cruise), Steven Spielberg was the director, and she trusted a review that claimed it to be a great watch. I personally would have preferred to see The Bourne Identity but was getting a free movie and wasn't about to complain. Afterwards, I was able to admit that she made a good choice. What a moving piece of art. Is this what our world could be headed towards? I was enthralled. My mom was not. She didn't care for it at all. A few weeks later I was able to wear her down and we saw The Bourne Identity, although she wasn't looking forward to it at all. We walk out of the theater and were both very happy with what we saw. In the ten years since these films were originally released I have caught my mom watching The Bourne Identity numerous times. She hasn't watched Minority Report since. I have watched both films countless times and find them to be very good films.
The easy thing to say was high expectations led to a poor experience and low expectations led to a quality experience. While true for my mother, not so much for me. How much of a role does having expectations really play on a person's opinion of a movie? I have overheard people in a theater telling themselves the movie won't be funny or entertaining and the attractive actor will look horrible just to enjoy it more. One of these times was before Leatherheads so needless to say, it didn't work. Can these pep talks actually influence your opinion on a movie?
What about when an expectation has been directly given to you? It has recently come to my attention that a person very close to me has never seen The Shawshank Redemption. I have since been trying to balance the pressure to watch it with a nonchalant approach so as to not give the impression that it's one of the best films ever made. This may end up not mattering at all. I mean, really, who dislikes Shawshank? But changing the scope a little bit, someone else has never seen any of the Back to the Future trilogy. I find this to be an abomination and a huge disappointment but I also wonder if at this point in their life they could even enjoy it. In Back to the Future Michael J. Fox goes to a future that we have already passed (2011). The effects in the film are cheesy and very clearly from the 80's. Overall, the movie is by no means a masterpiece. It doesn't make me love it any less, in fact, it may help me love it more. It was a perfect film to be watching at a young age and I can watch it now and appreciate the nostalgia it brings. If someone were to be forced into watching the films in their mid to late-20s for the first time it may not be as enjoyable. Especially when the person asking you to watch, considers the series to be one of their personal favorites. There is pressure to enjoy, making the enjoyment even less likely.
Instead of giving my opinion in this post, I leave you with my vague advice: You are going to dislike a bad movie regardless of how much you expect out of it but you may dislike a good movie because you did expect too much. Try to have a blank slate for yourself and leave a blank slate for others. Not that it's easy.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
It Was the Worst of Times
In late 2008 this country was headed for it's impending doom. The stock market was falling, the wars had no end in sight, unemployment was on the rise. It was 1929 all over again. People turned to the movies for entertainment, and more importantly an escape. People enjoyed turning their minds off for 100+ minutes and forgetting their problems. I fully endorse this idea to an extent. There is plenty to be said about movies that you like even if they aren't any good. Heck, Ryan Reynolds has made a career out of these films. Think about it for a second, how many Reynolds movies can you name that you enjoyed? How many of them were actually good? I found ten I like and one that I consider a good movie (Adventureland where he was a supporting player, at most). So before I get into the actual point of this post I want to make this point very clear: I don't condemn mindless entertainment and I never will. That being said people are missing out on a major opportunity of finding great films. The best movies I watch involve characters I can relate to. What better time to relate to people in pain than when in pain yourself?
It's no coincidence that I watched a good portion of my favorite films around 2009. Two factors heavily influenced this phenomena: I watched more movies that year than maybe any other year and it was an awful year for me personally. Even films I had seen previously made a much bigger impact on my life if I watched them in this year. In fact, five of my ten favorite films were because of viewings in 2009 and two of those were second or third viewings. I remember at the time I didn't want to watch certain movies because I didn't want to forever associate them with the pain I was feeling. Looking back on it I wish I had watched more. Very few people understand why Vanilla Sky is my favorite movie and I can argue its greatness for days straight. That being said, I also understand the reason I love it so much has a lot to do with the films themes lining up with my personal life at that moment. It's what makes Cameron Crowe such a phenomenal and underrated director. He gets it. He has felt pain, or at least knows enough about it to make films centered around it but more on that another time. What I'm trying to say is watching someone go through similar and often worse circumstances than you is both humbling and helpful.
They say misery loves company, yet when it comes to movies people go the opposite route far more than they should. Is the love of your life dating someone else? Watch Casablanca. Maybe Humphrey Bogart can show you how to handle things. No you won't have nearly as great sounding of a voice and it won't give you any idea about how to break them up and win your love back. Instead it can give you perspective and hope. Feel lonely? Watch A Single Man. Maybe Colin Firth can show you just how lonely life can get. He can also show that it does get better. Feel betrayed? Watch The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. The title alone tells you what's going to happen and maybe you'll think; "At least they didn't kill me." Or maybe you'll realize karma will get them in the end. Want to erase someone from your memory? Watch Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Maybe Jim Carrey can make you reconsider. And when you're done with these? Watch a Ryan Reynolds movie. Maybe he can take your mind off of the situation for a little while. Just don't forget that your pain leaves you vulnerable to recognizing and appreciating cinema at its finest.
It's no coincidence that I watched a good portion of my favorite films around 2009. Two factors heavily influenced this phenomena: I watched more movies that year than maybe any other year and it was an awful year for me personally. Even films I had seen previously made a much bigger impact on my life if I watched them in this year. In fact, five of my ten favorite films were because of viewings in 2009 and two of those were second or third viewings. I remember at the time I didn't want to watch certain movies because I didn't want to forever associate them with the pain I was feeling. Looking back on it I wish I had watched more. Very few people understand why Vanilla Sky is my favorite movie and I can argue its greatness for days straight. That being said, I also understand the reason I love it so much has a lot to do with the films themes lining up with my personal life at that moment. It's what makes Cameron Crowe such a phenomenal and underrated director. He gets it. He has felt pain, or at least knows enough about it to make films centered around it but more on that another time. What I'm trying to say is watching someone go through similar and often worse circumstances than you is both humbling and helpful.
They say misery loves company, yet when it comes to movies people go the opposite route far more than they should. Is the love of your life dating someone else? Watch Casablanca. Maybe Humphrey Bogart can show you how to handle things. No you won't have nearly as great sounding of a voice and it won't give you any idea about how to break them up and win your love back. Instead it can give you perspective and hope. Feel lonely? Watch A Single Man. Maybe Colin Firth can show you just how lonely life can get. He can also show that it does get better. Feel betrayed? Watch The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. The title alone tells you what's going to happen and maybe you'll think; "At least they didn't kill me." Or maybe you'll realize karma will get them in the end. Want to erase someone from your memory? Watch Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Maybe Jim Carrey can make you reconsider. And when you're done with these? Watch a Ryan Reynolds movie. Maybe he can take your mind off of the situation for a little while. Just don't forget that your pain leaves you vulnerable to recognizing and appreciating cinema at its finest.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Film Review: Take Shelter
When you start dreaming of an apocalyptic future do you shelter your family from an unlikely, yet potential storm or from yourself? That's the question at stake in Take Shelter, a Sundance selection written and directed by Jeff Nichols. The film starts off by introducing you to Curtis (Boardwalk Empire's Michael Shannon) standing outside in heavy rainfall but when the camera cuts to a shot of his hand the rain looks closer to oil. He wakes up in a sweat. The dreams and eventually delusions continue and most curiously, instead of ending when he wakes up, Curtis feels the effects of the dreams hours later. For instance, when a dog attacks his arm in a dream he is noticeably favoring the arm the rest of the day. These dreams feel so real to him he feels the need to expand a small tornado shelter so he can protect his wife Sam (The Help's Jessica Chastain) and deaf daughter Hannah (newcomer Tova Stewart).
The center of this story is based on the love between Curtis and Sam. Even when they are upset at each other there is never a doubt in the audience's mind that they love each other. Sam realizes that just because things are tough and her husband is acting strange and initially hiding things from her doesn't mean she needs to leave him. The film wouldn't work without the commitment and love between the two leads.
Speaking of the leads, Chastain and especially Shannon are cast perfectly for this film and give great performances. The first half of the film has a lot of monologue instead of back and forth between the two characters but it never feels unnatural or forced. The emotions are raw and real. There was a reason people felt Shannon deserved a nomination and it is plainly obvious while watching the film.
The premise of this movie reminds me a lot of Bug, another Shannon film with Ashley Judd, only this time the plot wasn't nearly as contrived and the director had a much better sense of where he was going with his story. In lesser hands Take Shelter could have been an absolute disaster but instead it turned out to be one of the better films of last year. There is one scene in particular at the climax of the movie where everything just came together perfectly. The score set the mood, the love and trust built up by the actors the rest of the film was paying off in a big way, and the tension was as high as one could hope for. Overall there is very little, if anything negative to say about the movie and instead of seeing an okay film with great acting like I had expected I ended up seeing a story unfold that will stay in the front of my mind over the next few days.
A-.
The center of this story is based on the love between Curtis and Sam. Even when they are upset at each other there is never a doubt in the audience's mind that they love each other. Sam realizes that just because things are tough and her husband is acting strange and initially hiding things from her doesn't mean she needs to leave him. The film wouldn't work without the commitment and love between the two leads.
Speaking of the leads, Chastain and especially Shannon are cast perfectly for this film and give great performances. The first half of the film has a lot of monologue instead of back and forth between the two characters but it never feels unnatural or forced. The emotions are raw and real. There was a reason people felt Shannon deserved a nomination and it is plainly obvious while watching the film.
The premise of this movie reminds me a lot of Bug, another Shannon film with Ashley Judd, only this time the plot wasn't nearly as contrived and the director had a much better sense of where he was going with his story. In lesser hands Take Shelter could have been an absolute disaster but instead it turned out to be one of the better films of last year. There is one scene in particular at the climax of the movie where everything just came together perfectly. The score set the mood, the love and trust built up by the actors the rest of the film was paying off in a big way, and the tension was as high as one could hope for. Overall there is very little, if anything negative to say about the movie and instead of seeing an okay film with great acting like I had expected I ended up seeing a story unfold that will stay in the front of my mind over the next few days.
A-.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Oscar week: A by the numbers recap
10- Minutes over run time. Not bad for a Billy Crystal hosted Academy Awards.
9- Best Picture nominees. There have previously been 5, 7, 10, and 12 nominees but never nine.
8- Times I thought Ellen DeGeneres was hosting the commercial breaks. Seriously, she was in every other commercial.
7- Times I mentioned that the score playing over the clips was from Moneyball, even though the Academy didn't even bother nominating it.
6- categories War Horse was nominated for, and it won none of them.
5- Wins for both Hugo and big winner The Artist. Hugo's technical awards were surprising but well deserved and The Artist was expected to win where it did.
4- Of my six predictions I got right. A dismal amount I must admit, but I did make a strong case for Jean Dujardin and who really predicted Meryl Streep would win? (4 is also the number of times the phenomenal Busy Phillips was spotted including on the red carpet.)
3- Career wins for Meryl Streep who probably deserves the award tonight more than anyone for her career resume including 17 nominations.
2- Muppets seen during the broadcast.
1.5- Bottles of wine consumed during the ceremony.
1- Career nominations for the fantastic and apparently underrated Gary Oldman.
0- Times I was surprised The Tree of Life didn't win a single award.
Highlights:
The telecast was a low frills affair that included Billy Crystal's two most famous games with "What are the nominees thinking?" and inserting himself into clips of the year's best picture nominees and other major films. When Octavia Spencer won she seemed truly shocked and grateful, which was a nice surprise. The only truly shocking win was Meryl Streep for Best Actress. Saying goodbye to Elizabeth Taylor was handled very elegantly and touching. I'm not one to get into the best and worst dressed but do want to say that Jessica Chastain was gorgeous tonight and I love that she has been in so many films this year. Speaking of Chastain, her cast mates for The Help all were incredibly supportive of each other and really had a sense of camaraderie not often seen in show business. The Bridesmaids cast had two hysterious presentations and one that was straightforward and disappointing. My favorite joke of the night was from Crystal introducing Christian Bale by saying, "An American Psycho, a Dark Knight, and a meth addict. And you can vote for one on super Tuesday!"
I really wasn't looking forward to the Oscars this year and they were better than I had expected, just not the best show ever. The "Hard Out Here for a Pimp" jokes will never get old and the speeches will never be short enough for the people we don't like. I just wish that every nominee will be announced by Morgan Freeman but don't we all? I now say goodbye to the Oscars until Awards season starts this November.
9- Best Picture nominees. There have previously been 5, 7, 10, and 12 nominees but never nine.
8- Times I thought Ellen DeGeneres was hosting the commercial breaks. Seriously, she was in every other commercial.
7- Times I mentioned that the score playing over the clips was from Moneyball, even though the Academy didn't even bother nominating it.
6- categories War Horse was nominated for, and it won none of them.
5- Wins for both Hugo and big winner The Artist. Hugo's technical awards were surprising but well deserved and The Artist was expected to win where it did.
4- Of my six predictions I got right. A dismal amount I must admit, but I did make a strong case for Jean Dujardin and who really predicted Meryl Streep would win? (4 is also the number of times the phenomenal Busy Phillips was spotted including on the red carpet.)
3- Career wins for Meryl Streep who probably deserves the award tonight more than anyone for her career resume including 17 nominations.
2- Muppets seen during the broadcast.
1.5- Bottles of wine consumed during the ceremony.
1- Career nominations for the fantastic and apparently underrated Gary Oldman.
0- Times I was surprised The Tree of Life didn't win a single award.
Highlights:
The telecast was a low frills affair that included Billy Crystal's two most famous games with "What are the nominees thinking?" and inserting himself into clips of the year's best picture nominees and other major films. When Octavia Spencer won she seemed truly shocked and grateful, which was a nice surprise. The only truly shocking win was Meryl Streep for Best Actress. Saying goodbye to Elizabeth Taylor was handled very elegantly and touching. I'm not one to get into the best and worst dressed but do want to say that Jessica Chastain was gorgeous tonight and I love that she has been in so many films this year. Speaking of Chastain, her cast mates for The Help all were incredibly supportive of each other and really had a sense of camaraderie not often seen in show business. The Bridesmaids cast had two hysterious presentations and one that was straightforward and disappointing. My favorite joke of the night was from Crystal introducing Christian Bale by saying, "An American Psycho, a Dark Knight, and a meth addict. And you can vote for one on super Tuesday!"
I really wasn't looking forward to the Oscars this year and they were better than I had expected, just not the best show ever. The "Hard Out Here for a Pimp" jokes will never get old and the speeches will never be short enough for the people we don't like. I just wish that every nominee will be announced by Morgan Freeman but don't we all? I now say goodbye to the Oscars until Awards season starts this November.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Oscar Week: And the winner should and will be...
Best Supporting Actress:
Berenice Bejo The Artist
Jessica Chastain The Help
Melissa McCarthy Bridesmaids
Janet McTeer Albert Noobs
Octavia Spencer The Help
Will win: Octavia Spencer. This race has been sewn up since the nominations were announced.
Should win: I want to say Berenice Bejo for her performance as Peppy but I just can't. Spencer was just too good.
Could Win: Bejo would be the dark horse. Just don't count on it.
Best Supporting Actor
Kenneth Brannagh My Week With Marilyn
Jonah Hill Moneyball
Nick Nolte Warrior
Christopher Plummer Beginners
Max Von Sydow Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
Will win: Christopher Plummer. Entertainment Weekly put Von Sydow as the second closest contender but the critics of his film were far too negative to hand over any awards. Plummer walks away with this one.
Should win: Plummer. Jonah Hill impressed the world with the idea that he could actually act. The nomination is his win. Nolte was great but essentially played himself. Again.
Could win: No close call here, just Plummer.
Best Actress:
Glenn Close Albert Nobbs
Viola Davis The Help
Rooney Mara The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
Meryl Streep The Iron Lady
Michelle Williams My Week With Marilyn
Will win: Viola Davis. People like to pretend this race is close and that Streep has a chance. She doesn't. Davis will run away with this award and mark the first time two African Americans won acting Oscars for the same movie.
Should win: Michelle Williams. A lot of people are denying her performance because she doesn't look enough like Marilyn Monroe. I have seen plenty of Monroe films and feel that Williams nailed every aspect of the character and showed why it was so easy for the world to become infatuated with Monroe.
Could Win: Davis, Davis, and Davis. The rest of the field should be happy they were nominated.
Best Actor:
Demian Bichir A Better Life
George Clooney The Descendants
Jean Dujardin The Artist
Gary Oldman Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Brad Pitt Moneyball
Will win: George Clooney. This one is not a runaway. In fact I hesitate typing in a prediction here. Sadly, I think the Academy awards Clooney since they missed the chance for his much stronger performances in Michael Clayton and Up in the Air.
Should win: Jean Dujardin I think. Maybe Brad Pitt. Maybe Gary Oldman. This category was just so strong this year I loved each performance.
Could win: Dujardin. I hope this race is close and I hope this is the outcome. Nothing against Clooney or The Descendants but Dujardin put on the better performance.
Best Director
Woody Allen Midnight in Paris
Michel Hazanavicius The Artist
Terrence Mallick The Tree of Life
Alexander Payne The Descendants
Martin Scorcese Hugo
Will win: Michel Hazanavicius. Another tight race but this one goes to the newcomer instead of the veterans. A black and white, silent film made in modern day society is no easy task and it deserves to be recognized.
Should win: Terrence Mallick. Love it or hate it, you must respect the scope of The Tree of Life. Essentially a silent film in it's own right, there was never a moment that the film wasn't making you think.
Could Win: Martin Scorcese. Hugo had a major marketing problem that has really hurt it. Scorcese mastered 3D and made a kids movie for adults.
Best Picture:
The Artist
The Descendants
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
The Help
Hugo
Midnight in Paris
Moneyball
The Tree of Life
War Horse
Will win: The Artist. Any supposed backlash happening against The Artist started far too late to prevent it from winning.
Should win: The Tree of Life. Did you even have to ask what I would put here? It isn't easy to get through and it may make you question your existence but it was perfection.
Could win: The Help has been getting a push late but too many people were hot on the performances and cold on the actual film. The Descendants has been running out of steam lately according to a lot of outlets but I still think it's the dark horse. If anything is going to beat The Artist it's The Descendants but the smart money says that won't happen.
And finally my ballot that the Academy forgot to ask for:
The Tree of Life
Moneyball
The Artist
Hugo
The Descendants
Midnight in Paris
The Help
War Horse
I choose to believe only eight films were nominated because the ninth is worthy of a Razzie. Not an Oscar.
Berenice Bejo The Artist
Jessica Chastain The Help
Melissa McCarthy Bridesmaids
Janet McTeer Albert Noobs
Octavia Spencer The Help
Will win: Octavia Spencer. This race has been sewn up since the nominations were announced.
Should win: I want to say Berenice Bejo for her performance as Peppy but I just can't. Spencer was just too good.
Could Win: Bejo would be the dark horse. Just don't count on it.
Best Supporting Actor
Kenneth Brannagh My Week With Marilyn
Jonah Hill Moneyball
Nick Nolte Warrior
Christopher Plummer Beginners
Max Von Sydow Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
Will win: Christopher Plummer. Entertainment Weekly put Von Sydow as the second closest contender but the critics of his film were far too negative to hand over any awards. Plummer walks away with this one.
Should win: Plummer. Jonah Hill impressed the world with the idea that he could actually act. The nomination is his win. Nolte was great but essentially played himself. Again.
Could win: No close call here, just Plummer.
Best Actress:
Glenn Close Albert Nobbs
Viola Davis The Help
Rooney Mara The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
Meryl Streep The Iron Lady
Michelle Williams My Week With Marilyn
Will win: Viola Davis. People like to pretend this race is close and that Streep has a chance. She doesn't. Davis will run away with this award and mark the first time two African Americans won acting Oscars for the same movie.
Should win: Michelle Williams. A lot of people are denying her performance because she doesn't look enough like Marilyn Monroe. I have seen plenty of Monroe films and feel that Williams nailed every aspect of the character and showed why it was so easy for the world to become infatuated with Monroe.
Could Win: Davis, Davis, and Davis. The rest of the field should be happy they were nominated.
Best Actor:
Demian Bichir A Better Life
George Clooney The Descendants
Jean Dujardin The Artist
Gary Oldman Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Brad Pitt Moneyball
Will win: George Clooney. This one is not a runaway. In fact I hesitate typing in a prediction here. Sadly, I think the Academy awards Clooney since they missed the chance for his much stronger performances in Michael Clayton and Up in the Air.
Should win: Jean Dujardin I think. Maybe Brad Pitt. Maybe Gary Oldman. This category was just so strong this year I loved each performance.
Could win: Dujardin. I hope this race is close and I hope this is the outcome. Nothing against Clooney or The Descendants but Dujardin put on the better performance.
Best Director
Woody Allen Midnight in Paris
Michel Hazanavicius The Artist
Terrence Mallick The Tree of Life
Alexander Payne The Descendants
Martin Scorcese Hugo
Will win: Michel Hazanavicius. Another tight race but this one goes to the newcomer instead of the veterans. A black and white, silent film made in modern day society is no easy task and it deserves to be recognized.
Should win: Terrence Mallick. Love it or hate it, you must respect the scope of The Tree of Life. Essentially a silent film in it's own right, there was never a moment that the film wasn't making you think.
Could Win: Martin Scorcese. Hugo had a major marketing problem that has really hurt it. Scorcese mastered 3D and made a kids movie for adults.
Best Picture:
The Artist
The Descendants
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
The Help
Hugo
Midnight in Paris
Moneyball
The Tree of Life
War Horse
Will win: The Artist. Any supposed backlash happening against The Artist started far too late to prevent it from winning.
Should win: The Tree of Life. Did you even have to ask what I would put here? It isn't easy to get through and it may make you question your existence but it was perfection.
Could win: The Help has been getting a push late but too many people were hot on the performances and cold on the actual film. The Descendants has been running out of steam lately according to a lot of outlets but I still think it's the dark horse. If anything is going to beat The Artist it's The Descendants but the smart money says that won't happen.
And finally my ballot that the Academy forgot to ask for:
The Tree of Life
Moneyball
The Artist
Hugo
The Descendants
Midnight in Paris
The Help
War Horse
I choose to believe only eight films were nominated because the ninth is worthy of a Razzie. Not an Oscar.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Oscar Week: The Snubs of 2012
Before getting down to the inevitable "Who will and who should win" post I will give a list of the films and performances that I felt were worthy of a nomination, yet didn't get one.
Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures, Original Score
Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross for The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. They won last year for their work on The Social Network and put out an equally perfect score this year. More importantly there is absolutely no reason that John Williams deserved a nomination, let alone two. It sounded like the rejected score from everything else the man has done. I think he is a supremely talented composer but hasn't put out anything breathtaking or groundbreaking in years.Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen
Mike Mills for Beginners. The story for this film would have been completely unbelievable if not for three things. One, the basic outline of the plot actually happened to Mills, who also directed. Two, the fantastic performance by Christopher Plummer (who is finally getting some Academy love in recent years). And three, the writing of the story. Mills never makes it seem unlikely that a recently widowed father in his 70's could not only come out of the closet, but be the happiest he has ever been even while being diagnosed with cancer. It sounds like a drama-fest but is surprisingly funny and poignant.Diablo Cody for Young Adult. This film did not sit right with voters despite their love of both Cody and her Juno director Jason Reitman primarily because Charlize Theron's character just isn't likable but that's what I love so much about the film. Sure we could have made the main character a lovable pretty loser that we root for but hasn't that been done enough? Instead she based a film on a character you root against and is such a train wreck you can't not look. Risky writing and film making that truly deserved to be nominated.
Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role
There are two complaints in this category. The first one is minor and it's that while I am ecstatic at the recent onslaught of films and the recognition given to the magical Jessica Chastain, I think she got nominated here for the wrong role. The more upsetting issue with this category is the complete omission of Shailene Woodley for The Descendants. Yup, I am defending the actress from Secret Life of My Teenage Daughter (I think that's the title. Don't quote me on that). My life has come to this. In all honesty though, she was phenomenal. A lot of attention gets put on the fact that she cries underwater, which is kind of amazing when you think about it and her detractors say that she is essentially playing a sitcom character in a drama. Everyone has a right to their opinion and mine is that if you take her out of the film and add anyone else it would be missing something. I can't tell you what it is, only that Woodley has it.
Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role
Albert Brooks in Drive. I want to mention Patton Oswalt in Young Adult too but the category had too many strengths and I can't think place him above five nominees even if he was fantastic. Back to Brooks though. The man stole a movie, with limited screen time no less, away from two of Hollywood's most electrifying young stars in Ryan Gosling and Carrie Mulligan. That is no easy task. Most importantly, he plays the villain without being showy about it. This quality makes him scarier than most villains today. His quiet and direct approach turns a bad guy into a frightening man. Brooks should be contending with Christopher Plummer to win this award instead of watching with the pit crew.
Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role
There could be a case made for Tilda Swinton in We Need to Talk About Kevin but the movie is so disturbing and was so little seen that it wasn't all that surprising when she was left off despite the fantastic performance. Overall, this category was probably the best job done by the Academy this year. Kirsten Dunst also has the right to complain after Melancholia but the film was too avant-garde and her performance too understated for the Academy's taste.
Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role
Disclaimer: I have not seen Take Shelter or Shame. Yes. There are two movies from 2011 I did not see. I apologize. From what I have been told Michael Shannon (Take Shelter) and Michael Fassbender (Shame) give the two best performances of the year and deserved to be nominated. Of the films I did see the most glaring omission is Ryan Gosling. Perhaps his lack of a nomination is because he was too versatile this year and the voters couldn't choose. Do you pick the nameless bad ass from Drive, the political wunderkind from The Ides of March, or the lovable bad boy from Crazy, Stupid, Love? It must have been too hard to make a unanimous decision leaving him empty handed.
Best Achievement in Directing
Probably the second best category from the Academy this year. It's hard to take any one of the nominees out of the field but I have to. A case could be made for Steven Spielberg for his effort behind War Horse but while the film was far better than it looked, it still isn't the same Spielberg the world wants it to be. I will, however, toss David Fincher's name into the mix. The man has yet to win an Academy Award despite directing some of the best films of our generation in Seven, Fight Club, Zodiac, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and of course The Social Network. He knocked another one out of the park with The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. And while I understand the movie isn't going to sit well with a lot of the older Academy members but if Rooney Mara can get nominated for playing Lisbeth Salander why can't the man who turned an unknown actress into a star?
Best Motion Picture of the Year
In order to justify having three films on this list I am going to pretend the Academy still has 10 nominees this year and throw out the two weakest films in Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and War Horse. The movies I would add in are Melancholia, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part Two. Melancholia was a mind-trip of a movie that affected me like very only the best films ever have. Like it was previously stated, the film was not your typical cinematic fare and that clearly hurt it come ballot time. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo never had a chance and I know it. This doesn't make it one of the more enjoyable films of the year. Some people try to claim the Swedish version was better, and maybe it was, but that doesn't mean that Fincher's take on the story was anything to be scoffed at. The final chapter of the Harry Potter saga may not even be the best film of the series but it was incredibly entertaining and a fantastic cap on a series that started off slowly only to finish off with a bang. Even if that final scene is a little iffy. The series deserves some sort of Academy love and if they were going to shut out Alan Rickman surely they could have found room here for a nomination.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Oscar week: When the Academy is wrong. Part Four.
Before I go on to list the biggest mistake the Academy has made over the last 20 years I figured I could give the lazy kids who don’t want to read the previous couple thousand words a brief summary.
5) The 2009 ceremony got not one or two, but all five nominees for Best Picture wrong, leaving the rightful movies in the dark.
4) Leonardo DiCaprio was blindsided by Jaime Foxx for Best Actor in 2005
3) Shakespeare in Love shoots past Saving Private Ryan to take home Best Picture in 1999
2) Last year’s abomination of letting The King’s Speech stutter past The Social Network for top prize.
As for the biggest error in the past 20 years we go have to go back to one of the strongest years of modern day cinema: 1994. All five movies were absolutely great. Masterpieces even. There was a romantic comedy thrown in the mix, which is almost unheard of. Specifically though, let’s talk about the movies currently ranked as #27, #4, and #1 of all time on IMDb. Keep in mind, only 10 of the top 30 films on this list are from the 90’s at all. That leaves seven spots for nine years of films. At twenty-seventh is the winner Forrest Gump. A fantastic film about.. I don’t even need to talk about it. You’ve seen it and have quoted it for most of your life. I am absolutely not claiming it as an undeserving winner of the award. It was just undeserving THAT year against the following competition. Now, when people ask me what should have won that year I can’t tell them. I honestly have no idea because the two movies that deserve it were both two of the best films of all time and I proudly place them in my personal top 10. Pulp Fiction and The Shawshank Redemption. I don’t even know what else to say. Quintin Tarantino’s time jumping, foul mouthed masterpiece or the Stephen King adaptation that will put you through the ringer of emotions. Pulp Fiction (#4) has some of the best lines of dialogue cinema will ever see and flips the entire genre of gangster movies on its head. Not to mention it contains performances of a lifetime from Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman, Christopher Walken (in one scene, no less), and the role that is credited with saving John Travolta’s career. There had been movies that played with their timeline before, but never to this extent. To have a character die and be in the movie a few scenes later was unheard of. The craziest thing is that it works flawlessly. Most of the world hadn’t known Tarantino yet, but after seeing this film, we got a pretty good idea. Whether it’s learning what they call a quarter-pounder in Amsterdam or the amount of pain a man is willing to go through for a watch, the film is perfection if there ever could be such a thing. Swinging over to The Shawshank Redemption (#1) you get Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman telling the prison story of all prison stories. The film didn’t do well at the box office, which clearly hurt it’s Academy performance but those who did see it could not deny what they had seen. As I said previously this movie will put you through the ringer of emotions be it fear, anger, sadness, loneliness, pride, or happiness, you will feel it. This movie resonates so much with the world that earlier today I was in a meeting where they referred to Shawshank for at least five minutes and it made sense to everyone. The message of the film is get busy living or get busy dying and it’s more and more true every day. It is such an important film that is perfectly directed by Frank Darabont without being too showy or stylized. It is almost the anti-thesis of Pulp Fiction and that is what makes it so hard to compare the two. Either way you slice it though, one of them deserved to call itself Best Picture and sadly neither ever will.
5) The 2009 ceremony got not one or two, but all five nominees for Best Picture wrong, leaving the rightful movies in the dark.
4) Leonardo DiCaprio was blindsided by Jaime Foxx for Best Actor in 2005
3) Shakespeare in Love shoots past Saving Private Ryan to take home Best Picture in 1999
2) Last year’s abomination of letting The King’s Speech stutter past The Social Network for top prize.
As for the biggest error in the past 20 years we go have to go back to one of the strongest years of modern day cinema: 1994. All five movies were absolutely great. Masterpieces even. There was a romantic comedy thrown in the mix, which is almost unheard of. Specifically though, let’s talk about the movies currently ranked as #27, #4, and #1 of all time on IMDb. Keep in mind, only 10 of the top 30 films on this list are from the 90’s at all. That leaves seven spots for nine years of films. At twenty-seventh is the winner Forrest Gump. A fantastic film about.. I don’t even need to talk about it. You’ve seen it and have quoted it for most of your life. I am absolutely not claiming it as an undeserving winner of the award. It was just undeserving THAT year against the following competition. Now, when people ask me what should have won that year I can’t tell them. I honestly have no idea because the two movies that deserve it were both two of the best films of all time and I proudly place them in my personal top 10. Pulp Fiction and The Shawshank Redemption. I don’t even know what else to say. Quintin Tarantino’s time jumping, foul mouthed masterpiece or the Stephen King adaptation that will put you through the ringer of emotions. Pulp Fiction (#4) has some of the best lines of dialogue cinema will ever see and flips the entire genre of gangster movies on its head. Not to mention it contains performances of a lifetime from Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman, Christopher Walken (in one scene, no less), and the role that is credited with saving John Travolta’s career. There had been movies that played with their timeline before, but never to this extent. To have a character die and be in the movie a few scenes later was unheard of. The craziest thing is that it works flawlessly. Most of the world hadn’t known Tarantino yet, but after seeing this film, we got a pretty good idea. Whether it’s learning what they call a quarter-pounder in Amsterdam or the amount of pain a man is willing to go through for a watch, the film is perfection if there ever could be such a thing. Swinging over to The Shawshank Redemption (#1) you get Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman telling the prison story of all prison stories. The film didn’t do well at the box office, which clearly hurt it’s Academy performance but those who did see it could not deny what they had seen. As I said previously this movie will put you through the ringer of emotions be it fear, anger, sadness, loneliness, pride, or happiness, you will feel it. This movie resonates so much with the world that earlier today I was in a meeting where they referred to Shawshank for at least five minutes and it made sense to everyone. The message of the film is get busy living or get busy dying and it’s more and more true every day. It is such an important film that is perfectly directed by Frank Darabont without being too showy or stylized. It is almost the anti-thesis of Pulp Fiction and that is what makes it so hard to compare the two. Either way you slice it though, one of them deserved to call itself Best Picture and sadly neither ever will.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Oscar week: When the Academy is wrong. Part three.
3. In 1999 the five movies nominated for Best Picture were the war epics The Thin Red Line and Saving Private Ryan, the period piece dramas Shakespeare in Love and Elizabeth, and the less period-yet still period drama Life is Beautiful. If you were to sit ten people down and ask them to name their favorite nine would pick Saving Private Ryan. The one who didn’t was most likely too upset by the realism. Somehow, the Academy didn’t pick Saving Private Ryan. It didn’t pick The Thin Red Line with it’s A-list cast, big scope approach. It didn’t even pick Elizabeth with Cate Blanchett fully immersing herself in the character of the queen. Instead it picked a showy, derivative, film about a woman playing a woman in a Shakespeare play and the Bard himself falling in love. I’m not saying that Shakespeare in Love is a bad movie. It just isn’t a very good one. And I am by no means saying that Saving Private Ryan is perfect. It’s not. The ending in the graveyard is a little overacted tries too hard to pull at your heart strings and there are some scenes that I feel don’t work. It is still a highly enjoyable movie that is widely considered one of the top 100 films of all time by critics and the public alike. I have seen both films more than once and own each but in no area would I consider Shakespeare in Love the better movie. The only logical conclusion I can come to is that fans of the movie were split between the two war films and fans of period dramas greatly preferred Shakespeare over the other choices. I was eleven when this year’s awards aired and even then I felt it was wrong. That can’t be a good sign.
2. The King’s Speech. I saw this movie with minimal hopes and they were met but that’s about it. It’s a movie with some great acting, especially from Colin Firth, whom I had never liked until his phenomenal performance in A Single Man. It is also a very cut and dry, typical Oscar film that as Entertainment Weekly puts it, “could have been made at any point in the last five decades.” And it’s true. It’s formulaic and exactly what you would expect. A movie full of accents (never mind that the principle cast is British), showy wardrobes, good conquering evil (good being the king and evil being speech impediments), and a feel good ending (speech impediment no more!). On the other side of the spectrum was The Social Network, a movie that during it’s initial promotion was referred to regularly as “The Facebook Movie.” It sounds nothing like an award winner and actually sounded like kind of a terrible idea. Enter David Fincher. He turns the act of coding into an exciting world where being “plugged in” isn’t nerdy, it’s cool. It’s a movie based on a true story with major liberties taken, but the same can be said for The King’s Speech. The acting is tremendous from the entire ensemble. They all seemed to be born for Aaron Sorkin’s quick-witted dialogue. Justin Timberlake, Andrew Garfield and Rooney Mara whom got snubbed themselves in the Best Supporting Acting races for playing a too-slick for his own good founder of Napster ,a business student who makes a bad business decision, and the (doesn’t actually exist) driving force behind our beloved Facebook respectively. The score, which won an Oscar for Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, is both excellent and fresh. Most importantly though, it’s a movie that took a chance. It didn’t try to say look at the mistakes we’ve made in the past and how far we’ve come like so many other Best Picture winners have. Instead, Fincher told us how the world is now take it or leave it. I own every Best Picture winner from 1991 until 2009 but one (The English Patient) and there is a reason for that. The winners in 1996 and 2010 just weren’t that good. Sure, I have problems with plenty of the other winners, but I can still enjoy them. It’s not even that I have this grudge against The King’s Speech preventing me from watching it again, it’s simply that I have had no desire to. Once was more than enough and I am fine with that. In the year+ since The Social Network showed us a million dollars isn’t cool, Eduardo Saverin’s shares were reduced to .03%, and Mark Zuckerberg isn’t an asshole, he’s just trying so hard to be I have watched it no less than 10 times. Maybe that’s why this ranks so highly on my list of snubs. Or maybe it’s because it’s only been a year and I haven’t been had a new mistake to take my mind off of it. Regardless of why, doesn’t change the blatant injustice that happened on that night in 2011. I guess Aaron Sorkin really knew what he was talking about when he said you don’t get 500 million friends without losing a few Oscar races.
2. The King’s Speech. I saw this movie with minimal hopes and they were met but that’s about it. It’s a movie with some great acting, especially from Colin Firth, whom I had never liked until his phenomenal performance in A Single Man. It is also a very cut and dry, typical Oscar film that as Entertainment Weekly puts it, “could have been made at any point in the last five decades.” And it’s true. It’s formulaic and exactly what you would expect. A movie full of accents (never mind that the principle cast is British), showy wardrobes, good conquering evil (good being the king and evil being speech impediments), and a feel good ending (speech impediment no more!). On the other side of the spectrum was The Social Network, a movie that during it’s initial promotion was referred to regularly as “The Facebook Movie.” It sounds nothing like an award winner and actually sounded like kind of a terrible idea. Enter David Fincher. He turns the act of coding into an exciting world where being “plugged in” isn’t nerdy, it’s cool. It’s a movie based on a true story with major liberties taken, but the same can be said for The King’s Speech. The acting is tremendous from the entire ensemble. They all seemed to be born for Aaron Sorkin’s quick-witted dialogue. Justin Timberlake, Andrew Garfield and Rooney Mara whom got snubbed themselves in the Best Supporting Acting races for playing a too-slick for his own good founder of Napster ,a business student who makes a bad business decision, and the (doesn’t actually exist) driving force behind our beloved Facebook respectively. The score, which won an Oscar for Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, is both excellent and fresh. Most importantly though, it’s a movie that took a chance. It didn’t try to say look at the mistakes we’ve made in the past and how far we’ve come like so many other Best Picture winners have. Instead, Fincher told us how the world is now take it or leave it. I own every Best Picture winner from 1991 until 2009 but one (The English Patient) and there is a reason for that. The winners in 1996 and 2010 just weren’t that good. Sure, I have problems with plenty of the other winners, but I can still enjoy them. It’s not even that I have this grudge against The King’s Speech preventing me from watching it again, it’s simply that I have had no desire to. Once was more than enough and I am fine with that. In the year+ since The Social Network showed us a million dollars isn’t cool, Eduardo Saverin’s shares were reduced to .03%, and Mark Zuckerberg isn’t an asshole, he’s just trying so hard to be I have watched it no less than 10 times. Maybe that’s why this ranks so highly on my list of snubs. Or maybe it’s because it’s only been a year and I haven’t been had a new mistake to take my mind off of it. Regardless of why, doesn’t change the blatant injustice that happened on that night in 2011. I guess Aaron Sorkin really knew what he was talking about when he said you don’t get 500 million friends without losing a few Oscar races.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Oscar Week: When the Academy is wrong. Part Two.
4. Once upon a time there was an actor with a crazy Italian name. He was nominated in 1994 for Best Supporting Actor because he played an autistic kid really well. He spent the next 11 years staring in both artistic and mainstream movies becoming one of the most popular actors in American cinema. Despite playing at least four characters that nobody would even bat an eyelash at if they were nominated, Leonardo DiCaprio was shut out entirely. In 2005 he was finally recognized for his role as Howard Hughes in The Aviator. All seemed to be right with the Academy again. The film was directed by Martin Scorcese and had all of the hype heading into Oscar night. Much like his director, the Academy had again shunned DiCaprio. They instead decided that Jamie Foxx's portrayal of Ray Charles in Ray was the more worthy performance. Not to take anything away from Foxx, he was fantastic, but seriously? One of the more annoying flaws in the Academy is they always feel the need to reward for the past and assume that young actors will have plenty more films to get nominated for in the future. As Martin Scorcese can prove (until he finally won the next year he for The Departed), that is not always the case. Sometimes they decide to make a wrong choice just for the sake of making a wrong choice. I might not be writing this if the award went to Clint Eastwood for Million Dollar Baby. While I wouldn't agree with it, I understand that the Academy was swept up with the movie and it won four of the major six awards that season. Instead they overlooked one of the finest acting performances I have ever witnessed for a very good one. DiCaprio is able to make you feel, if not understand, Hughes uneasiness and eccentric nature over the span of decades. Towards the end of the film DiCaprio is stuck staring at a bathroom door handle that he is too afraid to touch because of his obsessive compulsive disorder and the audience has no choice but to question what options he has. There are germs everywhere and he is stuck in what must be the worst place in the world to be stuck. Cate Blanchett did win an acting award for playing Katherine Hepburn in the film, but it's hard to imagine her performance without DiCaprio on the other side of the screen. This is one of the rare times the Golden Globes were correct by giving him the award. Even more concerning is the idea that since this performance DiCaprio gained one nomination for the overrated Blood Diamond and nothing else. Not Inception. not J. Edgar. not The Departed, and most mystifyingly not for his finest performance from a film I mentioned in the previous post, Revolutionary Road. The man can't catch a break and that is why his omission for The Aviator is the fourth biggest mistake of the Oscars in the past 20 years.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Oscar Week: When the Academy is wrong. Part One.
The 2012 Academy Awards will air this Sunday and it will involve rich and famous people congratulating each other for being rich, famous, and artistic in a very long-winded, unnecessary ceremony. Awards will be handed out and I will disagree with them, especially Best Picture. This happens every year. It probably sounds like I don't like awards season, but this is not at all true. I don't have the complaint that I hear every day: "They nominate movies nobody has ever seen or even heard of." I love awards season. It's my favorite time of the year aside from November and December when all of the supposed awards-worthy movies come to film festivals, gain hype, open in theaters, and gain more hype or make everyone question why they were hyped to begin with. I love it so much that I have made it a point to not only see all of the Best Picture nominees along with most of the acting, but to see them before the nominations are announced. Getting back to my original point, the Oscars are this week and they are about to name the wrong film Best Picture, the wrong actor best actor, and the right actor best supporting actor. Before I discuss the who will win, the who should win, and the who should have won but somehow wasn't nominated because the Academy is full of safe bets, Over the next few days I will discuss the 5 biggest Oscar mistakes in the past 20 years.
5. The 2009 Academy Awards were broken. So broken, in fact, that they amended the rules almost immediately after the ceremony to prevent the travesty that occurred. Five films were nominated for Best Picture and I can make a valid argument against each one of them and name five films that deserved to be in the race just as much, some even more.
I will start with The Reader. This film was made as Oscar bait and the Academy bit. Sure, Kate Winslet is great in it but it isn't her best performance nor film of the year. That distinction belongs to Revolutionary Road. There is a reason Hugh Jackman joked during his opening number singing "I did not see The Reader." It wasn't award worthy and we all knew it.
Frost/Nixon is a fine film with some phenomenal acting. but it isn't anything special. It won a nomination for being a Ron Howard film about a bad time in American history that made today's society look like we came further than we have, not because it was a risky, ground-breaking film that changed the way movies are made or even how we perceive ourselves. It was an above average movie with hype and a premise.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a film I love. It is by far my favorite of the nominees and I don't care how much you tell me it was just backwards Forrest Gump. That being said, it was backwards Forrest Gump. Something that could have been wildly original ended up being a slightly different movie that had won this award previously.
Milk may actually belong in this category. It had everything the Academy loves (the little guy, history being made for the better, great acting, a well-known director who had been nominated before) but there's something missing from this film I have never been able to fully explain.
The year's Best Picture winner was the Danny Boyle directed Slumdog Millionaire. When this film won, which was inevitable as soon as the nominations were introduced I had no problem with it. I enjoy the film and I like the way the story was told. Plus, I'm a sucker for two things: a tragedy and a good love story. This film had both aspects. The reason this film won was because Obama had just been elected president, America was turning downhill and he was our hope. This film was the epitome of hope. Keep in mind Hollywood is known for being a very liberal society. But as time passed the movie clearly doesn't have what it takes to be considered a classic, which is what the winner of this category is supposed to be.
So with those five films thrown out what should be put in? I mentioned one previously in Revolutionary Road. I know it isn't uplifting or hopeful. In fact it is one of the saddest films I have ever watched. This doesn't make it any less beautifully shot, acted, directed, and executed. When I walked out of the theater one of my friends said to me "If you ever are unsure about your current girlfriend, don't have her watch Revolutionary Road. You will break up before the credits roll."Any film that can evoke that much emotion deserves recognition.
Clint Eastwood kind of shot himself in the foot this year by directing two films that had award hopes, and likely split the vote between the two. Changeling and Gran Torino both have their classic Eastwood touches and are definitely stories meant to tug your heart strings. Both have great lead performances (Angelina Jolie in Changeling and Eastwood in Gran Torino) and both have their issues. Maybe Gran Torino should have cast actors instead of just finding children living in a Hmong village. Maybe Changeling should have focused less on dressing down Angelina Jolie and let her acting speak for itself. The fact is these issues didn't drag down either movie enough to make them less enjoyable. Gran Torino was loved by everyone I have spoken with and carried a message of even old dogs can learn new tricks that the Academy should have loved. Changeling is the one film I could throw out of the running in favor of Milk or Slumdog Millionaire, but it deserved more credit than it got.
In the 1992 Academy Awards a new precedent was set with Beauty and the Beast getting a Best Picture nomination. An animated picture didn't get a nomination again until 2010 when the field expanded to 10 nominees. The Academy was able to justify this by creating a Best Animated Picture category in 2001. The reason Up was able to claim that Best Picture nomination in 2010 is because of the public and critical outcry for Wall-e to get one the year before. Wall-e is one of the best films ever made. The main character says two words: Wall-e and (incorrectly) Eva. The first 30 minutes are practically silent and the animation is practically 3D before 3D came back in style. Sure the last half of the movie can't top the first, but it isn't enough to prevent Wall-e from being a great film.
The final nominee should have been a movie that was such a critical success that out of the 283 people that reviewed it for RottenTomatoes.com only 18 gave it a "rotten" rating. This is coupled with the fact that it is the third highest domestic grossing film of all time with $533.3 million. This film is of course The Dark Knight. Those of you who know me probably know I love Batman. I did before this film and I will after the series ends, but this doesn't make it any less worthy of the award. This is not bias, this is truth. It embodies everything that the Academy should love if it could get past the fact that the hero is in a mask. It has a clearly defined good and evil then muddies the waters with Harvey Dent/Two-Face. It has a hopeful, yet dark ending. It shows that there is such thing as too much power for one person, just ask Lucius Fox. It has a public that won't be corrupted. This movie just showed you the world is full of people ready to believe in good. As Batman has the Joker hanging upside down the camera starts to turn, slowly making the Joker no longer upside down, but instead turned us and our perceptions upside down. If the Academy really wanted to award a movie for giving us hope, this was the one.
5. The 2009 Academy Awards were broken. So broken, in fact, that they amended the rules almost immediately after the ceremony to prevent the travesty that occurred. Five films were nominated for Best Picture and I can make a valid argument against each one of them and name five films that deserved to be in the race just as much, some even more.
I will start with The Reader. This film was made as Oscar bait and the Academy bit. Sure, Kate Winslet is great in it but it isn't her best performance nor film of the year. That distinction belongs to Revolutionary Road. There is a reason Hugh Jackman joked during his opening number singing "I did not see The Reader." It wasn't award worthy and we all knew it.
Frost/Nixon is a fine film with some phenomenal acting. but it isn't anything special. It won a nomination for being a Ron Howard film about a bad time in American history that made today's society look like we came further than we have, not because it was a risky, ground-breaking film that changed the way movies are made or even how we perceive ourselves. It was an above average movie with hype and a premise.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a film I love. It is by far my favorite of the nominees and I don't care how much you tell me it was just backwards Forrest Gump. That being said, it was backwards Forrest Gump. Something that could have been wildly original ended up being a slightly different movie that had won this award previously.
Milk may actually belong in this category. It had everything the Academy loves (the little guy, history being made for the better, great acting, a well-known director who had been nominated before) but there's something missing from this film I have never been able to fully explain.
The year's Best Picture winner was the Danny Boyle directed Slumdog Millionaire. When this film won, which was inevitable as soon as the nominations were introduced I had no problem with it. I enjoy the film and I like the way the story was told. Plus, I'm a sucker for two things: a tragedy and a good love story. This film had both aspects. The reason this film won was because Obama had just been elected president, America was turning downhill and he was our hope. This film was the epitome of hope. Keep in mind Hollywood is known for being a very liberal society. But as time passed the movie clearly doesn't have what it takes to be considered a classic, which is what the winner of this category is supposed to be.
So with those five films thrown out what should be put in? I mentioned one previously in Revolutionary Road. I know it isn't uplifting or hopeful. In fact it is one of the saddest films I have ever watched. This doesn't make it any less beautifully shot, acted, directed, and executed. When I walked out of the theater one of my friends said to me "If you ever are unsure about your current girlfriend, don't have her watch Revolutionary Road. You will break up before the credits roll."Any film that can evoke that much emotion deserves recognition.
Clint Eastwood kind of shot himself in the foot this year by directing two films that had award hopes, and likely split the vote between the two. Changeling and Gran Torino both have their classic Eastwood touches and are definitely stories meant to tug your heart strings. Both have great lead performances (Angelina Jolie in Changeling and Eastwood in Gran Torino) and both have their issues. Maybe Gran Torino should have cast actors instead of just finding children living in a Hmong village. Maybe Changeling should have focused less on dressing down Angelina Jolie and let her acting speak for itself. The fact is these issues didn't drag down either movie enough to make them less enjoyable. Gran Torino was loved by everyone I have spoken with and carried a message of even old dogs can learn new tricks that the Academy should have loved. Changeling is the one film I could throw out of the running in favor of Milk or Slumdog Millionaire, but it deserved more credit than it got.
In the 1992 Academy Awards a new precedent was set with Beauty and the Beast getting a Best Picture nomination. An animated picture didn't get a nomination again until 2010 when the field expanded to 10 nominees. The Academy was able to justify this by creating a Best Animated Picture category in 2001. The reason Up was able to claim that Best Picture nomination in 2010 is because of the public and critical outcry for Wall-e to get one the year before. Wall-e is one of the best films ever made. The main character says two words: Wall-e and (incorrectly) Eva. The first 30 minutes are practically silent and the animation is practically 3D before 3D came back in style. Sure the last half of the movie can't top the first, but it isn't enough to prevent Wall-e from being a great film.
The final nominee should have been a movie that was such a critical success that out of the 283 people that reviewed it for RottenTomatoes.com only 18 gave it a "rotten" rating. This is coupled with the fact that it is the third highest domestic grossing film of all time with $533.3 million. This film is of course The Dark Knight. Those of you who know me probably know I love Batman. I did before this film and I will after the series ends, but this doesn't make it any less worthy of the award. This is not bias, this is truth. It embodies everything that the Academy should love if it could get past the fact that the hero is in a mask. It has a clearly defined good and evil then muddies the waters with Harvey Dent/Two-Face. It has a hopeful, yet dark ending. It shows that there is such thing as too much power for one person, just ask Lucius Fox. It has a public that won't be corrupted. This movie just showed you the world is full of people ready to believe in good. As Batman has the Joker hanging upside down the camera starts to turn, slowly making the Joker no longer upside down, but instead turned us and our perceptions upside down. If the Academy really wanted to award a movie for giving us hope, this was the one.
Prologue
For those of you who have ever had more than two conversations with me, I can almost guarantee you know one thing about me: I love pop culture, especially movies. I took a film class online in 6 days and got an A. I own more movies than any person should. I have a nickname based on a trivia question I got wrong once, because I apparently knew enough that I was just expected to get it right. I have a job that allows me to listen to movies on my iPod while I work. Yes, you listen to music, I listen to movies. I can discuss, debate, and quote movies for hours without a break. In fact, a conversation I had this past weekend is what sparked this blog. Granted, it's not like I wasn't already aware of this obsession, but I never wanted to start before because I felt that I have nothing worth saying. There are thousands upon thousands of mid-early 20 year old white males who blog about movies. What makes my opinion any different? Well, maybe nothing, but more importantly, maybe something. I am not doing this to make money nor to even gain a giant following. This blog is because I like discussing movies and now have a fantastic outlet for doing so. I don't like to just watch a film. I will watch it, log onto IMDb to read trivia about the film, then read the FAQs and message boards for different interpretations, then I will read reviews that I both agree and disagree with because I want to know what other people also thought. Sometimes this can completely change my opinion. The first time I watched the 2007 version of 3:10 to Yuma I was incredibly disappointed, until I read a different perspective that read it completely changed the movie. I now thoroughly enjoy 3:10 to Yuma. Hopefully I can provide this experience to someone at some point. I promise that I won't just complain about the blatant lack of respect Vanilla Sky gets or how Avatar is (disappointingly) just Pocahontas with blue people. I won't love every movie I talk about but I won't hate everything either. My opinion is not always the popular one, but it's never against the grain just to be against the grain. I will vary my topics and types of film. Most of all I will be honest and happy because I am discussing something I love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)