I Am DB

February 5, 2011

Oscars 2010: And the Nominees Are…

Filed under: Movies,Oscars — DB @ 3:20 pm
Tags: , , , ,

Complete List of Nominees

With the announcement of the Oscar nominations now nearly two weeks past, you’ve probably been aching with anticipation to hear my thoughts. My apologies for the delay, but I figured it would take this long to read my predictions piece anyway, so I had a little time to play with. Ready to get back into it?

BEST PICTURE
This list shaped up pretty much as expected, with 127 Hours muscling in to replace The Town, which I thought would make the cut. I’ve got no problem with that. The Town was a fine movie and another welcome component of the Ben Affleck Career Reboot, but I was surprised it got elevated to the Best Picture conversation in the first place.

Despite the presence of eight other movies, most still see the contest as boiling down to The King’s Speech and The Social Network. Based on recent events, I have to agree. What recent events, you ask? Well, as I said previously, things can change awfully fast. And so they have. The first half of the season clearly favored The Social Network,  but in the days since the nominations were revealed, the Screen Actor’s Guild honored The King’s Speech with their top prize – for best cast – and the Director’s Guild selected Speech‘s Tom Hooper as Best Director. (I’m having trouble making sense of that one, but I’ll say a bit more below.) Taken individually, neither of these awards necessarily shore up a Best Picture win for The King’s Speech. But taken together – along with a win from the Producer’s Guild – that scenario now looks likely.

I’m about to go off on a tangent here, but longtime readers know this is nothing new. I possess no filter. The day of the nominations, this article appeared on CNN.com and promptly pissed me off. The author, one Lewis Beale, calls The Social Network an “also-ran” behind The King’s Speech and True Grit because Speech led the way with 12 nominations, Grit followed with 10 and Social tied for third with eight. He says the numbers make Speech and Grit the frontrunners.

No, Lewis. No they don’t.

Speech may well be the frontrunner now, but not because it has the most nominations. And sorry, but Grit isn’t a frontrunner at all. The number of nominations a movie gets has nothing to do with whether it will win Best Picture or with whether the Academy thinks it’s the single best movie of the year. If The Social Network is now relegated to “also-ran” status, that’s not because it doesn’t have the highest nomination tally; it’s because three major awards, voted on by many of the same people who vote for the Oscars, all went to a different film, thereby suggesting a lack of the necessary support. And at the time Beale’s article was published, two of those awards hadn’t even been announced yet. The Social Network was still sittin’ pretty.

The movies that receive the most nominations every year are the ones that hit the sweet spot of having appeal in the top races (Picture, Acting, Directing, Writing) AND the below-the-line races (crafts and technical categories). Fantasy or fanciful films (Lord of the Rings, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) and period pieces (Bugsy, Titanic and yes, The King’s Speech and True Grit) are the movies that score the big numbers. A movie like The Social Network is not gonna get nominated for things like Art Direction or Costume Design. That fact has nothing to do with how good the movie is or how much people like it. Contemporary movies almost never get those nominations, fair or not. Fantasy films, science-fiction films and period pieces get those nominations. Simple as that.

There is no reliable correlation between a movie getting the most nominations of the year and then winning Best Picture. Often it happens (Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Titanic) and often it doesn’t (Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Bugsy, Benjamin Button). But guys like Beale try to draw direct lines like these all the time.

To address some of his other points:
  • If voters disliked Social‘s main character so much, they wouldn’t have nominated the actor who played him.
  • If voters didn’t appreciate Aaron Sorkin’s script, they wouldn’t have nominated it. And Sorkin is the favorite to win this award by a wide margin.
  • The film’s supporting actors got dissed because that category is super-competitive and some good work is inevitably left out (like Matt Damon in the more-nominated-than-Social-Network-so-it-must-be-a-frontrunner True Grit).
About the only thing Beale gets right is that The King’s Speech – as enjoyable, well-crafted and audience-friendly as it is – is a bigger-budget Masterpiece Theatre installment that constitutes safe, traditional filmmaking. Although I thought the movie was great, I’d like to see something more interesting singled out by the Academy. But like Ma Kelly in Johnny Dangerously, it goes both ways. Let’s use Benjmain Button again. In 2008, it led the field with 13 nominations, and it was the more traditional, classical movie in the year’s race. But the big winner – taking Best Picture, Director, Screenplay and five others – was Slumdog Millionaire, which displayed a bolder, more modern-style. (Benjamin Button – directed, ironically, by The Social Network‘s David Fincher – won three awards.) To the Academy’s credit, in recent years they’ve been more often swinging away from their traditional safe zone, giving Best Picture to darker, violent movies like The Departed and No Country for Old Men that they have traditionally not annointed. (The Departed, incidentally, was the fourth most nominated film of its year. I guess that was an also-ran too.) So the pendulum may well swing back this year, with The King’s Speech taking Best Picture. But if it beats The Social Network, it will have nothing to do with the latter having received fewer nominations.

Tangent over.

BEST DIRECTOR
I’m not sure what compelled me in the pre-nomination write-up to mention the potential of Christopher Nolan being overlooked, because I really didn’t think it was likely. But there it was. That was easily the biggest shock and disappointment for me. I don’t get it. What does this guy have to do to earn an Oscar nomination for directing? Three citations from the Director’s Guild of America over the past decade, and still not a single nod to match from the Academy. Eight nominations for Inception, so certainly an impressive showing for the film, but I don’t understand the lack of appreciation for Nolan’s undeniable vision and skill. The five nominees (six actually, with the Coen Brothers) all did impressive work, but c’mon – from a directorial standpoint, The King’s Speech is hardly the equal of Inception. Nolan continues to be one of the most exciting directors on the scene right now, and I look forward to the day when the Directing branch of the Academy will wake the fuck up and acknowledge it.

With that out of the way, at least there wasn’t a total rejection of bold, original filmmakers. Darren Aronofsky’s first nomination is cause for celebration, and it’s nice to see David O. Russell embraced by the establishment as well.

BEST ACTOR
Although I still haven’t seen Biutiful, something I’ll soon be able to rectify now that it’s playing at a theater near me, I was happy to see Javier Bardem make the list. Just based on what I’ve heard of the film, it seems like the right move. And it gave the announcement a nice jolt of surprise since his inclusion was by no means a sure thing. Unfortunately, the voters blew it with their omission of Blue Valentine‘s Ryan Gosling. I love Jeff Bridges and enjoyed him in True Grit, but there’s no way that performance belongs here over Gosling’s, whose portrayal of a husband trying to save his marriage is raw and electrifying. The guy literally acted without a net. His absence stings all the more given that his equally impressive co-star Michelle Williams did get nominated. This is a case of two actors truly doing a dance, relying on each other in every way, each one’s amazing work due in part to drawing amazing work from the other. To nominate only one is an act of blindness.

BEST ACTRESS
The fact that Michelle Williams was nominated while Gosling wasn’t speaks, perhaps indirectly, to the disproportionate number of strong roles for women to strong roles for men. There almost always seems to be stiffer competition for the five Best Actor nominations than for the Best Actress slots. I’d argue it’s at least partly the reason Kate Winslet was nominated for both Titanic and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind while her co-stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Jim Carrey, respectively, were slighted. Williams absolutely deserves her nomination; I’m not trying to imply she only made it in because the field was weak. It’s more the point that Gosling didn’t make it because that field had more contenders, which comes back around to the dearth of great roles for women in film. But I digress. My final comment on the subject is that Williams’ nomination thrills me, but also disappoints me because I can’t help but see her recognition as one half of a whole.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Though it was no surprise to see Christian Bale nominated – indeed, his win is as close to a sure thing as we have – it still needs to be said that this recognition from the Academy is long overdue for such a committed and versatile actor. It’s hard to believe this is his first nomination. And while we’re at it, congratulations are also in order for Mark Ruffalo finally making it into the club, over a decade after You Can Count on Me put him on the map. And it’s really nice to see a great working actor like John Hawkes get this level of recognition. Anyone familiar with his work in films like The Perfect Storm and American Gangster and TV shows like Deadwood and Eastbound and Down will surely be happy for him, and will be impressed by his lived-in performance in Winter’s Bone.

The category’s big disappointments are the exclusions of True Grit‘s Matt Damon and The Social Network‘s Andrew Garfield. I made my case for Damon in the previous write-up, so I won’t repeat myself. Except I’m totally going to repeat myself. What the hell happened this awards season to Matt Damon?!? Barely a mention for his essential performance even as True Grit became one of the most acclaimed and honored films of the year. 10 nominations in total, two of those for the acting, and yet no recognition for Damon? These are the same people who nominated him last year for a competent but unremarkable turn in Invictus, yet here overlook the colorful, captivating work he does in what is practically the classic definition of a great supporting performance. The Invictus argument may be unfair, given that a film or performance must be judged against the competition it faces in the given year. Last year’s Supporting Actor field was unusually lacking, whereas this year’s was typically overcrowded. Still, Damon’s work stands among the year’s best.

As for Garfield, I had him pegged last fall as the most likely acting nominee from The Social Network‘s excellent ensemble, but in the end it was Jesse Eisenberg who dominated the awards circuit and gets to carry the flag for the film’s cast at the Oscars. I wish Garfield could be there with him. The role isn’t as showy as, say, Christian Bale’s, but he brings a compelling dynamic to it. I’d even say that much like Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling’s performances work in true sync, so do Garfield’s and Eisenberg’s.

I enjoyed Jeremy Renner’s live-wire work in The Town, but I would absolutely push him to the side in favor of Damon or Garfield. His recognition throughout the season has been a bit of a puzzle to me. But it is nice to see him doing so well of late, nominated (along with Jeff Bridges and Colin Firth) for the second consecutive year and landing a big gig like The Avengers, where apparently he’ll be filling Alan Alda’s shoes in the role of Hawkeye.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Three cheers for the two ladies of The Fighter, Amy Adams and Melissa Leo, both of whom were also nominated in 2008 (Leo as Best Actress for Frozen River, Adams in this category for Doubt). Each did excellent work, all the more impressive considering how easily they could have been dominated by Christian Bale. And although she didn’t quite make my personal list, I was pleased to see Jacki Weaver get the nod for Animal Kingdom…not just because it proved a correct prediction (ten points to Gryffindor, thank you very much), but because it’s nice to see a small movie like this and an actress not well known in the U.S. get such high profile attention. Apparently she is well known in her native Australia, with a long career in films, television and theater (she was recently onstage in Sydney opposite Cate Blanchett in Uncle Vanya). I hope her nomination draws more viewers to the film, which I only saw recently but consider one of the year’s best.

Hailee Steinfeld’s nomination was another quasi-success in my personal Oscar game. I felt she belonged in the Best Actress category, but correctly figured that voters would keep her in the Supporting race, as she was campaigned. As long as she got nominated, that’s what matters. And there’s no doubt that, as a Supporting nominee, she has a much better shot at the prize than she would have had as a Best Actress nominee.

And then there’s Helena Bonham Carter, whose nomination for The King’s Speech was both completely expected and completely unnecessary. I loves me some Bonham Carter, and she does nice work in The King’s Speech (if nothing else, it’s refreshing to see her come out from under the make-up and crazy wigs that she seems to live in onscreen lately). But this is a total auto-pilot nomination (a trend that definitely benefitted The King’s Speech as we work our way down through the categories). She’s being recognized for appearing in a beloved film, and nothing more. Watch the movie and tell me that Bonham Carter really does anything worthy of being singled out for one of the five finest supporting performances of the year. Even the actress herself thinks the attention is misplaced, saying in this Variety article, “I thought it was a boys’ film. Sometimes you get nominated for the wrong things. I’m not knocking it, because I want the good roles, so if it helps me get another really good part, that’s great. For that moment, when you’re nominated, you get offered parts you wouldn’t otherwise be offered. After Wings of a Dove, I got Fight Club. When you are up for awards, they remember you’re still alive.”

Couldn’t voters have expanded their horizons just a little? Where’s Greta Gerwig, who gave a beautiful, should-be breakout performance in Greenberg? How about Marisa Tomei for the conflicted girlfriend and mother in Cyrus, or Imogen Poots as a sexually confident teen with a hidden agenda in Solitary Man? If those are too outside the box, there were choices in the safety zone too. Hello? Julianne Moore for The Kids Are All Right? (A lead role, but hey, it worked for Steinfeld.) Or Marion Cotillard for her balance of tragic and creepy in Inception? And if they were set on Bonham Carter, why not honor her for Alice in Wonderland? She was one of the few good things about that movie, evoking both laughs and sympathy as the cranially-challenged Red Queen. A nomination for that performance would have been a good reminder that even work which appears to be pure fun can earn accolades (after all, it’s been a couple of years since Robert Downey Jr.’s Tropic Thunder nomination).

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Here was one case where I was perfectly happy to get a prediction wrong. I thought Black Swan would make the list, but also made clear that I didn’t think it should. I’m glad the Writer’s branch agreed with me. In its place, they nominated Mike Leigh for Another Year, which I still have yet to see, but which I mentioned as a possible spoiler given the Academy’s fondness for Leigh’s work. I’m not the biggest Leigh fan in the world, and I’ve always found his screenwriting nominations to be frustrating given that his movies are largely improvised and do not follow the traditional screenwriting path. (This article from The Hollywood Reporter briefly describes his process.) But who’s to say there’s a right way to write? I chose Derek Cianfrance’s Blue Valentine script as one of my personal picks to be nominated, and although he worked on that piece for roughly 12 years, he’s the first to admit that much of the end result was born out of improvisations he executed with Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling. So I guess I’ll just take my hypocrisy and get myself to Another Year.

Other than that, the category shook out as I expected. At least Christopher Nolan got nominated here.

BEST FILM EDITING
Nolan’s snub in the Best Director race was definitely the day’s biggest WTF omission, but equally inexplicable to me, if not as high profile, is Inception not getting nominated for Editing. Are you fucking kidding me?!? Lee Smith’s achievement should be the clear winner in this category. The rules of Nolan’s story may have confused some audiences, but thanks to the crisp editing, we always knew where we were even as the film was shuttling between multiple levels of dreams and reality. It was masterful visual storytelling, yet it’s nowhere to be found here while a straightforward film like The King’s Speech makes the list? Editor friends, if you’re reading this, please explain that to me.

BEST ORIGINAL SONG
I commented previously that I had no opinion about the contenders in this race, as no song had stuck out for me all year. The Academy couldn’t even find five songs they liked enough to nominate, selecting only four. But I was a bit surprised that they ignored Burlesque (not that I’ve seen it) and “Shine”, from Waiting for Superman. I do like Dido a lot, so I’m pleased to see her get an Oscar nomination, even if her song from 127 Hours didn’t stick with me after my initial viewing of the film.

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
Alexandre Desplat composed scores for four films released in 2010, and of course he earned his Oscar nomination for the least interesting one. Actually that’s not fair; I haven’t seen Tamara Drewe. But Desplat’s compositions for both The Ghost Writer and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I were far more deserving of nominations than his adequate work in The King’s Speech, which proved to once again be selected as if voters were just sleepwalking through their ballot. At least Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross made it in for The Social Network, along with Hans Zimmer’s indispensible contribution to Inception.

Okay, that’s all the commentary I have to offer until the big night looms closer and I weigh in with my predictions. You may have been expecting opinions about every category, but there’s not always much to say at this stage. You can use the hours it would take you to read more of my commentary to instead go catch one of the nominated films you have yet to see. In the meantime, here are two brief gimpses of your hosts Anne Hathaway and James Franco getting primed.

January 24, 2011

Oscars 2010: Nominations Eve

Filed under: Movies,Oscars — DB @ 1:34 pm
Tags: , , , ,

Lots of people talking about the Oscars are looking to February and discussing what will win, but I’d like to roll things back a little and actually let the nominations get announced before I start predicting the winners. It must seem awfully old-fashioned of me in this day and age, when so many awards are handed out before the Oscar nominations are even announced that the winners already seem like foregone conclusions. If you listen to the professionals, the endgame for this season has already been inscribed. The Social Network. David Fincher. Colin Firth. Natalie Portman. Christian Bale. Melissa Leo. Toy Story 3.

Yeah, it’ll probably look something like that. But humor me anyway. Since it has apparently become so boring to predict the winners, let’s a least relish the opportunity to predict the nominees – the one part of the process that can still offer some surprises. The winners may already be engraved in gold, but two things can always be expected at this stage: each category has a few slots up for grabs, and some great work is bound to go un-nominated. I for one don’t want to miss the opportunity to cry foul, so let’s not close the book on the 2010 award season before we’ve had a chance to milk it for all we can.

So here we go. My predictions, my personal picks and a little bit of commentary along the way.

Okay, a large amount of commentary along the way.

I should point out that as always, despite a solid effort, not being a Los Angeles-based professional in this game means there are a handful of movies I haven’t seen which might have impacted my personal choices, mostly in the below-the-line categories. Among this year’s possibly-award-friendly crop that I haven’t yet taken in: Biutiful, Another Year, Casino Jack, Megamind, Made in Dagenham, Four Lions, Love and Other Drugs, TRON: Legacy, The Tempest, Burlesque and Country Strong.

BEST PICTURE
Black Swan
The Fighter
Inception
The Kids Are All Right
The King’s Speech
The Social Network
The Town
Toy Story 3
True Grit
Winter’s Bone

Early on I thought Black Swan would be too polarizing to get a Picture nomination, but it has been a constant presence in the precursor awards and no longer seems like a risky bet at all. I wonder if it would have as good a chance with only five slots. I think a five-film race would likely have been The Fighter, Inception, The King’s Speech, The Social Network and True Grit. I feel somewhat guilty playing into a narrative that suggests two tiers of nominees, but it’s hard not to go there.

Of this list, I’d say The Town and Winter’s Bone are the most vulnerable. The Town has reportedly done quite well with Academy members and it’s managed to hold its ground throughout the awards season thus far, which bodes well for its inclusion. Winter’s Bone, which fills this year’s token slot for the Little Indie That Could, has also made a strong showing thanks to the film critics associations and ten best lists that kept it alive at year’s end, long after its debut at Sundance. Acting and screenwriting nominations are likely, but I’m not sure if it will have enough support from the Academy-at-large to crack the top ten. If it doesn’t, 127 Hours is waiting in the wings to take its place. And while we haven’t been looking at a ten-film race for very long, last year offered at least one big surprise in the nomination for The Blind Side. A few more years of this will tell if we should always expect something unexpected; if we should, keep an eye out for Shutter Island and The Ghost Writer.

Personal Picks: Black Swan, Blue Valentine, The Fighter, The Ghost Writer, Inception, The King’s Speech, Never Let Me Go, The Social Network, Toy Story 3, True Grit

BEST DIRECTOR
Darren Aronofsky – Black Swan
Christopher Nolan – Inception
Tom Hooper – The King’s Speech
David Fincher – The Social Network
Joel Coen & Ethan Coen – True Grit

Where I have the Coen Brothers, the Director’s Guild of America nominated David O. Russell for The Fighter. I wasn’t sure what to do there. I went this way out of a sense that The Fighter may come off as more of an actor’s movie than a director’s movie, however much O. Russell is (of course) responsible for the movie being as good as it is. The Coens have become Academy favorites, and their stamp can be felt more on True Grit than O. Russell’s can on The Fighter – not a criticism; just an observation. But this could go either way.

I could also see Tom Hooper being overlooked despite the popularity of The King’s Speech. Hooper isn’t a big name (not that other directors, as the ones doing the voting, would care about that), plus for all its strengths, The King’s Speech doesn’t necessarily come across as a work of bold directorial vision the way Black Swan or Inception do. Still, I think it’s highly unlikely Hooper would be overlooked (even if he still hasn’t quite re-entered my good graces after his obnoxiously excessive use of dutch angles in HBO’s John Adams miniseries). And then there’s Christopher Nolan, who seems a lock for Inception but was snubbed in 2008 for The Dark Knight. Such a slight is unlikely to happen again, but maybe Nolan just leaves Academy members cold (he earned DGA nominations for both Memento and Knight, but has yet to earn an Oscar nod for Directing). With David O. Russell and the Coens vying for that fifth spot, and Danny Boyle’s impressive work on 127 Hours still in the ether, an out-of-left-field surprise seems unlikely. But I can’t say I’d be shocked if Roman Polanski were to sneak in for The Ghost Writer, an admired movie by an admired filmmaker.

Personal: Boyle, Aronofsky, Nolan, Polanski, Fincher

BEST ACTOR
Jeff Bridges – True Grit
Jesse Eisenberg – The Social Network
Colin Firth – The King’s Speech
James Franco – 127 Hours
Ryan Gosling – Blue Valentine

We have two sure things here in Firth and Franco. Beyond that, I think the field is somewhat open. Or at least, I can see vulnerabilities in each of the other frontrunners.  Let’s start with Jesse Eisenberg. I’m a big fan of his, so I’ve been pleased to see his strong showing in the season so far. But it’s surprised me too. His unique, high-strung energy and natural fast-paced speech rhythms can make it seem like he’s doing the same thing from film to film, which of course he isn’t. Additionally, the character he plays is not all that likable or sympathetic, which could be a factor voters consider. I think back a few years to Emile Hirsch’s sensational performance in Into the Wild, which some thought may have missed out on an Oscar nomination because voters didn’t like the character, saw him as too selfish, etc. Who knows if that’s true, and obviously it shouldn’t make a difference anyway, but that’s the Oscars for you. If these sorts of things matter, it could be a strike against Eisenberg. On the other hand, he’s part of a film that has much broader support than Into the Wild did; he’s been nominated for the four major pre-Academy prizes: the Golden Globe, the Broadcast Film Critics Association award, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) award and the Screen Actor’s Guild award (Hirsch scored two of those four); and he’s also been named by quite a few more critics organizations than Hirsch was, including two that are among the more high-profile: the National Board of Review and the National Society of Film Critics (both of which skip right to naming a winner rather than having nominations). So things do look good for Eisenberg, but I’d say a snub is not out of the question.

Next, Jeff Bridges. Last year’s winner of this award will probably be back in the race, especially given the popularity True Grit seems to be enjoying with viewers in and out of the Academy. But while Bridges is a hoot in the role, is it really seen as one of the best performances of the year? I could see him getting squeezed out. As for Ryan Gosling, I worry that I’m letting my personal feelings cloud my judgment by including him. Not that he’s a longshot; he’s firmly in the running for a nomination. But Blue Valentine‘s unflinching look at a troubled marriage may be more than voters want to put themselves through. Still, actors vote for actors, and given the buzz out of Sundance around the film’s central performances – not to mention the controversy over the rating – I have to think people would look to see what the fuss was about. And I have to think they’d be pretty floored. Although neither of the film’s stars were nominated for a SAG award, the movie was a late release and SAG voters may not have had the chance to see it in time. I’m hoping the extra month or so will have allowed them to rectify that.

If any one of these guys is overlooked, a likely replacement is Robert Duvall for Get Low. I struggled with whether or not to include him. He has BFCA and SAG nominations in his favor, plus he’s Robert friggin’ Duvall. People love him. But have they seen the film? Casting a slightly wider net, the popularity of The Fighter could sweep Mark Wahlberg into the race, but his performance is overshadowed by the more colorful ones around him. He does a fine job, but I don’t see him breaking through. Aaron Eckhart has earned praise for his role as a grieving father in Rabbit Hole, but the award attention so far has all been around Nicole Kidman.

The biggest question mark for Best Actor has to be Javier Bardem in Biutiful. Word is that he went to hell and back for this role and gives an incredibly powerful performance, yet it’s been ignored all season long. Unfortunately, Biutiful has yet to open in San Francisco, and my obsession with seeing as many Oscar-potential movies as possible before the nominations did not extend to taking an L.A. day-trip. You gotta draw the line somewhere, I guess. I hear the film is pretty bleak, so it may be another one that voters shy away from. Then again, fellow actors like Sean Penn, Ryan Gosling, Josh Brolin and Ben Affleck have sung Bardem’s praises, and Julia Roberts hosted a screening to drum up support. It wouldn’t be the first time Bardem has had some help. Back in 2000, when he was barely known to American audiences, several Hollywood stars (I want to say Jack Nicholson and Winona Ryder were among the champions, but I can’t recall for sure) tried to draw attention to his performance in Before Night Falls. It paid off; he earned his first nomination. Can lightning strike twice? One glimmer of hope for Bardem is that he was nominated last week for a BAFTA award. Oscar voting had already closed by then, so the news couldn’t spur any undecided Academy members into action. But there is some overlap between the BAFTA and Academy membership, so perhaps his nomination suggests a growing awareness of the film and his work.

Personal: Eisenberg, Firth, Franco, Paul Giamatti (Barney’s Version), Gosling


BEST ACTRESS
Annette Bening – The Kids Are All Right
Nicole Kidman – Rabbit Hole
Jennifer Lawrence – Winter’s Bone
Natalie Portman – Black Swan
Michelle Williams – Blue Valentine

Annette Bening and Julianne Moore have been pegged for nominations ever since The Kids Are All Right played at Sundance last year. But as awards season got underway, Moore found herself sitting on the sidelines while Bening not only got all the accolades, but was heralded the frontrunner. I’m not quite sure why Moore has been so unjustly overlooked, any more than I understand why Bening has been so celebrated. She’s great in the movie, but honestly her character is a variation on others we’ve seen her play before, and I actually felt her character was less interesting than Moore’s. Still, Bening’s nomination is a given; we’ll see if the Academy surprises us by honoring Moore as well. Either way, I think it’s safe to say that Bening’s frontrunner status has been eclipsed by Natalie Portman. But that’s a topic for a later post.

Jennifer Lawrence, the young breakthrough star of Winter’s Bone, has been nominated for just about every award possible, so she’s a safe bet, and Nicole Kidman is likely, though I wouldn’t say a lock. Michelle Williams is in the same boat as Ryan Gosling. In a just world she would be a sure thing, but it could go either way.

Who is poised to sneak in should any of these ladies fail to make the cut? Well, there’s Moore of course. Hilary Swank scored a surprise SAG nomination for Conviction, after being ignored by every other group. Swank did a fine job in the film, but I don’t think the performance merits award attention. Maybe SAG members couldn’t resist another Bening-Swank match-up. (Both of Swank’s Oscar wins for Best Actress came with Bening having been her strongest competition.) Swank’s SAG nomination was even stranger when considering that her co-star Sam Rockwell was not nominated. His performance had Oscar buzz for months in advance, and as usual the actor didn’t disappoint. He did get a few nominations along the way, but the positive word of mouth hasn’t amounted to much.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo‘s Swedish star Noomi Rapace has been mentioned, but I don’t think it will happen. A tougher call to make is Lesley Manville, the British actress who’s earned raves for her role in Mike Leigh’s Another Year. The Academy has been kind to Leigh’s films, but Manville doesn’t seem to have caught on. Though she has definite spoiler potential, I don’t feel confident in her chances. And there seems to be differing views on whether she should be in the Lead or Supporting category…a problem that also affects True Grit‘s Hailee Steinfeld, who I’ll talk about later since I believe she’ll be nominated in the Supporting category (though I definitely see her as a lead).

Personal: Lawrence, Carey Mulligan (Never Let Me Go), Portman, Steinfeld, Williams

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Christian Bale – The Fighter
Matt Damon – True Grit
Jeremy Renner – The Town
Mark Ruffalo – The Kids Are All Right
Geoffrey Rush – The King’s Speech

Almost always one of the toughest categories in terms of just not having enough room for all the worthy performances. My  against-the-grain prediction here is Damon. Including him is foolhardy given that there’s zero precedent in the season thus far. Which I just can’t wrap my head around. Damon is so damn good in this movie, and brings more depth to the part than I was expecting, having heard ahead of seeing it that he was primarily comic relief and that his part was really small…neither of which is true. I find it hugely surprising that he has been virtually shut out of the race thus far, and while it may be my personal appreciation of the performance overwhelming my good sense, I believe he stands an excellent chance of surprising everyone. If people are loving True Grit, how can Damon not be a huge part of the reason for it? And if voters fill the movie out in lots of other categories – which it seems likely they will – I just can’t imagine them not citing Damon too. Hell, if he got nominated last year for Invictus, this deserves to be a slam dunk.

The other risky call here – though much less so than Damon – is Jeremy Renner, a Best Actor nominee last year for The Hurt Locker. I couldn’t decide whether to go with him or with John Hawkes’ terrific performance in Winter’s Bone. Both have done well in the precursor awards, but neither well enough to be considered sure things. They each earned SAG nominations, but Hawkes missed out on both the Golden Globes and BFCA awards, while Renner scored both. That’s why I’m going with him, but it took me a while to commit. And hey, maybe they’ll both make it if I’m wrong about Damon.

Also in the mix – indeed, a highly possible spoiler – is Andrew Garfield, excellent as the moral center of The Social Network. Many consider him to be a lock, but I worry that his chances have faded somewhat and that voters are more focused on Eisenberg. Garfield’s co-star Armie Hammer, who superbly embodied the Winklevoss twins (while actually only embodying one of them, if we want to get technical), also deserves to be in the running. Unfortunately the field is just too crowded. But Armie will be okay; he’s just been cast opposite Leonardo DiCaprio in Clint Eastwood’s J. Edgar Hoover biopic. Earlier I mentioned Sam Rockwell, who has been relegated to a distant longshot at this point, and I’d be remiss not to mention two others who were excellent in a film that has been unjustly overlooked due to an ill-advised release strategy: Ed Harris and Colin Farrell in The Way Back. Peter Weir’s first movie in seven years, it was quietly released late in December for a one-week qualifying run in Los Angeles, and just went into wider release last Friday. That’s no way to handle a movie from so illustrious a filmmaker.

Personal: Bale, Damon, Garfield, Hawkes, Ruffalo

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams – The Fighter
Helena Bonham Carter – The King’s Speech
Melissa Leo – The Fighter
Hailee Steinfeld – True Grit
Jacki Weaver – Animal Kingdom

So let’s talk about The Steinfeld Problem. As pointed out above, I clearly see her as a lead and believe she deserves to be nominated as such. The studio is campaigning her in the Supporting category, and most of the awards and nominations she’s received so far (and she’s received many) have placed her there. But Oscar voters don’t always follow the campaigning, and from what I’ve read, many are putting her down for Best Actress. It could happen. In 2008, Kate Winslet was promoted for Best Actress in Revolutionary Road and Best Supporting Actress for The Reader, but Academy voters chose to nominate her as a lead for the latter. In 2003, young actress Keisha Castle-Hughes was campaigned as a Supporting Actress for Whale Rider, but earned a surprise nomination in the Best Actress race. Which way will Steinfeld go? While she’ll surely earn a lot of votes in both categories, I think the Best Actress field is stronger than Supporting Actress, so if for no other reason than that, I suspect more will stick with Supporting Actress. Plus, those who want her to go all the way know she’ll stand a better chance of winning if she’s in the Supporting race. Kristopher Tapley, who runs the great Oscar website In Contention, reported on a conversation he had with True Grit producer Scott Rudin, who explained his reasons for Steinfeld being in the Supporting category. Tapley disagrees, and both make interesting cases. We’ve already established which side I’m on, and I agree with the point that True Grit is ultimately Mattie’s story, not Rooster’s…just one of the reasons Best Actress is where she belongs.

Moving on, I’ve included Jacki Weaver for Animal Kingdom, but I’m not confident that enough voters have seen the film. She’s made an impressive showing in the season to date, including BFCA and Golden Globe nominations, but she has no name recognition in Hollywood, which could hurt her given the film’s low profile. Still, I couldn’t think of anyone who seemed any more logical. Mila Kunis stands a chance for Black Swan, bolstered by the Golden Globe/BFCA/SAG trifecta. But I just don’t see the Academy nominating Kunis. Maybe it’s my own opinion that there’s nothing award-worthy about the performance (not to say Kunis doesn’t do a great job). Or maybe it’s the sense that she hasn’t quite earned her stripes yet (which wouldn’t matter in the case of newcomers like Jennifer Lawrence or Steinfeld, who give such knockout performances. Kunis’ work just doesn’t compare). But maybe I’m wrong. Her co-star Barbara Hershey is also a longshot candidate, but I think her part is too small to get her in. Lesley Manville, as mentioned in the Best Actress section, could show up here instead, and it’s even possible that Julianne Moore could land here, though that would be pretty unexpected at this point. Other names are floating on the outskirts – Dianne Wiest for Rabbit Hole, Olivia Williams for The Ghost Writer – but they seem like distant shots. I’ll stick with Weaver.

Personal: Adams, Marion Cotillard (Inception), Greta Gerwig (Greenberg), Leo, Rosamund Pike (Barney’s Version)

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Black Swan – Mark Heyman, Andres Heinz, John McLaughlin
The Fighter – Scott Silver, Paul Tamasy, Eric Johnson
Inception – Christopher Nolan
The Kids Are All Right – Lisa Cholodenko, Stuart Blumberg
The King’s Speech – David Seidler

It disappoints me to think that Black Swan will make the cut here since the screenplay is clearly the film’s weak link. It’s that much more a testament to Darren Aronofsky’s gifts as a filmmaker that the movie is so strong when its script is so “meh.” But with a lack of other strong contenders – or a lack of attention being paid to a broader range of contenders, I should say – I’m afraid it will likely score a spot. That same narrow scope will probably aid The Fighter as well, which is at least a good, solid script if not really one of the year’s very best.

Mike Leigh is always a possibility in this category, though I don’t get the sense that Another Year has extended its reach beyond being a critic’s darling. I could see Derek Cianfrance’s Blue Valentine sneaking in, which would be a pleasant and much deserved surprise, but I’m not holding my breath. The Writer’s Guild of America nominated the indie dramedy Please Give, but the guild is not the best barometer for the Oscars since its rules render so many would-be contenders ineligible. (A film has to be produced according to certain WGA guidelines in order to be qualify.) In fact, the first two films mentioned in this paragraph – along with The King’s Speech – were left out of consideration for this reason. With all three back in the running, I don’t see Please Give making the cut.

Personal: Animal Kingdom, Blue Valentine, Cyrus, Inception, The King’s Speech

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
127 Hours – Danny Boyle, Simon Beaufoy
The Social Network – Aaron Sorkin
Toy Story 3 – Michael Arndt
True Grit – Ethan Coen, Joel Coen
Winter’s Bone – Debra Granik, Anne Rosellini

This list looks solid and safe. If anything is vulnerable I’d say it’s 127 Hours, which seems to have faded somewhat from the general conversation (James Franco’s performance notwithstanding). Other worthy contenders that could slide in include The Ghost Writer, Rabbit Hole and The Town (which, along with I Love You, Phillip Morris, earned WGA nominations…likely  attributable to Toy Story 3 and Winter’s Bone being cockblocked by the guild).

Personal: Same

BEST ANIMATED FILM
Despicable Me
How to Train Your Dragon
Toy Story 3

I only recently caught Despicable Me, and was less impressed than I expected to be given all the acclaim and box office success. It was cute, but not much more. People seemed to love it though, and with Toy Story 3 locked in and How to Train Your Dragon nearly as certain, I’m guessing Tangled and The Illusionist will miss out. But maybe there’ll be an obscure shocker. Last year, nobody saw The Secret of Kells coming. It’s too bad that once again there will only be three nominees. There were 15 eligible films, and the rules state that only when there are a minimum of 16 can there be five nominees (at least 8 are required for the category to exist at all).

Personal: How to Train Your Dragon, Tangled, Toy Story 3

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
Matthew Libatique – Black Swan
Wally Pfister – Inception
Jeff Cronenweth – The Social Network
Robert Richardson – Shutter Island
Roger Deakins – True Grit

Black Swan, Inception and True Grit are the sure bets here. Jostling for the remaining two spots are a handful of great contenders. The King’s Speech and The Social Network rounded out the American Society of Cinematographer’s list, though as is always the case with the guilds, there is rarely a complete match-up. I’m going with Shutter Island, but 127 Hours stands a good chance too. And if there are a few categories where The Way Back may actually be on voters’ radar, this could be one.

Personal: Black Swan, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I, Inception, Shutter Island, True Grit

BEST FILM EDITING
127 Hours
Black Swan
Inception
The King’s Speech
The Social Network

Personal: Black Swan, Inception, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, The Social Network, The Town

BEST ART DIRECTION
Alice in Wonderland
Inception
The King’s Speech
Shutter Island
TRON: Legacy

Personal: Get Low, The Ghost Writer, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I, Inception, Shutter Island

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
Alice in Wonderland
Burlesque
The King’s Speech
The Tempest
True Grit

Personal: Alice in Wonderland, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I, Shutter Island, The Tempest, The Wolfman (I haven’t actually seen The Tempest, but just based on some photos I can clearly see it deserves to be here.)

BEST ORIGINAL SONG
I See the Light – Tangled
If I Rise – 127 Hours
Shine – Waiting for Superman
We Belong Together – Toy Story 3
You Haven’t Seen the Last of Me – Burlesque

Honestly, I haven’t seen a single movie this year with an original song that left an impression on me. The five songs above have been the most oft mentioned in the season so far, so I’ll go with them. There are a couple of other songs from Burlesque that could conceivably make the cut, although “You Haven’t Seen the Last of Me” is apparently Cher’s big number, so I’m sure that will carry some weight. Tunes from Country Strong and The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader have been mentioned too, so perhaps one of them will make it in. Also, Eddie Vedder has a song from Eat Pray Love in the mix. I haven’t heard it, but considering that the Academy owes Vedder bigtime after snubbing his Into the Wild contributions back in ’07, maybe they can try to make it up to him now.

Personal: No opinion

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
A.R. Rahman – 127 Hours
Danny Elfman – Alice in Wonderland
Hans Zimmer – Inception
Alexandre Desplat – The King’s Speech
Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross – The Social Network

True Grit and Black Swan might have fared a chance here, but both were deemed ineligible due to the large percentage of pre-exisiting music used in the films. I can’t speak to that in the case of True Grit, but certainly Black Swan‘s score is largely built around Tchaikovsy’s Swan Lake. I hope Reznor and Ross make the cut. They’re considered frontrunners, and yet the music branch of the Academy is known for making some tone deaf decisions lately. I have a sneaking suspicion that Reznor and Ross’ outsider status could hurt their chances. Hopefully I’m imagining things.

Personal: The Ghost Writer (Alexandre Desplat), Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I (Desplat), Inception, Never Let Me Go (Rachel Portman), The Social Network

BEST MAKEUP
Alice in Wonderland
Barney’s Version
The Wolfman

The Makeup branch works differently than most other branches when it comes to voting, in that the list of contenders has already been whittled down to seven. These are the three I suspect will make the cut (Barney’s Version features nicely done aging makeup, something which often finds a place in the final three.) The remaining possibilities are The Fighter, True Grit, The Way Back and Jonah Hex.

Personal: Alice in Wonderland, Barney’s Version, The Way Back

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
Alice in Wonderland
Inception
Iron Man 2
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I
TRON: Legacy

The Visual Effects branch also has preliminary rounds, but for the first time this year, five nominees will be selected from the list of seven, rather than the usual three. Given how much movies today use and rely on visual effects work, it’s nice to see that more films will be recognized…though I can’t quite understand the logic of sticking with the process as it’s been, seeing as only two films from the “semi-finals” will be omitted. The other two contenders this time around are Scott Pilgrim vs. the World and Hereafter. My memory of Scott Pilgrim is that the effects were perfectly fine, but not really award-caliber. Hereafter features a stunning tsunami sequence that is certainly worthy of recognition, but I’m not sure it’s enough to justify nominating the film. Alice in Wonderland‘s effects were inconsistent, but I think they’ll win out over Scott Pilgrim and Hereafter. I would like to have seen The Social Network in the running, for the incredibly impressive CGI of the Winklevii (which more than makes up for the overdone, digitally inserted cold breath), but Social didn’t even make the branch’s preliminary list of 15. Nor did Black Swan, which I’d say was also worthy of consideration. But Alice notwithstanding, and without having seen TRON yet, this looks like a good list.

Personal: Black Swan, Inception, Iron Man 2, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I, The Social Network

BEST SOUND MIXING
Black Swan
Inception
Iron Man 2
Toy Story 3
True Grit

BEST SOUND EDITING
Black Swan
Inception
The Social Network
Toy Story 3
True Grit

This is always a shot in the dark for me, as I never have and likely never will – no matter how many cool DVD special features on sound I watch – understand these two categories. To me, what should be honored – which I don’t think these two categories do, exactly – is overall sound design. How is sound used in the film? What impact does it have? How does it contribute to the experience of the movie? Sound mixing and sound editing obviously contribute to that, but I think I understand enough to know that neither covers the overall sonic experience of the film. I’m making the picks above based on a) instinct, b) the nominations by the Cinema Audio Society and Motion Picture Sound Editors and c) by looking at the nominees in years past and trying to extract some sort of logic from them. We’ll see how I do. The King’s Speech could certainly find a place on one or both of these lists, as could action movies like TRON: Legacy, Unstoppable, Salt or Red. Musicals and animated films also tend to do well here, so perhaps Burlesque, How to Train Your Dragon or Tangled – which combines both – could show up.

Personal: If the category worked the way I, in my infinite ignorance, think it should, I’d be citing Black Swan, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I, Inception, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World and…ummm…maybe…I don’t know, lemme get back to you.

That’s as far as I can go. Unfortunately my intake of documentaries and foreign language films is embarrassingly paltry, and I know nothing of the contenders for the short film awards. So I’ll end with this point, to bring it all full circle: the awards pundits had pretty much declared The Social Network the winner of Best Picture, but guess what movie didn’t win the prize on Saturday night from the Producer’s Guild of America? The PGA went with The King’s Speech. Does that mean Speech is now a lock for the Oscar? No. Sometimes the PGA’s pick goes on to win the Oscar, sometimes it doesn’t. All it means is that a lot can happen in a month. Just ask Eddie Murphy, or the producers of Brokeback Mountain.

This thing can’t be over yet; it hasn’t even started.

May 7, 2010

Twenty Films I’m Looking Forward to in 2010

Filed under: Movies — DB @ 7:48 pm
Tags: , ,

Yes, it’s May. Yes, it’s a little late for a list of movies I’m looking forward to in a year that is already five months old. Yes, I’m going to do it anyway. After all, how many really good movies have you seen in the last four months?

That’s what I thought.

The only earlier releases that would have made my list are Shutter Island and Greenberg, and so far there have been few flicks that have really impressed (How to Train Your Dragon is one of the few). So with the summer just getting started and the fall still ahead, here are the movies I’m most eager to see (of the ones I’m already aware of…)

20. THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT – I love movies that give actors a chance to shine, and the reviews out of Sundance (the festival’s output is heavily represented on this list) say this film does just that. Julianne Moore and Annette Bening earned high praise as a longtime couple whose teenagers seek out the sperm donor from whence they came (played by Mark Ruffalo). The comedic drama is directed by indie darling Lisa Cholodenko, whose credits include High Art and Laurel Canyon. (July)

19. SOLITARY MAN – I’ve always liked Michael Douglas, but I’ve never thought of him as one of my favorite actors. Yet I get pretty excited everytime a movie comes along that offers the potential of a rich role for him, so maybe I need to re-evaluate. In this film directed by the screenwriters behind Rounders and Steven Soderbergh’s Ocean’s Thirteen and The Girlfriend Experience, Douglas plays a guy dealing with the fallout from years of selfish behavior and damaged relationships. Supported by Mary Louise Parker, Jenna Fischer, Susan Sarandon, Jesse Eisenberg and his old friend Danny DeVito, Douglas is earning his best reviews since Wonder Boys. If that’s the bar he’s meeting, we’re in for a treat. (May)

18. THE TOWN – In 2007, Ben Affleck made an impressive directorial debut with Gone Baby Gone, so I’m hopeful that his second outing behind the camera – a heist film which he co-wrote – will yield similarly positive results. His casting of Jeremy Renner, Chris Cooper and Jon Hamm suggests he’s on the right track; his casting of himself might suggest to others that he’s not. But it doesn’t worry me; I’ve liked Affleck’s performances in films like Good Will Hunting, Chasing Amy, Shakespeare in Love, Changing Lanes and Dogma, so I’m firmly rooting for his efforts both in front of and behind the camera. (September)

17. THE SOCIAL NETWORK – On paper, this film about the personal battles that went down around the founding of Facebook sounds less than exciting. But when a movie is written by Aaron Sorkin and directed by David Fincher, attention must be paid. Here’s hoping they prove my initial judgment wrong. Jesse Eisenberg, Justin Timberlake, rising British star Andrew Garfield (The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus) and Rashida Jones head the cast. With all the recent developments around Facebook’s privacy policy, I already smell a sequel. (October)

16. SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD – Michael Cera stars as a geeky kid (big surprise) who must battle his dream girl’s evil ex-boyfriends in order to date her. It’s based on a cult comic book which I’ve never seen, so my interest in this boils down to its director, Edgar Wright, whose Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz are two of the best comedies in recent years. Those films had the advantage of a hilarious on-screen duo in Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, but Wright’s snazzy, energetic direction was a big part of the appeal. Combine that with a goofy concept, Cera’s awkward charm and a cast that includes Jason Schwartzman, Chris Evans and Brandon Routh as some of his foes, and this could be one of the year’s most fun movies. (August)

15. THE CONSPIRATOR – There are simply not enough films that put the beautiful, smart, incredibly underrated Robin Wright front and center. For that reason alone, this film makes my list. Under the direction of Robert Redford, Wright plays a woman on trial as one of the figures who planned the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. James McAvoy co-stars as her attorney, a Union soldier who takes the case reluctantly and then has reason to wonder if his client is being wrongly prosecuted. Tom Wilkinson, Evan Rachel Wood, Justin Long, Danny Huston, Alexis Bledel, Jonathan Groff and Kevin Kline also star. (Fall)

14. THE FIGHTER – Director David O. Russell re-teams with his Three Kings and I Heart Huckabee’s star Mark Wahlberg in this story of boxer “Irish” Mickey Ward. That name means nothing to me, but here are some that do (in addition to Russell and Wahlberg): Christian Bale, Melissa Leo, Amy Adams and screenwriter Paul Attanasio, whose credits include Donnie Brasco and Quiz Show. (December)

13. BLUE VALENTINE – Another Sundance breakout, this one chronicles the crumbling marriage of a young couple played by Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling. Sounds like familiar territory, but it was received with near universal praise at the festival and promises to be a great showcase for two of our finest young actors, who were being pegged for 2010 Oscar nominations before 2009’s had even been announced. (December)

12. WALL STREET: MONEY NEVER SLEEPS – It’s been over 20 years since Oliver Stone and Michael Douglas collaborated on Wall Street, earning the latter an Academy Award and introducing “greed is good” into the annals of pop culture. But whereas most sequels are made with a single motivation in mind – cash money – here is the rare example that actually feels justified. The original wasn’t exactly a blockbuster, so it’s not like the motivatation here is profit or a desire to cash in on an idea that had some mileage initially but has nowhere left to go. Instead, we’ve got a central character who’s actually worth revisiting years later. Like Fast Eddie Felson, who Paul Newman returned to play in The Color of Money 25 years after originating the character in The Hustler, Gordon Gekko is ripe for revisiting in the wake of a financial crisis brought about by the very greed that he claimed was so good. What has happened to him after his imprisonment and the collapse of the financial markets? I look forward to seeing what Stone and Douglas come up with after all this time. The sterling supporting cast features Shia LeBeouf, Frank Langella, Josh Brolin, Carey Mulligan and Susan Sarandon. (October)

11. SOMEWHERE – I wasn’t so into Sofia Coppola’s last film, the visually sumptuous but narratively unengaging Marie Antoinette. Her latest, however, seems more akin to Lost in Translation, and that’s a good sign. The unexpected casting of Stephen Dorff, as a partying movie star left in charge of his 11-year old daughter while staying at Hollywood’s famous Chateau Marmont, only adds to the curiosity factor. (December)

10. TREE OF LIFE – A holdover from last year’s list, this is the first new film from Terrence Malick in five years…and only his fifth since 1973. I don’t know any more about it now than I did a year ago, but as a big fan of The Thin Red Line and The New World, I’m looking forward to seeing what the poet auteur comes up with this time. Sean Penn and Brad Pitt appear. (Fall)

9. LOVE RANCH – Another selection from last year’s list that didn’t see the light, this long-on-the-shelf film is finally getting a small release this summer. Directed by Taylor Hackford, it tells the story of the first legal brothel in Nevada and the husband and wife who founded it, played by odd-couple Oscar winners Joe Pesci and Helen Mirren. Pesci is the reason this movie makes my list. This marks his first non-cameo role in a film since 1998, and it will be great to finally have him back in action. (June)

8. THE COMPANY MEN – John Wells, the television writer and showrunner whose small-screen work includes ER , The West Wing, Southland and China Beach, makes his feature directorial debut with a timely film about the effects of corporate downsizing and the troubled economy on a group of men and their families. One of the best reviewed movies at Sundance this year, it stars Ben Affleck, Chris Cooper (also together in The Town), Tommy Lee Jones, Kevin Costner, Maria Bello, Rosemarie DeWitt and Craig T. Nelson. (Fall)

7. BLACK SWAN – For his follow-up to The Wrestler, director Darren Aronofsky unveils this psychological thriller featuring Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis as rival ballet dancers. That’s all I know about the plot…and with the promise of Portman and Kunis in leotards for two hours, it’s all I need to. (Fall)

6. THE OTHER GUYS – For every pair of Mel Gibson-Danny Glover A-list cops who are out on the streets getting all the action and cracking the big cases, there’s another duo who aren’t quite as…good. In the latest from Will Ferrell’s partner-in-comedy Adam McKay, Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg play the second-banana team to Samuel L. Jackson and Dwyane Johnson’s top cops. If the McKay-Ferrell comedy stylings of Anchorman and Talledega Nights – or this awesome “motion” poster – are any indication, this should be pretty damn funny. (August)

5. MACHETE – Robert Rodriguez generally makes two kinds of movies: those based on ideas his young kids come up with – resulting in horrifying films like Shorts and The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl – and R-rated, pulpy action films whose lineage can be traced back to his breakthrough, El Mariachi. These include Once Upon a Time in Mexico, From Dusk ‘Til Dawn, Sin City and Planet Terror (his half of the three-hour Tarantino collaboration, Grindhouse). While the mere trailers for the films in the first category tend to make me throw up in my mouth, I’ve always enjoyed his contributions in the latter, and found them to be great over-the-top fun. Machete looks to follow in that tradition. Born as one of the fake trailers created for Grindhouse, Rodriguez is expanding the premise of a revenge-seeking ex-Federale to feature length. Danny Trejo, a Rodriguez regular who starred in the trailer, is onboard as the title character. He heads up a wildly eclectic cast that includes Jessica Alba, Don Johnson, Lindsay Lohan, Jeff Fahey, Steven Seagal and Robert DeNiro. That’s right – Lohan, Seagal and DeNiro, together at last. How can a movie with a (real) trailer like this not kick ass? (September)

Vodpod videos no longer available.

4. TOY STORY 3 – A couple of months ago, I asked a friend who works at Pixar how Toy Story 3 was looking. She glanced up, and lit by the glow of her iPhone, ominously answered, “Dark.” Wuh? Toy Story? Dark? What, does Andy get a limb hacked off or something? Maybe not that dark, but the word is that while the latest adventure of Buzz, Woody and the rest is as much fun as ever, it’s also heading to some surprising emotional places. The return of these characters already had me reeled in, but curiosity over this mysterious new direction has piqued my interest considerably. Most of the main voice actors return, including Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Joan Cusack and Don Rickles. Newcomers to the toy chest include Michael Keaton, Whoopi Goldberg, Timothy Dalton and Ned Beatty. Little Miss Sunshine’s Academy Award winning screenwriter Michael Ardnt penned the script. (June)

3. HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PART I – The Potter films always thrill and frustrate me in equal measure. As a die-hard fan of the books with a detailed level of recall, I get irritated by alterations that seem unnecessary or leave gaping plot holes. But seeing J.K. Rowling’s world come alive through incredible production design, cinematography and performances by a cast of stellar British actors never gets old. As the final chapter in Harry’s saga, Deathly Hallows is the densest book in the series and in many ways the trickiest to adapt. Splitting it into two films (Part II arrives in July 2011) is a smart move, but even that won’t allow the filmmakers to capture everything. Seeing how they begin to resolve Harry’s onscreen saga earns the movie a high place on the list. There’s one particular sequence from the book that I’m dying to see on film. I don’t know if it will be in Part I or Part II, but if they do it right it could be as creepy as anything in The Exorcist. Yeah…you heard me. (November)

2. THE WAY BACK – I don’t know what this movie is about. I think it’s set during World War II. I know that it stars Ed Harris, Colin Farrell, Saorise Ronan and Jim Sturgess. That’s an appealing line-up. But the reason this movie makes my list can be summed up in four words: Directed by Peter Weir. The gaps between Weir’s movies are often long, but he almost always delivers something worth the wait. With a filmography that boasts Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, The Truman Show, Dead Poet’s Society, Witness, and Fearless among others, Weir always leaves me anxious for his next film. Having waited since 2003 for a new one, I’m more than ready. (Fall)

1. INCEPTION – From his debut Following to his breakthrough Memento to his gigantismash The Dark Knight, Christopher Nolan has shown a consistent knack for twisty plotting, strong character development and more recently, all the action and spectacle of the best popcorn movies. His latest, said to be his most ambitious film to date, sounds like the ideal vehicle for him to take it all to yet another level. Details have been tightly guarded, but it apparently involves a team of high-tech thieves who infiltrate people’s dreams. Nolan just keeps getting better, and this one sounds scary-good. Leonardo DiCaprio, Marion Cotillard, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Michael Caine, Cillian Murphy, Ken Watanabe and a back-from-the-80’s Tom Berenger star. (July)

March 14, 2010

Oscars 2009: What Went Down

Filed under: Movies,Oscars — DB @ 4:49 pm
Tags: , ,

Complete List of Winners

It’s been a week since Oscar night, and I’ve finally had a chance to put my thoughts down in writing…just in time for nobody to give a shit anymore. But so be it. I need to get it out of my system. As usual, I needed to watch the whole thing again during the week so I could pick up on all the stuff I missed entirely or just didn’t take in fully amidst the commotion and distractions of an Oscar party. I know the idea of watching the entire three-and-a-half hour show a second time right away probably seems like torture to most of you, but I like going through it and hearing all the speeches and whatnot. Yes, my movie and Oscar geekhood runs that deep…deeper than the Tree of Souls that Avatar‘s Na’vi worship and revere. So with that, a final dip into the 2009 Oscar pool…

BEST PICTURE
All season long it shaped up as an Avatar vs. Hurt Locker showdown. In the end, the Iraq drama took the big two prizes, proving that when it comes to winning Best Picture, nobody cares about how much a movie made at the box office. It irritated me that in the first few days after the show, articles kept popping up trying to explain why Avatar lost, as if it had been universally deemed the heavy favorite and suffered a stunning upset. Why do people feel a need to justify the loss? This wasn’t a Crash/Brokeback Mountain scenario. I’ll tell you right now why Avatar lost: because The Hurt Locker won. Why didn’t I see articles last year asking why Frost/Nixon or Benjamin Button lost to Slumdog Millionaire? Everyone has a theory about Avatar, and I’ll bet if you asked enough Academy members who didn’t place the movie high in their list, each theory would be heard. There’s no big mystery here, so stop trying to prolong the drama. The majority of Academy members felt The Hurt Locker was a better movie than Avatar. The end.

THE ACTING AWARDS
The opening of the show, with the lead acting nominees paraded out onstage and forced to stand there like beauty pageant contestants while the announcer said their names, was awkward and unnecessary. And why were only the lead actors singled out?

The presentation of Best Actor and Best Actress borrowed from last year’s show by having someone directly address each of the nominees. It’s still a good idea, but it didn’t work nearly as well this time. Last year, a former winner in each category spoke to a current nominee. This year, friends and co-stars of each nominee did the talking. So far so good, except that whereas last year’s presentations were short and sweet, this year’s rambled on as the speakers tried to cover not just the performances, but what wonderful people the nominees all are. Again, nice idea…but it went on too long. Producers Adam Shankman and Bill Mechanic said they took the idea from what Robert DeNiro said last year about Sean Penn. In that instance, the former winner was also speaking to a personal friend. But DeNiro’s speech covered Penn the man and his  performance more succinctly than the speeches this time. The highlight was Tim Robbins’ salute to Morgan Freeman, and it was nice to see Michelle Pfeiffer there for Jeff Bridges 20 years after The Fabulous Baker Boys, but overall the execution was not great. One improvement was that clips of the nominated work was shown, which I always think is an important part of the acting awards. And seriously, what was with the bitchslap to the supporting acting nominees this year? They didn’t get included in the opening (yeah, I said the idea was stupid, but I didn’t like seeing the supporting actors given second-class treatment), they didn’t get the friend/co-star tribute…the supporting actors got treated with the lack of respect that actors are supposed to reserve for the winners in the technical categories!
x
As for the winners themselves? No surprises in Waltz, Mo’Nique or Bridges. I know some have criticized Mo’Nique’s speech, but I thought hers was one of the best of the night, beginning with her thanking the Academy for “showing that it can be about the performance and not the politics.” After all the flak she took for not campaigning, not showing up at every press or promotional event, etc. I cheered her for calling out all the idiots who thought she should be denied for not playing the game. By the way, does her husband ever smile? I’ve seen her win four different awards, and each time he sits there blankfaced, not looking moved, happy, proud or anything. Your wife just won an Oscar, dude. Look alive! (Okay, a Google Image search has revealed lots of pictures of him smiling. Apparently he just doesn’t do it when she wins anything.)
And then there’s Sandra Bullock. Her win will go down in Oscar history as one of the Academy’s more ill-advised selections (see Roberto Benigni), but as I have made my feelings clear, I’ll finish the season on a positive note. Over the years, there’s been a pattern in which winners who I didn’t think deserved their gold managed to soften the blow by giving great acceptance speeches (I’m thinking Michael Caine for The Cider House Rules, Russell Crowe for Gladiator and Adrien Brody for The Pianist). Bullock, at least, continued that tradition. She was funny, humble and classy – it was an A+ speech all the way (her moment comes at about the 8:25 mark). And if there’s an upside to her win, maybe it’s that she will now have access to better material – and will make better choices – that match the talent I do think she has, even if it wasn’t on display in The Blind Side to the degree that should merit an Academy Award nomination and win.

Also, in the spirit of really praising Bullock, I have to say that her showing up at the Golden Razzies ceremony the night before the Oscars to personally pick up her Worst Actress prize for All About Steve was pretty damn cool, and further showed why people love her so much. She really is about as down to earth as a movie star can be. Her Razzie speech is definitely worth checking out (skip ahead to the 1:26 point for her entrance).

THE WRITING AWARDS
The biggest surprise of the night was the Best Adapted Screenplay win for Precious, which made Geoffrey Fletcher the first African-American to win a writing Oscar. I loved Precious, so I can’t complain about this win, but I think Up in the Air deserved that prize. I was disappointed to see it go home empty-handed. But Jason Reitman seemed to be enjoying himself all night, and hey: the guy is 32 years old and is coming off his second Best Picture/Best Director nomination in three years. He’ll be back.

The Hurt Locker‘s win for Original Screenplay was a mild surprise. While everything starts with the script obviously, I think that Hurt Locker‘s biggest strengths came in other areas, whereas Inglourious Basterds was, in my mind, a stronger achievement in screenwriting. Still, Tarantino’s got one writing Oscar on the shelf, and Waltz’s Supporting Actor win kept Basterds from going 0 for 8.

THE SPEECHES
-Costume design winner Sandy Powell didn’t come off so well, beginning her speech by saying in a rather blasé way that this was her third win. Here’s a hint to future award winners: don’t get up on stage and highlight that you’ve won the award before. It doesn’t exactly endear you to anyone, particularly your fellow nominees watching from their seats. Powell went on to try and pay tribute to the talented, hardworking costume designers on low-budget and contemporary films who don’t get the award recognition they deserve because these categories favor period pieces. It was a nice sentiment, but she somehow made it come off like an insult. Let’s hope she does a little better if and when she wins Oscar #4.

-One of the things that happens when I go back through and watch the show a second time is I can hear all the speeches that get drowned out by the din at the party. Sometimes those speeches have some of the funniest or most touching tributes of the ceremony, like Hurt Locker screenwriter Mark Boal thanking his father, who died a month ago. Or one of Avatar‘s art directors, who said that fifteen years ago he was diagnosed with a fatal condition that he obviously beat. I liked that Avatar‘s visual effects winner Joe Letteri thanked the actors for trusting the VFX artists with their performances. “I know that couldn’t have been easy,” he said. Original Score winner Michael Giacchino eschewed reading a list of names and instead spoke about the importance of supporting children’s creativity, thanking his parents for doing so with him. Nice moments, all.

-And then there was the WTF moment of the night, which came when Documentary Short winner Roger Ross Williams was interrupted by a crazy lady who turned out to be his fellow recipient, Elinor Burkett. There have been numerous accounts of the personal drama that was playing out in front of the world at that moment, but this short article from Salon is the most complete one I’ve seen. Obviously Williams and Burkett each have a different take on what happened – both in the making of their film and on the Kodak stage – but from what the video shows (the clip is embedded in the article) they both could have handled the situation a little more professionally. Still, it made for a great Oscar moment!

THE HOSTS
Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin did well, but I feel like they could have done more. The monologue was funny, but the entire thing consisted of acknowledging members of the audience and having fun with them. Nothing wrong with that; it’s always a component of the host’s monologue. But this year it wasn’t a component; it was all they did. Still, it generated some great jokes. The best of the night may have been when Martin said, “In Inglourious Basterds, Christoph Waltz plays a Nazi obsessed with finding Jews.” Then, spreading his arms wide to indicate the entire room, “Well Christoph? The motherload!”

It would have been great to see these two guys do more bits. The Paranormal Activity moment was funny, and I liked that they parodied that movie at the Oscars, but think about how much funnier it could have been. As it was, the camera caught the two hosts moving into awkward positions in their sleep, with Martin eventually getting up, standing over Baldwin and punching him in the head. But why not have Martin wake up in the middle of the night and start marching across the room playing a trombone? Then he gets back into bed and a little while later Baldwin gets up and starts trying to assemble an IKEA bookcase. They could have aired snippets all throughout the show, with each gag becoming progressively more elaborate.

That’s pretty much how it went for the whole show. They were good, they were funny, but I can’t help thinking there were a lot of missed opportunities.

THE SHOW
Good show or bad, I always love the Oscars. That said, I think Shankman and Mechanic’s production was lacking in a lot of areas, especially after the great show put on last year.

-The ongoing belief that Oscar ceremonies must have dance numbers resulted in a decent by time-wasting opening number featuring Neil Patrick Harris. It’s hard not to like him, so he saved the number. Unfortunately, the second dance-a-thon of the evening fared less well. Pairing up dancers and excerpts from the nominated film scores wasn’t a first, but the mix was awkward. The dancers were talented, but the numbers just didn’t fit with the music. To be fair, it’s a challenge trying to do a meaningful dance to The Hurt Locker‘s score. But it was a challenge that, in terms of the choreography, they were unable to meet.

-There were also some odd things happening with the set. It looked good enough at the beginning and end of the show, but there were head-scratching sections in the middle where the backdrop was a big rack of miscellaneous lampshades. I thought I was looking at the back wall of a Pottery Barn. When that disappeared, it was replaced by what looked like a giant empty, bookcase. Or maybe it was a honeycomb. All I know is that it was bizarre and ugly. Not sure what the designers were thinking…

-The tribute to horror films was a good idea, but as it was the only such piece in the show, it felt out of place and didn’t connect to anything else that was going on. Introducing the clip, Kristen Stewart said, “It’s been 37 years since horror had a place on this show, when The Exorcist picked up two Academy Awards.” That’s great…except the montage that followed began with footage from Jaws, which was nominated for Best Picture and won three Oscars two years after The Exorcist. The reel went on to include plenty of horror films that have earned Oscars since The Exorcist, including Aliens, Misery, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, The Silence of the Lambs (which won Picture, Director, Actor, Actress and Adapted Screenplay) and The Sixth Sense, which won nothing but garnered six nominations. And in what universe are Beetlejuice and Edward Scissorhands considered horror films?

-The “37 years” bit was just one piece of misinformation delivered throughout the night. Some may have just been bad teleprompter reading, but I suspect they were the result of sloppy writing. Alec Baldwin introduced Robert Downey Jr. as an Oscar winning actor, but in fact Downey has never won the award. Samuel L. Jackson said that Up was only the second film to be nominated for Best Picture and Best Animated Film…but that’s not really true, since there was no Best Animated Film category when Beauty and the Beast was nominated for Best Picture. And when Charlize Theron introduced Best Picture nominee Precious, she said that it had earned four nominations when it actually earned six. Note to the Academy: You need to get your friggin’ facts straight, and I’m happy to offer my services next year to make sure you do.

-The John Hughes tribute fared much better than the Horror presentation, and was a wonderful gesture on the part of the Academy given that while Hughes’ films had a strong impact on a generation of filmgoers, they were never the kind of movies embraced by the Academy. For them to single him out for special tribute was damn cool, and the montage did his career justice, working in footage not just from the teen angst films that we immediately associate with Hughes, but also comedy gems like Planes, Trains and Automobiles, Mr. Mom and Vacation. Having so many of his stars there added to the presentation, even if Jon Cryer, Anthony Michael Hall, Ally Sheedy, Judd Nelson and Macaulay Culkin got trotted out only to say one sentence each.

-For the second year in a row, the In Memoriam montage was accompanied by a live song performance rather than a piece of canned score, and it was once again a nice way to go. There was plenty of talk afterwards about the omission of Farrah Fawcett, which Academy executive director Bruce Davis attributed to her career consisting primarily of television, rather than feature films. I actually think it’s a fair point, until people rightly point out that Michael Jackson was included. Davis’ justification for that is pretty weak in my opinion, and his last comment is flat out insulting.

-It jumped out at me that presenters were all saying, “And the winner is” instead of the more traditional, “And the Oscar goes to.” Shankman told Entertainment Weekly, “I always thought it was overly polite. I wanted a sense of tension in the show. We thought of [the Oscars] as the most well-dressed reality competition show in the world.” Well, it didn’t add any tension, and Shankman’s status as a reality show judge doesn’t make this Dancing with the Stars. It also struck me that in nearly every category, presenters read the names of the nominees awfully quickly, barely giving the audience time to applaud. Tom Hanks came out to present Best Picture and didn’t even read the list of films one last time. I know I’m in the minority, but I’d rather let the nominees savor their brief moment than sit through a pointless dance number. Sorry Doogie.

-The Best Animated Feature introduction was clever, as newly created animation featured each film’s main character talking about what winning an Oscar would mean to them.

-Oh, and while the explanation of the two sound awards was a nice, helpful touch, using The Dark Knight as the example doesn’t make up for not nominating it for Best Picture last year.

-This year’s ceremony turned out to be the highest rated in five years, since The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King swept the accolades. Avatar‘s presence was probably the biggest factor, and the expanded Best Picture category – which also allowed for hits like District 9 and The Blind Side – probably helped. I’d guess the pairing of Martin and Baldwin was a draw as well. If 2010 sees a box office phenomenon make the Best Picture list, then perhaps we’ll be able to draw more likely conclusions. But the ceremony itself hardly re-wrote the book or did anything likely to excite new viewers. Even with the removal of song performances and honorary awards, the show still clocked in at three-and-a-half hours. So while Shankman and Mechanic are surely taking pride in the ratings boost, I think they should be thanking James Cameron and the Academy before they pat themselves on the back.

-Finally, I was pretty shocked that there wasn’t a single mention of the earthquakes in Chile or Haiti. Usually the liberal Hollywood crowd is all about calling attention to those kinds of disasters, but nary a word was heard or a ribbon displayed.

THE PRESENTERS
-Best in Show, Part I: Tina Fey and Robert Downey, Jr. They made for one of the night’s high points as Fey the Writer and Downey Jr. the Actor offered dueling perspectives on the importance of the screenplay. Fey scores two years in a row!

-Best in Show, Part II: Ben Stiller. Some people seem to think this gag was a misfire, but those people need their sense of humor checked. Stiller’s suit-wearing Na’vi made for yet another of his classic Oscar moments, which have included dressing as a bearded, rambling Joaquin Phoenix and a Lord of the Rings dwarf. I especially enjoyed the portion of his alien speech that was actually a Passover prayer in Hebrew.

-Poor Taylor Lautner, of Twilight and countless girls’ fantasy lives, looked out of his element in that room and was stiff as a board introducing the horror tribute. And his co-presenter Kristen Stewart proved once again that she doesn’t perform nearly as well on live stage as she does on film. These two were not the best representation of young Hollywood…though maybe they were the most accurate. At least Zac Efron showed some charisma when he came out later on.

But do Taylor Lautner and Miley Cyrus really belong at the Oscars? Mechanic told The Los Angeles Times, “The younger side of the audience has been drifting for years, so we’re more conscious of trying to build a youth element into the show.” Oh brother. First of all, I think I can tell you why the youth audience has been drifting for years: because most kids couldn’t give a shit about the Academy Awards. Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think No Country For Old Men, Million Dollar Baby, The Last Emperor and The English Patient are big draws for the 12-17 demographic, and you’re kidding yourself if you think hordes of them are going to tune into the telecast waiting around for some tween star’s minute-and-a-half in the spotlight. Even in the years when a popular film like Titanic, Lord of the Rings or Avatar is nominated, the youth crowd is still unlikely to be a significant part of the audience. Plus, the awards begin at 8:30 on the east coast, so a big chunk of the youth audience you’re courting could very well be in bed. So please, future producers: stop trying to win teenage viewers by throwing pretty faces with no real accomplishments onto Oscar’s stage. If you want to spotlight younger actors, try some like Dakota Fanning or Saoirse Ronan, who’ve actually done some real work (and to be fair, Kristen Stewart, Amanda Seyfried and arguably Zac Efron do fit that bill). But putting Cyrus and Lautner on the Oscars is just cheap pandering.

– I would like to suggest to the Academy that next time you invite Jennifer Lopez to be  presenter, go out on a limb and let her present in a category that doesn’t have anything to do with music. I’ll bet she can handle it.

-Sean Penn is one of our best actors, but he often finds it difficult to string together a coherent thought. A few nights before the Oscars, he was on Real Time with Bill Maher talking about his humanitarian work, and I’m pretty sure half of what he said didn’t really make any sense. His comments on Oscar night seemed headed for the same place, although upon second viewing I think he was trying to apologize to his ex-wife Robin Wright for not thanking her when he won last year, while also chiding the Academy for not nominating her this year for The Private Lives of Pippa Lee. Sean, you might be best sticking to the script.

-I liked that most of the Best Picture clips were presented by people who had an association with the filmmaker – Keanu Reeves, for example, saluting The Hurt Locker, which was helmed by his Point Break director Kathryn Bigelow (that’s right, the director of Point Break won an Oscar!), or Jeff “The Dude” Bridges introducing the Coen Brothers’ A Serious Man, etc. And it was kind of cool to have them do it on a raised platform in the middle of the auditorium, rather than on the main stage.

THE DRESSES
Being a fan of beautiful women, I’m as interested in the parade of dresses as any Sex and the City fan. I was largely underwhelmed by this year’s crop, but that’s not to say the ladies themselves weren’t looking good, so a shout-out to this year’s MVP’s: Penelope Cruz, Cameron Diaz, Tina Fey, Carey Mulligan, Zoe Saldana, Charlize Theron, Kristen Stewart, Demi Moore (still hot), Michelle Pfeiffer (also still hot, and really needing to make more movies), George Clooney’s date and of course, God love her, Kate Winslet.

THE HONORARY AWARDS
The switch to 10 Best Picture nominees was not the only big change the Academy instituted this year. In the past, honorary Oscars for lifetime achievement and such have been given out during the ceremony like any other, but this year a special, private ceremony was held to recognize those artists. I’m disappointed about this, since I enjoy seeing these presentations as much as any other, and I like that they get the high profile recognition that comes with appearing in the broadcast. On the other hand though, rather than having to be be squeezed into a 5-10 minute slot amidst the three-hour telecast, they can be feted more intimately and more time can be devoted to celebrating their careers. This year’s honorees were Lauren Bacall; Roger Corman, the king of low-budget B-movies, who launched the careers of Jack Nicholson, Ron Howard, Francis Ford Coppola, James Cameron and many others; and Gordon Willis, whose extraordinary cinematography was seen in such films as The Godfather trilogy, All The President’s Men and each of Woody Allen’s movies from Annie Hall to The Purple Rose of Cairo. The Irving G. Thalberg Award, which is given to producers with a lasting body of work, was presented to John Calley, whose credits include The Cincinnati Kid, Postcards from the Edge, The Remains of the Day and Closer. If you’re like me and like to see these presentations, click here for video clips, photos and more.

THE INDEPENDENT SPIRIT AWARDS
As usual, the Oscars tend to cast a shadow over the other award show that always takes place the same weekend, The Independent Spirit Awards. It’s always a fun show – certainly more casual and looser than the Oscars, and always good for some quality laughs. One of the things I always like about the Spirit Awards is that there’s a palpable sense of community. At the Oscars, the camera often catches stars in the front row looking bored or not bothering to applaud while the winner in a “lesser” category is heading to the stage or delivering a speech. The stars are just as big at the Spirit Awards, but the atmosphere feels much more embracing. Winners aren’t played off stage after 45 seconds, but are allowed to say what they want, as long as it takes. Once again I’m sure I’m in the minority here, but I like that.

Precious was the big winner, taking Best Feature, Director, Actress, Supporting Actress and First Screenplay. Jeff Bridges also won, and as he finished his speech, he held the award up to his wife and told her it was really gonna tie the room together. Nice, Dude. Very nice.

Ben Stiller was on hand as well, and once again was a highlight of the ceremony as he presented Best Feature…

And so another award season comes to and end. Though later than I would have hoped, I’m putting together a list of the movies I’m most looking forward to this year, so we’ll see how many of them show up in next year’s Oscar race. Now then…I think I have a Lost write-up to go work on. Farewell, sweet Kate.

February 20, 2010

Favorite Movies of 2009

Filed under: Movies — DB @ 1:24 pm
Tags: , ,

A traditional Top Ten list doesn’t make much sense to me. I can pick out my absolute favorite few movies in a given year, but beyond those, I’m not really sure what distinguishes my seventh favorite movie of the year from my eighth. By the same token, cutting the list off at ten seems equally pointless if the idea is to highlight the movies from the year that meant the most to me. Again, I’m not sure how to differentiate number ten on my list from number twelve. So what follows is a look at my favorite movies from the year, period…starting with the top of the top and working my way through the rest alphabetically rather than assigning arbitrary rankings.

And away we go…

#1:
PRECIOUS
If you’ve been afraid to see this movie, get over it. Yeah, it’s not exactly the feel-good movie of the year….but for my money, it was easily the best, so no excuses. You may think that the story of Claireece “Precious” Jones – an obese, illiterate 16 year-old, abused every which way by her monstrous mother and pregnant with her second child by her father – will be unbearably dark and depressing, but you couldn’t be more wrong. Remember last year’s crowd-pleasing indie (and winner of eight Academy Awards) Slumdog Millionaire? Precious is satisfying in much the same way. It doesn’t have the same stand-up-and-cheer momentum going for it, but like Slumdog‘s protagonist Jamal,  Precious refuses to be defined by her environment or background and will not allow others to set her limitations. From an audience’s perspective, the more important similarity between the two films is the emotional response they earn. As unforgiving as Precious’ circumstances are, she has the courage to fight against the forces that threaten to keep her down, and in her struggle is beauty and hope. She may still face a bleak future, but she’ll face it on her own terms, and not without a fight. Precious is not depressing; it’s inspired and inspirational.

As the producer of films like Monster’s Ball and The Woodsman, Lee Daniels has shone a light on dark, complex stories that ask more of us than another empty Mummy sequel or Katherine Heigl romantic comedy…and which give us more in return. Now he reveals himself as a director just as willing to tackle challenging material and find a way to make it accessible to a mainstream audience. With a script by Geoffrey Fletcher, adapted from the novel Push by Sapphire (the film’s full title cites its source material), Daniels strikes a delicate balance between the harsh realities of Precious’ life and the fantasies that provide her an escape, and he employs carefully measured cinematic flourishes to keep the gritty elements from becoming too overbearing. He is aided in this effort by the terrific, undersung cinematography of Andrew Dunn, who keeps dark the stifling apartment Precious shares with her cruel mother, but also bathes it in an orange glow as if the fires of hell are burning just offscreen. He contrasts this with brighter, more natural lighting for the classroom where Precious begins to come into her own.

In the title role, newcomer Gabourey Sidibe does more than just fulfill the highly specific physical requirements of the character. She nails the girl’s soul, and her performance is only more impressive once you see an interview with her and realize what a transformation she makes, holding every part of her physical self differently in order to become Precious. Lenny Kravitz and Mariah Carey shine in smaller roles as a nurse and social worker, respectively. Carey, especially is a wonderful surprise. Shedding her known persona entirely, she plays an average woman working a difficult job that takes its toll, and the strength of her performance is that in just a few scenes she shows us more about this woman than the movie has time to tell. She’s really excellent. At the alternative school where Precious begins her new journey, she finds a friend and supporter in the lovely Miss Rain, played by Paula Patton with an open heart and a tough edge lurking below the surface. The girls who play Precious’ classmates are also essential to the film’s success. Each brings a unique charm to the table and gives the sense that they could be the subject of their own compelling story.

Then of course, as Precious’ mother Mary Jones, there is Mo’Nique. Where did this woman come from? I don’t think I had seen her in anything prior to this, and only had marginal awareness of her as a comedic actress. Well there’s nothing comedic about her work here. Mo’Nique strikes with the fury of a hurricane, delivering a performance so powerful, so searing, so scary and riveting that for all of the character’s savagery, you just want more of her. You can’t take your eyes off her, and every single one of her scenes packs an unforgettable punch to the gut. The movie, and Mo’Nique’s performance, challenge the audience to understand that even a monster has its motivations. We aren’t asked to excuse or forgive anything Mary does, but in seeing what drives her, we are made to see that evil has roots. It doesn’t simply spring from nothing, and Mo’Nique drives that point home in the year’s best performance.

Don’t be afraid of Precious. You know it was showered with awards and accolades, you know you’re supposed to like it, but maybe it just sounds like so much work. Well listen to the words being typed by my fingers: this is a great, great film that will, in the best way possible, knock you on your ass. Vibrant characters, wonderful acting, humor, heart, drama…do not miss it.

The Rest:
(500) DAYS OF SUMMER
Writers Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber and director Marc Webb have pulled off one of the hardest types of films to do: a refreshing, original romantic comedy. Forgoing the gloss of such by-the-numbers studio efforts that have kept the likes of Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey busy over the last several years, (500) Days of Summer enjoys a breezy indie feel in its structure (jumping around through days in the relationship), its look (there’s a nice earthtone palette employed by cinematographer Eric Steelberg, and it actually makes Los Angeles look like a pleasant place to live) and certainly in its casting of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel as the couple. As the romantic Tom and the cynical Summer, Gordon-Levitt and Deschanel embody a relationship that is sweet, sad and authentic in all its ups and downs. I’m not even sure it’s fair to label it a romantic comedy; that might be limiting. The more dramatic elements feel real, rather than tacked on in order to hit story beats. It reminded me of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind in its capturing of a moving, believable relationship that evokes the yearning, excitement, joy, confusion, frustration and heartache that will be recognizable to anyone who’s ever been young and in love.

x

ADVENTURELAND
I’ve never worked at an amusement park; there wasn’t a lot of sex or drugs in my youth; and I was only 10 years old in 1987, the year in which this film is set. So I’m not quite sure what it was that I so personally connected with in the story of a college grad forced to take a summer job at a local, old-school fun park. Perhaps it was just the pleasure of watching a winsome story in an interesting setting with a colorful, appealing group of characters. Or maybe I’m just a sucker for movies where kinda nerdy guys get to hook up with hot girls. Whatever it was, the film slowly, warmly snuck up on me, just as the experience does on the protagonist James, played by Jesse Eisenberg. It’s evident that writer-director Greg Mottola (The Daytrippers, Superbad) has a lot of affection for this story and these people, and the cast – including Kristen Stewart, Martin Starr, Ryan Reynolds and Bill Hader – couldn’t be better. A few lesser-known actors also stand out: watch for Margarita Levieva as the park’s resident fantasy girl Lisa P. and Matt Bush as its resident bonehead, Frigo. Great movie for a warm summer night.

x

AVATAR
Despite its less-than-original story and simplistic characters, Avatar succeeded for me as a thrilling and transportive cinematic experience, introducing the beautiful but dangerous world of Pandora. Sure, I wish that James Cameron’s vivid imagination could have extended far enough to, say, create a less obvious name than Unobtanium for the planet’s elusive mineral sought by the humans as an energy source. (Seriously….Unobtanium?) It doesn’t hold up to Cameron’s past films, and its allure will probably fade over time, but right now in its recent wake I can say that the technical and creative achievements won me over. Plus, Sigourney Weaver makes everything better.

x

DISTRICT 9
The mysterious marketing campaign peaked people’s curiosity, and Peter Jackson’s name as producer didn’t hurt, but once we showed up it was co-writer and director Neill Blomkamp’s vision that carried the day. The film thrusts viewers immediately into the action, offering the minimal amount of history needed to set-up the story of an alien population in Johannesburg being forced out of the slum they’ve occupied for 20 years in favor of new, government-sponsored housing further outside the city, all while their massive, immobile mothership hovers overhead. How did the aliens and the humans learn to relate? How did they learn each others’ language? The answers may be interesting, but we don’t get them and we don’t need them. We accept the world as it is and dive into the story.

Using a combination of documentary-style footage with traditional narrative structure, Blomkamp and co-writer Terri Tatchell introduce us to Wikus Van De Merwe (impressive newcomer Sharlto Copley), a mid-level bureaucrat at Multi-National United, a global corporation which has been placed in charge of the massive alien evacuation operation. A seemingly minor incident in the field winds up having life-altering consequences for Wikus and puts him at odds with MNU, forcing him to seek help from the creatures he’s trying to displace.

It’s interesting to me that in this strong year for science-fiction, when genre god James Cameron returned to the game with a film huge in scope and budget, young filmmakers like Blomkamp and Duncan Jones (see Moon further down) are still carrying the torch of  ingenuity that Cameron displayed 25 years ago with The Terminator. With its simple but imaginative premise, low-tech style and adrenalizing tension, District 9 reminded me of Cameron’s 1984 breakthrough. If we’re lucky, this is the first step in a similarly awesome career.

x

FANTASTIC MR. FOX
Wes Anderson’s foray into stop-motion animation manages to be a completely original film even while sharing the now-familiar DNA that runs through all of the director’s work (including 1960’s rock and roll from artists like The Rolling Stones and The Beach Boys, appearances – vocally only, in this case – by Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman and Owen Wilson, and camerawork that slides and glides over immaculately designed sets). The fact that the film fits so snugly into Anderson’s oeuvre reinforces what a singular talent he is. His charming take on Roald Dahl’s classic story perfectly casts George Clooney as the voice of the title character who, despite his effort for a normal, domestic life, can’t turn away from his natural hunting instincts. His brazen thievery from the local farmers Boggis, Bunce and Bean endanger the entire animal community as well as his marriage. Among the pleasures of the adaptation by Anderson and Noah Baumbach is one of my favorite characters of the year, and one not featured in Dahl’s source material: Mr. and Mrs. Fox’s outcast son Ash, voiced by Schwartzman. Ash is frustrated that he lacks his father’s suave style and athleticism, and it upsets him all the more when his seemingly perfect cousin Kristofferson comes to stay. Ash gives the film much of its humor, and much of its heart as well.

x

THE HANGOVER
The high-concept premise of this hilarious comedy is sort of brilliant in its cleverness and simplicity: three men wake up in their wrecked Vegas hotel suite the morning after a bachelor party, unable to find the groom or recall anything about the previous night’s activities. Going off what few clues they have – including a tiger in the bathroom and a baby in the closet – they try to piece together what happened in time to find their friend and get back to L.A. for the wedding. The journey is full of belly laughs, but the trio itself is the key to the movie’s magic. Bradley Cooper is the cool party boy, Ed Helms is the uptight straight-arrow and Zach Galifianakis is…well, words really can’t do justice to Galifianakis’ oddball man-child, but he’s nearly worth the price of admission alone. If you don’t have the taste for a little raunch in your comedy, this probably isn’t for you. But if movies like Old School and Wedding Crashers are up your alley, The Hangover will have you rolling.

x

HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE
As a die-hard fan of the Potter books, I have (like many such fans, I suspect) a complicated relationship with their movie adaptations. This one was no exception, and my list of “why did they change that” and “it makes no sense to keep this if they didn’t include that” was long. Still, there’s a lot to enjoy about Half-Blood Prince. Director David Yates and screenwriter Steve Kloves manage some magic of their own in the balance they strike between the darkness encroaching on all the characters and the humor that comes as a result of the students’ raging hormones. To the latter point, two standout additions to the cast are Jessie Cave and Freddie Stroma as Ron’s girlfriend Lavender Brown and Hermione’s suitor Cormac McClaggen, respectively. Both are welcome and, at times, hilarious additions to an already amazing cast. Jim Broadbent, the latest British stalwart to join the series, shines in the key role of a professor from Hogwarts’ past. And as a teenage Voldemort in some too-brief flashbacks, Frank Dillane is frighteningly good, ever-so-subtly capturing the malice and menace that lurks just below the respectable prefect’s surface. Cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel casts a spell as well, with striking camerawork that moves furtively in and out of the shadows and helps conjure the feeling of dread that hangs over the story. Unfortunately the film oddly and frustratingly deflates in its last few scenes, when it should be hitting its emotional heights. But up until then it’s the moodiest, funniest and most beautiful film in the series so far.

x

THE HURT LOCKER
Director Kathryn Bigelow’s best film since Near Dark is an unrelentingly intense experience that places viewers alongside a three-man bomb squad in Iraq. Jeremy Renner plays the daredevil leader Will James, whose apparent lack of fear and casual discarding of protocol troubles his fellow soldiers, the cautious J.T. Sanborn (Anthony Mackie) and the nervous, struggling Owen Eldredge (Brian Geraghty). Even amidst the heart-pounding set-pieces, the film manages to be an intimate character study, drawing the audience close to the three men through simple glimpses into their days and nights, on duty and off. Working from a solid script by Mark Boal, a journalist who spent time with bomb squads in the field, Bigelow directs with restraint and a documentary-like unobtrusiveness, letting the natural tension of each situation do the work. She’s also not afraid to exercise the patience required to convey the men’s quieter challenges, demonstrated by a sequence in which they fall under attack in the middle of the desert by a sniper and must wait their enemy out for hours. This is a tight, compelling drama offering an unflinching look both at the broad experience of contemporary warfare and the personal experiences of the soldiers who fight it.

x

INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS
“Once upon a time in Nazi Occupied France…” is the kickoff to Quentin Tarantino’s long-gestating World War II tale. Over the course of five chapters, the writer-director tells two stories: one about a squad of Allied soldiers hunting and scalping Nazis across the French countryside; the other about a young Jewish woman, the sole survivor of her family’s murder at the hands of the SS. The two threads meet in a bravura, 40-minute final act that finds Tarantino audaciously and thrillingly re-writing world history. Along the way, he plays with tension like he never has before. He’s described his efforts as equivalent to stretching a rubber band as far as it can go before snapping. Scenes are often lengthy, and he wrings the maximum amount of suspense he can before delivering the payoff. The film’s ensemble – winner of the Screen Actor’s Guild award for Best Performance By a Cast – features Brad Pitt, hamming it up amusingly as the U.S. lieutenant in charge of the Basterds; Melanie Laurent as the Jewish girl; Michael Fassbender as an undercover British officer; Daniel Bruhl as a Nazi war hero; and Diane Kruger as a German movie star. But the standout performance belongs to Christoph Waltz as the cunning Nazi colonel Hans Landa, a simultaneously genial and sinister detective. It’s a great role, and in his American film debut, the veteran Austrian actor makes an unforgettable impression. He’s won nearly every acting prize available to him since the film premiered at last May’s Cannes Film Festival. All the hallmarks we expect from Tarantino are here: brilliant dialogue, shocking violence, great performances and an obvious love of films and filmmaking.

x

IN THE LOOP
This hilarious satire of diplomatic relations between the U.S. and the U.K. in the days leading up to a Middle East war flew under the radar last summer, but demands to be seen by anyone who likes their comedy whip-smart and their language extra-salty. The Oscar-nominated screenplay combines the rapid-fire wordplay of Aaron Sorkin with the precise and artful profanity of David Mamet. Few of the players are household names (James Gandolfini and Steve Coogan are the biggest stars on hand), but they are a sensational group of new and familiar faces who helped make this one of the best surprises I’ve had at the movies in recent memory. See it as soon as you can. And check out the lengthy collection of deleted scenes on the DVD – they’re every bit as good as what remained in the movie.

x

THE LOVELY BONES
I know that in offering praise on this film, I’m in the minority. Adapted from the 2002 best-seller by Alice Sebold, it received mixed to savage reviews, with Roger Ebert calling it “deplorable.” (Even if you weren’t a fan of the movie, I think a look a Ebert’s review shows that he’s way off base in his interpretation). Having not read the book – in fact, having the opinion that the story of a murdered teenage girl observing her family and her killer from heaven sounded kinda stupid – I came to the film only with the expectation that Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson would create something interesting. As far as I’m concerned, he succeeded. Saoirse Ronan plays Susie Salmon, the murdered girl caught between earth and heaven in a place whose landscapes are constructed from her own memories and from where she watches her family (Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weisz portray her parents) deal with her loss while her neighbor and killer (Stanley Tucci in a creepy, change-of-pace performance) covers his tracks.

The movie is not without problems. The role of Susie’s grandmother, played by Susan Sarandon, seems to exist mainly for comic relief, but I expect there was more to it in the book. Similarly, a plot thread involving a classmate of Susie’s who seems able to sense the dead girl’s presence is underdeveloped and probably had more significance on the page. From what I’ve seen, most of the negative reviews come from critics who’ve read the novel and feel that Jackson buried its beauty and soul in an orgy of CGI. (The “In-Between” that Susie occupies in death is aggressively art directed, no doubt.) Still, I think that overall Jackson created an engrossing and haunting movie that finds power in the depiction of a family torn apart, a killer trying to keep himself together and young victim trying to make sense of what happened to her and where she’s headed.

x

MOON
There’s something cool about Duncan Jones, the son of David Bowie, making his feature directorial debut with a science-fiction film whose haunting quality evokes his father’s classic song “Space Oddity.” The film centers on astronaut Sam Bell, the lone occupant of a lunar space station, as he enters the final two weeks of a three-year stretch running an operation in which the moon’s surface is mined for a substance that is sent back to Earth and converted to energy. As Sam’s departure looms, he has an accident which leads to a devastating discovery.

Among the smartest things that Jones does with his movie is casting the great Sam Rockwell in the lead role. The discovery that Bell makes and the situation he finds himself in as a result provide a great showcase for the actor, who deserves every opportunity to show off his stuff. Even with a setting as expansive as the moon and the emptiness of space around it, Jones keeps the film feeling intimate and Sam’s isolation palpable. And while, like many space stories, this one may seem a bit cold and cerebral, the director and his leading man offer something strangely moving and highly satisfying. This one really stayed with me.

x

THE ROAD
Director John Hillcoat and screenwriter Joe Penhall don’t mess with Cormac McCarthy’s Pulitzer Prize-winning source material in their adaptation. The story is so sparse, there’s not much messing that could be done. They faithfully tell the story of a father and son moving through the cold, dismal, ashen landscape that remains after an undefined natural disaster has destroyed the world. They search for food, they search for shelter, they try to avoid other survivors – many of whom have turned to cannibalism – and they try to reach the coast, where they hope to find warmer weather and perhaps hope itself. That’s it. Boring? Never. Viggo Mortensen is at his understated best as the protective father, striking a natural rapport with Kodi Smit-McPhee as his compassionate son. Watch for a brief but astounding performance by Robert Duvall, who digs deeper in five minutes of screen time than many actors can go in a whole film.

x

A SINGLE MAN
The impressive feature directorial debut of fashion designer Tom Ford looks as great as one would expect, but luckily Ford is concerned with something more than just the scenery. In the best performance of the year by a male lead, Colin Firth plays George Falconer, a college professor struggling and failing to deal with the sudden death of his partner. Taking place over the course of one day (with flashbacks illuminating the relationship between George and Jim, played by Matthew Goode), the film gives us a character perilously close to losing his way but still in possession of a desire for life, even if he doesn’t realize it. The journey of discovery that comes as George navigates his grief is one experienced by the audience as much as the character, for we get to see Firth dig into a role deeper than anything he’s done before. The scene where he receives the phone call about Jim’s death is a masterful example of restraint and internalization.

x

STAR TREK
An epic, imaginative reboot of the beloved but recently stalled-out Star Trek franchise that successfully introduces yet another new crew to follow, succeeding despite the challenge of having audiences accept this new team as younger versions of the original cast. Director J.J. Abrams pulls it off thanks to a smart script by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (how is it that these guys write so well for Abrams and so poorly for Michael Bay?) that takes the Trek continuity fans are familiar with and through that most wondrous and liberating storytelling device known as time travel, spins it into an alternate reality that paves the way for a new franchise. Some fans cried foul, accusing the filmmakers of using time travel as a cheat that would let them ignore the history of a universe already deeply established. Others heralded the bold choice as just what Star Trek needed, a creative jolt that shows respect to its roots but frees the filmmakers from the shackles that had begun to hold the series back. I agree with the latter, and the fact that Leonard Nimoy shows up to bridge the gap – just as William Shatner appeared alongside Patrick Stewart in Generations to help pass the baton to The Next Generation crew – helps smooth the transition.

Abrams and his technical crew have created a great looking film, one that revels in widescreen glory and fills the frame with icy blues and sunbright oranges. ILM’s gorgeous visual effects enhance the cinematography and art direction, and advances in technology have allowed Abrams to ramp up the intensity and speed of Trek’s space battles. (Even in the original spate of Trek movies, working with higher budgets and fewer limitations than the TV series, the battling ships didn’t move very fast or evasively. The climactic pursuit of the Enterprise by the Reliant in Wrath of Kahn was less cat and mouse than two blind mice). Credit also goes to the cast assembled to fill the shoes of the beloved original Trek crew. When Chris Pine’s casting was announced, I was skeptical. I hadn’t seen him in anything, but he looked like a dime-a-dozen pretty boy. Watching the movie, I was pleased to find he had charisma to spare and that, at moments, was able to almost capture that elusive Shatner magic. Zachary Quinto’s casting, on the other hand, seemed too good to be true from the get-go, and the story crafted by Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman allows him to add surprising new dimensions to Spock, a character we thought we knew so well. Quinto and Karl Urban, as Dr. McCoy, most successfully channel their predecessors, although Simon Pegg is full of promise as Scotty and Zoe Saldana is a smart, sexy Uhura.

Abrams does occasionally falter, most glaringly in a brief but distracting segment involving not one but two over-the-top CG creatures that serve no real purpose. He also has a tendency towards humor that goes a little too goofy, as when Kirk’s hands swell like balloons as the result of an injection he’s given by McCoy. Luckily these moments are brief and forgivable, overshadowed by a sense of fun and excitement that whets the appetite for continuing voyages.

x

UP
The Pixar formula might be getting boring if there was actually anything formulaic about what they do. But building a movie around a grumpy, 80-year old man isn’t exactly playing it safe. The fanciful adventure is set in motion when widower Carl Frederickson (voiced by the great Ed Asner) equips his house with enough helium balloons to carry him to Paradise Falls, an idyllic South American locale that he and his wife Ellie always dreamed of visiting but never managed to reach. The plan first goes awry when Carl discovers an inadvertent stowaway named Russell, a neighborhood boy trying to earn his latest Scout badge. Things continue to unravel from there, with talking dogs, an exotic bird and a mysterious figure from the past all standing between Carl and his dream. Among the movie’s many pleasures is an early montage depicting Carl and Ellie’s life together, and it is among the best and most moving scenes all year, a beautiful example of economic and emotional storytelling. It seems Pixar’s only formula is to come up with great stories and tell them superbly. If only they could share the secret, maybe all movies would be this imaginative and touching.

x

UP IN THE AIR
Avatar wasn’t the only movie released in December to feature wondrous three-dimensionality, and it wasn’t the best either. That honor belongs to this shimmering comedic drama from Jason Reitman, whose script (also credited to Sheldon Turner, who worked on earlier drafts, and based on a novel by Walter Kirn) provides three of the year’s richest roles, as well as a timely commentary on how the economic disaster affects the lives of everyday working folk. George Clooney, continuing to exhibit superb taste in material, plays Ryan, a consultant hired by companies to come in and handle layoffs. He loves the traveling-man life that goes along with the job, and has perfected the art of living simply and efficiently. Then the arrival of two women into his perfect world has unexpected effects. One is co-worker Natalie (Anna Kendrick), a recent Cornell grad with big ideas to redefine Ryan’s company; the other is Alex (Vera Farmiga), a fellow frequent flier with whom Ryan becomes romantically involved.

None of the three are quite what they appear to be, and Reitman’s generosity as a writer and understanding of great characters and relationships is beautifully displayed, particularly between Ryan and Natalie. They’re forced to go on the road together so Ryan can show her the ropes, and Reitman doesn’t just coast by throwing them into a constantly contentious relationship that finally thaws after one special moment finally brings them to a mutual understanding. Their relationship is more layered than that. There is tension, but Ryan doesn’t treat Natalie with total contempt or disrespect. He wants her to understand what he does and how her proposal would affect that. Though his goal is to stop her plans from going into practice, he’s supportive of her as she learns the job. She, in turn, is open to his guidance even as she wants to prove herself as more than the naive girl she feels he takes her for. As she watches him handle the challenge of firing someone, she knows that she has overlooked the nuance involved, and the more Natalie learns, the more Kendrick shines. None of this may sound like much, but many movies wouldn’t give its characters such shadings. Reitman doesn’t present us with archetypes; he presents us with realistic people…who admittedly, have perhaps unrealistically great dialogue to speak. There is so much to enjoy about this movie, from the Oscar-nominated performances of Clooney, Kendrick and Farmiga to the supporting players that include Danny McBride, Amy Morton and Reitman’s Juno alums Jason Bateman and J.K. Simmons; from the crisp editing and cinematography that visually convey the precision of Ryan’s lifestyle to the inspired stroke of weaving in scenes with non-actors who really were laid off from their jobs; from the blend of levity and thoughtfulness to the lack of a tidy resolution. With his third film, Jason Reitman cements his standing as one of contemporary cinema’s great storytellers.

x

WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE
Director Spike Jonze and his co-screenwriter Dave Eggers accomplish a small miracle with their adaptation of the classic children’s book by Maurice Sendak, turning the story known as much for its brevity as its charm into a psychologically fascinating meditation on loneliness, love and family. It’s  the best, most honest and moving depiction of adolescent isolation and longing I’ve seen since E.T. Actor Max Records is a natural as the rambunctious, lonesome protagonist with whom he shares a name, but the wild things are the real stars. Beautifully realized by Jim Henson’s Creature Shop, enhanced by the visual effects team at Double Negative and voiced by James Gandolfini, Catherine O’Hara, Forest Whitaker, Lauren Ambrose, Chris Cooper and Paul Dano, they are a stunningly original group of characters. I could not get enough of them, and my only disappointment with the film is that at an hour and a half, I didn’t get to spend nearly as much time with them as I wanted. The movie got a bit lost in the crowded fall schedule, and has been disappointingly overlooked during the awards season. I hope that in time, it will be re-visited, re-evaluated and eventually appreciated far and wide for the work of art that it is.

x

ZOMBIELAND
Because a certain faction of my friends were going through a big zombie-phase – from video games like Left 4 Dead to graphic novels like The Walking Dead to regular novels like World War Z – I felt compelled to rally the troops for what looked like a fun little movie on a favorite subject. I had no idea just how much fun it would be. It was, in fact, the most fun I had at the movies all year. Opening night, a packed house – always a good way to see a comedy – and from the first moments to the last (a post-credits easter egg worth sticking around for), Zombieland delivered bigtime. The pairing of Jesse Eisenberg (who had the A to Z “land” spectrum covered in 2009) and Woody Harrelson is inspired, the former’s nervous, nebbish energy providing a great counterpoint to the latter’s cool, cavalier alpha male. Adding to the fun are Emma Stone and Abigail Breslin as too-cool-for-school (if-there-were-still-school-but-there-isn’t-because-all-the-teachers-and-classmates-are-zombies) sisters out for themselves. The movie’s aim is firmly to have fun, but it goes just deep enough to remind us what these four characters have endured and lost, which enriches the story in a small but meaningful way. It also boasts the best surprise celebrity cameo of the year; maybe the best ever. So avoid all spoilers, and remember: double-tap!

x

There we have it. I could list plenty of other movies from the year that I enjoyed a lot, but these are the ones that left the strongest initial impressions. The film lover in me feels bad leaving certain others out, but I’ll exercise some restraint and leave you with these montages posted to YouTube from other movie fans out there, honoring the year in film.

(Click here for the creator’s blog listing all the clips featured here)


« Previous Page — Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.