Oscar Predictions – 2018 Films
February 17, 2019 at 8:02 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a commentThe Oscars are now one week away, which means it’s time for my predictions. I have seen all the films nominated in all the categories I will make predictions in (excepted as noted below). And I have been following the Hollywood buzz on which films seem to be in the lead. I must say that, even though I loved this year in films, this is going to be a very boring Oscars. I don’t see much surprise happening, and I think I will agree with most of the winners. But, I guess we’ll see how right I am:
Best Picture
Should be: Black Panther. I really debated this decision. I absolutely loved everything about “Roma.” It was a touching and visually stunning love letter to the women who raised director Alfonso Cuarón. Maybe from a technical point of view, it should, and I would be fine if it did. But I think “Black Panther” is the more important movie. “Roma” is a beautiful film of today, but it won’t change film making, and I think “Black Panther” will. It brings an outsider’s voice into the heart of mainstream movies in such a bold way, that I think it opens possibilities for where daring directors can take blockbuster films in the future. To see more of what I mean, you can read my review here.
Will be: Roma. The Academy could surprise us here. “Bohemian Rhapsody” has had some momentum in other awards shows. But, that would be a travesty, as it is the least deserving of the films on this list. It’s not that it is a bad movie; it just isn’t a great one. “BlacKKKlansman” also has an outside chance, but that wouldn’t be because it deserves it; this is not Lee’s best film (2015’s “Chi-Raq” is much better). If it wins, it would be because the Academy knows it is long past time Lee gets recognized. Ultimately, the Academy loves Cuarón and this feels like just the sort of movie they like to award.
Best Director
Should be: Alfonso Cuarón for Roma. His mastery of the material, the performances he gets from his actors, and the beautiful richness of what he puts on the screen, all make this film clearly the right choice.
Will be: Alfonso Cuarón for Roma. The Academy may choose to split this and the Best Picture, in which case Spike Lee could win here, for all the reasons stated above. Yorgos Lanthimos could be a dark horse candidate, but I am actually pretty certain this category belongs to Cuarón.
Lead Actress
Should be: Glenn Close in Wife. Not enough people saw this small film. The overall film was just okay, but her performance was searing. It was the best performance by any actor this year. It is ridiculous that she has never won an Oscar before now.
Will be: Glenn Close in Wife. This is one of the easiest predictions of the night. Both Olivia Coleman and Lady Gaga have outside chances. They both gave great performances, and I hope we see Coleman at the Oscars again. But the night belongs to Glenn.
Lead Actor
Should be: Christian Bale for Vice. I wish I had liked some other performance better this year. By all accounts, Bale is a bit of an asshole. But, he is an amazing physical actor. The fact is he transformed himself into Cheney in much the same way Gary Oldman was transformed into Churchill, but Bale didn’t use any prosthetics. He did it all with his face and body. It is an amazing performance in an ugly film.
Will be: Christian Bale for Vice. Everyone keeps talking about this performance. Rami Malek might steal it, but I don’t think so. I believe “Bohemian Rhapsody” has been losing steam in the race recently. I may be wrong, but I think Bale has it. Mortensen’s performance was fun but a little too hammy and over-the-top (as was Malek’s, in my opinon). Dafoe was wonderful as Van Gogh but too few people saw the film. Cooper could always sneak in sideways, but, for reasons I don’t understand, Hollywood seems to be punishing his film.
Supporting Actress
Should be: No opinion. I realize it is surprising that I have no opinion in such a major category. But, I just don’t feel really strongly about any of these performances. They were all fine and none stands out to me more than the others.
Will be: Regina King in If Beale Street Could Talk. This seems to be where the momentum is, especially with Stone and Weisz splitting the vote.
Supporting Actor
Should be: Richard E. Grant in Can You Ever Forgive Me? I am particularly annoyed that Mahershala Ali is in this category, as he clearly seems like a lead actor to me. This was a bit of manipulation to ensure an award for “Green Book” and it will likely work. I am even more annoyed that neither Timotheé Chalamet (for “Beautiful Boy”) or Michael B. Jordan (for “Black Panther”) were nominated. They are currently Hollywood’s best actors in their 20s and 30s, respectively. And they both gave scene stealing performances. While I love Sam Elliot, I don’t think this performance deserves to win an award. But, I hope it gets him access to other, more substantial roles that allow him to win in the future. I was tempted to say Sam Rockwell here, as I really loved his performance of George W. Bush, but his screen time was too short. In the end, Grant played a huge role in “Can You Ever Forgive Me?” and he brought such depth to his character that he made you like a very unlikeable man.
Will be: Mahershala Ali in Green Book. I think this is, unfortunately, all but locked in. And this was a good performance. It was funny, tender, and clever. Ali and Mortensen built their characters and perfect foils for each other. If there was an award for best partners or best collaboration, they should easily win. I just think this category belongs to someone else this year.
Adapted Screenplay
Should be: The Ballad of Buster Scruggs. Maybe? I am not sure I even agree with myself here. Is this an original screen play or just a combination of shorts? I actually think there is a cohesive through line, and I love the way the stories built toward the somber final act. This is not a traditional screenplay, by any means. But, it was still my favorite of the ones nominated.
Will be: A Star is Born. Maybe. This category is wide open. I think almost any of them (except maybe “Ballad”) has a chance of wining.
Original Screenplay
Should be: Green Book. I am not really thrilled with any of these choices. The fact that neither “Sorry to Bother You” or “Blindspotting” are nominated just reveals what a joke the Oscars are. Roma is too free-form to be a real screenplay, in the traditional sense. But, of these, Green Book had the best story arc and writing. It was genuinely funny and sometimes quite moving. Admittedly, it is a bit old fashioned, but it worked.
Will be: The Favourite. Everyone seems to love this movie and I just don’t get it. But, it has to win something. So, my guess is that this is the nod it will get.
Best Animated Feature
Should be: Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. Without a doubt. Much as I love Wes Anderson and really enjoyed “Isle of Dogs,” “Spider-Man” was original in a way that animated films haven’t been for years. Just for the record, I did not see “Ralph Breaks the Internet” or “Mirai,” so judge my opinions appropriately.
Will be: Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. The easiest prediction of the night.
Best Foreign Language Film
Should be: Capernaum. This is a tough call. “Cold War” has a subtle energy that, at times, is mesmerizing. And it has a stunning ending. But nobody saw the beautiful and heartbreaking “Capernaum.” It was so good and so moving. And the young actor was fantastic. In a fair world, he would have an Oscar nomination instead of Rami Malek. I should note that I have not seen the German film, “Never Look Away,” because it will not even be released in this area until after the Oscars.
Will be: Cold War. With all the momentum for Roma winning Best Picture, I think it will not win here. Instead, they will give the Oscar to another black and white film, this one from Poland. It is a beautiful film with a devastating ending that was perfectly rendered. I will not be disappointed with this win at all.
Best Cinematography
Should be: Roma. Really, there should be no question here.
Will be: Roma. Definitely.
Costume Design
Should be: Black Panther. The costumes in Wakanda were so carefully constructed. They said so much about culture and spoke to Black pride and identity in such key ways that this really has to be the winner. Although, to be fair, I did not see either of the Marys: “Mary Poppins Returns” or “Mary Queen of Scots.” But, did I really need to?
Will be: Black Panther. For the reasons I said above and because this is likely the only Oscar it will get. I will be pissed if “The Favourite” wins.
Visual Effects
Should be: Avengers: Infinity War. It is really the only obvious choice.
Will be: Avengers: Infinity War. Obviously.
Original Song
Should be: Shallow from A Star is Born. I don’t really care that strongly. The truth is that this is the only song on the list that I can even recall. I’m guessing everyone in the Academy is the exact same way.
Will be: Shallow from A Star is Born. See above.
2018 – The Year in Review
February 6, 2019 at 12:14 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a commentHere is my annual synopsis of the year in film and what I thought were the best and worst of what I saw. I saw 72 of the films released in 2018. That is just below the 73 I saw two years ago and above the 67 for last year. Netflix plays an increasing part of this list, with several of their movies showing up, two of them up for Oscars (“Roma” and “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs”).
There were some really great films this year and, though I managed to avoid seeing anything truly awful, there were more films in my top and bottom categories. Last year, I had one 5 lozenge movie, and this year I have two. I had eight 4.5 lozenge movies, and now I have ten. I had nine 4 lozenge movies and this year I have twelve. And, finally, I had only one 1/2 lozenge movie last year, while, sadly, I have three this year. With that, here is my ranking for 2018:
◊◊◊◊◊
◊◊◊◊½
◊◊◊◊
Spider-man: Into the Spider-verse
½
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
As with the past several years, you can check out any of my above reviews by clicking on the film’s title.
Can You Ever Forgive Me?
February 4, 2019 at 2:54 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a commentTags: Anna Deavere Smith, Biopic, Comedy, Dolly Wells, Drama, Jane Curtin, Melissa McCarthy, Richard E. Grant, Stephen Spinella
◊ ◊ ◊
So, this is it; the last 2018 film. It was released months ago but had returned to theaters after getting several Oscar nominations. I might describe this film as a biographical, comical drama. Lee Israel had been a moderately successful author of famous biographies before she fell on hard times after her biography of Estée Lauder flopped in 1985. After trying various (sometimes dubious) things to pay rent, she found a very lucrative living forging letters by famous authors. With the help of her friend, Jack Hock, she sold hundreds of letters between 1992 and 1993. She eventually wrote a book about it. The story itself is interesting as a general curiosity; a peek into, another world. It is fairly light fare, never too dramatic, and gently humorous at times. The real joy of the film is in the dysfunctional relationship between Israel and Hock. Both are played beautifully by Melissa McCarthy and Richard E. Grant. McCarthy is so widely known for her broad, crass physical comedies, that this understated performance was a real pleasure. I’m glad to see she was nominated for an Oscar. She does not deserve to win against such fantastic competition, but she deserves to be recognized as a more versatile and skilled actor than many people might realize. It is not easy to make an essentially unlikable person likable, while staying true to their character. Israel was angry, dour, misanthropic, foul-mouthed, and she had a stunted moral development. The same could be said for Hock. Yet, the audience cannot help but like these two, miserable people, despite how deeply self-involved they both are. I think that takes a deft hand as an actor. McCarthy’s Israel, in particular, had a haunted pain behind her eyes that made her someone people could relate to and empathize with. This is not a terribly important film, nor will it be one that likely stays with me. But, if it opens up opportunities for McCarthy to take more serious roles, then it was well worth the new round of attention it has gotten.
Capernaum
January 21, 2019 at 5:45 pm | Posted in 2018 | 1 CommentTags: Alaa Chouchnieh, Boluwatife Treasure Bankole, Drama, Elias Khoury, Fadi Kamel Yousef, Foreign Film, Kawsar Al Haddad, Lebanese film, Yordanos Shiferaw, Zain Al Rafeea
◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ½
In French, the Biblical word “capernaum” is apparently used to signify chaos, which seems a pretty apt title for this grim look at poverty in modern Lebanon. The film starts in a courtroom, where a young boy is suing his parents for having conceived him. He is roughly 12 or 13 years old (nobody knows) and he is serving a 5 year sentence for stabbing someone. Then, over the course of two-hours, we get flashbacks that slowly let us know how we got to this miserable place. That story is unrelentingly grim, but it is also fascinating and beautiful. The young actor, Zain Al Rafeea, is astonishing. He was so believable that I found myself wondering if this was more documentary than fiction (it wasn’t). While the film is set in the poorest slums of Beirut, there is a grace and beauty to the film making. Some of the images were so evocative and the core characters all had such life in them; they really felt so real. The journey is a tough one to go one, particularly because you cannot help but deeply care about the children at its center, but it is one worth taking. It gave me a genuine appreciate for how much I take for granted every day. And a deep respect for the strength and courage it takes for many people to face the world. This was a grim story, but not without hope and with a final scene that (while probably not earned) was deeply needed. In the end, this is one of the best films I have seen this year, and a great film to end 2018 on.
Cold War
January 21, 2019 at 9:57 am | Posted in 2018 | Leave a commentTags: Black and White Film, Drama, Foreign Film, Joanna Kulig, Pawel Pawlikowski, Tomasz Kot
◊ ◊ ◊ ½
I was very much taken by Pawel Pawlikowski’s 2013 film, “Ida.” He works well in black and white, using it to create mood more effectively than most directors I have seen. As just one example, watch the spacing in his films. He often puts the center of attention off-center on screen. He then fills the background with images that build the mood of the movie. In “Ida” that mood was sullen, quiet, and introspective. Here it is much more energetic (at times riotous), angry, and tense with sexual energy. The story covers 15 years during the 1940s and 50s, as communism is emerging in Eastern Europe. The film starts with Wiktor recording villagers singing traditional Polish songs. He and his crew are travelling around Poland capturing traditional music as evidence of the cultural pride that was so present in early communism. Along the way, he meets Zula. He is mesmerized by her and her voice. Over the rest of the film, they orbit each other’s lives. They are drawn to each other, but also bad for each other. They love, fight, meet and cheat on others. They travel between Poland and Paris as their musical careers grow and diminish; they seem incapable to resisting each other. All of this is shown with tremendous reserve. So much of the roiling emotions is shown through the eyes, with nothing spoken. In fact there is little dialogue in this film. Also, the story is presented in a series of discreet vignettes. The screen will fade to black for a few seconds, and, when the story resumes, some amount of time has passed. The audience must use context clues to figure out what has changed in relationships, careers, etc. You cannot be lazy if you are going to watch this movie; it requires you to be paying attention. If you can do that, you will be rewarded with beautiful images, perfectly choreographed scenes, a love story that is both subtle and intense (anchored by two stunning performances), and a devastating ending that is visually perfect. This is a hard movie to watch, but a rewarding one if you can stick with it.
Destroyer
January 14, 2019 at 4:54 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a commentTags: Bradley Whitford, Drama, Karyn Kusama, Movie Review, Nicole Kidman, Nicole Kidman's Nose, Revenge, Scoot McNairy, Sebastian Stan, Tatiana Maslany, Toby Kebbell
◊ ◊ ◊
We are getting close to the end of the 2018 films. After this, I have one or two more I want to see. Then, I will be doing my end of the year review. When I do, where will this one go? Not in my top 10, unfortunately. But, not at the bottom, either. This was a good film, really decent, worth seeing, in fact. I just didn’t love it, and I don’t know exactly why. This is the story of a haunted woman, stripped raw by regret, and the journey of revenge she goes on in her attempt to find peace. But, this isn’t revenge-porn; if you are expecting “John Wick” or “Oldboy” or anything with Liam Neeson, you are just going to be disappointed. Director Karyn Kusama is doing something deeper here. Her lead character, Erin, is not ruthless. She wants to be ruthless, but she is more real than that. She stumbles through this story, leaking vulnerability and pain the entire time. Erin is played beautifully by Nicole Kidman, sporting a prosthetic nose that is far less distracting than the one she wore in “The Hours.” Kidman, who almost disappeared into this character, did so much work with her eyes. She looked haunted and worn out the entire time. The rest of the cast included Toby Kebbell (“Kong,” “War for the Planet of the Apes”), Tatiana Maslany (“Orphan Black”), Sebastian Stan (all the various “Captain America” and “Avengers” movies), Scoot McNairy (“Halt and Catch Fire”), and Bradley Whitford. They all did a good job in their various roles, although Maslany deserves extra credit in her role as Petra. But, the film was Kidman’s film and she was the center of every scene. The story was also shot very effectively. It was not until the very end of the film that I realized how Kusama had stitched scenes together. That misdirection was intentional on her part and it made for an effective a-ha moment, where the audience is reinterpreting scenes they saw earlier. She seems to be a very deliberate and planned filmmaker. I will give you another example but this comes with a spoiler alert. If you have not seen the movie you may want to stop reading now. Early in the film, we are told that there was an incident “a long time ago” for which Erin wants revenge. A little later we meet her 16 year old daughter in a bar with an older guy. A bit later, we then here that this incident was about “two decades ago.” This is where it sits until later in the film, when we learn that the incident was exactly 17 years ago. We are then almost immediately reminded that her daughter is 16, and then we get the reveal that Erin got pregnant by her partner. Kusama very deliberately kept things vague, until she wanted the audience to put the clues together just in time for the reveal. That is very methodical and deliberate filmmaking. So, why didn’t I like it more? I am been struggling to try and explain, but I just think it was a bit heavy handed at times. The best example of this is in the final moments of the film, when we are given the scene of Erin and her daughter in the snow. I cannot image how much work it was to light that scene so that all the snow was glowing and had this magical feel. But why? I just felt like that scene was hammering a point home that had been made effectively enough already. There were just a few small moments like that. Trimmed of that and this film would have been tighter, more effective. It really is a small thing in a film that I really did like, but just didn’t love.
At Eternity’s Gate
January 6, 2019 at 6:39 pm | Posted in 2018 | Leave a commentTags: Biopic, Drama, Emmanuelle Seigner, Julian Schnabel, Mads Mikkelsen, Mathieu Amalric, Movie Review, Oscar Isaac, Period Piece, Rupert Friend, Willem Dafoe
◊ ½
This dreamy, meandering film by Julian Schnabel was sadly more of a miss than a hit for me. Schnabel has directed some fantastic indie biopics in the past; “The Diving Bell & The Butterfly,” Before Night Falls,” and “Basquiat” were all compelling films that helped us get inside the real people at the center of the stories. Schnabel takes risks to tell interesting stories in interesting ways, and I think I understand what he was doing here. Sometimes shooting scenes through a golden filter, sometimes have long moments of silence, sometimes have a black screen with just a voice, sometimes blurring part of the screen– all of this was in service of trying to help us experience the world in (perhaps) the way Van Gogh did. By all accounts, the man was deeply mentally ill, but that illness made him one of the greatest painters in human history, and my all time favorite. He captured the world as he saw it, a world we could not see, and made some portion of it visible to us. How do you tell that story on screen? It is not an easy task, and a standard telling would not have been enough. So, I give credit for being daring. I just wished I had enjoyed it more. In the end, the film was mostly pensive fretting that felt unmoored from any story arc. As such, it was hard to stay engaged, much as I wanted to be. It really is a shame. The film is beautifully shot on location and well-acted. It just didn’t land emotionally for me.
Free Solo
January 5, 2019 at 9:43 am | Posted in 2018 | Leave a commentTags: Action Film, Alex Honnold, Documentary, Free Solo, Jimmy Chin, Movie Review, Sanni McCandless, Tommy Caldwell
◊ ◊ ◊ ◊
The general rule in making a traditionaal documentary is that the makers remain invisible; they attempt to remove their presence as much as possible. In “Free Solo,” Jimmy Chin and his crew insert themselves right into the middle of the story. They are professional climbers themselves and they are filming Alex Honnold. Honnold is a climber who has become famous for free soloing, which is climbing without ropes. The documentary might have been just another (of many) sports docs, full of heroic images of their star doing what s/he does best. Here, there is a level of transparency that is uncommon in the genre. We see Honnold for exactly who he is, socially awkward, obsessed, and emotionally distant in a way that can feel cruel. Chin also shows us his struggle with the filming process. How much are they risking Honnold’s safety by distracting him with cameras while he is on the rockface, hundreds of feet in the air, with nothing to stop him should he slip? The stakes are high; as they point out early on, almost every famous free climber has fallen and died. In fact, death in this sport is treated by Honnold as an almost inevitability. But, he has made clear he would rather die young living fully, regardless of how those who love him may feel. Chin does a great job of making an esoteric sport accessible. We come to really understand how much strategy and planning is involved. We know where the risky sections are and what’s at stake here. I will say this: if you are afraid of heights, do not see this movie. I am only mildly uncomfortable and I found whole portions of this film unnerving. No horror movie I have ever seen as made me as anxious as this one did; perhaps, because the stakes were real. During the long final scene, I had to look away multiple times. In fact, I found myself watching the heartmonitor on my Fitbit slowly tick up several times when I just couldn’t watch what Honnold was doing. The power of a documentary is the power to shed light, to let us see some corner of the world that we have not seen, to experience some stranger’s perspective. When it does it well, it’s art. And this film comes pretty close to it.
Vice
January 5, 2019 at 8:48 am | Posted in 2018 | Leave a commentTags: Adam McKay, Alison Pill, Amy Adams, Black Comedy, Christian Bale, Comedy, Eddie Marsan, Jesse Plemons, Justin Kirk, LisaGay Hamilton, Movie Review, Period Piece, Sam Rockwell, Steve Carell, Tyler Perry
◊ ◊ ◊ ◊
“Vice” is the sort of grimly funny affair that is definitely not for everyone. In fact, you could argue that it’s almost not for anyone. I’m not sure who will have come out of the theater having enjoyed the experience. Conservatives will be angry at the attack dog brutality with which the Bush Administration is portrayed, and liberals will likely be at least as angry at the successes of powerful, amoral men. This film has a little something to piss off everyone. Unfortunately, what gets lost in all that emotion is the excellence of the craft. Adam McKay is a well-established Hollywood writer, producer, and director, who garnered a lot of attention for his brilliant look at the 2007 financial crisis; “The Big Short” made a dense topic engaging and suprisingly clear. He brings the same nervy style to “Vice,” to some of the same effect. You can expect to get mini-lessons about various political philosophies, such as the unitary executive. These asides never feel discordant; McKay has a gift at weaving didactic teaching into his narrative. As with “The Big Short,” this film stars Christian Bale, who really is at the top of his game. Again, he packed on ridiculous amounts of weight to play Dick Chaney, and succeeds at looking remarkably like him. He has the body language, vocal cadence, and facial expressions down to a tee. He is surrounded by a cast of some of Hollywood’s best, though none better than Sam Rockwell, doing a spot-on George W. And, in a truly brilliant move, McKay has cast Jesse Plemmons as the narrator, who early on teases you with his relevance to the plot. When it is finally revealed in the latter half, you’ll shake your head in wonder; that’s a punchline almost 2 hours in the making that is also a gut-punch. This is clever stuff. McKay plays with recurring themes of flyfishing and heart attacks, using both to explore Cheney’s character as a heartless predator. There is really so much to admire here and it’s a film I strongly encourage people to see; just don’t expect to enjoy it.
Pete
Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.
Clear Blue Eye 