Given the absurdity that has sent this year from a "Won't it be great when Wes Anderson wins?" to a "Argo is a lock" to a "But have you seen Lincoln?" to a "But did you see Zero Dark?" to a "But did you see Les Miz" trajectory --- it seems that next year the proper thing to do would be to simply chart the emotional reaction to the year's overall content and to whichever picture seems to be leading the pack at any given point. Obviously there are many places that already conduct such analyses, but I am talking purely about some cardiogram style read out and one title -- no paragraphs, no prose, no reasoning. Just an uptick and a name -- PALPATATION... PERKS!!! I'll do it next year after I rig up some oddball equipment to track my every move. People will be able to look back and say things like, "Oh yeah, July, people were way into Moonrise Kingdom." End of info from chart.
Now we have reached the end of the year and the Nook shall launch as it does each year -- by pointing out my top ten. No, this list does not reflect what I think will fill the Oscar field. These are purely the top ten films according to me this year. I know that people will point out criminal omissions. And if I were making a time capsule, I might select other pictures to give a truer visual feel of what this year was in cinema and award competition. But it seems assembling lists in that manner is what ultimately results in a degradation of quality. You've got to just be straight.
Furthermore, since Oscar has expanded to a list of ten leaving me no option to simply say "If I wanted to call my personal picture noms it would be these five" -- it means there are consequently many more films I wish I could include because ten is simply too many to have on a list. It's like organizing a wedding party. If you just did a best man, maid or honor, and a bridesmaid or usher or two -- you'd be fine. Once you broaden the search to ten bridesmaids and groomsmen you've also expanded the list of "would be insulted people who have no business being in my wedding party but will be jealous otherwise" well into the twenties.
The plan is to announce the list - sans justification - and then to spend the next weeks leading up to the Globes analyzing the films individually -- whether they are on my list or simply HFPA noms. Then category by category, then predict the Oscar noms, then track the chase for Gold.
The McCue Top 10 for 2013:
The Dark Knight Rises
The Perks of Being a Wallflower
Zero Dark Thirty
Lincoln
Les Miserables
The Life of Pi
Skyfall
Argo
Looper
Wreck-It Ralph
The Obvious Notable Omissions Include:
Moonrise Kingdom
Django Unchained
The Master
Silver Linings Playbook
Beasts of the Southern Wild
Each will be dealt with in its time...
Films I Loved and Wished Could Have Squeezed In:
Ruby Sparks
Anna Karenina
Promised Land
Arbitrage
Friends with Kids
So how the hell did I watch a year full of movies and come to the conclusion that The Dark Knight Rises and The Perks of Being a Wallflower should supersede Zero Dark Thirty, Lincoln, and (my immortal beloved) Les Miz?
Quite simply because it was not something I needed to think about. When I look back over this year there is a swath of films that jumped off the edge of a ship swimming for shore with all their might, flinging swag and banner ads every which way to lock down critic, guild, and "real" honors. But the truth is, as a man who would go see a film in the theater absolutely every day -- and who is going to try to do just that in 2013 -- there are two pictures that stuck with me: The Dark Knight Rises and The Perks of Being a Wallflower.
Frankly, the only issue I've debated with myself is which of those films should take my personal number one slot. I feel I'm betraying my insane love for Perks by going with TDKR. It's not exactly Sophie's Choice... it's more like being at a restaurant and wondering if you should have the duck or the lamb. They're both excellent. You hate not having both. And there will always be some regret for not having chosen the other. In the end, you're guaranteed a succulent treat the guy with filet mignon doesn't know he's missing.
I will do my extensive write-up of The Dark Knight Rises wherein I defend that sucker harder than Godfather III. In fact, my defense for it needn't be as strong because no flaw of equal significance lies in the final Nolan picture. The mastery with which the Nolan Batman trilogy was made is equal to if not more significant to that associated with Jackson's LOTR trilogy. They're apples and oranges, for sure. These men are not in competition and should not be compared in a competitive way. Alack, Oscar history puts this film in a spot that asks whether the final masterfully made, largest of the three, should be given credit for the entire set? The very reason that the field has expanded from five best pictures to this absolutely awful world of "could be ten" noms is simply due to The Dark Knight. Never forget that. After years of downright "screwage" where the Weinsteins -- in whatever form their company was taking and where they were serving -- were battling SKG like Lannisters and Starks. Sure, there were other kingdoms vying for the field and sometimes they snuck through. But the game was being locked up a little tight -- "types" of movies, regardless of majesty, were locked out of the game and it was nice to see that the world was clamoring hard enough after The Dark Knight's snub that things changed.
It's simply that the wrong change was made. (I'm gonna drift here for a sec then hook back.)
Going from "Sure we'll include other pictures" to "Let's invite everyone to the party!" was, obviously, not the right decision. It's like saying "rather than having people of color and women on the supreme court, why don't we just let everyone be justices!" Why can't the point of view of what could be considered in the top 5 drift a way from a land so concocted it brought us ... Chocolat?
Jaws was a picture nom, so was Clockwork Orange, Cabaret nearly clipped Godfather. How about a year with Annie Hall and Star Wars. How about Midnight Cowboy winning? Well, cut to the opening of the envelopes ten and eleven years ago and everyone agreed what a weirdly formulaic game was being played. The backlash to that has led us to the field of ten which means in a world where the academy doesn't have the balls to only nominate Inglorious Basterds or An Education or Precious -- it means you get all of them, and A Serious Man and The Blind Side. So what's a nomination worth at this point anyway? Is it like picking the president at one of those early debates where they're kind enough to still bring out a modified and miniaturized Kucinich sized podium.
But I digress...
To hook back to TDKR, it should absolutely be considered a best picture nominee -- even if it were a field of five. Sixth Sense, anyone? Fugitive?!?! But it will be the surprise of my life if it is included this February, even if the field were to expand as far as ten nominees -- which is met in this year where there's about six or twenty things that could be nominated. Nolan will more than likely be overlooked. I'll cover the individual performances and my reaction to the film as a whole in a separate post. There's one surprise I could actually see happening -- you'll have to read that post to find out.
And then there's my dear beloved Perks. A film that has struck me as hard as a 2000 pic I like to call Wonder Boys. I will always have Perks near the DVD player. It will always be a film I will admire with my heart, I will occasionally emulate, and that has a piece of my soul. I never read the book -- as if I didn't have enough time while it was on the best-seller list. I went in with very little knowledge simply because I knew I would love it the moment I saw one press still with Ezra Miller, Logan Lerman, and Emma Watson. I invented an emotional reaction in my head that was so lofty I was teeing the film up to fail. Hardly. I'll watch it everyday and get a charge from it. I shall go into that film in depth in a spoiler ridden write-up of its own.
But let me just say it's a shame the reaction was so small and this is the year of adapted screenplays. Perks will be straight up locked out of the awards and it will hurt its legacy. It may fall by the wayside like Danny Boyle's Millions -- a great damn film not enough people have known to see.
My boys won't make it to the dance, I'm not a fool.
Zero Dark Thirty will.
I say this despising American foreign policy, not having believed in the value of killing one man until Barack Obama did it, still considering it too expensive, having the most psychotic respect for all the men and women in our armed forces let alone those with advanced levels of training -- and as someone who did not (ready your stones) like The Hurt Locker. This movie ran all over the place politically and the psycho conspiracy theorist in me wonders whether we're just being spoonfed the last bit of "so here's how it went down" bullshit from the "machinery." So I wasn't hooked by it's point of view on the subject and I was not predisposed to like this thing.
But sweet Christ.
ZDT brings home the bacon and fries it in the pan. Go ahead and lop my two favorite suckers off the top of the ticket and judge my picks for award contenders from there down.
Now to begin covering the films one by one...
