There's no point prolonging the inevitable... so let's get to what I would like to win and what actually will in this -- The Matthew J. McCue & Sebastian Equinox Picks for the 85th Annual Academy Awards...
In my dream scenario, the awards would be distributed as follows...
Picture: Zero Dark Thirty
Director: Steven Spielberg
Actor: Hugh Jackman, Les Miserables
Actress: Naomi Watts, The Impossible
Supporting Actor: Christoph Waltz, Django Unchained
Supporting Actress: Anne Hathaway, Les Miserables
Original Screenplay: Mark Boal, Zero Dark Thirty
Adapted Screenplay: Tony Kushner, Lincoln
Best Animated Feature: Wreck It Ralph
BUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO HAPPEN...
I'm simply not taking the time to go through all the minor awards. I hope that Deakins wins, that Adele wins, that Life of Pi racks up what it can, and that there are some full-on, legitimate surprises. I want "upsets."
I think this year we're going to get a couple of upsets and I think they'll actually fall in the top nine -- hence those being the only ones where I listed my wishes...
BEST ANIMATED FEATURE...
The best animated feature of the year is Wreck It Ralph. Somehow, Brave has been winning awards all over the place -- so has Ralph. But this is the chance to give Tim Burton an Oscar. So I see this as Disney either congratulating themselves for yet another win with Brave and keeping the PIXAR streak at a max, or I see them handing it to the guy who showed them how much money there was in a new Alice in Wonderland -- you can thank him for Oz, too.
Why not give it to Tim for the feature version of the student film that made him a legend?
Are we going to wait until 20 years from now when Helena has to push him out in a black and white wheelchair, or are we going to give an Oscar to TIM BURTON now?
Tim better hope Brave loses.
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Christ Terrio for Argo, David O. Russel for Silver Linings, Tony Kushner for Lincoln.
Tony should absolutely win. A win by any of these three may show a trend for the night as in -- "You bet your ass it's Argo." or "Holy shit, how many is Silver Linings going to win?" The only idea to compete with those is -- "Holy shit, could Lincoln hold?"
The last seems the most improbable.
I think this is Tony Kushner's to lose. I think that Spielberg did a brilliant job directing a brilliant -- albeit occasionally boring -- Tony Kushner play. And I think David O. Russell has edged him out.
A Christ Terrio victory would be just shy of a Precious level surprise.
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
It would be nice if Wes Anderson could win this. He won't.
It would be something else if Mark Boal were a guaranteed winner here.
But this one's a horse race between Zero Dark and Django.
My gut is saying things have tipped and it's Quentin's second. Mark Boal won for writing Hurt Locker. Unless we want to make him the Ruth Prawer Jhabvala of the modern Middle East pic. However, a Boal win would be lovely as it may be the only significant Zero Dark victory tonight.
The surprise here will be if Michael Haneke win. He could Almodovar this... but I doubt it -- highly.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
This is Anne Hathaway. I couldn't be happier.
An upset here would be psychotic.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Besides "Original Screenplay" which is my all time favorite because it is my life, there is the most historically heated category of all time -- "Best Supporting Actor."
This is where the dog fights happen.
This year, we've got one between Christoph Waltz and Tommy Lee Jones -- two previous winners. Normally that's something that can call the race. Not this time.
The power of Lincoln could drag TLJ along. But that seems to be stalling out.
Waltz's charming acceptance speeches and his sheer exuberance that all of this is happening to him -- again -- actually matters. The reason is because we were all going to see Django to see the movie we thought was going to bring Leo a supporting actor nomination. All from a couple of shots of DiCaprio with a coconut cocktail. But once you'd seen the Tarantino, it was hard to lie -- Waltz was the best actor in the film. Period. So what do we do now?
Well, it looks like you may well let him have it over the Hollywood veteran. Let Waltz get all Jason Robards up in here. I do think it may well be the case.
A Tommy Lee win means that Lincoln is still in play in every category.
BEST ACTRESS
Will be Jennifer Lawrence. This one is as close as Meryl and Viola -- no matter what anyone says. We can all think what we want, but we're not going to truly know it until the envelope opens. If David O. Russell is up two Oscars or DeNiro has a good night -- well, shit -- it'll be obvious. But if this thing is going to run a normal course, we won't know.
It will be Jennifer Lawrence. It's actually historic if it's Jessica Chastain. Wouldn't that be something?
ACTOR
Is no question Daniel Day.
How I wish there were a Bill Murray's chance in hell for Valjean... even a Bill Macy's... but there isn't. I'm sorry, Hugh. I love you. It is the performance of a lifetime. It is better than Daniel Day. You should win. You will lose.
We'll have more fun watching you tonight, guaranteed.
Await the Joycean D-Day speech where we lose our way in lyric.
BEST DIRECTOR
It will be Steven Spielberg and it should be.
David O. Russell would be a not too big surprise. I really think he may have it.
Ang Lee would be beyond shocking. And how many times are you going to win director and lose picture? Three?! (Yes, he won Foreign Language Film, but it's a directing award.)
It will be Spielberg's third for directing. One more and he's John Ford. Mission Accomplished.
BEST PICTURE
If everything goes Lincoln or Silver Linings way, they could upset the seemingly un-upsettable Argo.
I WOULD LOVE THIS.
If it's Silver Linings -- people are going to be "moveon.org" level mad. I'm not a fan of the film and I'm telling you it could happen.
If it's Lincoln, Spielberg will be pulling a reverse Shakespeare in Love and may well get booed.
It is only Argo. It has no director nominated. If that happens tonight, we watch Oscar's armor tear.
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Watts it all about, Naomi: Cause you ain't in this race...
Tonight the boxing gloves are on Jennifer Lawrence and Jessica Chastain.
It looks like Lawrence has it all locked up -- which is going to put her in a position no lead actress winner has been in -- at least in some time. Argue all you want about Charlize Theron, Reese Witherspoon, and Angelina Jolie (which was supporting). None of them was sitting pretty with the second installment of The Hunger Games -- whose box office DOUBLED Twilight -- let alone a stint in The X-Men franchise, and the slew of indie cred she's already amassed. Let alone her -- "coulda been a Whale Rider" nomination for Winter's Bone. This girl is a dynamo.
In the far corner, we see Jessica Chastain -- tour de force in The Debt, Tree of Life, and The Help -- which earned her a supporting actress nomination -- she would lose to co-star Octavia Spencer. Jessica Chastain got stamped with an It-Girl far exceeding Jennifer Lawrence's. However, that all changed with this race.
Jessica Chastain is still a formidable actress who is simultaneously the lead, character role in The Heiress on Broadway while being the tough as nails intelligence lead of Zero Dark Thirty. But odds are she is losing tonight.
So what of the rumors that Chastain's not being part of the raid on UBL's compound lessened her role -- and cut her out of a significant portion of the movie. Frankly -- and I'll write about Zero Dark in its own separate article -- I feel like that's only become the equation because major critics and consequent buzz loosely compared Chastain's performance to that of Jodie Foster's in Silence of the Lambs. A faulty comparison considering we live in a time where that kind of role is a rarity for women. In fact, I'd say there's been nothing better that Clarice Starling since. But that ain't Jessica's fault -- so stop making that comparison -- it only leads to -- "Well, Jodie was really down there in the basement, with the dude in the night-vision goggles, and the swastika bedspread and the whole nine -- Chastain kind hung back." Yeah, she's a CIA agent. Kathryn Bigelow made an accurate movie about "the greatest manhunt of all time." For some reason, society is not taking it for what it is. And that's why Chastain comes across as a tough, angry, durable believer -- whose tone isn't that far off of Brad Pitt in Moneyball. Another role, I'm sorry to say, that doesn't win Oscars.
Which probably means ZDT can forget picture (obviously) and probably screenplay -- Final picks to be posted one more article after this.
So what we're going with the is the strongest element of what I consider to be a quite flawed film, Silver Linings Playbook. I will admit that it harkens back to a type of film that I loved when I was growing up. I will also pronounce that it's not as good as any of them. There's something about it coming out now when the world is devoid of such films -- the closest we're getting is The Family Stone -- which, by the way, was better. Oscar pedigree, however, Silver Linings has.
I will more than likely watch the film again and edit my response. I doubt that will be anytime soon. But I am willing to allow for the possibility of fallibility with this one.
Lawrence, however, hasn't a mark on her. She nailed this thing and she made people rich with another thing. She's a regular Anne Hathaway. They can enjoy posing together at the end of the night. It isn't the first nomination. It wasn't necessarily expected. And it's gone that way -- period.
So what the hell is going on with the fact that Naomi Watts was never even part of the conversation? You could say it has something to do with the fact that The Impossible wasn't really the biggest part of the Oscar conversation this year. That's true. You could also say that it was a year that was so devoid of opportunities for strong female performance, the conversation was already quite narrow. You could also say say. But to you, I'd say that logic gets blown to pieces when you look at years where Jessica Lange won for Blue Sky -- what the hell, guys -- and the Marion Cotillard's La Vie En Rose victory -- deserved, but who the hell really saw it? You at least have to look Stockard Channing deep into a category and see which ponies are in play. Lord knows we're doing that with supporting actor. The only reason we're not with actor is because it was never a question.
But Naomi Watts is remarkable in The Impossible. I don't really know who else I would have wanted to see her go through what she went through and survive. I feel like there are other actresses I care about less and there are other actresses I wouldn't believe had it in them. She takes the brunt of a tsunami like nobody's business in this thing. Ewan McGregor seems like he is just going to smile his way through the fact that he's endlessly involved with Oscar related materials. No Trainspotting, Moulin Rouge!, or Beginners and their only being the question of whether Naomi would be nominated for The Impossible -- sight unseen -- made the "We don't nominate Ewan" policy forever clear.
But are we really not going to sift through the performances to see who's pulling a Burstyn? We haven't always seen all the films, and we know who's going to win -- we're not idiots -- but it seems the sliver that goes to see a film simply because "They heard Judi Dench was amazing in Notes on a Scandal" is dwindling. That's what's going on with Naomi Watts in The Impossible. There's no student sex, no great Phillip Glass, and the breasts are more "punctured" than "buoyant." But the work is unreal.
Naomi rides in to tonight's battle royale stress free. She should hold her head a bit higher as the true victor -- a Remains of the Day unto herself.
It looks like Lawrence has it all locked up -- which is going to put her in a position no lead actress winner has been in -- at least in some time. Argue all you want about Charlize Theron, Reese Witherspoon, and Angelina Jolie (which was supporting). None of them was sitting pretty with the second installment of The Hunger Games -- whose box office DOUBLED Twilight -- let alone a stint in The X-Men franchise, and the slew of indie cred she's already amassed. Let alone her -- "coulda been a Whale Rider" nomination for Winter's Bone. This girl is a dynamo.
In the far corner, we see Jessica Chastain -- tour de force in The Debt, Tree of Life, and The Help -- which earned her a supporting actress nomination -- she would lose to co-star Octavia Spencer. Jessica Chastain got stamped with an It-Girl far exceeding Jennifer Lawrence's. However, that all changed with this race.
Jessica Chastain is still a formidable actress who is simultaneously the lead, character role in The Heiress on Broadway while being the tough as nails intelligence lead of Zero Dark Thirty. But odds are she is losing tonight.
So what of the rumors that Chastain's not being part of the raid on UBL's compound lessened her role -- and cut her out of a significant portion of the movie. Frankly -- and I'll write about Zero Dark in its own separate article -- I feel like that's only become the equation because major critics and consequent buzz loosely compared Chastain's performance to that of Jodie Foster's in Silence of the Lambs. A faulty comparison considering we live in a time where that kind of role is a rarity for women. In fact, I'd say there's been nothing better that Clarice Starling since. But that ain't Jessica's fault -- so stop making that comparison -- it only leads to -- "Well, Jodie was really down there in the basement, with the dude in the night-vision goggles, and the swastika bedspread and the whole nine -- Chastain kind hung back." Yeah, she's a CIA agent. Kathryn Bigelow made an accurate movie about "the greatest manhunt of all time." For some reason, society is not taking it for what it is. And that's why Chastain comes across as a tough, angry, durable believer -- whose tone isn't that far off of Brad Pitt in Moneyball. Another role, I'm sorry to say, that doesn't win Oscars.
Which probably means ZDT can forget picture (obviously) and probably screenplay -- Final picks to be posted one more article after this.
So what we're going with the is the strongest element of what I consider to be a quite flawed film, Silver Linings Playbook. I will admit that it harkens back to a type of film that I loved when I was growing up. I will also pronounce that it's not as good as any of them. There's something about it coming out now when the world is devoid of such films -- the closest we're getting is The Family Stone -- which, by the way, was better. Oscar pedigree, however, Silver Linings has.
I will more than likely watch the film again and edit my response. I doubt that will be anytime soon. But I am willing to allow for the possibility of fallibility with this one.
Lawrence, however, hasn't a mark on her. She nailed this thing and she made people rich with another thing. She's a regular Anne Hathaway. They can enjoy posing together at the end of the night. It isn't the first nomination. It wasn't necessarily expected. And it's gone that way -- period.
So what the hell is going on with the fact that Naomi Watts was never even part of the conversation? You could say it has something to do with the fact that The Impossible wasn't really the biggest part of the Oscar conversation this year. That's true. You could also say that it was a year that was so devoid of opportunities for strong female performance, the conversation was already quite narrow. You could also say say. But to you, I'd say that logic gets blown to pieces when you look at years where Jessica Lange won for Blue Sky -- what the hell, guys -- and the Marion Cotillard's La Vie En Rose victory -- deserved, but who the hell really saw it? You at least have to look Stockard Channing deep into a category and see which ponies are in play. Lord knows we're doing that with supporting actor. The only reason we're not with actor is because it was never a question.
But Naomi Watts is remarkable in The Impossible. I don't really know who else I would have wanted to see her go through what she went through and survive. I feel like there are other actresses I care about less and there are other actresses I wouldn't believe had it in them. She takes the brunt of a tsunami like nobody's business in this thing. Ewan McGregor seems like he is just going to smile his way through the fact that he's endlessly involved with Oscar related materials. No Trainspotting, Moulin Rouge!, or Beginners and their only being the question of whether Naomi would be nominated for The Impossible -- sight unseen -- made the "We don't nominate Ewan" policy forever clear.
But are we really not going to sift through the performances to see who's pulling a Burstyn? We haven't always seen all the films, and we know who's going to win -- we're not idiots -- but it seems the sliver that goes to see a film simply because "They heard Judi Dench was amazing in Notes on a Scandal" is dwindling. That's what's going on with Naomi Watts in The Impossible. There's no student sex, no great Phillip Glass, and the breasts are more "punctured" than "buoyant." But the work is unreal.
Naomi rides in to tonight's battle royale stress free. She should hold her head a bit higher as the true victor -- a Remains of the Day unto herself.
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Will Waltz Weist?
Two supporting acting victories in a short time span working with the same director. Who does this Austrian think he is? But like the great Dianne with 1986's Hannah and Her Sisters and 1994's Bullets Over Broadway -- Christoph Waltz may well Weist!
The scowling outhouse, henhouse, doghouse -- I did not kill my wife! I don't caredness of it all that is Tommy Lee Jones may not be getting an Oscar for emphatically repeating the same phrase, dramatically removing his wig, and Bob Newharting it with his surprising wife. Going toe to toe with Daniel Day Lewis is certainly an accomplishment. And let's not forget that Tommy Lee's been doing some doozies lately: the under-sung Valley of Elah -- boring as it was -- had a great T.J. performance -- and let's not forget the zero recognition for his work in No Country. Lincoln's a hell of a feather to stick in that cap. And he took the SAG -- so let's not rule him out.
But what might is that he wasn't necessarily the stand out supporting actor performance. David Strathairn -- still Oscar-less -- was remarkable as Seward. No, he doesn't get the big moments of screaming down "Pushing Daisies" in the Capitol. That's not where he's allowed to wander. But the work is solid and it's interesting he wasn't equally recognized. Because frankly, D-Day's casting a big shadow over the entire Civil War era. When all is said and done, Daniel may have turned the Spielberg-Kushner masterpiece into a Sophie's Choice. A "Yeah, HE was really good in it" -ed-ness that may shadow the rest of the film. Moreso than he did with There Will Be Blood. All I'm saying is take if from the perspective of Lewis' first two Oscars and Tommy Lee ain't no Brenda Fricker (also a victor) nor is he a Paul Dano (not even nominated). So, Tommy Lee Jones ain't a guarantee.
This ain't no Jim Broadbent free for all, either. This is an absolute usurper who's taken the other half of the awards and a distant third place in "did Harvey just pull that off." And that man is Golden Globe and BAFTA winner Christoph Waltz for Django Unchained.
What's amazing is a Waltz win may mean Quentin takes script. Meaning -- you weren't even close, Wes Anderson; I'm actually not sure what you're going to have to do to win an Oscar. And if Boal's out -- does that mean all Zero Dark sympathy is heading Chastain's way -- or that there just isn't any?
I hate to say I think it's the latter. I think we may be watching Quentin Tarantino's second original screenplay Oscar. And you know what, it's about time we gave him another trophy. Every time out of the gate this guy is going for it. He is one of the few American directors who has remained an international artistic presence for the last twenty years. He was a "celebrity" before the Coen Brothers were -- and he delivers as consistently. Inglorious Basterds deserved a lot more than a Waltz win. Could be that Django is going to take two.
My question is what happens to a Zero Dark that doesn't have either a script or an actress Oscar. Is it walking away with a couple for sound -- maximum of editing. Does that mean it's going to become a Black Hawk Down. I don't know if you all remember Ridley Scott's masterpiece about another bin Laden event -- but BHD is some serious shit. The problem is -- I wonder how much people are talking about it or watching it since it really got pushed to the side at Awardsville. Will Zero Dark become a Seabiscuit? A Master and Commander? A Munich?
There have been some stellar movies made about the Middle East. Argo is simply not one of them. Argo is a a stellar movie that "takes place" in the Middle East. But it is not a film in line with The Deer Hunter, Coming Home, Apocalypse Now, Platoon -- the non-Rambo's of Nam and their current descendants -- Stop Loss, Hurt Locker, or even Jarhead. And it sure as shit doesn't hold a candle to Zero Dark.
Crazily, this is precisely the reason ZDT has the time of it's life if it takes script and actress tomorrow. It should have had picture but got shot straight between the eyes upon release -- by politicians and controversy -- and by the nominations. Affleck was anointed the darling. Good night, Miss Bigelow... and has everyone met Miss Lawrence? It was a double jump. "Your whole show's out and there's a new film that might win a lot of shit -- you're lucky Boal didn't base that script on anything published."
Yeah, that's right -- the guy just used journalistic skill to collect the information he wove into the original -- ORIGINAL -- screenplay for Zero Dark Thirty -- a goddamn epic achievement. And yet there is also something to the epic worlds Quentin Tarantino creates time and again. The truth is I could barely watch the violence -- I looked up -- and there was Jamie Foxx buck naked, handing from his ankles. Good Morning, New York. Sure. But this guy truly went both John Ford and Sam Peckinpah on us. What -- yet another -- sweeping epic... about something entirely different -- using great movie stars -- in insane situations -- to really make a statement. You simply have to hand it to Q.
Odds are Supporting Actor is way before Original Screenplay. Odds are Supporting Actor is nigh on the first award of the night. If it's Christoph Waltz... the cresting wave could well be... Tarantino, Russell, Russell, Lawrence, Lewis, Hathaway, Argo. Could damn well be Tarantino, Lawrence, Lewis, Hathaway, Spielberg, Argo.
I'm just worried about the way that's rolling off the tongue in these last moments. Does it not feel like the flow is...
Silver Linings on the RISE
Lincoln on the DECLINE -- with the exception of the D-Day Lock.
Zero Dark on the DECLINE
Waltz on the rise
Quentin giving somewhat surprising acceptance speeches
Isn't that what we're kind of watching happen? Why would that be a "surprise" tomorrow?
Might not be my final prediction... not just yet.
But the Waltz Weist is an actual "tipping point." Gladwell sequels at the ready.
The scowling outhouse, henhouse, doghouse -- I did not kill my wife! I don't caredness of it all that is Tommy Lee Jones may not be getting an Oscar for emphatically repeating the same phrase, dramatically removing his wig, and Bob Newharting it with his surprising wife. Going toe to toe with Daniel Day Lewis is certainly an accomplishment. And let's not forget that Tommy Lee's been doing some doozies lately: the under-sung Valley of Elah -- boring as it was -- had a great T.J. performance -- and let's not forget the zero recognition for his work in No Country. Lincoln's a hell of a feather to stick in that cap. And he took the SAG -- so let's not rule him out.
But what might is that he wasn't necessarily the stand out supporting actor performance. David Strathairn -- still Oscar-less -- was remarkable as Seward. No, he doesn't get the big moments of screaming down "Pushing Daisies" in the Capitol. That's not where he's allowed to wander. But the work is solid and it's interesting he wasn't equally recognized. Because frankly, D-Day's casting a big shadow over the entire Civil War era. When all is said and done, Daniel may have turned the Spielberg-Kushner masterpiece into a Sophie's Choice. A "Yeah, HE was really good in it" -ed-ness that may shadow the rest of the film. Moreso than he did with There Will Be Blood. All I'm saying is take if from the perspective of Lewis' first two Oscars and Tommy Lee ain't no Brenda Fricker (also a victor) nor is he a Paul Dano (not even nominated). So, Tommy Lee Jones ain't a guarantee.
This ain't no Jim Broadbent free for all, either. This is an absolute usurper who's taken the other half of the awards and a distant third place in "did Harvey just pull that off." And that man is Golden Globe and BAFTA winner Christoph Waltz for Django Unchained.
What's amazing is a Waltz win may mean Quentin takes script. Meaning -- you weren't even close, Wes Anderson; I'm actually not sure what you're going to have to do to win an Oscar. And if Boal's out -- does that mean all Zero Dark sympathy is heading Chastain's way -- or that there just isn't any?
I hate to say I think it's the latter. I think we may be watching Quentin Tarantino's second original screenplay Oscar. And you know what, it's about time we gave him another trophy. Every time out of the gate this guy is going for it. He is one of the few American directors who has remained an international artistic presence for the last twenty years. He was a "celebrity" before the Coen Brothers were -- and he delivers as consistently. Inglorious Basterds deserved a lot more than a Waltz win. Could be that Django is going to take two.
My question is what happens to a Zero Dark that doesn't have either a script or an actress Oscar. Is it walking away with a couple for sound -- maximum of editing. Does that mean it's going to become a Black Hawk Down. I don't know if you all remember Ridley Scott's masterpiece about another bin Laden event -- but BHD is some serious shit. The problem is -- I wonder how much people are talking about it or watching it since it really got pushed to the side at Awardsville. Will Zero Dark become a Seabiscuit? A Master and Commander? A Munich?
There have been some stellar movies made about the Middle East. Argo is simply not one of them. Argo is a a stellar movie that "takes place" in the Middle East. But it is not a film in line with The Deer Hunter, Coming Home, Apocalypse Now, Platoon -- the non-Rambo's of Nam and their current descendants -- Stop Loss, Hurt Locker, or even Jarhead. And it sure as shit doesn't hold a candle to Zero Dark.
Crazily, this is precisely the reason ZDT has the time of it's life if it takes script and actress tomorrow. It should have had picture but got shot straight between the eyes upon release -- by politicians and controversy -- and by the nominations. Affleck was anointed the darling. Good night, Miss Bigelow... and has everyone met Miss Lawrence? It was a double jump. "Your whole show's out and there's a new film that might win a lot of shit -- you're lucky Boal didn't base that script on anything published."
Yeah, that's right -- the guy just used journalistic skill to collect the information he wove into the original -- ORIGINAL -- screenplay for Zero Dark Thirty -- a goddamn epic achievement. And yet there is also something to the epic worlds Quentin Tarantino creates time and again. The truth is I could barely watch the violence -- I looked up -- and there was Jamie Foxx buck naked, handing from his ankles. Good Morning, New York. Sure. But this guy truly went both John Ford and Sam Peckinpah on us. What -- yet another -- sweeping epic... about something entirely different -- using great movie stars -- in insane situations -- to really make a statement. You simply have to hand it to Q.
Odds are Supporting Actor is way before Original Screenplay. Odds are Supporting Actor is nigh on the first award of the night. If it's Christoph Waltz... the cresting wave could well be... Tarantino, Russell, Russell, Lawrence, Lewis, Hathaway, Argo. Could damn well be Tarantino, Lawrence, Lewis, Hathaway, Spielberg, Argo.
I'm just worried about the way that's rolling off the tongue in these last moments. Does it not feel like the flow is...
Silver Linings on the RISE
Lincoln on the DECLINE -- with the exception of the D-Day Lock.
Zero Dark on the DECLINE
Waltz on the rise
Quentin giving somewhat surprising acceptance speeches
Isn't that what we're kind of watching happen? Why would that be a "surprise" tomorrow?
Might not be my final prediction... not just yet.
But the Waltz Weist is an actual "tipping point." Gladwell sequels at the ready.
What's Up With Oscar?
In past years I used to through each of the pictures one at a time. I shan't be doing that this time around. And the reason is because that isn't the story of what's going on with this year's Academy Awards. The truth is that this thing is crazy with a capital "C," that rhymes with "T," that stands for "TEN." In my Oscar expert opinion, the expansion of the picture field has turned the awards schizophrenic. People may be out there saying, well -- doesn't that make for better television and isn't this whole thing just about audience size? Yes, You're right. People are really wondering what's going to happen tomorrow night rather than last year when the basic convo was...
"What's gonna win?"
"The Artist."
(Shoulders sag slightly) "Oh, yeah."
This Argo biz is actually interesting. I will give the Academy that. I just think that they haven't created drama as much as they've signaled that there are some serious kinks in their system. So, expand the audience all you want. Get the buzz out there. I'd just say there's a way to do that and have accurate awards. I would also say that there is a way to absolute redo the entire telecast and fix it in five seconds.
-Move all the technical awards out of the telecast. I love you - but it's a telecast.
-Move the lifetime achievements back in - but make them presented in an exciting way.
-Get the short categories out of the telecast. Replace them with awards like "Best First Film."
-Hire the producer of the BAFTAs.
That alone and you've at least got the late 80s/early 90s back, which were some damn good telecasts.
This year we are completely adrift.
I plan to continue blogging daily after this telecast. Hold me to it. I'll watch a film a day or talk about trends. But it will be daily -- and it may have a new address so I can begin using photos. During that daily blogging I'm really going to dig in to Oscar and make that the approach I take toward every single film blogged about. One of the key things I will speak about is 1998.
1998 was the year the studios had the best picture cocktail on overload. Not only was it the year that Shakespeare in Love robbed the Oscar from Saving Private Ryan and showed the world just what Harvey could do during award season -- it was a year where the five best pictures were just about two things: World War II and Elizabethan England -- two topics we've given MANY Oscars to. Look at the spread: Life is Beautiful, The Thin Red Line, Saving Private Ryan, Elizabeth, and Shakespeare in Love. I've said it once -- and I'll say it again -- the ensuing fight between Miramax and then the Weinstein Company against DreamWorks broke the system.
That trend has obviously not stopped. Certain films are made to win Oscars. Certain films are given automatic Oscar consideration. That will never change and has been since Doug Fairbanks & Co. set us off on this crazy bender.
Amazingly, during a time period where American is in at least two wars in the Middle East -- where we have not adequately awarded a film that accurately reflects the American experience abroad -- please with the Hurt Locker -- please -- in that pocket of time we have two remarkably directed, written, and acted films in Argo and Zero Dark Thirty.
It's an absolutely fair assessment to say that Argo is the crowd and fan favorite -- it has been since the weekend it was released. It seemed this time the world was going to make up for completely overlooking The Town -- save Jeremy Renner -- and proudly proclaim "Ben Affleck's all growns up." And what the hell -- we'll give Clooney and Heslov -- deserving film makers and cool dudes -- Oscars while we're at it. Handshakes and pack pats all around.
It's an absolutely palatable movie about Iran that has an amazing message about hope -- and man is it slaying people with the b.s. "this is a movie about the power of storytelling" line. Christ, if you can come up with a line half that good and half as applicable and get it rolling in each of your speeches. Well, you wouldn't be Mitt Romney.
Argo was Chicago. Movie ended, nearly everyone said, "So that sews up the Oscar race, huh?"
Somehow Lincoln got confused into the conversation. Probably because of what an amazing turn it is for Spielberg -- which I'll talk about in a separate article. The issue truly was "Are they actually going to give Ben Affleck a directing Oscar over Spielberg? Is that actually going to happen?"
And then, Christmas week, a little film called Zero Dark Thirty opened. The no questions asked best picture of the year. Period. Absolutely. Slam dunk. It's a winner. Call a cop. Zero Dark. Done. It suffered through a massive smear campaign from our government while the calm and collected -- perhaps too serene -- Kathyn Bigelow and the simply too genius Mark Boal. I feel like huge chunk of America -- including Academy members -- have refused to see Zero Dark Thirty because they have a skewed understanding of the content and politics of this incredible film. The thing's incredible and I'll give ZDT its due post Oscar.
The thing is -- Spielberg's nominated -- Bigelow and Affleck -- let alone Tom Hooper -- are NOT nominated. And the other thing is -- it's a done deal, Argo wins tomorrow night unless there's one of the sweetest upsets in the history of the Academy Awards -- again, 1998.
So let's talk about what's up, people. No Affleck. Why?
The director category is devoid of Ben Affleck for what sure as heck doesn't seem like a snub. Have you seen a town love a guy more? It's standing ovations and "gee, shucks" speeches all over this town -- all over the world! -- for this guy. So why the hell didn't he have the votes? He won the DGA and wasn't nominated for director? Get your house in order, Oscar! You're going to give him picture anyway? Are we honestly saying Ben Affleck isn't at least Kevin Costner? TATANKA?!
We haven't seen a picture go on to win without a nominated director since Driving Miss Daisy. Anytime you have Driving Miss Daisy as your historic Oscar reference point, you're doing something terribly wrong. I'm looking at you, Emmanuelle Riva (I'm joking, don't die. You're lovely, that movie is brutal).
We actually don't know what will happen tomorrow.
It could be...
Spielberg, Lincoln
Spielberg, Argo
Russell, Argo
Lee, Argo
That is insanity. We have NO idea what will happen with screenplay. And the amazing thing is every way you cut it, it's an upset.
If Life of Pi wins anything beyond effects or score, we're all going to be like "Holy shit! It's Ang Lee's Hugo." And the amazing thing is, it's simply a superior film. It's the unsung hero of this chaos. The last five minutes are beyond A.I. in my humble opine -- but like with the Spielberg masterpiece -- I forgive Ang. And here he is -- with a gorgeous film -- just gorgeous. Could be Ang Lee... though I see him behind David O. Russell.
If David O. Russell doesn't win screenplay or director, I will be stunned. What happens if he wins both? Is it still Argo?
If Chris Terrio takes screenplay and Argo wins picture it makes the lack of a director nomination that much more stupid.
If Spielberg and Lincoln win -- especially if that's coupled with a Tony Kushner script victory -- it will actually be an upset at this point. Even though everyone immediately deemed a Lincoln sweep what would take place the morning the nominations were announced. Somehow, after making an incredible film in Lincoln -- yes, yes, which I will speak about in a separate entry -- the position it has landed Spielberg in is "That's Ben Affleck's Oscar and it's yours to lose." How the hell is that the vibe we're sending this guy to the Oscars with? Somehow this under-sung master is routinely shafted at awards. No, he doesn't always win -- look it up. No, there not all popcorn movies -- look it up. It's not Spielberg's fault everyone was a lot crazier about his film the morning they screwed Ben Affleck than they may feel now that we've been officially introduced to Mr. Affleck's second act. But boy it sure as hell feels like it's starting to tip in that direction.
So yes, these awards are insane. I'm going to come through and attack specific categories before making my straight out predictions tomorrow.
Happy Oscar Weekend.
"What's gonna win?"
"The Artist."
(Shoulders sag slightly) "Oh, yeah."
This Argo biz is actually interesting. I will give the Academy that. I just think that they haven't created drama as much as they've signaled that there are some serious kinks in their system. So, expand the audience all you want. Get the buzz out there. I'd just say there's a way to do that and have accurate awards. I would also say that there is a way to absolute redo the entire telecast and fix it in five seconds.
-Move all the technical awards out of the telecast. I love you - but it's a telecast.
-Move the lifetime achievements back in - but make them presented in an exciting way.
-Get the short categories out of the telecast. Replace them with awards like "Best First Film."
-Hire the producer of the BAFTAs.
That alone and you've at least got the late 80s/early 90s back, which were some damn good telecasts.
This year we are completely adrift.
I plan to continue blogging daily after this telecast. Hold me to it. I'll watch a film a day or talk about trends. But it will be daily -- and it may have a new address so I can begin using photos. During that daily blogging I'm really going to dig in to Oscar and make that the approach I take toward every single film blogged about. One of the key things I will speak about is 1998.
1998 was the year the studios had the best picture cocktail on overload. Not only was it the year that Shakespeare in Love robbed the Oscar from Saving Private Ryan and showed the world just what Harvey could do during award season -- it was a year where the five best pictures were just about two things: World War II and Elizabethan England -- two topics we've given MANY Oscars to. Look at the spread: Life is Beautiful, The Thin Red Line, Saving Private Ryan, Elizabeth, and Shakespeare in Love. I've said it once -- and I'll say it again -- the ensuing fight between Miramax and then the Weinstein Company against DreamWorks broke the system.
That trend has obviously not stopped. Certain films are made to win Oscars. Certain films are given automatic Oscar consideration. That will never change and has been since Doug Fairbanks & Co. set us off on this crazy bender.
Amazingly, during a time period where American is in at least two wars in the Middle East -- where we have not adequately awarded a film that accurately reflects the American experience abroad -- please with the Hurt Locker -- please -- in that pocket of time we have two remarkably directed, written, and acted films in Argo and Zero Dark Thirty.
It's an absolutely fair assessment to say that Argo is the crowd and fan favorite -- it has been since the weekend it was released. It seemed this time the world was going to make up for completely overlooking The Town -- save Jeremy Renner -- and proudly proclaim "Ben Affleck's all growns up." And what the hell -- we'll give Clooney and Heslov -- deserving film makers and cool dudes -- Oscars while we're at it. Handshakes and pack pats all around.
It's an absolutely palatable movie about Iran that has an amazing message about hope -- and man is it slaying people with the b.s. "this is a movie about the power of storytelling" line. Christ, if you can come up with a line half that good and half as applicable and get it rolling in each of your speeches. Well, you wouldn't be Mitt Romney.
Argo was Chicago. Movie ended, nearly everyone said, "So that sews up the Oscar race, huh?"
Somehow Lincoln got confused into the conversation. Probably because of what an amazing turn it is for Spielberg -- which I'll talk about in a separate article. The issue truly was "Are they actually going to give Ben Affleck a directing Oscar over Spielberg? Is that actually going to happen?"
And then, Christmas week, a little film called Zero Dark Thirty opened. The no questions asked best picture of the year. Period. Absolutely. Slam dunk. It's a winner. Call a cop. Zero Dark. Done. It suffered through a massive smear campaign from our government while the calm and collected -- perhaps too serene -- Kathyn Bigelow and the simply too genius Mark Boal. I feel like huge chunk of America -- including Academy members -- have refused to see Zero Dark Thirty because they have a skewed understanding of the content and politics of this incredible film. The thing's incredible and I'll give ZDT its due post Oscar.
The thing is -- Spielberg's nominated -- Bigelow and Affleck -- let alone Tom Hooper -- are NOT nominated. And the other thing is -- it's a done deal, Argo wins tomorrow night unless there's one of the sweetest upsets in the history of the Academy Awards -- again, 1998.
So let's talk about what's up, people. No Affleck. Why?
The director category is devoid of Ben Affleck for what sure as heck doesn't seem like a snub. Have you seen a town love a guy more? It's standing ovations and "gee, shucks" speeches all over this town -- all over the world! -- for this guy. So why the hell didn't he have the votes? He won the DGA and wasn't nominated for director? Get your house in order, Oscar! You're going to give him picture anyway? Are we honestly saying Ben Affleck isn't at least Kevin Costner? TATANKA?!
We haven't seen a picture go on to win without a nominated director since Driving Miss Daisy. Anytime you have Driving Miss Daisy as your historic Oscar reference point, you're doing something terribly wrong. I'm looking at you, Emmanuelle Riva (I'm joking, don't die. You're lovely, that movie is brutal).
We actually don't know what will happen tomorrow.
It could be...
Spielberg, Lincoln
Spielberg, Argo
Russell, Argo
Lee, Argo
That is insanity. We have NO idea what will happen with screenplay. And the amazing thing is every way you cut it, it's an upset.
If Life of Pi wins anything beyond effects or score, we're all going to be like "Holy shit! It's Ang Lee's Hugo." And the amazing thing is, it's simply a superior film. It's the unsung hero of this chaos. The last five minutes are beyond A.I. in my humble opine -- but like with the Spielberg masterpiece -- I forgive Ang. And here he is -- with a gorgeous film -- just gorgeous. Could be Ang Lee... though I see him behind David O. Russell.
If David O. Russell doesn't win screenplay or director, I will be stunned. What happens if he wins both? Is it still Argo?
If Chris Terrio takes screenplay and Argo wins picture it makes the lack of a director nomination that much more stupid.
If Spielberg and Lincoln win -- especially if that's coupled with a Tony Kushner script victory -- it will actually be an upset at this point. Even though everyone immediately deemed a Lincoln sweep what would take place the morning the nominations were announced. Somehow, after making an incredible film in Lincoln -- yes, yes, which I will speak about in a separate entry -- the position it has landed Spielberg in is "That's Ben Affleck's Oscar and it's yours to lose." How the hell is that the vibe we're sending this guy to the Oscars with? Somehow this under-sung master is routinely shafted at awards. No, he doesn't always win -- look it up. No, there not all popcorn movies -- look it up. It's not Spielberg's fault everyone was a lot crazier about his film the morning they screwed Ben Affleck than they may feel now that we've been officially introduced to Mr. Affleck's second act. But boy it sure as hell feels like it's starting to tip in that direction.
So yes, these awards are insane. I'm going to come through and attack specific categories before making my straight out predictions tomorrow.
Happy Oscar Weekend.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Every Harvey has a Silver Lining
The film I like least... but the world seems to like most...
I admit freely and straight-uppedly, right-out-of-the-gatedly that I am missing whatever kind of emotional zeitgeist-ish thing that's happening with Silver Lining's Playbook. I am willingly and openly admitting that I damn sure am in the minority when I say that I think Silver Linings Playbook is tantamount to being this year's Chocolat. You do the math on that one and you come to your own conclusions. I have made no specific pronouncement.
I am simply saying that Lasse Hallstrom is a director whose work I love. My Life As A Dog is the first foreign film I saw in a theater (thank you, Joanne). The year he directed The Cider House Rules, I wondered if he might give American Beauty a run for it's money -- and he got my boy John Irving an Oscar. But sweet heavenly what?! is Chocolat?
To a softer, more mellow note -- and I mean that quite seriously -- get a trumpet mute in on the level of statement right off the bat -- I feel the same way about Silver Linings Playbook. I saw Spanking the Monkey in a now closed Palace Theater in Manhattan outside of which I saw Smashing Pumpkins just talking to each other -- and we still maintain they came in and saw the movie -- i.e. coolest "1990s independent film day" in the life of a dude where that matters. Flirting with Disaster -- Amazing. Three Kings was how I learned the National Board of Review was a legitimate organization. And then there's something like The Fighter. Look -- we know I'm wrong on this. I blogged about how wrong I was -- you all loved Melissa Leo and Christian Bale -- you gave them Oscars!
"How?!" I suppose would be my question. If you had told me that David O. Russell directed either Christian Bale, Melissa Leo, or both to Oscars -- I would not have guessed it would be for The Fighter -- which was DESTROYED by Warrior -- have you seen Warrior? I don't know what the hell you're doing reading this blog when you could be watching Warrior. It destroyed The Fighter.
So I don't know what's up with my connect to David O. Rusell... lately it's been off...
Because let's be frank folks, David O. Russell is one "guy" this year who really has Harvey behind him... Waltz? probably... Quentin? sure... But Django's got no chance... Silver Linings and the Jennifer Lawrence of it all is a chance for Harvey to Re-Gwynethize himself... and when you got Harvey waves of that size carrying your ship to port, it means some "man" is taking a trophy, too. But for SLP (no wonder Ali likes it) here's how the gents break down...
Is Robert DeNiro going to win? You know what, you sons of bitches, wouldn't that be something? I do think the absolute smug faced-ness of Tommy Lee Jones may have cost him the Oscar -- despite his SAG win. There's always someone who streaks all the way up through the SAGS and then tanks. That person is looking more and more like Tommy Lee. It's usually not a four-for-four year -- in fact, I'll check and update if that has ever been the case -- hell, Jodie won for Nell and Lange for frickin' Blue Sky the very first year the SAG telecast began. They've long been splitters. I do think we could see Tommy Lee topple. Yes. Whether I see DeNiro taking that slot all has to do with whether...
Well... whether you think that Harvey can dig that deep for a third DeNiro Oscar. There's sure as hell a way to get Booby D. number three. But this just ain't the role. And if Harvey's rolling the dice on the supporting actor game this year, the bets on Waltz. We'll get to him in a whole separate piece whose title you're just going to adore. But if Harv snags this sucker Judi Dench style... then hold on to your frickin' hats -- it may not even be Argo. Just tie those odds with a bow and calculate what you think.
Is Bradley Cooper winning? There's not a Hugh Jackman's chance in this male award season hell that Bradley Cooper is winning. The fact that "the guy from the Hangover" is nominated, should let Mr. Cooper feel enough like a second string Greg Kinnear to know that if he really puts his mind to it, he sure as hell showed us that he's really capable of something -- something probably amazing. Silver Linings -- again -- not it for me. I do admit, I picture a girl with brown lipstick so wanting to smack me right now because of how much she loved his sensitivity. My answer? Not real!
So it looks like the Oscar in one way shape or form is going to David O. Russell. He's either taking out Tony Kushner and walking home with adapted screenplay -- bear in mind he'd have to take out Argo's Chris Terrio, too. Or he's going to take out El Spielbergo. It could be that the once "Give Us Bararbbas!" culture of the Academy that left Affleck crucified on nomination morning has now rallied for his "but we gave you a kind of side swiped thank you that includes a friggin' best picture Oscar -- so you're Michael Douglas, not Warren Beatty." So it looks like Don Spielz is going to lose out on the Lincoln picture slot. That sucker seems done. As does hopefully the ten picture system -- you fools. But that means director may damn well be wide open.
Kneejerk was "Affleck, Bigelow, and Hooper are out. That means Lincoln and Spielberg sweep." But that sure as hell ain't proving to be the case. And that reason is manifold.
One of the reasons... Argo is and always was going to win best picture. I will get to where I made my error on that bet later... Unless there's a fantastically amazing upset! Which... I obviously hope for! Drama at all costs, unless it's when my favorite is the lock.
But look how the "And they said it was a Lincoln sweep but now it looks like an Argo romp" chips fall when you line 'em up against the Oscar nominations...
1. Bigelow's absence is killing Zero Dark. Jessica Chastain doesn't seem to have the staying power to be ZDT's victor. Looks like that is heading toward Mark Boal -- problem is it looks like he could lose to Quentin. Zero Dark is either shut out (likely), it wins screenplay (50/50), or it pulls an actress upset (1 in 10). This could be where you thank Django and ZDT goes away empty handed.
2. This means Jennifer Lawrence is absolutely going to win best actress . This has most of America saying "Wait a minute, the chick who played Katniss and Mystique can actually act?" It has your better friends saying, "Wow, she came a long way from Winter's Bone -- fast." A "lead" win for a film with other acknowledged performances is HUGE.
3. This means that the film that's nominated in every acting category is now getting a second glance because Silver Linings Playbook is nominated in ALL FOUR CATEGORIES -- it's As Good As It Gets -- plus one... no, I won't say it's REDS. 'Cause you can rally round the flag all you want at the SAG awards -- but Argo ain't an actor's movie -- not in Oscar's view. It just isn't the best cast of the year. It's a great film with many great elements. But Argo only has the Arkin nom. Suddenly you've got actors looking at a film with four categories. CLIFFHANGER!!! Does this throw Silver Linings into "Picture Play?" DON'T FORGET HOW CRASH WON.
4. You know how it's going -- Hathaway (the Les Miz-Ozcar), Waltz (looks like it, huh?), Lawrence, Day-Lewis... screenplay ain't a guarantee... so where else can Silver Lining's strike? Director and Picture. At this point, I'd say picture is out.
5. This is my blog, so I'll say it -- if David O. Russell wins best director, I will be sickened for having predicted it here. Spielberg can't lose for that to happen. It can't be this way. No.
Let's get back to it...
David O. Russell has effectively -- auteurishly in what I would consider to be the most drastically self reflexive way in the world -- made a film that was important to him. This is because -- as he brings up, I would never bring up -- his son has certain disabilities and it was important to Mr. Russell (not Mr. O'Russell) that he artistically communicate with his son. I think that is wonderful, of course. I have members of my family who are disabled or otherwise abled in some capacity and have lost some close friends who had a range of similar maladies. So -- yeah -- it resonates. To so many of you, it was "human."
Out of all the films this year, America has said "that's the one with all around character connect." I freely admit that I see why that would be the case. I emphatically admit that while being a psychotic fan of all things connected to this film, I did not feel it.
To me, everything about mental illness did not ring true. With SLP there was an overly emphatic tone to what symptoms were, to what behavior was, to what conversation was, to what breakdown was. Now -- that differs from experience to experience. DOR said it was personal to him -- perhaps that's how it was for him. But for me, this wasn't Niagra, Niagra by a good country sneeze. And as much as why that limits the film reaction for me -- which sounds obnoxious -- (but I just didn't feel it got there), I am obviously completely wrong when it comes to how everyone else has reacted. You all loved it. So screw me.
I just felt that there was a time where we were representing mental difficulties in a real way or in a fake way -- so that we could either increase awareness or so that we could simply use a lunatic as a part of storytelling. This puppy -- I don't know where it falls. I have very specific reactions to the presentation of mental illness -- so that should be taken into account. Then again, I consider things from oh, running somewhere out by that tree in Amadeus over to that screen door in Awakenings to the barred windows in Twelve Monkeys to Midnight Express -- TO BE ACCURATE! Somewhere between Hefty Bag, lucky charm when you sit next to me, and dance tournament -- I parted ways with this film -- in a way I was drawn closer to Billy Elliot, The Full Monty (film only, thank you), and Little Miss Sunshine. Here -- the "too much"... was... for me... "too much."
But all of you seem to love it!
Are we that short on "it was just an actually good romance between complicated adult characters" style films that this one is living the life of a 1970s Neil Simon screenplay?
Look, I'm a big fan of horse racing. Big fan. I'm having questions about the morals of it lately -- and maybe I'll give it up -- but not before I introduce a couple of more friends to the thrill of race where you're not just betting on the winner. You can call "Argo!" at the ribbon all you want. But shagging ass as down the stretch they come is Silver Lining's Playbook streaking past Lincoln and probably going to end in second. It's the Harvey push... and has been the case in many year's past -- The King's Speech, The Artist -- it's the flick that hooked the audience's heart.
Hey, I like The Dreamers -- I can be a jerk. DOR, J'adore. I want you to be an Oscar winner. I guess I'm just hoping for more sophisticated tackle with more piercing barbs. My heart requires a more complicated trap.
I admit freely and straight-uppedly, right-out-of-the-gatedly that I am missing whatever kind of emotional zeitgeist-ish thing that's happening with Silver Lining's Playbook. I am willingly and openly admitting that I damn sure am in the minority when I say that I think Silver Linings Playbook is tantamount to being this year's Chocolat. You do the math on that one and you come to your own conclusions. I have made no specific pronouncement.
I am simply saying that Lasse Hallstrom is a director whose work I love. My Life As A Dog is the first foreign film I saw in a theater (thank you, Joanne). The year he directed The Cider House Rules, I wondered if he might give American Beauty a run for it's money -- and he got my boy John Irving an Oscar. But sweet heavenly what?! is Chocolat?
To a softer, more mellow note -- and I mean that quite seriously -- get a trumpet mute in on the level of statement right off the bat -- I feel the same way about Silver Linings Playbook. I saw Spanking the Monkey in a now closed Palace Theater in Manhattan outside of which I saw Smashing Pumpkins just talking to each other -- and we still maintain they came in and saw the movie -- i.e. coolest "1990s independent film day" in the life of a dude where that matters. Flirting with Disaster -- Amazing. Three Kings was how I learned the National Board of Review was a legitimate organization. And then there's something like The Fighter. Look -- we know I'm wrong on this. I blogged about how wrong I was -- you all loved Melissa Leo and Christian Bale -- you gave them Oscars!
"How?!" I suppose would be my question. If you had told me that David O. Russell directed either Christian Bale, Melissa Leo, or both to Oscars -- I would not have guessed it would be for The Fighter -- which was DESTROYED by Warrior -- have you seen Warrior? I don't know what the hell you're doing reading this blog when you could be watching Warrior. It destroyed The Fighter.
So I don't know what's up with my connect to David O. Rusell... lately it's been off...
Because let's be frank folks, David O. Russell is one "guy" this year who really has Harvey behind him... Waltz? probably... Quentin? sure... But Django's got no chance... Silver Linings and the Jennifer Lawrence of it all is a chance for Harvey to Re-Gwynethize himself... and when you got Harvey waves of that size carrying your ship to port, it means some "man" is taking a trophy, too. But for SLP (no wonder Ali likes it) here's how the gents break down...
Is Robert DeNiro going to win? You know what, you sons of bitches, wouldn't that be something? I do think the absolute smug faced-ness of Tommy Lee Jones may have cost him the Oscar -- despite his SAG win. There's always someone who streaks all the way up through the SAGS and then tanks. That person is looking more and more like Tommy Lee. It's usually not a four-for-four year -- in fact, I'll check and update if that has ever been the case -- hell, Jodie won for Nell and Lange for frickin' Blue Sky the very first year the SAG telecast began. They've long been splitters. I do think we could see Tommy Lee topple. Yes. Whether I see DeNiro taking that slot all has to do with whether...
Well... whether you think that Harvey can dig that deep for a third DeNiro Oscar. There's sure as hell a way to get Booby D. number three. But this just ain't the role. And if Harvey's rolling the dice on the supporting actor game this year, the bets on Waltz. We'll get to him in a whole separate piece whose title you're just going to adore. But if Harv snags this sucker Judi Dench style... then hold on to your frickin' hats -- it may not even be Argo. Just tie those odds with a bow and calculate what you think.
Is Bradley Cooper winning? There's not a Hugh Jackman's chance in this male award season hell that Bradley Cooper is winning. The fact that "the guy from the Hangover" is nominated, should let Mr. Cooper feel enough like a second string Greg Kinnear to know that if he really puts his mind to it, he sure as hell showed us that he's really capable of something -- something probably amazing. Silver Linings -- again -- not it for me. I do admit, I picture a girl with brown lipstick so wanting to smack me right now because of how much she loved his sensitivity. My answer? Not real!
So it looks like the Oscar in one way shape or form is going to David O. Russell. He's either taking out Tony Kushner and walking home with adapted screenplay -- bear in mind he'd have to take out Argo's Chris Terrio, too. Or he's going to take out El Spielbergo. It could be that the once "Give Us Bararbbas!" culture of the Academy that left Affleck crucified on nomination morning has now rallied for his "but we gave you a kind of side swiped thank you that includes a friggin' best picture Oscar -- so you're Michael Douglas, not Warren Beatty." So it looks like Don Spielz is going to lose out on the Lincoln picture slot. That sucker seems done. As does hopefully the ten picture system -- you fools. But that means director may damn well be wide open.
Kneejerk was "Affleck, Bigelow, and Hooper are out. That means Lincoln and Spielberg sweep." But that sure as hell ain't proving to be the case. And that reason is manifold.
One of the reasons... Argo is and always was going to win best picture. I will get to where I made my error on that bet later... Unless there's a fantastically amazing upset! Which... I obviously hope for! Drama at all costs, unless it's when my favorite is the lock.
But look how the "And they said it was a Lincoln sweep but now it looks like an Argo romp" chips fall when you line 'em up against the Oscar nominations...
1. Bigelow's absence is killing Zero Dark. Jessica Chastain doesn't seem to have the staying power to be ZDT's victor. Looks like that is heading toward Mark Boal -- problem is it looks like he could lose to Quentin. Zero Dark is either shut out (likely), it wins screenplay (50/50), or it pulls an actress upset (1 in 10). This could be where you thank Django and ZDT goes away empty handed.
2. This means Jennifer Lawrence is absolutely going to win best actress . This has most of America saying "Wait a minute, the chick who played Katniss and Mystique can actually act?" It has your better friends saying, "Wow, she came a long way from Winter's Bone -- fast." A "lead" win for a film with other acknowledged performances is HUGE.
3. This means that the film that's nominated in every acting category is now getting a second glance because Silver Linings Playbook is nominated in ALL FOUR CATEGORIES -- it's As Good As It Gets -- plus one... no, I won't say it's REDS. 'Cause you can rally round the flag all you want at the SAG awards -- but Argo ain't an actor's movie -- not in Oscar's view. It just isn't the best cast of the year. It's a great film with many great elements. But Argo only has the Arkin nom. Suddenly you've got actors looking at a film with four categories. CLIFFHANGER!!! Does this throw Silver Linings into "Picture Play?" DON'T FORGET HOW CRASH WON.
4. You know how it's going -- Hathaway (the Les Miz-Ozcar), Waltz (looks like it, huh?), Lawrence, Day-Lewis... screenplay ain't a guarantee... so where else can Silver Lining's strike? Director and Picture. At this point, I'd say picture is out.
5. This is my blog, so I'll say it -- if David O. Russell wins best director, I will be sickened for having predicted it here. Spielberg can't lose for that to happen. It can't be this way. No.
Let's get back to it...
David O. Russell has effectively -- auteurishly in what I would consider to be the most drastically self reflexive way in the world -- made a film that was important to him. This is because -- as he brings up, I would never bring up -- his son has certain disabilities and it was important to Mr. Russell (not Mr. O'Russell) that he artistically communicate with his son. I think that is wonderful, of course. I have members of my family who are disabled or otherwise abled in some capacity and have lost some close friends who had a range of similar maladies. So -- yeah -- it resonates. To so many of you, it was "human."
Out of all the films this year, America has said "that's the one with all around character connect." I freely admit that I see why that would be the case. I emphatically admit that while being a psychotic fan of all things connected to this film, I did not feel it.
To me, everything about mental illness did not ring true. With SLP there was an overly emphatic tone to what symptoms were, to what behavior was, to what conversation was, to what breakdown was. Now -- that differs from experience to experience. DOR said it was personal to him -- perhaps that's how it was for him. But for me, this wasn't Niagra, Niagra by a good country sneeze. And as much as why that limits the film reaction for me -- which sounds obnoxious -- (but I just didn't feel it got there), I am obviously completely wrong when it comes to how everyone else has reacted. You all loved it. So screw me.
I just felt that there was a time where we were representing mental difficulties in a real way or in a fake way -- so that we could either increase awareness or so that we could simply use a lunatic as a part of storytelling. This puppy -- I don't know where it falls. I have very specific reactions to the presentation of mental illness -- so that should be taken into account. Then again, I consider things from oh, running somewhere out by that tree in Amadeus over to that screen door in Awakenings to the barred windows in Twelve Monkeys to Midnight Express -- TO BE ACCURATE! Somewhere between Hefty Bag, lucky charm when you sit next to me, and dance tournament -- I parted ways with this film -- in a way I was drawn closer to Billy Elliot, The Full Monty (film only, thank you), and Little Miss Sunshine. Here -- the "too much"... was... for me... "too much."
But all of you seem to love it!
Are we that short on "it was just an actually good romance between complicated adult characters" style films that this one is living the life of a 1970s Neil Simon screenplay?
Look, I'm a big fan of horse racing. Big fan. I'm having questions about the morals of it lately -- and maybe I'll give it up -- but not before I introduce a couple of more friends to the thrill of race where you're not just betting on the winner. You can call "Argo!" at the ribbon all you want. But shagging ass as down the stretch they come is Silver Lining's Playbook streaking past Lincoln and probably going to end in second. It's the Harvey push... and has been the case in many year's past -- The King's Speech, The Artist -- it's the flick that hooked the audience's heart.
Hey, I like The Dreamers -- I can be a jerk. DOR, J'adore. I want you to be an Oscar winner. I guess I'm just hoping for more sophisticated tackle with more piercing barbs. My heart requires a more complicated trap.
Monday, February 18, 2013
The Perks of Being Award Snubbered
Surprise! The movie about the quiet kid who likes books and socially awkwardly finds his way into a group of weirdos that includes one of the best gay teen performances ever has turned out to be one of my favorite movies of the year!
Surprise! The one where the kid sings Air Supply in a Jesus Christ Super Star T-Shirt!
Surprise! The one where these incredible teenagers hunt all movie just to find that Bowie is the most liberating music of all -- as they burst from the darkened tunnel of teen angst into wind-in-the-hair style revelry -- into starry nighted Bowie-ness. That one.
SUH. Prize.
Yeah, that one, where the kid reads A Separate Peace and carries a 45 of my favorite Beatles song.... I don't know what it was about it ... but somehow, a notch above Zero Dark Thirty and a notch below The Dark Knight Rises, I pick The Perks of Being a Wallflower - one of the best teen films I have seen in years.
In fact, it's probably the best American teen film in ten years -- excluding, of course, the mess of excellent comedies that have rolled out. This movie is not a comedy. There's some great laughs -- GREAT laughs. But this is no comedy. This was a real-ish teen experience that falls somewhere in that Cameron Crowe/John Hughes ballpark. These 80s/90s titans were obviously quite different but Chbosky's movie of his own novel... lands there. It lands in the realm of Ordinary People -- though I will freely admit it is no Ordinary People. It lands in the realm of Breaking Away -- though I will admit it is no Breaking Away
So what is it about The Perks of Being a Wallflower that has those who love it hooked as hard as they were by (500) Days of Summer -- and if you really just said, "Ugh, I didn't like that one either!" just stop reading. This post is not for you.
I knew nothing of the novel except that it was a smash success people told me I should read. However, when I heard that Chbosky was going to make the film himself, I opted to wait. I may read it now -- who knows -- neither here nor there. The point is I walked into the film with zero expectations. I knew there were three exceptional teen actors in the lead roles. I was unprepared for what a monumental trio they would turn out to be and how there is a new kind of iconography in the way that group works. Any teen writer worth his salt is going to say the phrase, "Kind of like Perks of Being a Wallflower," some time in the next year. It's just how it is. We all have Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, and Ezra Miller to thank for that.
Watson and Miller's step-sibling-soul-mates were the incredible guardian angels to swoop in and carry wounded Lerman's character into a world that may not have been the coolest kids in the world -- though Brad did show up at their parties -- but they were excellent spirits who insisted on having liberating experiences. How fitting for Pittsburgh, home of Andy Warhol.
Here these zine printing, mix tape making, Rocky Horror performers found a world of comfort among each other where there wasn't a struggle to climb ranks. There wasn't a sense of who lived on which side of what tracks, and there wasn't a sense of tension arising from anything -- except one's actions and one's past. That was an angle Chbosky played well. We see just enough woundedness in each of the three leads to pull us right into their world. Yes -- truth be told -- I find it hard to believe that any character Emma Watson plays is or was a slut. That was difficult to accept. Not "Danny Zucko lettered in track" difficult -- but it seemed off. Could be I've got Hermione on a pedestal -- a teen should correct me. Miller and Lerman's woes really struck a chord.
The love between this triangle of spirits swallowed me whole. For some, it simply was too wordy. Well... to you I say... some things should be too wordy. Some of us (clearly) are too wordy and they should be represented at all ages. Far too often, teenagers leaning on each other as they weather through years of unrequited love are forgotten. Suddenly you go to the prom - you become popular - you take off those pesky glasses and someone realizes you're a movie star, have been the whole time. Well, that's not Perks. This is a kid who listens to The Smiths while reading Harper Lee getting the balls to sneak onto the dancefloor for a little "Come On Eileen." And it's not only the bravest thing he does -- but the first in a stretch of brave moves by a real scaredy cat. Someone whose life blossomed because of love.
Well, I'll take it.
And I do feel there has simply been too much sappy material since about -- well -- either the end of "Seinfeld" or 9/11. There has been a push for everyone to learn something and get somewhere with their spirit that I feel betrays reality and entertainment. It's particularly annoying in the teen world where there's a time for a feel good movie -- and then there's a time where a movie should set some real expectations. Perks is on the sunny side of "real expectations" with a dash of after school special drama. But, for many people, so is life.
There was a moment this summer where I considered the fact that both Perks of Being a Wallflower and Wes Anderson's Moonrise Kingdom -- which I will write more extensively about after awards season -- could both be nominated. To me, this was a marvel. The stylized French Movie-esque Andersonian love tale that was Moonrise and the more bookish and heartbreaking Perks. Two films about adolescence that grabbed significant audiences. Neither of these films got the awards recognition it deserves -- and I feel the Academy is foolish in this regard.
Moonrise was just as much a faux-indie darling as Beasts of the Southern Wild -- more so, it seemed. Yet Moonrise was locked out to the picture game -- it's significant nomination being for Wes Anderson and Roman Coppola in the original screenplay category. As I will discuss the closer we get to the awards -- this is perfectly fine for Anderson. Guys like Wes and Roman are of the Quentin Tarantino, Jane Campion, Neil Jordon, Sofia Coppola breed -- the award's original screenplay. But to leave it out of a field of ten -- when Winters Bone and An Education were both nominees -- it seems foolish.
I'm going to go so far as to say it seems "ageist." Perks not even landing a screenplay nomination is absurd. Look, this is a worst nightmare year for anyone in the adapted category. EVERYTHING is adapted. You're gonna have to jump -- of the bat -- and swim with Silver Linings, Argo, and Lincoln? Lots of luck. But the truth is -- regardless of that -- if there's one thing Perks was, it was written. There's been a lot of bizarre events this award season. Perhaps this one is screwy Oscar math, too. But my gut tells me it's that movies about young people simply don't get the recognition they deserve. It consequently creates a space where solid moves about youth are a rarity.
Breaking Away took original screenplay, as did Dead Poets. Of course Redford, Hutton, and Sargent all took home Oscars for Ordinary People. But there's a void of these films -- in existence, let alone as award winners. Truth is, they're tough to make -- they're tough to pull off. The same people who love Running on Empty would kill me if I said Life as a House were just as good. It's a tough audience you're playing to. So all I'm saying is when they're well done, they should be celebrated. There's 10 spaces up there. If The Blind Side can get one, Perks OR Moonrise deserves one, too -- especially if you're only nominating NINE!
Surprise! The one where the kid sings Air Supply in a Jesus Christ Super Star T-Shirt!
Surprise! The one where these incredible teenagers hunt all movie just to find that Bowie is the most liberating music of all -- as they burst from the darkened tunnel of teen angst into wind-in-the-hair style revelry -- into starry nighted Bowie-ness. That one.
SUH. Prize.
Yeah, that one, where the kid reads A Separate Peace and carries a 45 of my favorite Beatles song.... I don't know what it was about it ... but somehow, a notch above Zero Dark Thirty and a notch below The Dark Knight Rises, I pick The Perks of Being a Wallflower - one of the best teen films I have seen in years.
In fact, it's probably the best American teen film in ten years -- excluding, of course, the mess of excellent comedies that have rolled out. This movie is not a comedy. There's some great laughs -- GREAT laughs. But this is no comedy. This was a real-ish teen experience that falls somewhere in that Cameron Crowe/John Hughes ballpark. These 80s/90s titans were obviously quite different but Chbosky's movie of his own novel... lands there. It lands in the realm of Ordinary People -- though I will freely admit it is no Ordinary People. It lands in the realm of Breaking Away -- though I will admit it is no Breaking Away
So what is it about The Perks of Being a Wallflower that has those who love it hooked as hard as they were by (500) Days of Summer -- and if you really just said, "Ugh, I didn't like that one either!" just stop reading. This post is not for you.
I knew nothing of the novel except that it was a smash success people told me I should read. However, when I heard that Chbosky was going to make the film himself, I opted to wait. I may read it now -- who knows -- neither here nor there. The point is I walked into the film with zero expectations. I knew there were three exceptional teen actors in the lead roles. I was unprepared for what a monumental trio they would turn out to be and how there is a new kind of iconography in the way that group works. Any teen writer worth his salt is going to say the phrase, "Kind of like Perks of Being a Wallflower," some time in the next year. It's just how it is. We all have Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, and Ezra Miller to thank for that.
Watson and Miller's step-sibling-soul-mates were the incredible guardian angels to swoop in and carry wounded Lerman's character into a world that may not have been the coolest kids in the world -- though Brad did show up at their parties -- but they were excellent spirits who insisted on having liberating experiences. How fitting for Pittsburgh, home of Andy Warhol.
Here these zine printing, mix tape making, Rocky Horror performers found a world of comfort among each other where there wasn't a struggle to climb ranks. There wasn't a sense of who lived on which side of what tracks, and there wasn't a sense of tension arising from anything -- except one's actions and one's past. That was an angle Chbosky played well. We see just enough woundedness in each of the three leads to pull us right into their world. Yes -- truth be told -- I find it hard to believe that any character Emma Watson plays is or was a slut. That was difficult to accept. Not "Danny Zucko lettered in track" difficult -- but it seemed off. Could be I've got Hermione on a pedestal -- a teen should correct me. Miller and Lerman's woes really struck a chord.
The love between this triangle of spirits swallowed me whole. For some, it simply was too wordy. Well... to you I say... some things should be too wordy. Some of us (clearly) are too wordy and they should be represented at all ages. Far too often, teenagers leaning on each other as they weather through years of unrequited love are forgotten. Suddenly you go to the prom - you become popular - you take off those pesky glasses and someone realizes you're a movie star, have been the whole time. Well, that's not Perks. This is a kid who listens to The Smiths while reading Harper Lee getting the balls to sneak onto the dancefloor for a little "Come On Eileen." And it's not only the bravest thing he does -- but the first in a stretch of brave moves by a real scaredy cat. Someone whose life blossomed because of love.
Well, I'll take it.
And I do feel there has simply been too much sappy material since about -- well -- either the end of "Seinfeld" or 9/11. There has been a push for everyone to learn something and get somewhere with their spirit that I feel betrays reality and entertainment. It's particularly annoying in the teen world where there's a time for a feel good movie -- and then there's a time where a movie should set some real expectations. Perks is on the sunny side of "real expectations" with a dash of after school special drama. But, for many people, so is life.
There was a moment this summer where I considered the fact that both Perks of Being a Wallflower and Wes Anderson's Moonrise Kingdom -- which I will write more extensively about after awards season -- could both be nominated. To me, this was a marvel. The stylized French Movie-esque Andersonian love tale that was Moonrise and the more bookish and heartbreaking Perks. Two films about adolescence that grabbed significant audiences. Neither of these films got the awards recognition it deserves -- and I feel the Academy is foolish in this regard.
Moonrise was just as much a faux-indie darling as Beasts of the Southern Wild -- more so, it seemed. Yet Moonrise was locked out to the picture game -- it's significant nomination being for Wes Anderson and Roman Coppola in the original screenplay category. As I will discuss the closer we get to the awards -- this is perfectly fine for Anderson. Guys like Wes and Roman are of the Quentin Tarantino, Jane Campion, Neil Jordon, Sofia Coppola breed -- the award's original screenplay. But to leave it out of a field of ten -- when Winters Bone and An Education were both nominees -- it seems foolish.
I'm going to go so far as to say it seems "ageist." Perks not even landing a screenplay nomination is absurd. Look, this is a worst nightmare year for anyone in the adapted category. EVERYTHING is adapted. You're gonna have to jump -- of the bat -- and swim with Silver Linings, Argo, and Lincoln? Lots of luck. But the truth is -- regardless of that -- if there's one thing Perks was, it was written. There's been a lot of bizarre events this award season. Perhaps this one is screwy Oscar math, too. But my gut tells me it's that movies about young people simply don't get the recognition they deserve. It consequently creates a space where solid moves about youth are a rarity.
Breaking Away took original screenplay, as did Dead Poets. Of course Redford, Hutton, and Sargent all took home Oscars for Ordinary People. But there's a void of these films -- in existence, let alone as award winners. Truth is, they're tough to make -- they're tough to pull off. The same people who love Running on Empty would kill me if I said Life as a House were just as good. It's a tough audience you're playing to. So all I'm saying is when they're well done, they should be celebrated. There's 10 spaces up there. If The Blind Side can get one, Perks OR Moonrise deserves one, too -- especially if you're only nominating NINE!
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
The Dark Knight Rises To the Top of My List: Tales of an Oscar-less Wonder
When the awards season ends, I will continue writing this blog on what I hope is a near daily basis -- using photos, reformatting, making the Nook a nice new joint. Then I will address the entire trilogy and settle all things... Avengers fans know what I mean when I say that...
THE DARK KNIGHT RISES TO THE TOP OF MY LIST: TALES OF AN OSCAR-LESS WONDER...
Christopher Nolan's neither picture, nor director, nor script, nor supporting actor nominated The Dark Knight Rises is the official McPic of the year.
Were I an Academy or a Nazi dentist, I would be melting and molding gold this very instant to crown Nolan with both director and picture in precisely the way Peter Jackson was lauded for the third installment of what may be a Lucas-long Rings saga. Sadly, Nolan will ride through the majesty and brilliance of his Batman Trilogy -- a true, self-contained trilogy not a "franchise" that petered out after three "installments." Lucas did with Star Wars. Spielberg did with Indiana Jones.
There's gonna be a little recent Oscar history here... feel free to skip ahead...
Jackson, amazingly is the lone beneficiary of the logic that "they'll give it to him for the final one." This, in 2003 (yes, Nookers, I go by Picture Year not "when the ceremony was held) was believed to be some sort of logic that had a foundation in Oscar history.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Godfather and Godfather Part II both won -- notice how the first installment was a victor -- the second installment is the only direct sequel to win. Return of the King is an absolute anomaly. There's no other case of people holding out to the end of a series to hand out a picture trophy. It's just Jackson. If anyone were being honest it's because the 2001 awards were a debacle. Chicago was a Weinstein fueled juggernaut... and so Return of the King was the only opportunity to admit how incredible Jackson was.
Ironically, it was unequivocally the failure of Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight to earn a best picture nomination that was used as a rally cry to expand the picture field to include ten films.
Though not nominated for picture, The Dark Knight's Heath Ledger took home a supporting actor Oscar -- a victory which had nothing to do with his untimely death -- for playing The Joker. In my opinion, that same award for the same role should have gone to Jack Nicholson in 1989, though Irish wasn't even nominated. Which, of course, was bull. Nicholson was the clear best supporting actor that year, comic books were simply not going to get statues. No offense to Denzel Washington -- then again, when he was campaigning in 2001 (ahem) for Training Day the buzz was that people couldn't believe Denzel didn't have an Oscar. Well... he did. Supporting Actor for '89's Glory. The party line then became "Yeah, well... that was just for supporting." The nerve.
In the wake of Knight, the picture field expanded. Nolan, deservedly slid into the picture and screenplay positions for Inception -- also a Film Nook Picture Winner. This year, he's complete locked out. There's absolutely no reason for that to be the case. We'll simply have to wait for Christopher to get the Oscar he should have gotten fro Memento, Dark Knight, Inception, and Dark Knight Rises until the Academy broadens its perspective not just its field so that everyone can feel falsely included. Either that, of C-Nolz needs to find a Schindler's List all his own.
This year, there will be no gold for Nolan. He'll have to rest comfortably knowing that he has written his own ticket with this brilliant trilogy and hopefully be comforted by the fact that TDKR's boxoffice make it the number 7 film in U.S. history and number 8 worldwide. That should feel good enough.
Matt and the Bat...
I don't read reviews. I don't read press. I barely read buzz. Yes, I read the trades. But as much as I'm actually finding my way into this industry, I don't want movies spoiled. Thus, like most Americans, I walked into The Dark Knight Rises with a limited perspective of thoughts...
So get to the damn film already, McQ...
The Dark Knight Rises was the absolute perfect closing chapter to a mature movie trilogy experience that transcended the commonly held notions of comic books and superheroes. That's all Nolan (and a bit of Goyer). Starting with The Scarecrow in Batman Begins was a curveball. Try as you might, that guy was a zero as a villain in the cadre of Gothamites. Why, many of us wondered, didn't Nolan start with The Joker -- like Burton (whose original installment outgrossed Nolan's) -- The Penguin -- The Riddler?
Well, of course, that's all due to the fact that the Scarecrow wasn't the actual head villain in Batman Begins, it was Ra's Al Ghul, head of the League of Shadows. How brilliant of Nolan to close his films by reconnecting them with their beginning. If Kevin Williamson has taught us anything, that's the rule. Luke went back to Tatooine. Michael went back to Sicily. Bruce went back to his roots.
As well he should. After two films where Christian Bale -- and I say this as a person who occasionally screams "Cadillac of the skies!!!" -- was virtually inconsequential, Nolan allowed his title character to have a significant hero's journey. We're so busy watching Bruce rediscover his roots, pull himself from the depths of his Howard Hughesian isolation, bandage himself, and re-don the suit -- that none of us were paying attention to the mastery of Dark Knight Rises' villains.
You put The Joker on screen, the film's about him. Same goes for The Penguin, The Riddler. You can't close out that way. So the choice was BANE.
After the terroristic rancor of Ledger's Joker that left folks like me wishing those two ferries in the harbor exploded and the purple suited man escaped... how was Nolan going to top it?
BANE...
Tom Hardy is remarkable. Even if you were to put aside what Hardy did to bring his physical body up from RockNRolla size and Inception swagger... the evil he embodies is the perfect villain for our time.
Here we sit in American during a time where gluttonous wealth has proven to be one of the most destructive forces. And yet we have done nothing to bring about a "class settling" justice for the financial crisis. We've been pitted 99% against 1. At the same time, Nolan's operating within the constricts of a hero saga where one of the only justifications for the existence of the protagonist is that he's a billionaire.
Enter Bane... the man who plans to topple the system. He's not the Joker -- just out to cause a little mayhem. This is a villain with a specific mission based in deep philosophical conviction. Imagine if Lenin or Napoleon actually had any physical might, were willing to put their lives at endless risk, and weren't just selling a line in the hopes of becoming wealthy himself. The end result is a terrorist who can only be killed -- he can never be beaten down, treated, or incarcerated.
And he's not even the boss. It's not even his plan. A superb twist that testifies to Nolan's brilliance as both a writer and director.
In true to form fashion, Bane is a second tier man and consequently far more dangerous than you ever imagined. It's one thing to come up with a twisted philosophy and sell it to your loyal followers. It's another to be a psychopath who happily and willingly embraces it. Don't believe me? Consider the work of any high ranking Nazi: far sicker than what Hitler personally dirtied his hands with.
Hardy has us all in his meaty palm -- hook, line, and sinker -- being pulverized into silt. He's a vicious murderer who had my deepest sympathy the moment he shed a tear. And with a few killer lines...
"Perhaps he's wondering why you would shoot a man before throwing him out of a plane."
"Do you feel in charge?"
"That's a lovely, lovely voice."
"We come here not as conquerors, but as liberators." (Ever hear that before?)
... Hardy's Bane had me dropping my at-home Daniel Plainview impressions for a whole new voice.
Ms. Kyle...
What other film could introduce Anne Hathaway with the unforgettable line, "Shrimp balls?"
Anne Hathaway's showing the world what it's like if you dodged a No Strings Attached (which I enjoy) or Norbit. In addition to being a stellar Catwoman who was all claw and no paw -- the kitten who kicks Wayne's cane -- Hathaway's got supporting actress all locked up for Les Miz. The Dark Knight Rises is just the icing on the cake.
She's the perfect counterpoint to Christian Bale: a solid female anti-heroine who's willing to do what it takes to survive. She has some of the best lines in the film and Nolan allows Hathaway to do something she hasn't done since the back-seat of a car in Brokeback -- be sexy! Take note, earth: we don't just want to watch her smirk, struggle, suffer, and/or die. The woman's absolutely gorgeous and sexy as hell. Let her be!
Wrapping it up...
I could (surprise, surprise) go on forever.
-How Michael Caine would have been a perfectly acceptable supporting actor nominee.
-How the remarkable Gary Oldman not only rolled through the last decade as Harry Potter's Sirius Black but as Commissioner Gordon!
-How JGL was a wise man to take this role -- and how he'd be a fool to go forward with any Robin or Nightwing related efforts.
-How hilarious calling JGL's character a hot-head half a dozen times proved to be.
-How the bridge to my apartment was the lone survivor in Bane's master plan -- thanks, Bane!
-How even atop a mound of desks handing out death sentences, Cillian Murphy is still hot.
-How the brilliance of Hans Zimmer never ceases.
But I must wrap up by speaking about Christopher Nolan.
What Nolan did so remarkably was dig into the mythos of Batmania and emerge with fragments that are accurate. Ra's al Ghul had a daughter. Ra's al Ghul had a connection to the Lazarus Pit Prison -- accurately named for one would have as good a chance of returning from the dead than from that cavernous jail. Nolan wove these together into a life-lesson that allowed Bruce Wayne to rediscover himself.
Simplistic as it may seem, Nolan's Wayne toppled into a well on the manor land and was swarmed by bats. His loving father - Linus Roache - descends to rescue him asking a simple question: "Why do we fall?"
In this unrelenting, adult, mature, sophisticated masterpiece, Nolan answers: so we can RISE.
THE DARK KNIGHT RISES TO THE TOP OF MY LIST: TALES OF AN OSCAR-LESS WONDER...
Christopher Nolan's neither picture, nor director, nor script, nor supporting actor nominated The Dark Knight Rises is the official McPic of the year.
Were I an Academy or a Nazi dentist, I would be melting and molding gold this very instant to crown Nolan with both director and picture in precisely the way Peter Jackson was lauded for the third installment of what may be a Lucas-long Rings saga. Sadly, Nolan will ride through the majesty and brilliance of his Batman Trilogy -- a true, self-contained trilogy not a "franchise" that petered out after three "installments." Lucas did with Star Wars. Spielberg did with Indiana Jones.
There's gonna be a little recent Oscar history here... feel free to skip ahead...
Jackson, amazingly is the lone beneficiary of the logic that "they'll give it to him for the final one." This, in 2003 (yes, Nookers, I go by Picture Year not "when the ceremony was held) was believed to be some sort of logic that had a foundation in Oscar history.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Godfather and Godfather Part II both won -- notice how the first installment was a victor -- the second installment is the only direct sequel to win. Return of the King is an absolute anomaly. There's no other case of people holding out to the end of a series to hand out a picture trophy. It's just Jackson. If anyone were being honest it's because the 2001 awards were a debacle. Chicago was a Weinstein fueled juggernaut... and so Return of the King was the only opportunity to admit how incredible Jackson was.
Ironically, it was unequivocally the failure of Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight to earn a best picture nomination that was used as a rally cry to expand the picture field to include ten films.
Though not nominated for picture, The Dark Knight's Heath Ledger took home a supporting actor Oscar -- a victory which had nothing to do with his untimely death -- for playing The Joker. In my opinion, that same award for the same role should have gone to Jack Nicholson in 1989, though Irish wasn't even nominated. Which, of course, was bull. Nicholson was the clear best supporting actor that year, comic books were simply not going to get statues. No offense to Denzel Washington -- then again, when he was campaigning in 2001 (ahem) for Training Day the buzz was that people couldn't believe Denzel didn't have an Oscar. Well... he did. Supporting Actor for '89's Glory. The party line then became "Yeah, well... that was just for supporting." The nerve.
In the wake of Knight, the picture field expanded. Nolan, deservedly slid into the picture and screenplay positions for Inception -- also a Film Nook Picture Winner. This year, he's complete locked out. There's absolutely no reason for that to be the case. We'll simply have to wait for Christopher to get the Oscar he should have gotten fro Memento, Dark Knight, Inception, and Dark Knight Rises until the Academy broadens its perspective not just its field so that everyone can feel falsely included. Either that, of C-Nolz needs to find a Schindler's List all his own.
This year, there will be no gold for Nolan. He'll have to rest comfortably knowing that he has written his own ticket with this brilliant trilogy and hopefully be comforted by the fact that TDKR's boxoffice make it the number 7 film in U.S. history and number 8 worldwide. That should feel good enough.
Matt and the Bat...
I don't read reviews. I don't read press. I barely read buzz. Yes, I read the trades. But as much as I'm actually finding my way into this industry, I don't want movies spoiled. Thus, like most Americans, I walked into The Dark Knight Rises with a limited perspective of thoughts...
- I trust Nolan and know this will rule.
- I love Tom Hardy, Marion Cotillard, and Joseph Gordon Levitt
- There was a horrible shooting in Aurora and I'm actually a tad nervous about seeing this film despite the fact that I knew nothing would happen and that American panic needs to get itself under control.
So get to the damn film already, McQ...
The Dark Knight Rises was the absolute perfect closing chapter to a mature movie trilogy experience that transcended the commonly held notions of comic books and superheroes. That's all Nolan (and a bit of Goyer). Starting with The Scarecrow in Batman Begins was a curveball. Try as you might, that guy was a zero as a villain in the cadre of Gothamites. Why, many of us wondered, didn't Nolan start with The Joker -- like Burton (whose original installment outgrossed Nolan's) -- The Penguin -- The Riddler?
Well, of course, that's all due to the fact that the Scarecrow wasn't the actual head villain in Batman Begins, it was Ra's Al Ghul, head of the League of Shadows. How brilliant of Nolan to close his films by reconnecting them with their beginning. If Kevin Williamson has taught us anything, that's the rule. Luke went back to Tatooine. Michael went back to Sicily. Bruce went back to his roots.
As well he should. After two films where Christian Bale -- and I say this as a person who occasionally screams "Cadillac of the skies!!!" -- was virtually inconsequential, Nolan allowed his title character to have a significant hero's journey. We're so busy watching Bruce rediscover his roots, pull himself from the depths of his Howard Hughesian isolation, bandage himself, and re-don the suit -- that none of us were paying attention to the mastery of Dark Knight Rises' villains.
You put The Joker on screen, the film's about him. Same goes for The Penguin, The Riddler. You can't close out that way. So the choice was BANE.
After the terroristic rancor of Ledger's Joker that left folks like me wishing those two ferries in the harbor exploded and the purple suited man escaped... how was Nolan going to top it?
BANE...
Tom Hardy is remarkable. Even if you were to put aside what Hardy did to bring his physical body up from RockNRolla size and Inception swagger... the evil he embodies is the perfect villain for our time.
Here we sit in American during a time where gluttonous wealth has proven to be one of the most destructive forces. And yet we have done nothing to bring about a "class settling" justice for the financial crisis. We've been pitted 99% against 1. At the same time, Nolan's operating within the constricts of a hero saga where one of the only justifications for the existence of the protagonist is that he's a billionaire.
Enter Bane... the man who plans to topple the system. He's not the Joker -- just out to cause a little mayhem. This is a villain with a specific mission based in deep philosophical conviction. Imagine if Lenin or Napoleon actually had any physical might, were willing to put their lives at endless risk, and weren't just selling a line in the hopes of becoming wealthy himself. The end result is a terrorist who can only be killed -- he can never be beaten down, treated, or incarcerated.
And he's not even the boss. It's not even his plan. A superb twist that testifies to Nolan's brilliance as both a writer and director.
In true to form fashion, Bane is a second tier man and consequently far more dangerous than you ever imagined. It's one thing to come up with a twisted philosophy and sell it to your loyal followers. It's another to be a psychopath who happily and willingly embraces it. Don't believe me? Consider the work of any high ranking Nazi: far sicker than what Hitler personally dirtied his hands with.
Hardy has us all in his meaty palm -- hook, line, and sinker -- being pulverized into silt. He's a vicious murderer who had my deepest sympathy the moment he shed a tear. And with a few killer lines...
"Perhaps he's wondering why you would shoot a man before throwing him out of a plane."
"Do you feel in charge?"
"That's a lovely, lovely voice."
"We come here not as conquerors, but as liberators." (Ever hear that before?)
... Hardy's Bane had me dropping my at-home Daniel Plainview impressions for a whole new voice.
Ms. Kyle...
What other film could introduce Anne Hathaway with the unforgettable line, "Shrimp balls?"
Anne Hathaway's showing the world what it's like if you dodged a No Strings Attached (which I enjoy) or Norbit. In addition to being a stellar Catwoman who was all claw and no paw -- the kitten who kicks Wayne's cane -- Hathaway's got supporting actress all locked up for Les Miz. The Dark Knight Rises is just the icing on the cake.
She's the perfect counterpoint to Christian Bale: a solid female anti-heroine who's willing to do what it takes to survive. She has some of the best lines in the film and Nolan allows Hathaway to do something she hasn't done since the back-seat of a car in Brokeback -- be sexy! Take note, earth: we don't just want to watch her smirk, struggle, suffer, and/or die. The woman's absolutely gorgeous and sexy as hell. Let her be!
Wrapping it up...
I could (surprise, surprise) go on forever.
-How Michael Caine would have been a perfectly acceptable supporting actor nominee.
-How the remarkable Gary Oldman not only rolled through the last decade as Harry Potter's Sirius Black but as Commissioner Gordon!
-How JGL was a wise man to take this role -- and how he'd be a fool to go forward with any Robin or Nightwing related efforts.
-How hilarious calling JGL's character a hot-head half a dozen times proved to be.
-How the bridge to my apartment was the lone survivor in Bane's master plan -- thanks, Bane!
-How even atop a mound of desks handing out death sentences, Cillian Murphy is still hot.
-How the brilliance of Hans Zimmer never ceases.
But I must wrap up by speaking about Christopher Nolan.
What Nolan did so remarkably was dig into the mythos of Batmania and emerge with fragments that are accurate. Ra's al Ghul had a daughter. Ra's al Ghul had a connection to the Lazarus Pit Prison -- accurately named for one would have as good a chance of returning from the dead than from that cavernous jail. Nolan wove these together into a life-lesson that allowed Bruce Wayne to rediscover himself.
Simplistic as it may seem, Nolan's Wayne toppled into a well on the manor land and was swarmed by bats. His loving father - Linus Roache - descends to rescue him asking a simple question: "Why do we fall?"
In this unrelenting, adult, mature, sophisticated masterpiece, Nolan answers: so we can RISE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)