The King is directed terribly. David Michôd, as ever, seems to have no sense of urgency or stakes. The whole movie is ponderous, as if everything is very, very important, but the direction never seems to communicate that importance, only assume it. There is, accordingly, a great deal of slow-motion photography and an overburdened but beautiful score by Nicholas Britell.
This is a shame because everyone is doing very good work here, especially the armorer, the costumer, Joel Edgerton, the production designer, and every other actor. I think Timothée Chalamet is miscast slightly, but he is still doing good work. Edgerton, who co-wrote the screenplay by telescoping Shakespeare's 1 Henry IV and 2 Henry IV and focusing on a much adjusted version of Henry V, has given himself all the best lines and has turned Sir John Falstaff into a wise old sage. That is sort of delightful. There's even a gorgeous reference to a speech in Hamlet in The King's version of the St. Crispin's day speech from Henry V. But none of this can save this movie from what Michôd does to it.
Oh and the fights! I should say something about the fights. My housemate, who is a director and fight choreographer, watched the movie with me, and while we were watching I offhandedly said This looks like a fight from a Marvel movie. It makes no sense in the context of the medieval period we are watching. Turns out, the fights were choreographed by a guy who works on the Marvel stuff. Zzzzzz. Stop with all the punching! It's so boring. They're wearing armor, for fuck's sake!
Love and scandal are the best sweeteners of tea. —Henry Fielding
Showing posts with label joel edgerton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label joel edgerton. Show all posts
29 January 2020
25 November 2018
Boy Erased
Joel Edgerton's Boy Erased is pretty good. It has its problems. But if you're me, and you grew up in a Baptist house afraid you might be gay, it's pretty intense. I cried so many times that I lost count.
The plot works like this. Young Jared (Lucas Hedges) says goodbye to his mom and dad (Nicole Kidman and Russell Crowe) and enrolls in a program that promises to help him get rid of his homosexuality and return to the love of the Christian god. Most of the movie involves time spent in sessions of this conversion therapy – which are all legitimately insane but wouldn't quite sound insane to the ear of a good Christian boy like I was growing up.
Christianity and other spiritual practices already involve accepting things that don't seem rational and making sense of things that apparently contradict one another. And these are desperate young people who really don't want to be gay, so they are willing to try anything that promises the possibility of normal heterosexuality. So the idea that, say, making a list of the different "sins" practiced by members of one's family or learning how to hit a baseball might help a person get rid of same-sex attraction (that's what they call it) can seem like a great idea. At the very least, one can see why someone would be willing to commit to a program like this. The Baptist church has made homosexuality into the unpardonable sin par excellence, so nothing can be off the table when it comes to trying to change a gay kid into a straight kid.
I'm about to say something that I think might be controversial.
I honestly can't say that the gay conversion therapy in Boy Erased seemed that crazy to me in Baptist terms. None of the activities practiced in the therapy sessions seemed any more or less coercive, violent, bullying, shame-inducing, or insane than anything I experienced in church growing up. I'm really grateful my parents never sent me to any gay conversion camp (Thanks, mom and dad!); that would have totally sucked. But – although the film doesn't have anything to say about this – church life is actually like a constant gay conversion therapy in miniature. An effeminate boy feels constant pressure to behave in more masculine ways, to walk differently, talk differently, bend his body differently, firm up his handshake, tell certain kinds of jokes, play every sport possible, and pursue young women romantically. All while, of course, learning the scriptures and going to church all the time. In fact, if a boy does get a little too interested in masculine pursuits like girls or sports and thus slacks off in his more important spiritual duties, this is mostly ok with everyone. There is nothing, see, worse than homosexuality, except, perhaps, like, straight-up Satanism. So, yes, Boy Erased is a document of a terrible ordeal that several kids are made to endure because of their alleged sexual desires, but I would say that every kid growing up in the Baptist church feels these pressures, and queer kids in the Baptist church are made to feel them acutely.
The other structural element to the film is a set of flashbacks to earlier sections in Jared's life – all while he is an older teenager. These include sequences with a high school girlfriend, a Christian crush at college, and a Canadian painter. These are all intriguing, but I am not going to say anything about them because of spoilers. One of the sections is, in fact, very surprising.
But the film is not, as it turns out, very surprising. It mostly feels conventional. It's a very typical story – something like Thelma from a couple years ago – of a gay kid learning to be ok with being gay (although how he learned that is unclear, even apostrophized by the filmmakers) and then trying to deal with his mostly homophobic parents.
Edgerton's direction is not great either (although his performance in the film is quite good). The whole thing is very somber in tone, and the film is almost completely unbroken by humor of any kind – even though Kidman does her best to lighten the mood occasionally. A more confident filmmaker would have included more moments of humor, and so the fault is mostly with Edgerton's inexperience, I think. But also (and I also complained about this in my We the Animals review), the filmmaking has almost nothing gay about it, either. This is a film about a gay kid that is almost completely unrelated to gay culture. Even Jared's desire for his college friend Henry is rendered only through Lucas Hedges' facial expressions. The camera does nothing to tell us how much Jared desires Henry or what he wants from Henry. (There is, for example, this great sequence when the two go for a run together and Henry lifts his arms to stretch, and Jared sneaks a glance at his exposed belly. The camera shows us nothing – only Jared in medium shot looking furtively at his friend. Edgerton's camera, in other words, doesn't identify with Jared's desires; it stays outside of them, observing them without seeming really to understand.) The only campy moment in Boy Erased is in a single title-card at the end of the film – it is a good joke, but I could've used a bit more of this in Edgerton's relentless movie.
Edgerton also uses slow-motion way more than he needs it, contributing to the overall ponderousness of Boy Erased but not really contributing at all to our understanding of Jared and his journey toward reckoning with his same-sex attractions. But this is actually the point. The purpose of Edgerton's movie is a kind of public service announcement about how terrible gay conversion therapy is. Further, Boy Erased is a film designed to tell people about how awful gay conversion therapy is while not saying terrible things about Christianity or the Baptist church and not being a gay film. This is a mainstream film for mainstream audiences designed to change people's minds about gay conversion therapy and get some laws passed banning the practice. These are, perhaps, noble aims, and I haven't anything negative to say about them, but they make for a stilted film that doesn't hang together as nicely as it might.
The acting is great, though. I liked Lucas Hedges in Manchester by the Sea and Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri, and I loved him in Lady Bird, but he carries Boy Erased and does it wonderfully. He gives a beautiful, vulnerable performance, and I believed every second of it. I also really loved Russell Crowe, who is, I know, great in everything. Nicole Kidman (who I also love) is the only one who feels out of place here. She is acting a little too much, as though she is just too different from her character to play her quite without comment. Cherry Jones makes a fabulous cameo and has a great scene. Edgerton himself is also pretty great. Xavier Dolan has actually rather a large part, but I found him distracting. I see him way too much as a sort of outspoken enfant terrible of gay Canadian cinema for me to believe him as a kid who really wants to go back to being a good hetero Christian.
As for Oscar nominations... I don't know. I am skeptical. I don't think this movie is very good, even though my own adolescence made the whole thing deeply moving. I can see Hedges getting some Oscar buzz as the main character, but I have trouble seeing him with a Best Actor nomination. I am fairly certain that Troye Sivan (who also plays one of the kids doing the conversion therapy) wrote an original song for the movie (it is, of course, also quite ponderous). These two seem like the only real shots Boy Erased has for nominations. Nothing else really stands out.
(Sidebar: if you know me and you have seen the movie, you know that there is also something that I should be talking about here that I am not talking about. This is the surprising section to which I alluded above. I don't want to spoil that plot point, so I'll talk about it at another time.)
The plot works like this. Young Jared (Lucas Hedges) says goodbye to his mom and dad (Nicole Kidman and Russell Crowe) and enrolls in a program that promises to help him get rid of his homosexuality and return to the love of the Christian god. Most of the movie involves time spent in sessions of this conversion therapy – which are all legitimately insane but wouldn't quite sound insane to the ear of a good Christian boy like I was growing up.
Christianity and other spiritual practices already involve accepting things that don't seem rational and making sense of things that apparently contradict one another. And these are desperate young people who really don't want to be gay, so they are willing to try anything that promises the possibility of normal heterosexuality. So the idea that, say, making a list of the different "sins" practiced by members of one's family or learning how to hit a baseball might help a person get rid of same-sex attraction (that's what they call it) can seem like a great idea. At the very least, one can see why someone would be willing to commit to a program like this. The Baptist church has made homosexuality into the unpardonable sin par excellence, so nothing can be off the table when it comes to trying to change a gay kid into a straight kid.
I'm about to say something that I think might be controversial.
I honestly can't say that the gay conversion therapy in Boy Erased seemed that crazy to me in Baptist terms. None of the activities practiced in the therapy sessions seemed any more or less coercive, violent, bullying, shame-inducing, or insane than anything I experienced in church growing up. I'm really grateful my parents never sent me to any gay conversion camp (Thanks, mom and dad!); that would have totally sucked. But – although the film doesn't have anything to say about this – church life is actually like a constant gay conversion therapy in miniature. An effeminate boy feels constant pressure to behave in more masculine ways, to walk differently, talk differently, bend his body differently, firm up his handshake, tell certain kinds of jokes, play every sport possible, and pursue young women romantically. All while, of course, learning the scriptures and going to church all the time. In fact, if a boy does get a little too interested in masculine pursuits like girls or sports and thus slacks off in his more important spiritual duties, this is mostly ok with everyone. There is nothing, see, worse than homosexuality, except, perhaps, like, straight-up Satanism. So, yes, Boy Erased is a document of a terrible ordeal that several kids are made to endure because of their alleged sexual desires, but I would say that every kid growing up in the Baptist church feels these pressures, and queer kids in the Baptist church are made to feel them acutely.The other structural element to the film is a set of flashbacks to earlier sections in Jared's life – all while he is an older teenager. These include sequences with a high school girlfriend, a Christian crush at college, and a Canadian painter. These are all intriguing, but I am not going to say anything about them because of spoilers. One of the sections is, in fact, very surprising.
But the film is not, as it turns out, very surprising. It mostly feels conventional. It's a very typical story – something like Thelma from a couple years ago – of a gay kid learning to be ok with being gay (although how he learned that is unclear, even apostrophized by the filmmakers) and then trying to deal with his mostly homophobic parents.
Edgerton's direction is not great either (although his performance in the film is quite good). The whole thing is very somber in tone, and the film is almost completely unbroken by humor of any kind – even though Kidman does her best to lighten the mood occasionally. A more confident filmmaker would have included more moments of humor, and so the fault is mostly with Edgerton's inexperience, I think. But also (and I also complained about this in my We the Animals review), the filmmaking has almost nothing gay about it, either. This is a film about a gay kid that is almost completely unrelated to gay culture. Even Jared's desire for his college friend Henry is rendered only through Lucas Hedges' facial expressions. The camera does nothing to tell us how much Jared desires Henry or what he wants from Henry. (There is, for example, this great sequence when the two go for a run together and Henry lifts his arms to stretch, and Jared sneaks a glance at his exposed belly. The camera shows us nothing – only Jared in medium shot looking furtively at his friend. Edgerton's camera, in other words, doesn't identify with Jared's desires; it stays outside of them, observing them without seeming really to understand.) The only campy moment in Boy Erased is in a single title-card at the end of the film – it is a good joke, but I could've used a bit more of this in Edgerton's relentless movie.
Edgerton also uses slow-motion way more than he needs it, contributing to the overall ponderousness of Boy Erased but not really contributing at all to our understanding of Jared and his journey toward reckoning with his same-sex attractions. But this is actually the point. The purpose of Edgerton's movie is a kind of public service announcement about how terrible gay conversion therapy is. Further, Boy Erased is a film designed to tell people about how awful gay conversion therapy is while not saying terrible things about Christianity or the Baptist church and not being a gay film. This is a mainstream film for mainstream audiences designed to change people's minds about gay conversion therapy and get some laws passed banning the practice. These are, perhaps, noble aims, and I haven't anything negative to say about them, but they make for a stilted film that doesn't hang together as nicely as it might.
As for Oscar nominations... I don't know. I am skeptical. I don't think this movie is very good, even though my own adolescence made the whole thing deeply moving. I can see Hedges getting some Oscar buzz as the main character, but I have trouble seeing him with a Best Actor nomination. I am fairly certain that Troye Sivan (who also plays one of the kids doing the conversion therapy) wrote an original song for the movie (it is, of course, also quite ponderous). These two seem like the only real shots Boy Erased has for nominations. Nothing else really stands out.
(Sidebar: if you know me and you have seen the movie, you know that there is also something that I should be talking about here that I am not talking about. This is the surprising section to which I alluded above. I don't want to spoil that plot point, so I'll talk about it at another time.)
11 October 2018
The Closet and Its Protections: On National Coming Out Day and Love
On this National Coming Out Day, I am in a dormitory on the campus of Louisiana State University, having escaped Tallahassee for Hurricane Michael.
Today – because of all sorts of recent circumstances in my life – I am reflecting on coming out in new and different ways. George Chauncey tells us, in his extraordinary book Gay New York, that young gay men used to come out into gay society. That the phrase come out used to mean something like a debut, an introduction into adulthood or a marking of a new status in the community. Post Stonewall, with the arrival of gay politics and the invention of National Coming Out Day, coming out was coupled with protest and activism: out of the closet and into the streets was the common rejoinder. One came out in order to mark one's positionality as a member of a group of active gay people.
I am fond of both of these formulations of coming out. They both have an intriguing resonance for me, and they seem linked in several key ways to community, to making a statement, to self-definition.
Lately, though, I have been pondering our obsession with outing, with insisting that some gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans, and other non-hetero people publicly define themselves. I was struck especially by an extraordinary campaign by the actress Chloë Grace Moretz against the film Boy Erased in which Moretz trashed the film (which is about gay conversion therapy) because it was directed by a straight white man and stars a straight white man. Her own film, she said, "was directed by a bisexual woman of diversity". Moretz's position, leaving aside the questionable phrase "woman of diversity", is that one film is more authentic than the other because the roles are played by queer people in one and not the other and because one film is directed by a queer person and one is not. Maybe so, but sexuality doesn't really work that way. And who's to say who is gay and who is not?
I had assumed, for about a year now – at least since Lady Bird – that Lucas Hedges (who stars in Boy Erased) was not straight. This made me more invested in his career and more interested in his artistic choices. Moretz's accusation that Boy Erased had a straight man as its lead performer, then, struck an odd note with me. But he isn't straight, I thought. Who is she to say that he is or is not straight, especially when he has said nothing about it publicly? Worse yet, her statement seemed to throw the gauntlet down – actively to question his sexuality or to ask him to either defend or deny his heterosexuality. This is an unfair position either way, and it is the business of none of us – especially since the film is not about an out and proud young man but a boy who is actively trying to make a life for himself and is in fact negotiating the closet and the very serious risks of coming out. Sure enough, Lucas Hedges recently did come out as "not totally straight", a common enough formulation for young people these days. It would have been nice if Hedges hadn't been pushed to do that, though, and I find Moretz's position totally unacceptable. We don't know what Joel Edgerton's sexuality is either, thank you very much, and it isn't anyone's job to force him to confess it to us so that we can feel better or worse about enjoying his movie.
(I suppose it is also worth mentioning that some folks I know have accused Senator Lindsey Graham of being gay and closeted. Accused of being gay – it's an interesting way of putting things. To my way of thinking, Graham deserves our contempt for his actual politics not for his perceived hypocrisy, his perceived queerness, or his perceived closetedness. His relationship to his own sexuality is of no interest to me compared to his reprehensible political positions. And we should all be careful of attempting to out Senators or accusing politicians of queerness. Graham is hardly the only Senator who might be accused of hiding his sexuality.)
This summer I broke most of my rules and dated a closeted Christian guy. He is a really special man whose relationship with the closet was way more complicated than I understood then or understand now. He hadn't told anyone about being gay, and he has no intention of telling anyone that he is gay. His relationship with his family, his relationship with his religion, his relationships with his friends, and his relationship with his workplace all demand his heterosexuality. Those relationships make no room for the possibility of him being anything other than heterosexual. He doesn't want to come out, but, of course, how could he want to do something that would jeopardize and possibly destroy his relationships with everyone he loves, with everything he knows, with everything that gives him value as a human being? The closet, in other words, is a demand that his society makes of him. Closets are created by homophobia, by a restriction of options for queer people. And so I am arguing that queer people owe nothing to those closets. There are no rules for how queer people ought to interact with those closets, for what they ought to do in response to those closets. Queer people did not make the closets and they owe the closets nothing. It is not my job to judge how a person deals with a closet she didn't make in the first place.
Has this man's choice been heartbreaking for me? Certainly. But it is his job to decide what he thinks will make him happy or what he thinks is right. And it is not my place to impose my version of what I think will make him happy onto him. Most of us rebelled against our parents' versions of what our happiness ought to look like. I have no desire to replicate that same system in reverse when it comes to someone I love.
Being queer is very difficult for a very large number of people – and I think sometimes those of us who are out and proud forget how hard being "out" can be. What I want, on this National Coming Out Day is to try not to privilege the "out" position. For some of us, the closet is saving our lives. For some of us, the closet is (merely?) saving our careers. For some of us, the closet is saving us the headache of having to deal with relatives who ask too many questions. The queer people in our lives deserve our love no matter what relationship they have with the closet. Let us love each other with fierceness and generosity.
Today – because of all sorts of recent circumstances in my life – I am reflecting on coming out in new and different ways. George Chauncey tells us, in his extraordinary book Gay New York, that young gay men used to come out into gay society. That the phrase come out used to mean something like a debut, an introduction into adulthood or a marking of a new status in the community. Post Stonewall, with the arrival of gay politics and the invention of National Coming Out Day, coming out was coupled with protest and activism: out of the closet and into the streets was the common rejoinder. One came out in order to mark one's positionality as a member of a group of active gay people.
I am fond of both of these formulations of coming out. They both have an intriguing resonance for me, and they seem linked in several key ways to community, to making a statement, to self-definition.
Lately, though, I have been pondering our obsession with outing, with insisting that some gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans, and other non-hetero people publicly define themselves. I was struck especially by an extraordinary campaign by the actress Chloë Grace Moretz against the film Boy Erased in which Moretz trashed the film (which is about gay conversion therapy) because it was directed by a straight white man and stars a straight white man. Her own film, she said, "was directed by a bisexual woman of diversity". Moretz's position, leaving aside the questionable phrase "woman of diversity", is that one film is more authentic than the other because the roles are played by queer people in one and not the other and because one film is directed by a queer person and one is not. Maybe so, but sexuality doesn't really work that way. And who's to say who is gay and who is not?
I had assumed, for about a year now – at least since Lady Bird – that Lucas Hedges (who stars in Boy Erased) was not straight. This made me more invested in his career and more interested in his artistic choices. Moretz's accusation that Boy Erased had a straight man as its lead performer, then, struck an odd note with me. But he isn't straight, I thought. Who is she to say that he is or is not straight, especially when he has said nothing about it publicly? Worse yet, her statement seemed to throw the gauntlet down – actively to question his sexuality or to ask him to either defend or deny his heterosexuality. This is an unfair position either way, and it is the business of none of us – especially since the film is not about an out and proud young man but a boy who is actively trying to make a life for himself and is in fact negotiating the closet and the very serious risks of coming out. Sure enough, Lucas Hedges recently did come out as "not totally straight", a common enough formulation for young people these days. It would have been nice if Hedges hadn't been pushed to do that, though, and I find Moretz's position totally unacceptable. We don't know what Joel Edgerton's sexuality is either, thank you very much, and it isn't anyone's job to force him to confess it to us so that we can feel better or worse about enjoying his movie.
(I suppose it is also worth mentioning that some folks I know have accused Senator Lindsey Graham of being gay and closeted. Accused of being gay – it's an interesting way of putting things. To my way of thinking, Graham deserves our contempt for his actual politics not for his perceived hypocrisy, his perceived queerness, or his perceived closetedness. His relationship to his own sexuality is of no interest to me compared to his reprehensible political positions. And we should all be careful of attempting to out Senators or accusing politicians of queerness. Graham is hardly the only Senator who might be accused of hiding his sexuality.)
This summer I broke most of my rules and dated a closeted Christian guy. He is a really special man whose relationship with the closet was way more complicated than I understood then or understand now. He hadn't told anyone about being gay, and he has no intention of telling anyone that he is gay. His relationship with his family, his relationship with his religion, his relationships with his friends, and his relationship with his workplace all demand his heterosexuality. Those relationships make no room for the possibility of him being anything other than heterosexual. He doesn't want to come out, but, of course, how could he want to do something that would jeopardize and possibly destroy his relationships with everyone he loves, with everything he knows, with everything that gives him value as a human being? The closet, in other words, is a demand that his society makes of him. Closets are created by homophobia, by a restriction of options for queer people. And so I am arguing that queer people owe nothing to those closets. There are no rules for how queer people ought to interact with those closets, for what they ought to do in response to those closets. Queer people did not make the closets and they owe the closets nothing. It is not my job to judge how a person deals with a closet she didn't make in the first place.
Has this man's choice been heartbreaking for me? Certainly. But it is his job to decide what he thinks will make him happy or what he thinks is right. And it is not my place to impose my version of what I think will make him happy onto him. Most of us rebelled against our parents' versions of what our happiness ought to look like. I have no desire to replicate that same system in reverse when it comes to someone I love.
Being queer is very difficult for a very large number of people – and I think sometimes those of us who are out and proud forget how hard being "out" can be. What I want, on this National Coming Out Day is to try not to privilege the "out" position. For some of us, the closet is saving our lives. For some of us, the closet is (merely?) saving our careers. For some of us, the closet is saving us the headache of having to deal with relatives who ask too many questions. The queer people in our lives deserve our love no matter what relationship they have with the closet. Let us love each other with fierceness and generosity.
07 February 2017
Oscar Noms 2017: 6 of 13
Part 1 - La La Land, Moonlight, Arrival
Part 2 - Manchester by the Sea, Hacksaw Ridge, Lion
Part 3 - Fences, Hell or High Water, Hidden Figures, Jackie
Part 4 - Florence Foster Jenkins, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Passengers, Rogue One
Part 5 - Deepwater Horizon, Kubo and the Two Strings, Moana, A Man Called Ove
Part 6:
I am rather surprised that Matt Ross wasn't nominated in the Original Screenplay category, as well. This was one of my favorite movies of the year, though, so I will take what I can get. It is not perfect, but I didn't care about any of this movie's flaws. I was only paying attention to what I loved about it. But let's talk about Viggo Mortensen and how this is only his second nomination ever. His performances in The Road, The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring, A Dangerous Method, and A History of Violence have all had some awards buzz around them, but this is only his second Oscar nomination, despite the chatter. This is pretty stunning when you think about it. In any case, I am glad more people are talking about this movie, and I sure hope more people see it. The truth is that Captain Fantastic is an ensemble picture, and this lead performance, although it is clearly the lead of the movie, often takes a backseat to the work done by the ensemble as a whole.
I really really liked this movie, but it is a very troubling film and I have really recommended it to no one. This is primarily because Elle is a film about rape, it is a smart film about ethics and rape and desire, and it asks the audience to do a lot of thinking. The central character is as complex as most Huppert characters; in fact this is a kind of classic Huppert performance – the kind we are used to seeing in more recent Huppert films like The Piano Teacher, Merci pour le Chocolat, and Gabrielle. It is odd, really, that this film has finally scored her her first Oscar nomination. After appearing in numerous Oscar-nominated films (from 1980-1991 that includes Heaven's Gate, Coup de Torchon, Entre Nous, and Madame Bovary), she is only now being recognized by the Academy, even though she has, since then, become an enormous star internationally (nominated for 16 César Awards). In any case, this is her first nomination and it is well deserved – especially since she was also so great this year in L'Avenir. But back to Elle for a second, just so you who haven't seen it have a bit of an idea of what this film is: Huppert's character is raped very early on in the film in a scene that is very difficult to watch. She then decides to take revenge on her rapist. She must figure out who her rapist is first, but meanwhile she is attempting to seduce her married next door neighbor (or is he attempting to seduce her?). There are also plenty of other things with which she must deal: an ungrateful son, a theatrical mother, the remarriage of her ex-husband, an affair with her best friend's husband, sexual harassment at work. This is a complex, fascinating character study that thrills with Hitchcockian levels of suspense. It is also filled with mysterious surprises until the very end.
Part 2 - Manchester by the Sea, Hacksaw Ridge, Lion
Part 3 - Fences, Hell or High Water, Hidden Figures, Jackie
Part 4 - Florence Foster Jenkins, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Passengers, Rogue One
Part 5 - Deepwater Horizon, Kubo and the Two Strings, Moana, A Man Called Ove
Part 6:
1 Nomination
- Actor: Viggo Mortensen (Eastern Promises)
Director: Matt Ross
Cast: Mortensen, George MacKay, Frank Langella, Samantha Isler, Annalise Basso, Nicholas Hamilton, Shree Crooks, Charlie Shotwell, Kathryn Hahn, Steve Zahn, Ann Dowd, Trin Miller, Erin Moriarty, Missi Pyle, Elijah Stevenson, Teddy Van Ee
I am rather surprised that Matt Ross wasn't nominated in the Original Screenplay category, as well. This was one of my favorite movies of the year, though, so I will take what I can get. It is not perfect, but I didn't care about any of this movie's flaws. I was only paying attention to what I loved about it. But let's talk about Viggo Mortensen and how this is only his second nomination ever. His performances in The Road, The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring, A Dangerous Method, and A History of Violence have all had some awards buzz around them, but this is only his second Oscar nomination, despite the chatter. This is pretty stunning when you think about it. In any case, I am glad more people are talking about this movie, and I sure hope more people see it. The truth is that Captain Fantastic is an ensemble picture, and this lead performance, although it is clearly the lead of the movie, often takes a backseat to the work done by the ensemble as a whole.
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #11 out of 91
1 Nomination
- Actress: Isabelle Huppert
Director: Paul Verhoeven
Cast: Huppert, Laurent Lafitte, Charles Berling, Anne Consigny, Jonas Bloquet, Christian Berkel, Judith Magre, Virginie Efira, Alice Isaaz, Raphaël Lenglet, Vimala Pons, Arthur Mazet, Lucas Prisor, Stéphane Bak
I really really liked this movie, but it is a very troubling film and I have really recommended it to no one. This is primarily because Elle is a film about rape, it is a smart film about ethics and rape and desire, and it asks the audience to do a lot of thinking. The central character is as complex as most Huppert characters; in fact this is a kind of classic Huppert performance – the kind we are used to seeing in more recent Huppert films like The Piano Teacher, Merci pour le Chocolat, and Gabrielle. It is odd, really, that this film has finally scored her her first Oscar nomination. After appearing in numerous Oscar-nominated films (from 1980-1991 that includes Heaven's Gate, Coup de Torchon, Entre Nous, and Madame Bovary), she is only now being recognized by the Academy, even though she has, since then, become an enormous star internationally (nominated for 16 César Awards). In any case, this is her first nomination and it is well deserved – especially since she was also so great this year in L'Avenir. But back to Elle for a second, just so you who haven't seen it have a bit of an idea of what this film is: Huppert's character is raped very early on in the film in a scene that is very difficult to watch. She then decides to take revenge on her rapist. She must figure out who her rapist is first, but meanwhile she is attempting to seduce her married next door neighbor (or is he attempting to seduce her?). There are also plenty of other things with which she must deal: an ungrateful son, a theatrical mother, the remarriage of her ex-husband, an affair with her best friend's husband, sexual harassment at work. This is a complex, fascinating character study that thrills with Hitchcockian levels of suspense. It is also filled with mysterious surprises until the very end.
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: Actress
My Rating: #20 out of 91
1 Nomination
- Actress: Ruth Negga
Director: Jeff Nichols
Cast: Joel Edgerton, Negga, Terri Abney, Sharon Blackwood, Will Dalton, Alano Miller, Chris R. Greene, Nick Kroll, Michael Shannon, Jon Bass
I really enjoyed this movie. This is the first Oscar nomination for a Jeff Nichols movie, which I don't think I understand given his amazing output. (Nichols had two films out this year and I liked the other one even better.) But I am glad Negga is getting attention for her performance. Loving is not your typical Nichols movie, either. It has no real science fiction qualities to it, and it is not really a mystery, but it is essentially a story of the South, which is what Nichols does, and it is also – for a movie whose outcome we already know – a film absolutely chock full of suspense. This is, of course, also one of the things Nichols does really, really well, and he uses his techniques of suspense here excellently. It is worth noting, too, that Loving's script and photography are also both very good, and the film's central performance – by Joel Edgerton – was also one of the best of the year.
1 Nomination
- Supporting Actor: Michael Shannon (Revolutionary Road)
Director: Tom Ford
Cast: Amy Adams, Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Shannon, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Isla Fisher, Ellie Bamber, Armie Hammer, Andrea Riseborough, Michael Sheen, Laura Linney, Karl Glusman, Robert Aramayo, Jena Malone
I adored this movie. It is my #3 for the year. It is a really difficult film, and I understand why so many people had so much trouble with it, but I both really enjoyed the movie and thought it interrogated many interesting things. In fact, I loved it. It's creepy and mysterious and violent, but it is also sexy and unsparing and sad. Nocturnal Animals is a film about revenge, about being unfair to the people in our lives and then about suffering the consequences of that unfairness. Nocturnal is also about art or about trying to make something that expresses how the artists (or non-artist) feels. Let's just be honest and say that I have a lot of trouble articulating why I loved this movie as much as I did, but I thought it was brave and intriguing and gorgeous, while also being very difficult – which is why I've really not recommended it to anyone. As for Michael Shannon's nomination, this came as rather a big surprise to everyone, I think, but it is well deserved. Isn't it odd that Shannon now has two nominations and that they're for Revolutionary Road and this movie? So strange.
Will Win: N/A
I adored this movie. It is my #3 for the year. It is a really difficult film, and I understand why so many people had so much trouble with it, but I both really enjoyed the movie and thought it interrogated many interesting things. In fact, I loved it. It's creepy and mysterious and violent, but it is also sexy and unsparing and sad. Nocturnal Animals is a film about revenge, about being unfair to the people in our lives and then about suffering the consequences of that unfairness. Nocturnal is also about art or about trying to make something that expresses how the artists (or non-artist) feels. Let's just be honest and say that I have a lot of trouble articulating why I loved this movie as much as I did, but I thought it was brave and intriguing and gorgeous, while also being very difficult – which is why I've really not recommended it to anyone. As for Michael Shannon's nomination, this came as rather a big surprise to everyone, I think, but it is well deserved. Isn't it odd that Shannon now has two nominations and that they're for Revolutionary Road and this movie? So strange.
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #3 out of 91
Back to:
Part 1 - La La Land, Moonlight, Arrival
Part 2 - Manchester by the Sea, Hacksaw Ridge, Lion
Part 3 - Fences, Hell or High Water, Hidden Figures, Jackie
Part 4 - Florence Foster Jenkins, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Passengers, Rogue One
Part 5 - Deepwater Horizon, Kubo and the Two Strings, Moana, A Man Called Ove
Back to:
Part 1 - La La Land, Moonlight, Arrival
Part 2 - Manchester by the Sea, Hacksaw Ridge, Lion
Part 3 - Fences, Hell or High Water, Hidden Figures, Jackie
Part 4 - Florence Foster Jenkins, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Passengers, Rogue One
Part 5 - Deepwater Horizon, Kubo and the Two Strings, Moana, A Man Called Ove
21 January 2017
Best Actor 2016
My top choices in the order I would place them on my Academy ballot if I were allowed to vote. In other words, this is my top five, but I acknowledge that this list is already influenced by awards buzz, and the actors who I think would theoretically benefit the most from my vote are at the top.
Also loved:
Cliff Curtis, The Dark Horse
Joel Edgerton, Loving
Colin Farrell, The Lobster
Ralph Fiennes, A Bigger Splash
Ben Foster, The Program
Ryan Gosling, La La Land
Jake Gyllenhaal, Nocturnal Animals
Shahab Hosseini, The Salesman (فروشنده)
Apologies to:
Gael García Bernal (Neruda), Dave Johns (I, Daniel Blake), and Shia LaBeouf (Man Down), whose films I have not yet seen but will see soon.
Related:
My Best Actor picks from past years (2004-2016)
My Best Actress picks from 2016 (TBA)
My Best Supporting Actress picks from 2016
My Best Supporting Actor picks from 2016
HA JUNG-WOO, The Handmaiden (아가씨)
VIGGO MORTENSEN, Captain Fantastic
ANDREW GARFIELD, Hacksaw Ridge
DENZEL WASHINGTON, Fences
Also loved:
Cliff Curtis, The Dark Horse
Joel Edgerton, Loving
Colin Farrell, The Lobster
Ralph Fiennes, A Bigger Splash
Ben Foster, The Program
Ryan Gosling, La La Land
Jake Gyllenhaal, Nocturnal Animals
Shahab Hosseini, The Salesman (فروشنده)
Apologies to:
Gael García Bernal (Neruda), Dave Johns (I, Daniel Blake), and Shia LaBeouf (Man Down), whose films I have not yet seen but will see soon.
Related:
My Best Actor picks from past years (2004-2016)
My Best Actress picks from 2016 (TBA)
My Best Supporting Actress picks from 2016
My Best Supporting Actor picks from 2016
19 January 2017
Best Supporting Actor 2016
My top choices in the order I would place them on my Academy ballot
if I were allowed to vote. In other words, this is my top five, but I
acknowledge that this list is already influenced by awards buzz, and the
actors whom I think would theoretically benefit the most from my vote
are at the top.
Also loved:
Riz Ahmed, Rogue One
Sylvain Dieuaide, Marguerite
Colman Domingo, The Birth of a Nation
Russell Hornsby, Fences
Laurent Lafitte, Elle
Dev Patel, Lion
Jack Reynor, Sing Street
James Rolleston, The Dark Horse
Matthias Schoenaerts, A Bigger Splash
Michael Shannon, Nocturnal Animals
Hugo Weaving, Hacksaw Ridge
Related:
My Best Supporting Actor picks from past years (2004-2015)
My Best Actress picks from 2016 (TBA)
My Best Actor picks from 2016 (TBA)
My Best Supporting Actress picks from 2016 (TBA)
Also loved:
Riz Ahmed, Rogue One
Sylvain Dieuaide, Marguerite
Colman Domingo, The Birth of a Nation
Russell Hornsby, Fences
Laurent Lafitte, Elle
Dev Patel, Lion
Jack Reynor, Sing Street
James Rolleston, The Dark Horse
Matthias Schoenaerts, A Bigger Splash
Michael Shannon, Nocturnal Animals
Hugo Weaving, Hacksaw Ridge
Related:
My Best Supporting Actor picks from past years (2004-2015)
My Best Actress picks from 2016 (TBA)
My Best Actor picks from 2016 (TBA)
My Best Supporting Actress picks from 2016 (TBA)
01 August 2016
Jeff Nichols' New Little Gem
Let the Midnight Special shine her light on me
Let the Midnight Special shine her ever-loving light on me
Jeff Nichols is just so good. Midnight Special is his fourth film (his fifth, Loving, will be out during awards season) and it is a tense, taught, always exciting sci-fi movie that is full of surprises and twists. I don't want to say too much about this, because I don't want to spoil anything, but I can say that Midnight Special is about a dad trying to help his son, who has special powers possibly related to Cyclops from the X-men. He wears goggles and can only travel at night because the sun does very weird things to him. But dad (Nichols muse Michael Shannon) and another man (we don't really know much about who this guy is at the beginning, but he's played by Joel Edgerton who gives a superb performance) are trying to get the boy somewhere or are running away from something.Do not spoil this movie by watching trailers. Just watch it without knowing anything.
![]() |
| Jaeden Liberher in Midnight Special |
![]() |
| From Take Shelter |
Nichols' worlds are not places that we can understand completely. Or, rather, what Nichols' films give us are our own world with the wonderful returned to it. If we are asking what in the hell is going on here? How can this happen? the film is reminding us that if our science knows a great deal, if we think we can understand the human brain (as in Take Shelter), there are still many many mysteries out there; there are still inexplicable wonders to be explored. And not just that: we are looking for mystery. The characters in Midnight Special want, like Fox Mulder, to believe in something else. And Midnight Special (and I think Nichols in general) is interested in reminding us that there are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
![]() |
| Jeff Bridges and Karen Allen in Starman (1984) |
Ooooo. And pay very close attention to the ending.
09 February 2014
Oscar Nominees 2014: Part 6 of 14
2 Nominations
- Animated Feature
- Original Song: Pharrell Williams
Director: Pierre Coffin, Chris Renaud
Cast: Steve Carrell, Kristin Wiig, Russell Brand, Benjamin Bratt, Steve Coogan, Miranda Cosgrove, Elsie Fisher, Dana Gaier, Ken Jeong
I did not care for the first Despicable Me, and much of the charm of this second one is lost on me as well. The film's main gags involve beating its characters to a pulp without them getting injured – this bit of humor is at its most egregious when Gru goes on a date with a rude young woman who is then tranquilized and tied to the top of a car and thrown around like a giant sack of potatoes. Still, #2 does feature a few laugh-out-loud moments, and Steve Carrell is very charming. Even more importantly, Benjamin Bratt is absolutely excellent in this. He plays two characters and both are a blast (and there is a nice shout-out to Stanley Kubrick in one of his sequences). The music in Despicable Me 2 is its best feature, though, and the film is filled with great original songs by Pharrell Williams – who is A.) everywhere these days and B.) kind of genius. His song "Happy" is so catchy, and so much fun, that I am starting to think it is the only contender that might be able to beat Frozen's song "Let It Go". The awesome music videos out right now for "Happy" (there is an official one here and then there is the 24-hour version) definitely up its chances. But in the end I don't really expect it to win.
I did not care for the first Despicable Me, and much of the charm of this second one is lost on me as well. The film's main gags involve beating its characters to a pulp without them getting injured – this bit of humor is at its most egregious when Gru goes on a date with a rude young woman who is then tranquilized and tied to the top of a car and thrown around like a giant sack of potatoes. Still, #2 does feature a few laugh-out-loud moments, and Steve Carrell is very charming. Even more importantly, Benjamin Bratt is absolutely excellent in this. He plays two characters and both are a blast (and there is a nice shout-out to Stanley Kubrick in one of his sequences). The music in Despicable Me 2 is its best feature, though, and the film is filled with great original songs by Pharrell Williams – who is A.) everywhere these days and B.) kind of genius. His song "Happy" is so catchy, and so much fun, that I am starting to think it is the only contender that might be able to beat Frozen's song "Let It Go". The awesome music videos out right now for "Happy" (there is an official one here and then there is the 24-hour version) definitely up its chances. But in the end I don't really expect it to win.
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: Original Song
My Rating: #60 out of 79
2 Nominations
- Production Design: Beverley Dunn & Catherine Martin (Moulin Rouge!, Romeo + Juliet)
- Costume Design: Catherine Martin (Australia, Moulin Rouge!)
Director: Baz Luhrmann
Cast: Tobey Maguire, Leonard DiCaprio, Carey Mulligan, Joel Edgerton, Elizabeth Debicki, Jason Clarke, Isla Fisher, Amitabh Bachchan
If only this film had been a film only about parties. Alas, it purports to be a film with a storyline, and worse! It purports to be a film version of one of the great USAmerican novels. It is neither of these things. Instead it is an enormous, opulent, cartoon version of a real story. And it has some awesome party sequences. But this film is not without merit: Catherine Martin will deserve her second Costume Design Oscar when she wins on March 2. It will be, in fact, well deserved. The entire film feels like it was simply an excuse for Martin to design the gorgeous frocks and suits she made for this movie. I was less sold on the production design - it often looks as cartoony as the acting, personally, but I see why it has shown up here, as well. There was a film version of Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby made this year, but it is called The Great Beauty not The Great Gatsby. My advice, if you're thinking of seeing Baz Luhrmann's mess of a film? Go see Paolo Sorrentino's version.
Will Win: Costume Design
Will Win: Costume Design
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #71 out of 79
2 Nominations
- Sound Mixing
- Sound Effects Editing
Director: Peter Berg
Cast: Mark Wahlberg, Taylor Kitsch, Ben Foster, Emile Hirsch, Alexander Ludwig, Eric Bana, Yousef Azami, Ali Suliman, Dan Bilzerian
The National Board of Review named Lone Survivor one of the ten best films of the year. No one else seemed to notice. I've posted about my problems with the movie already, so I won't go into that. I just want to say that while these nominations might've seemed to come out of nowhere, they really didn't. All of the critics groups saw this and many respected it, as the National Board of Review mention indicates. And the film really is technically awesome, especially in the sound department. These guys end up falling down some difficult cliffs at one point, and it is actively wince-inducing, as the audience can hear the crunching of bones. It is pretty great stuff. As film theorist Stephen Prince has argued in his book on violence in classical film, the sound information we receive as we watch a film is directly related to our empathy for the person suffering violence. Sounds of anguish or pain have been directly censored (silenced) by the MPAA, because they make violence more difficult for an audience to watch. The sounds in Lone Survivor, then, do their job, asking for the audience to empathize with the four men who get surrounded by men who wish to kill them. These sounds of agony go away, of course, as the helicopters swoop in and the full might of the U.S. military is felt, but the sound work is very, very good. (Not that this film can beat Gravity for either of its awards, because it cannot.)
The National Board of Review named Lone Survivor one of the ten best films of the year. No one else seemed to notice. I've posted about my problems with the movie already, so I won't go into that. I just want to say that while these nominations might've seemed to come out of nowhere, they really didn't. All of the critics groups saw this and many respected it, as the National Board of Review mention indicates. And the film really is technically awesome, especially in the sound department. These guys end up falling down some difficult cliffs at one point, and it is actively wince-inducing, as the audience can hear the crunching of bones. It is pretty great stuff. As film theorist Stephen Prince has argued in his book on violence in classical film, the sound information we receive as we watch a film is directly related to our empathy for the person suffering violence. Sounds of anguish or pain have been directly censored (silenced) by the MPAA, because they make violence more difficult for an audience to watch. The sounds in Lone Survivor, then, do their job, asking for the audience to empathize with the four men who get surrounded by men who wish to kill them. These sounds of agony go away, of course, as the helicopters swoop in and the full might of the U.S. military is felt, but the sound work is very, very good. (Not that this film can beat Gravity for either of its awards, because it cannot.)
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #67 out of 79
24 January 2013
Oscar Nominees 2013: Part 3 of 13
5 Nominations
- Picture
- Actress: Jessica Chastain (The Help)
- Original Screenplay: Mark Boal (The Hurt Locker)
- Film Editing: William Goldenberg (Argo, Seabiscuit, The Insider) & Dylan Tichenor (There Will Be Blood)
- Sound Editing
Director: Kathryn Bigelow
Cast: Chastain, Jason Clarke, Jennifer Ehle, Kyle Chandler, Reda Kateb, Harold Perrineau, Mark Strong, James Gandolfini, Chris Pratt, Joel Edgerton, Taylor Kinney
Good stuff. I loved it less than I probably ought to have because this movie is not The Hurt Locker. I know that it is unfair for me to expect it to be The Hurt Locker and even for me to want Bigelow to repeat herself, but, alas, that's sort of how I felt while watching Zero Dark Thirty. This movie is very good, has an excellent script, and was named by dozens of critics groups across the country as the best film of the year. Still, with the big surprise of Ben Affleck's Director snub on Oscar nomination morning came the same snub for Kathryn Bigelow. Their spots were taken by David O. Russell and Benh Zeitlin. However... I feel like ZDT is going to make a comeback by the time Oscar night comes around. I am predicting a Black Hawk Down style surge at the last minute. I expect ZDT to definitely win Actress, but I expect it also to take home Original Screenplay and Film Editing, with a possible fourth Oscar for Sound Editing.
Will Win: Actress, Original Screenplay, Film Editing
Could Win: Sound Editing
My Rating: #14 out of 61
Django Unchained
5 Nominations
- Picture
- Original Screenplay: Quentin Tarantino (Inglourious Basterds, Pulp Fiction)
- Supporting Actor: Christoph Waltz (Inglourious Basterds)
- Film Editing: William Goldenberg (Zero Dark Thirty, Seabiscuit, The Insider)
- Cinematography: Robert Richardson (Hugo, Inglourious Basterds, The Aviator, Snow Falling on Cedars, JFK, Born on the Fourth of July, Platoon)
- Sound Editing
Director: Tarantino
Cast: Jamie Foxx, Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L. Jackson, Kerry Washington, Laura Cayouette
A fun but overly long picture. QT gets a bit carried away with himself and can't seem to stop himself from adding in sidebars that are delightfully fun but that his movie doesn't actually need. In this way (and forgive me for saying it, QT) Django Unchained is a lot like one of this year's other endless movies: The Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey. My real feeling about all of this is that QT should be making films for HBO. Then he could make the six-hour epics he really wants to make, we could watch them an hour at a time, and we'd also get the pleasure of watching them (and talking about them) for weeks and weeks. I think this is a win-win plan. Whaddya think, QT? I have Django winning Supporting Actor in my predictions mostly because all of the nominees have already won an Oscar and Christoph Waltz is the least established among them, i.e. the most in need of the award (although he really isn't). I want to take this moment also to note that the Academy truly showed no imagination with its Supporting Actor nominees this year. Arkin, Jones, Hoffman, De Niro, and Waltz are all fine in their movies, but they aren't as exciting as these five guys or (to my mind) the other seven guys I've listed on the page.
A fun but overly long picture. QT gets a bit carried away with himself and can't seem to stop himself from adding in sidebars that are delightfully fun but that his movie doesn't actually need. In this way (and forgive me for saying it, QT) Django Unchained is a lot like one of this year's other endless movies: The Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey. My real feeling about all of this is that QT should be making films for HBO. Then he could make the six-hour epics he really wants to make, we could watch them an hour at a time, and we'd also get the pleasure of watching them (and talking about them) for weeks and weeks. I think this is a win-win plan. Whaddya think, QT? I have Django winning Supporting Actor in my predictions mostly because all of the nominees have already won an Oscar and Christoph Waltz is the least established among them, i.e. the most in need of the award (although he really isn't). I want to take this moment also to note that the Academy truly showed no imagination with its Supporting Actor nominees this year. Arkin, Jones, Hoffman, De Niro, and Waltz are all fine in their movies, but they aren't as exciting as these five guys or (to my mind) the other seven guys I've listed on the page.
Will Win: Supporting Actor
Could Win: Original Screenplay, Sound Editing
My Rating: #15 out of 61
5 Nominations
- Cinematography: Roger Deakins (True Grit, The Reader, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, No Country for Old Men, The Man Who Wasn't There, O Brother, Where Art Thou?, Kundun, Fargo, The Shawshank Redemption)
- Score: Thomas Newman (WALL·E, The Good German, Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events, Finding Nemo, Road to Perdition, American Beauty, Unstrung Heroes, Little Women, The Shawshank Redemption)
- Sound Mixing
- Sound Editing
- Song: Adele Adkins & Paul Epworth
Director: Sam Mendes
Cast: Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem, Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris, Albert Finney, Ben Whishaw, Bérénice Marlohe, Helen McCrory
The Academy decided it loved James Bond again! This is what happens when Sam Mendes directs your Bond movie instead of Lee Tamahori. These nominations are all well deserved, too. I was delighted by Adele's song – which she is performing at the Oscars and which will in all likelihood win – but the Academy will also be doing a tribute to "50 Years of Bond" at the Oscars, so the Song win will be icing on that particular cake, I think. Roger Deakins, who is one of our very best cinematographers, earned a very deserved tenth nomination here, but he will (again) not take home the Oscar. I am not sure when he will get to take home one, but I hope it is soon.
Will Win: Song
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #17 out of 61
20 February 2012
2012's Nominees: Part 6 of 10
1 Nomination
- Original Screenplay: J.C. Chandor
Director: Chandor
Cast: Kevin Spacey, Zachary Quinto, Paul Bettany, Jeremy Irons, Demi Moore, Simon Baker, Stanley Tucci, Penn Badgley.
I really liked this movie! It's also about a bunch of genuinely terrible human beings. A fascinating paradox: in a movie where I genuinely thought nearly all of the people depicted in the film were despicable, I liked a lot of them. Margin Call is a movie about the financial crisis and one (out of many) of the situations that brought about this crisis. And yet... this movie is gripping and interesting; the characters are fascinating, and though the plot is completely predictable, Margin Call (unlike a movie like Fair Game) breathes new life into its historical subject and makes for riveting cinema. The screenplay, by director Chandor, is an absolute marvel. A fully deserved nomination.
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #22 out of 66
1 Nomination
- Supporting Actor: Christopher Plummer (The Last Station)
Director: Mike Mills
Cast: Ewan McGregor, Mélanie Laurent, Plummer, Goran Visnjic, Mary Page Keller, Lou Taylor Pucci.
This movie was not my favorite. I've written about the movie here, so I won't go into that now; I'd rather just talk about Christopher Plummer. Plummer is, as you might recall, amazing in 1965's classic The Sound of Music, and if you've ever seen this musical onstage, it is obvious how absolutely essential Plummer's performance is to that film. He is astounding in that movie. Plummer has, however, only been nominated for the Oscar one other time (very recently for the underwhelming The Last Station). This is after being very notably passed over in 1999 and again in 2001. All that to say: Plummer's win is long overdue, and his performance is excellent, so everyone is delighted to be able to honor him this year.
Will Win: Supporting Actor
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #42 out of 66
1 Nomination
- Supporting Actor: Nick Nolte (Affliction, The Prince of Tides)
Director: Gavin O'Connor
Cast: Tom Hardy, Joel Edgerton, Nolte, Jennifer Morrison, Frank Grillo, Kevin Dunn.
I really liked this movie, too! Some of these choices this year are excellent. To begin with Nolte, he is absolutely superb in this movie. He is broken and sad and penitent and ugly. It is a performance awash in self-pity, and I found it brave and completely endearing. I think this is one of my favorite performances of the year. He is so good! O'Connor's direction of this movie is ludicrous, and the script is filled with clichés, but none of that really seemed to matter as I watched this film. The fighting is exciting, Tom Hardy and his acting partners are all excellent, and the sentiments behind the brother-brother and father-son relationships all kept me deeply affected.
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #24 out of 66
1 Nomination
- Original Score: John Williams (War Horse, Munich, Memoirs of a Geisha, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Catch Me If You Can, Artificial Intelligence: A.I., Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, The Patriot, Angela's Ashes, Saving Private Ryan, Amistad, Sleepers, Nixon, Sabrina, Schindler's List, JFK, Home Alone, Born on the Fourth of July, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, The Accidental Tourist, Empire of the Sun, The Witches of Eastwick, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, The River, Return of the Jedi, E.T.: the Extra-Terrestrial, Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Empire Strikes Back, Superman, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Jaws, The Towering Inferno, Tom Sawyer, Cinderella Liberty, Images, The Poseidon Adventure, Fiddler on the Roof, The Reivers, Goodbye, Mr. Chips, Valley of the Dolls)
Director: Steven Spielberg
Cast: Jamie Bell, Andy Serkis, Daniel Craig.
So. Much. Fun. I've talked about this film already here, and at the time I mentioned how delightful Williams's score is, so I don't need to go into that, but what I will go into is how this movie got totally snubbed by the animation branch. I don't care what criteria they are using or what the animation branch has against motion capture, but they cannot seriously believe that any single movie that was nominated for the so-called Best Animated Feature award is better than The Adventures of Tintin, Because that is a joke. Tintin is impeccably directed. The editing, the sound effects, the score, the screenplay, and the cinematography are all superb, and the only reason Tintin isn't nominated for Best Animated Feature is because of politics. And I know, I know, that the Oscars are about politics a lot of the time. I understand that, but Tintin's exclusion is simply indefensible. One nomination is simply not enough for this fantastic film. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: N/A
My Rating: #18 out of 66
16 February 2011
2011's Nominees: Part 7 of 12
ANIMAL KINGDOM
I have written about this film here. I have felt compelled to write about it mostly because I didn't particularly care for it, though it was reviewed very well by critics here and in Australia. As for Weaver's nomination, I am delighted for her. This is her big break in the States, and it is nice to see a working actress – someone who has made a career playing character parts – get bigtime recognition like this. I hope she is having a great time.
Will Win: N/A
Might Win: N/A
My Rating: #40 out of 45
INCENDIES
1 Nomination:
· Best Supporting Actress: Jacki Weaver
Director: David Michôd
Cast: James Frecheville, Jacki Weaver, Ben Mendelsohn, Guy Pearce, Joel Edgerton, Luke Ford, Sullivan Stapleton
Cast: James Frecheville, Jacki Weaver, Ben Mendelsohn, Guy Pearce, Joel Edgerton, Luke Ford, Sullivan Stapleton
I have written about this film here. I have felt compelled to write about it mostly because I didn't particularly care for it, though it was reviewed very well by critics here and in Australia. As for Weaver's nomination, I am delighted for her. This is her big break in the States, and it is nice to see a working actress – someone who has made a career playing character parts – get bigtime recognition like this. I hope she is having a great time.
Will Win: N/A
Might Win: N/A
My Rating: #40 out of 45
INCENDIES
1 Nomination:
· Best Foreign Language Film: Canada (The Barbarian Invasions, Water)Director: Denis Villeneuve
Cast: Lubna Azabal, Mélissa Désormeaux-Poulin, Rémy Girard, Maxim Gaudette
Cast: Lubna Azabal, Mélissa Désormeaux-Poulin, Rémy Girard, Maxim Gaudette
I haven't seen this picture and it won't be released until April, but you can watch the trailer here. I don't expect this to win the Oscar, either.
Will Win: N/A
Might Win: N/A
My Rating: Released in 2011
IN A BETTER WORLD
1 Nomination:
· Best Foreign Language Film: Denmark (After the Wedding)
Director: Susanne Bier
Cast: Ulrich Thomsen, Mikael Persbrandt, Trine Dyrholm, William Jøhnk Juels Nielsen, Wil Johnson
Cast: Ulrich Thomsen, Mikael Persbrandt, Trine Dyrholm, William Jøhnk Juels Nielsen, Wil Johnson
I love Susanne Bier's movies, and I was surprised to see this here because I thought she was exclusively making movies in the U.S. these days (Things We Lost in the Fire was her debut here, and it is excellent.) Her After the Wedding was nominated in this category before and her Brothers was remade into a movie with Jake Gyllenhaal and Tobey Maguire (I skipped the remake). Bier's films are explorations of deep trauma and the three I've seen depend heavily on powerfully emotional acting and honest writing. You can read my review of Things here. At any rate, this will not be released until later in 2011, but until then, we can all watch the trailer here. I expect lots of heavy emotionality and some really hard questions.
Will Win: N/A
Might Win: Foreign Language Film
My Rating: Released in 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



































