Saturday 18 February 2012

The 84th Academy Awards


And so it comes to that grand old time again -- the Oscars. The biggest awards ceremony on the planet, and by far the most watched. Even with dwindling ratings, millions of people across the globe tune in to catch a glimpse of their A-list idols, and see who snags the biggest of big prizes.

2012 sees the return of Billy Crystal, back to resume his love-affair with the Academy and show James Franco and Anne Hathaway how it's done.

In terms of nominations, Martin Scorsese's Hugo leads the way with 11 nominations, but I think the more prestigious categories may elude Marty this time around.

So here's my rundown of the main events -- these are purely my opinions so don't criticise or belittle me in any way, shape, or form.


Oh, and one one more note -- I haven't got around to seeing The Help yet -- nothing against them, I just haven't done it yet. Soon. Soon....


Best Picture

The Artist
The little black and white picture that has taken the world by storm. Is this film a serious contender? Yes, and not just because it features a strong yearning for a classical period of Hollywood. It's a great story, featuring strong performances, reminiscent of a golden era, and is smartly told, beautifully orchestrated, and never loses focus or interest. I'd encourage you all to see it -- dialogue is not necessary, and it's easily the best film of last year. Except for maybe Rango...

Chances of Winning?: Bang on the money.


The Descendants
Featuring the performance of Clooney's career, this little gem stands a real chance. Its complex subject matter is simplified through its recurring theme of family, and what that means to those involved. Everything is put firmly in place with effortless style and significance, and the movie hits the audience hard, tugs at their emotions and is a charmingly smart, funny, and heart-wrenching tale.

Chances of Winning?: Very good. Strong contender.


Extremely Loud And Incredibly Close
Again, this is my opinion, and clearly the Academy disagree with me. But this movie should not have been nominated. Yes, it has Tom Hanks, and it deals with 9/11 in some capacity, and therefore, feels like Oscar fodder, but it's rubbish. It's insanely dull, features an incredibly irritating protagonist, and doesn't seem to reach any discernible conclusion (for me) -- it's place should have been taken by Drive or even We Need To Talk Above Kevin. Both are superior in every aspect, and this film severely falters in comparison to the names it's listed with. And I hated that fucking tambourine. Still...Tom Hanks ftw.

Chances of Winning?: Lol.


The Help
My girlfriend thought it looked good. She didn't like Real Steel though...(or E.T.).








Hugo
Real movie magic. That's what Hugo has to offer. Created by a man with an obscene amount of love for the art, and featuring a story about the birth of cinema, it almost can't go wrong. Fortunately, Scorsese is well-equipped for his first foray into 3-D, and makes efficient use of the format, providing the audience with a world in which they are able to fully immerse themselves, and get lost, along with Hugo, in the intricate mazes of Scorsese's beautiful tale.

Chances of Winning?: Good. Perhaps in the shadows of The Artist/The Descendants.


Midnight In Paris
From one love letter to another. Midnight In Paris is a top return to form for Woody Allen who has noticeably struggled recently. He's back on path with this latest offering, a dainty and sweet depiction of Paris through the eyes of an American Romantic. It's a remarkable feel-good movie (even for someone like me, who bloody hates Paris) and will leave all with a smile on their face and a distant wish to visit the Eiffel Tower in the near future. Plus...Marion Cotillard.

Chances of Winning?: Very meh. Possible, but would be punching above its weight.


Moneyball
Penned by Aaron Sorkin, fresh off his 'Social Network' success, this film is snappy, succinct, and gripping. As traditionally expected with most sports films, it features an underdog tale, but like its main characters, it does it with style and an unexpected method, working with statistics rather than rousing music and last-gasp victories. Pitt proves his acting credentials once again for any of those niggling doubters, and the movie fully deserves its place among the best of last year.

Chances of Winning?: No, not really, but a great film nonetheless.


The Tree Of Life
Perhaps the most polarising film of last year. A traditional marmite situation; you either loved it, or you hated it. I, unfortunately, dislike it immensely. That's down to personal taste. What I can't deny though, is its beauty. It features some truly stunning shots and the 'creation of the universe' segment will grip you entirely. Brad Pitt, yes him again, is in top form, and the coming-of-age story is well told, paced, and intriguing. Sean Penn, however....

Chances of Winning?: Perhaps TOO polarising. It's a darkhorse.


War Horse
When people ask about Spielberg's greatest film, expect responses like 'Jurassic Park', 'Schindler's List', 'E.T.' -- timeless classics. Can I say the same for War Horse? Probably not. It has great beauty, and stunning shots (the full-on pelt through the trenches), but I don't think it has the winning formula employed so successfully by Spielberg on other films. It's slightly uneven at times, and ever so contrived, but it has emotion, a plethora of good performances, and all the foreigners have the decency to speak in English.

Chances of Winning?: Doubt it, but the Academy does love Spielberg.



Best Director

Woody Allen -- Midnight In Paris

Has whipped back into form with this latest picture, creating a world which worships culture seemingly with ease. Well constructed, and deftly directed, it's great to see him nominated again. He doesn't actually show up to the Oscars nowadays though, but will perhaps be coerced this year.

Chances of Winning?: I'd love to see him up there, but this won't be his second Directing win.


Michel Hazanavicius -- The Artist

Very little known about this guy before The Artist (at least for me anyway), but he's made himself known with this daringly creative picture. Stretching back the years, and channeling a forgotten era into modern day Hollywood, Hazanavicius has achieved something quite remarkable here.

Chances of Winning?: The Oscar is his.




Terrence Malick -- The Tree Of Life

I'm not great with Malick's movies -- I've seen two of them, and neither completely gripped me; but it's clear he has a strong affinity for cinema and the way it appears on screen. The sheer beauty of Tree Of Life may be interpreted as pretentious by some, but I don't think that's what he was going for, and his achievements with this film should be commended. It's the most beautifully visual film of last year.

Chances of Winning?: Unlikely, but remains a dark horse, akin to his movie.


Alexander Payne -- The Descendants

Payne is hardly a household name, but take a gander at his track record, and you'll realise how hugely talented this guy is. Following on from his successful Sideways, The Descendants is a remarkably ambitious film which is made to look effortless (in a good way) by the sheer skill which the director demonstrates in manipulating events so very delicately in order to tell his story. He's rewarded by a host of great performances, but he keeps the story tight and compact throughout and stands a real good chance of winning.

Chances of Winning?: Second favourite behind Hazanavicius.


Martin Scorsese -- Hugo

The winner of the Golden Globe for Best Directing, and easy to see why. One of the greatest movie directors in history, Scorsese creates a love letter to cinema in a similar vein to Hazanavicius, but blends old and new with his venture into 3-D. It has a wondrous effect, and it's a world unlike any other. It's a film which no one can really dislike, and an effort that may find more fans among the Academy than some of his grittier features.

Chances of Winning?: The dark horse.



Best Actor In A Leading Role

Demián Bichir for A Better Life as Carlos Galindo

I haven't seen all of A Better Life. Not that it was boring or anything, I just wasn't in the right frame of mind, and will get back to it ASAP. What I did see what quite captivating though -- and Bichir, popping so suddenly into our lives, has done well to put himself on the radar with a performance that oozes desperation. Though I don't know how it ends, he shows himself as a lowly immigrant gardener, struggling with American life, and does it with so much conviction, that I can imagine it was hard for the Academy to overlook him.

Chances of Winning?: No, Dujardin has this one.


George Clooney for The Descendants as Matt King

Guy's having a good year -- having recently made the transition from acting to directing, Clooney has also had a busy year, directing films like The Ides Of March. The Descendants sees him at his very best though, and conveying a host of emotions, he manages to juggle the aspects of drama and humour with relative easy, proving once again how talented an actor he is.

Chances of Winning?: Good. Probably a two-horse race between him and Dujardin.


Jean Dujardin for The Artist as George Valentin

Have you seen this guy off-camera? He's arguably the most charming bloke like EVER. He made a Benny Hill crack at the BAFTAs which was a hoot. Had the audience in the palm of his hands. It's almost a shame he wasn't born in the 1900s, because he is made for silent movies. He has a range of expressions and gestures, which are fittingly apt for silence. He also has an incredibly strong french accent, which is used to amusing effect towards the end (watch the movie). He channels figures such as Douglas Fairbanks in this performance, and it's refreshing to watch. There are no negatives in his performance.

Chances of Winning?: The favourite. Deservedly so.


Gary Oldman for Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy as George Smiley

It's pretty great to see Gary Oldman nominated for his first Oscar. It's long overdue, and though he won't win it, it's probably a great honour to have his marvelous work recognised by his peers. His work in Tinker Tailor is relatively simple it seems, but this is down to Oldman's precarious approach to the role, his effortless ease at moving around the camera, and essentially becoming one with the misty canvas (fuck knows what I'm talking about, but there's a real meaning in there somewhere) -- it's a brilliant performance in a brilliant film.

Chances of Winning?: Not much. But hooray for England.


Brad Pitt for Moneyball as Billy Beane

I hear a lot of crap about Brad Pitt from some people. In a nutshell, 'he's a pretty boy who can't act' seems to just about cover it. This is, of course, bullshit. Though he hasn't had a lot of success in winning awards outside the usual MTV Movie Awards arena, he's been nominated for an Oscar 3 times now, accompanied by a host of other big nominations. Whilst this won't be third time lucky, you just have to watch the film to see how he gives such a zest to the script, and brings the film to life in an entertaining way. I really enjoyed the film and its subject, and he deserves his nomination.

Chances of Winning?: Naaaah.



Best Actress In A Leading Role

Glenn Close for Albert Nobbs as Albert Nobbs

She plays a dude.

I hadn't heard anything about this movie until the Oscars. She won't win. But it's nice to see her nominated for a movie -- as far as I know, she's been playing around on TV shows for the last few years. Damages any good?

Chances of Winning?: Albert No.... (not my best)





Viola Davis for The Help as Aibileen Clark

She won the SAG award, which is usually a great indicator, so damn, I don't know. This category seems wide open. Although she was also in Extremely Loud...







Rooney Mara for The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo as Lisbeth Salander

Never have I seen an actress commit so much to a film role. Total transformation here. Forget Black Swan, this was quite a horrific turn from Rooney Mara, who was featured ever so slightly in Fincher's 'Social Network' in 2010. She doesn't 'make the film', because it works on so many levels, but she is captivating, unafraid, and really fuckin' odd. Mara gives it her all, and succeeds in every aspect. She is deserving of her nomination, and in the group she's in, I'd personally give her the award, but for some inane reason....I'm not in charge of Hollywood. One day...

Chances of Winning?: No. The Academy hates Fincher and goth sex...


Meryl Streep for The Iron Lady as Margaret Thatcher

Haven't seen the film. Have no intention of seeing it, so I shall instead talk about Meryl Streep in Sophie's Choice....

She was well good.

Chances of Winning?: Probably. Everyone loves her, and she's a mighty fine actress.




Michelle Williams for My Week with Marilyn as Marilyn Monroe

I wasn't exactly around at the time of Marilyn Monroe, but from what I've gathered, she was the kinda' woman that you fell in love with...just like 'that'. So, I assume Michelle Williams had quite a difficult job on her hands. But fuck it, I fell in love with her, so success in my book. What she does is exceedingly good; she portrays a Hollywood icon as an almost stereotype, but because it invokes such a strong sense of nostalgia, it works, and she's my choice of winner (even though I've said that twice...).

Chance of Winning?: I hope so.




Best Supporting Actor

Kenneth Branagh for My Week with Marilyn as Laurence Olivier

Acting royalty in this film. His job is to make his presence known and everything he does he does with sublime character. Again, I know little about Laurence Olivier, but I know a great performance when I see one, and it takes quite something to stand your own against Marilyn Monroe. Maybe not a winner this time, but yay for England again...

Chances of Winning?: Sadly not.




Jonah Hill for Moneyball as Peter Brand

Whilst I'm fully behind Brad Pitt's nomination, Jonah Hill's nod was a slight surprise. Not to say he's not deserving, because I think he was great. It's just the last time most people saw him in a movie, he was crudely declaring to Michael Cera his intentions of fucking Emma Stone. Now he's being nommed for Oscars. Good for him. His performance was great; he was ever so slightly awkward. A genius. He grew into his role well, and was never over-the-top or sentimentally mundane. G'wan, Jonah!

Chances of Winning?: He's going home empty-handed. Unless he turns up with a girlfriend/wife...


Nick Nolte for Warrior as Paddy Conlon

I think Warrior was an underrated film. If Extremely Loud... was nominated, then I'd like to think Warrior should have been too...

Well maybe not, but it was still a lot better. And Nick Nolte delivers a performance that only he could. A drunk, wreck of a man... -- that's harsh, he's trying to recover, but when he's pushed, he goes through a dramatic change and it really twangs at the heart-strings. It's an amazingly powerful movie and performance. Definitely worth watching, and well worthy of the nomination.

Chances of Winning?: Nah. This category has an easy winner.


Christopher Plummer for Beginners as Hal Fields

The easy winner. He's picked up all the awards so far, and for bloody good reason. He's incredibly funny as the gay elderly man, dying of cancer. It's a film that a lot of people haven't seen, but has a truly unique feel to it, so I implore y'all to see it. Christopher Plummer (who you should all know) has been around a while, but never won an Oscar. This will be his first time, and after throwing himself into the deep end in such an amusing, yet emotional way....well deserved.

Chances of Winning?: YEEEEESSSSSSS (Imagine Michael McIntyre screaming that)


Max von Sydow for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close as The Renter
Urgh. I like this guy as an actor -- I think he's wonderfully...weird. But I can't get behind anything representing this movie. I think I don't like him because he genuinely thought it'd be a good idea to follow this kid around the city, even if he was his (SPOILER) grandfather. Blah blah blah.

Chances of Winning?: No. Albert Brooks should be here. GROSS MISCONDUCT.





Best Supporting Actress

Bérénice Bejo for The Artist as Peppy Miller

Similar to Dujardin, she carries a lot of charm and grace with her throughout the movie, and I don't really get why she's Best Supporting Actress when she was very much the main actress in the film...I think. Either way, she stands a real chance, as I don't think there was too much difference in performance levels between her and Dujardin. She is as beautiful as she is talented, and never looked out of depth.

Chances of Winning?: Very good, I reckon


Jessica Chastain for The Help as Celia Foote
Again. Haven't seen. YET.











Melissa McCarthy for Bridesmaids as Megan Price

Ha, what a great nomination. I'm surprised the Academy went with this as it doesn't seem their style. I guess it would have been prudent to award the year's funniest film in some way. Best Supporting Actress seemed a safe option, and so we have Melissa McCarthy. She got more laughs than Zach Galifiniakaiskis did in both Hangover films and was unashamedly brilliant. She won't win -- the Academy wouldn't let it get that far, but it's a testament to the film's popularity and success that she was nominated for a hilarious performance.

Chances of Winning?: I severely doubt it.


Janet McTeer for Albert Nobbs as Hubert Page

See Glenn Close.

Good for her though.

Chances of Winning?: Nope.





Octavia Spencer for The Help as Minny Jackson

The favourite in the category, and I back her to win it.









I'mma put the predicted winners in BOLD.




Best Writing -- Original

The Artist – Michel Hazanavicius
Bridesmaids – Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo
Margin Call – J.C. Chandor
Midnight in Paris – Woody Allen
A Separation – Asghar Farhadi

As nice as it would be to see Midnight In Paris pick this one up, The Artist will win. Those who complain that it doesn't have any dialogue need to learn a thing or two about scripts. It's not all about the dialogue (if you've seen Drive, you'll know that).


Best Writing -- Adapted

The Descendants – Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon, and Jim Rash from The Descendants by Kaui Hart Hemmings
Hugo – John Logan from The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick
The Ides of March – George Clooney, Grant Heslov, and Beau Willimon from Farragut North by Beau Willimon
Moneyball – Screenplay by Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin; Story by Stan Chervin from Moneyball by Michael Lewis
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy – Bridget O'Connor and Peter Straughan from Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy by John le Carré

Christ -- any of them could pick this one up. I'm going for The Descendants because I think it's the most appealing of the lot, and probably the smartest.

Best Animated Feature

A Cat in Paris – Alain Gagnol and Jean-Loup Felicioli
Chico and Rita – Fernando Trueba and Javier Mariscal
Kung Fu Panda 2 – Jennifer Yuh Nelson
Puss in Boots – Chris Miller
Rango – Gore Verbinski

If Rango doesn't win, I'll pack up, move to Hollywood, and kick some serious Academy ass.

Best Foreign Language Film

Bullhead (Belgium) in Dutch and French – Michaël R. Roskam
Footnote (Israel) in Hebrew – Joseph Cedar
In Darkness (Poland) in Polish – Agnieszka Holland
Monsieur Lazhar (Canada) in French – Philippe Falardeau
A Separation (Iran) in Persian – Asghar Farhadi

People be loving it. Haven't seen it myself, but I will check it out soon-ish. Maybe you should too.


The other nominations are a mixed bag. Anything that sees fit to nominate Transformers 3 for an Award is barely worth thinking about. Expect Hugo to really ramp up the technical awards though.

For those interested, the Academy Awards will be on UK TV on Sunday night. Sky Premiere and E! Entertainment will be hosting.


Should be a good 'un.

Thursday 16 February 2012

Carnage -- Review

Carnage is perhaps a hyperbole. The implied connotations may give you different expectations of this movie, and not all of them will be met. It’s remarkable how so much damage can be inflicted through mere words, and this film explores that, accompanied by a quartet of bitingly sharp performances from its leads.

Though the movie takes place in a Manhattan apartment, it was in actual fact filmed in Paris, due to Roman Polanski’s inability to step foot in the USA. This has never prevented him from working with the best actors available, and making some of the greatest films of the last 50 years. Though his magnum opus remains Chinatown, made almost 40 years ago now, his work is as relevant today as it was back then.

The movie is a screen adaptation of Yasmina Reza’s play ‘God Of Carnage’. This is evident in the way Polanksi has bizarrely made use of space and time. With the exception of the opening and closing credits, the movie doesn’t stray from the apartment of Mr and Mrs Longstreet (John C. Reilly and Jodie Foster). Reluctantly joining them is upper-class couple, Mr and Mrs Cowan (Christophe Waltz and Kate Winslet). The reason for their occupying the same space is their children. Zachary, belonging to the Cowan’s, has smashed Ethan, belong to the Longstreet’s, around the face with a stick. The conversation flows politely in its early exchanges, a brief moment of silence here and there, or whenever Alan (Waltz) is ‘forced’ to remove himself and answer his incessantly-ringing cellphone.

The power here is how it develops. We open with a shady state of equilibrium; a state that has to smoothly cross into the realms of the eponymous carnage. This is orchestrated with masterful work from Polanski, giving his actors just that little bit extra to work with, deftly timing each event that takes place to occur precisely when it needs to. The running time of the movie is just over an hour, as is the on-screen narrative.

It’s a character study of considerable depth; at first, each of them displays signs of accustomed social conventions. Nancy (Winslet) feels inclined to enquire about the apartment she finds herself in, as well as the different displays of culture which Penelope (Foster) has laid out, primarily on her luxurious coffee table. Alan and Michael (C. Reilly) discuss their jobs, picking apart each other’s livelihood through polite, yet slightly strained dialogue, which is to lead someplace darker.

Bit by bit, shot by shot, Polanksi manipulates happenings to his will, sparks begin to fly, and tempers begin to flare. Put together by their children’s childish behaviour, the four parents exhibit their own infantine dispositions by hurling verbal put-downs at each other. They belittle, they snarl, they vomit, they drink, they scoff, they drink more, they sob, they turn on their own spouses, they drink even more, they smoke. It doesn’t ever reach what I would call ‘carnage’, but it certainly inhabits a space nearby.

As you’d expect, the script is solid enough to keep an audience satisfied for 70minutes, but the four actors, Winslet and Foster in particular, exude unmatched ability in being able to distort themselves over and over again, finely treading, but never crossing, the line between radical depiction and parody. They are all cynics, expecting next to nothing from their opponents; they won’t budge on their opinions, and a considerable amount of care is put into the way they act within the different circumstances Polanksi throws their way. It’s a refreshingly honest piece of work, but not funny enough to be considered comedy. It’s a movie worth watching, but don’t expect to be enlightened, amused, or entertained. This is a movie about character; it’s peculiar and comes off with an odd taste, but it’s impeccably acted, and masterfully directed.