So, the Oscar nominations are being announced 5.38 am PST time. I have no idea what that equates to in Brisbane time, and I certainly can't be bothered figuring it out. Needless to say it will be sometime in the next 24 hours, and I thought I'd try my hand at predicting the best picture nominations. One of the reasons I'm doing this is that last year I correctly predicted all ten nominations, yet didn't record my predictions anywhere, and subsequently have no record or proof of said excellent prediction skills. This year will be even more difficult to pick, however, given that the Academy has changed the nomination format again after only two years. This year instead of ten films definitely being nominated, at least five films HAVE to be nominated but it COULD be as many as ten. In other words it will be somewhere between five and ten films. So I'll do this prediction a little differently.
If only five films are nominated they will be.....
The Artist
If someone had told me last year that the favourite to win best picture the following year would be a silent black and white French film I would have either assumed they were joking or crazy. But here we are. It appears that just about everyone thinks The Artist will take the main prize home, possibly because it's something different yet accessible, possibly because people appreciate the classical film making approach, or possibly because it's a great movie. I haven't seen it as it's not even out here yet, and while I don't usually fully embrace films that are overly gimmicky I'm pretty excited to see it when it comes out in February.
The Descendants
It won the award for best drama at the Golden Globes, which if recent history is anything to go by means it will be nominated for best picture at the Oscars but wont win. On top of that it's received loads of critical acclaim and IS one of the best movies of the year (I'll review it in my next entry), so it's a shoe in.
Hugo
As with The Descendants, it is one of the best reviewed films of the years and has loads of Oscar buzz, so it's lock in for a nomination. I've been slack and haven't gotten around to seeing it yet, but am muchly looking forward to doing so. You can bet your bottom dollar on this, The Descendants, and The Artist all being nominated.
Midnight in Paris
I'm slightly less confident about this one than the previous three, however the Oscars always needs the obligatory slightly off beat comedy in their best picture recognitions to show they're not a bunch of old stiffs who are all about the drama movies, and Woody Allen's new treasure will do nicely.
Moneyball
Probably the movie I feel least confident about putting in the top five, however the Academy loves rewarding intelligently written films that are based on true stories like this one, so I think it will be in there. Plus it has Brad Pitt in it.
.... but I think eight films will be nominated in total, with the next three being....
The Help
The Academy also loves recognising movies about people standing up against racism and injustice. It makes them feel like they're progressive, tolerant people and gives them a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside ( I assume.) Plus it's gotten pretty good reviews. I missed it at the cinema but will check it out when it comes to DVD in February.
Drive
Not alot of Oscar buzz for Drive however it has received overwhelmingly positive reviews from critics. This would be a different sort to be nominated, however I've noticed a slight trend in recent years for more trendy or "cult" movies to be recognised. I personally thought it was a tad overrated, but the majority disagree.
War Horse
My award for most obvious Oscar bait of the year, War Horse wasn't exactly a critical darling, however it IS exactly the kind of classical film making the Academy loves to award, and with the Spielberg director's credit attached I think the Academy will find it too hard to resist taking the bait.
...however if ten films happen to be nominated the next two will be...
Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Another one I've yet to see, David Fincher's adaptation of the beloved novel has been gaining a tremendous amount of critical acclaim. The reason I think it will miss out is I'm sure there will be a contingent amongst Academy voters who loathe the whole Americans remaking foreign films thing, especially so soon after the original film came out, and will refuse to vote for it.
The Tree of Life
I hope with all of my being that the best film of the year (entirely objective statement of course) scrapes in for a nomination, but I can't see it happening. While I'm sure there will be a number of Academy voters that will vote the film quite highly, the new system means you have to get a certain number of votes to qualify for a nomination, and I think the love it or hate it nature of The Tree of Life will mean it wont quite get enough.
So there we go, and I'll be very curious to see how my predictions play out. I've got about 8 or 9 films to write ups for at the moment, so hopefully I'll get some spare time and do that soon.
Monday 23 January 2012
Saturday 7 January 2012
Mission Impossible, War Horse & Others
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol
I've enjoyed the Mission Impossible films up to this point, although the franchise has never really excited me that much. However, when I heard that the fourth film in the series was to be the live action debut of director Brad Bird (of Pixar fame) i was more than a little optimistic. My optimism, I discovered, was not unfounded, because what we have here is a likely contender for best action film of 2011.
In a way Ghost Protocol reminds me of the best of the older Bond films, as it is full cool gadgets, multiple exotic locations, beautiful women and a bad guy determined to destroy the world for some ridiculous reasons. The many set pieces throughout the film perfectly filmed, and each action scene is almost a work of art unto itself. The script is funny and intelligently written, making a few knowing jabs at tired action cliches, and they even give a couple of characters there own mini arches within the main storyline. What more could you want from an action film, right?
Well, unfortunately, a couple of things. For one, the villain is a bit lame, and if you were to compare him with Phillip Seymour Hoffman's loathsome baddie from Mission Impossible 3 he really seems to be lacking a lot of the qualities that make memorable movie villains (personality for one.) Secondly, I've found that the action films I tend to enjoy the most are ones where there is something on the line personally for the good guys. To use Mission Impossible 3 as an example again, there Ethan not only had to stop the bad guys from succeeding in their evil scheme, but also had to rescue his wife. Here he is simply trying to prevent all out nuclear war, and important job no doubt, but with nothing personally at stake for him it takes away from the drama a bit.
But forget about the negatives, this is a fantastic popcorn film with some amazing action scenes, and if the series continues in this manner then MAYBE (very big maybe) one day it will rival the Bond series.
**** out of *****
War Horse
And the award for most obvious Oscar bit of 2011 goes to..... C'mon, you know I'm right. When I first saw the trailer I immediately thought four things; 1. Oscar bait, 2. Sentimental and emotionally manipulative, 3. I will still end up seeing the movie and 4. It will nonetheless be a good movie. All four of those statements proved accurate, however further to point 4, while it was a good movie it was a fair way off being a great movie.
The pros? I really liked the storytelling device of showing World War 1 through the eyes of the horse as it went from person to person, which also means we get to meet a number of different characters. The movie is very beautifully shot, and the battle scenes all look pretty impressive. You also get the feeling of being taken on a big, epic journey, which always tends to suck me in The cons? Besides the sentimentality factor the characterisations are all fairly bland, and while enough time is spent showing the bond between main character Albert and his horse for you to care about that relationship, there's no real reason to care about Albert as a Character. While I enjoyed the storyline it suffers from being a tad predictable, and John Williams' score is pretty obnoxious.
So should War Horse be nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars this year? No. Will it inevitably be nominated anyway? Probably. Will it be a blight on the Academy if it is nominated? Not at all.
***1/2 out of *****
Hobo with a Shotgun
I guess this review is kind of pointless as the title of the title gives away whether you're going to enjoy the movie or not. You're either the kind of person who would enjoy spending an hour and a half watching a movie called Hobo with a Shotgun or you're not. But, for what it's worth, here's my two cents.
Hobo with a Shotgun originally began as a fake trailer submitted to a competition run by Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez for their Grindhouse project, and is the second fake trailer from the project to be turned into a feature length film after Machete. While Machete was more of a stylistic tribute to grindhouse cinema, Hobo with a Shotgun appears closer to being an actual grindhouse film, complete with bad acting, cheesy production values and tacky dialogue.
Despite this, it kinda works. The hobo character is portrayed quite sympathetically, and through his relationship with a prostitute he tries to help I actually cared about his predicament. The over the top violence wont leave gore fans wanting, and the movie even attempts to offer some political commentary on crime and homelessness, and actually doesn't do a terrible job. This is what it is.
*** out of *****
Cowboys & Aliens
Yes, the movie does feature both cowboys and aliens, but do you think they could have come up with a more subtle title? While I had a certain amount of fun with this decent but completely forgettable sci-fi/western crossover, on reflection the movie just made me mad. It's not THIS movie specifically, but it just got me thinking about how sick I am of these "not bad" summer blockbusters. They cost heaps to make, often go on to make heaps of profit, yet all they are is "not bad." People go out and see these movies in droves because they are marketed well and feature big name stars, yet the most common response you'll hear is "yeah, it wasn't bad." They could be watching a movie that a director is passionate about and has poured their heart and soul into, but instead settle for by the numbers movies like this which are just another notch in the director's belt. And all you'll hear them say is that it "wasn't bad."
On a more positive note, this film wasn't bad.
*** out of *****
I've enjoyed the Mission Impossible films up to this point, although the franchise has never really excited me that much. However, when I heard that the fourth film in the series was to be the live action debut of director Brad Bird (of Pixar fame) i was more than a little optimistic. My optimism, I discovered, was not unfounded, because what we have here is a likely contender for best action film of 2011.
In a way Ghost Protocol reminds me of the best of the older Bond films, as it is full cool gadgets, multiple exotic locations, beautiful women and a bad guy determined to destroy the world for some ridiculous reasons. The many set pieces throughout the film perfectly filmed, and each action scene is almost a work of art unto itself. The script is funny and intelligently written, making a few knowing jabs at tired action cliches, and they even give a couple of characters there own mini arches within the main storyline. What more could you want from an action film, right?
Well, unfortunately, a couple of things. For one, the villain is a bit lame, and if you were to compare him with Phillip Seymour Hoffman's loathsome baddie from Mission Impossible 3 he really seems to be lacking a lot of the qualities that make memorable movie villains (personality for one.) Secondly, I've found that the action films I tend to enjoy the most are ones where there is something on the line personally for the good guys. To use Mission Impossible 3 as an example again, there Ethan not only had to stop the bad guys from succeeding in their evil scheme, but also had to rescue his wife. Here he is simply trying to prevent all out nuclear war, and important job no doubt, but with nothing personally at stake for him it takes away from the drama a bit.
But forget about the negatives, this is a fantastic popcorn film with some amazing action scenes, and if the series continues in this manner then MAYBE (very big maybe) one day it will rival the Bond series.
**** out of *****
War Horse
And the award for most obvious Oscar bit of 2011 goes to..... C'mon, you know I'm right. When I first saw the trailer I immediately thought four things; 1. Oscar bait, 2. Sentimental and emotionally manipulative, 3. I will still end up seeing the movie and 4. It will nonetheless be a good movie. All four of those statements proved accurate, however further to point 4, while it was a good movie it was a fair way off being a great movie.
The pros? I really liked the storytelling device of showing World War 1 through the eyes of the horse as it went from person to person, which also means we get to meet a number of different characters. The movie is very beautifully shot, and the battle scenes all look pretty impressive. You also get the feeling of being taken on a big, epic journey, which always tends to suck me in The cons? Besides the sentimentality factor the characterisations are all fairly bland, and while enough time is spent showing the bond between main character Albert and his horse for you to care about that relationship, there's no real reason to care about Albert as a Character. While I enjoyed the storyline it suffers from being a tad predictable, and John Williams' score is pretty obnoxious.
So should War Horse be nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars this year? No. Will it inevitably be nominated anyway? Probably. Will it be a blight on the Academy if it is nominated? Not at all.
***1/2 out of *****
Hobo with a Shotgun
I guess this review is kind of pointless as the title of the title gives away whether you're going to enjoy the movie or not. You're either the kind of person who would enjoy spending an hour and a half watching a movie called Hobo with a Shotgun or you're not. But, for what it's worth, here's my two cents.
Hobo with a Shotgun originally began as a fake trailer submitted to a competition run by Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez for their Grindhouse project, and is the second fake trailer from the project to be turned into a feature length film after Machete. While Machete was more of a stylistic tribute to grindhouse cinema, Hobo with a Shotgun appears closer to being an actual grindhouse film, complete with bad acting, cheesy production values and tacky dialogue.
Despite this, it kinda works. The hobo character is portrayed quite sympathetically, and through his relationship with a prostitute he tries to help I actually cared about his predicament. The over the top violence wont leave gore fans wanting, and the movie even attempts to offer some political commentary on crime and homelessness, and actually doesn't do a terrible job. This is what it is.
*** out of *****
Cowboys & Aliens
Yes, the movie does feature both cowboys and aliens, but do you think they could have come up with a more subtle title? While I had a certain amount of fun with this decent but completely forgettable sci-fi/western crossover, on reflection the movie just made me mad. It's not THIS movie specifically, but it just got me thinking about how sick I am of these "not bad" summer blockbusters. They cost heaps to make, often go on to make heaps of profit, yet all they are is "not bad." People go out and see these movies in droves because they are marketed well and feature big name stars, yet the most common response you'll hear is "yeah, it wasn't bad." They could be watching a movie that a director is passionate about and has poured their heart and soul into, but instead settle for by the numbers movies like this which are just another notch in the director's belt. And all you'll hear them say is that it "wasn't bad."
On a more positive note, this film wasn't bad.
*** out of *****
Monday 2 January 2012
Melancholia, Tin Tin & Arthur Christmas
Melancholia
Melancholia is the first film I've seen from controversial Danish director Lars Von Trier, which is a little embarrassing to admit, but nonetheless I had no idea what to expect. It starts with a series of images depicting the end of the earth as it collides with another planet (not a spoiler, happens right at the start of the movie!) which are rather beautifully presented and hauntingly paired with the prelude with Richard Wagner's Triston and Isolde opera. The film then shifts to events that occurred before the earth's doom, and is split into two parts named after two characters, sisters Justine and Claire.
In the first part, titled "Justine", the titular character, played brilliantly by Kirsten Dunst, has just gotten married and the scene is set at the wedding reception. It's a rather upper class affair and has been paid for by Justine's wealthy brother in law, played by Kiefer Sutherland. It soon becomes clear that Justine is suffering pretty badly from mental illness, and the wedding reception is played out like one of those disaster comedies where everything that could go wrong during an high brow event does go wrong, except here it's played out for dramatic effect rather than laughs. It's all quite awkward and painful to watch, all the while the planet known as Melancholia is getting closer to earth.
The second part is named after Claire, who is played by Charlotte Gainsbourg. In contrast to her sister Justine Claire appears to be quite mentally stable and is living on easy street with her wealthy husband. As the possibility that Melancholia will collide with earth becomes more real, however, we see Claire slowly start to lose the plot.
I think it's fair to say that Melancholia is a flawed masterpiece. I don't think I've ever seen a less accessible science fiction dealing with the end of the world, yet it handles the subject in with more poignancy and in a more relatable manner than the big Hollywood blockbuster. By focusing on just two people rather than the mass hysteria would come with such a situation it allows us to engage with the characters in a more organic way, and gives a realistic insight into the way people deal with the inevitability of death given their current circumstances.
On the other hand, Melancholia has some pacing issues and feels uneven, especially during the Wedding section of the film, which goes on a bit too long and could have done with some tighter editing. However, this is only a small issue, and the final sequence is one of the most brilliant I have ever seen on film, and really rammed home the importance to me of seeing some films at the cinema. I cannot imagine the intensity of this scene being replicated at home without Wagner's score crashing through the cinema speakings, followed by the eerie darkness and silence that prelude the end credits.
****1/2 out of *****
Arthur Christmas
Saw this one a couple of days before Christmas, partly because I had had read good reviews and partly just because I was in the festive spirit. Arthur Christmas is about a guy named Arthur, who is the son of Santa Claus. Santa is about to retire, and when he hangs up the boots the role is Santa Claus is meant to be going to Arthur's older brother. While Steve appears to be much more organised and suited to the job than Arthur, he doesn't have the same kind heart and love for Christmas as Arthur. When one child's toy is accidentally not delivered Arthur must come to the rescue before Christmas morning, as the rest of his family see as less than important.
While Arthur Christmas, in a way, is a fairly standard family Christmas fare with tired themes of the true meaning of Christmas and sacrifice and love trumping selfish ambition being in play, it actually manages to rise above the average Christmas movie with it's nice looking animation, interesting and likable characters and comedic elements. It also adds a little something extra by introducing the idea of the Santa Claus family being sort of like a monarchy and Santa using all sorts of modern gadgets. You may never see it pop up on any "Best Christmas Movie" lists that always come out around the holiday period, but you could do alot worse than adding this one to the play list come December 2012.
***1/2 out of *****
The Adventures of Tin Tin
I was a massive Tin Tin fan when I was growing up, and I read almost every comic and saw most of the cartoon series, however I hadn't given the franchise much thought in years when along comes Steven Spielberg with this animated (motion capture if you want to be technical) big screen adaption. The storyline for this outing is a combination of three or four of the comic books, but is a fairly standard Tin Tin adventure with our favourite reporter investigating a possible big story, stumbling onto something more sinister than he first thought, and then travelling all over the place and interacting with different people in an attempt to save the day.
It feels as though Spielberg was really inspired by his own Indiana Jones films here, as Tin Tin has the same sense of unapologetic adventure, and the action scenes all look really good in the 3D motion capture format. The script is quite funny in parts, and the characters all maintain the same charm as they did in the comics. The film suffers some from some pacing issues early on, as we barely given a second to absorb the setting the action has already started, and more could have been done to establish the character. Also, there's never really much of a feeling that there's anything at stake, meaning there's no real tension created at any point and no real reason to root for the good guys. However, this was an extremely fun ride and a good popcorn movie that I can imagine would have a wide ranging appeal, so any criticism of this film is pretty much redundant anyway.
***1/2 out of *****
Melancholia is the first film I've seen from controversial Danish director Lars Von Trier, which is a little embarrassing to admit, but nonetheless I had no idea what to expect. It starts with a series of images depicting the end of the earth as it collides with another planet (not a spoiler, happens right at the start of the movie!) which are rather beautifully presented and hauntingly paired with the prelude with Richard Wagner's Triston and Isolde opera. The film then shifts to events that occurred before the earth's doom, and is split into two parts named after two characters, sisters Justine and Claire.
In the first part, titled "Justine", the titular character, played brilliantly by Kirsten Dunst, has just gotten married and the scene is set at the wedding reception. It's a rather upper class affair and has been paid for by Justine's wealthy brother in law, played by Kiefer Sutherland. It soon becomes clear that Justine is suffering pretty badly from mental illness, and the wedding reception is played out like one of those disaster comedies where everything that could go wrong during an high brow event does go wrong, except here it's played out for dramatic effect rather than laughs. It's all quite awkward and painful to watch, all the while the planet known as Melancholia is getting closer to earth.
The second part is named after Claire, who is played by Charlotte Gainsbourg. In contrast to her sister Justine Claire appears to be quite mentally stable and is living on easy street with her wealthy husband. As the possibility that Melancholia will collide with earth becomes more real, however, we see Claire slowly start to lose the plot.
I think it's fair to say that Melancholia is a flawed masterpiece. I don't think I've ever seen a less accessible science fiction dealing with the end of the world, yet it handles the subject in with more poignancy and in a more relatable manner than the big Hollywood blockbuster. By focusing on just two people rather than the mass hysteria would come with such a situation it allows us to engage with the characters in a more organic way, and gives a realistic insight into the way people deal with the inevitability of death given their current circumstances.
On the other hand, Melancholia has some pacing issues and feels uneven, especially during the Wedding section of the film, which goes on a bit too long and could have done with some tighter editing. However, this is only a small issue, and the final sequence is one of the most brilliant I have ever seen on film, and really rammed home the importance to me of seeing some films at the cinema. I cannot imagine the intensity of this scene being replicated at home without Wagner's score crashing through the cinema speakings, followed by the eerie darkness and silence that prelude the end credits.
****1/2 out of *****
Arthur Christmas
Saw this one a couple of days before Christmas, partly because I had had read good reviews and partly just because I was in the festive spirit. Arthur Christmas is about a guy named Arthur, who is the son of Santa Claus. Santa is about to retire, and when he hangs up the boots the role is Santa Claus is meant to be going to Arthur's older brother. While Steve appears to be much more organised and suited to the job than Arthur, he doesn't have the same kind heart and love for Christmas as Arthur. When one child's toy is accidentally not delivered Arthur must come to the rescue before Christmas morning, as the rest of his family see as less than important.
While Arthur Christmas, in a way, is a fairly standard family Christmas fare with tired themes of the true meaning of Christmas and sacrifice and love trumping selfish ambition being in play, it actually manages to rise above the average Christmas movie with it's nice looking animation, interesting and likable characters and comedic elements. It also adds a little something extra by introducing the idea of the Santa Claus family being sort of like a monarchy and Santa using all sorts of modern gadgets. You may never see it pop up on any "Best Christmas Movie" lists that always come out around the holiday period, but you could do alot worse than adding this one to the play list come December 2012.
***1/2 out of *****
The Adventures of Tin Tin
I was a massive Tin Tin fan when I was growing up, and I read almost every comic and saw most of the cartoon series, however I hadn't given the franchise much thought in years when along comes Steven Spielberg with this animated (motion capture if you want to be technical) big screen adaption. The storyline for this outing is a combination of three or four of the comic books, but is a fairly standard Tin Tin adventure with our favourite reporter investigating a possible big story, stumbling onto something more sinister than he first thought, and then travelling all over the place and interacting with different people in an attempt to save the day.
It feels as though Spielberg was really inspired by his own Indiana Jones films here, as Tin Tin has the same sense of unapologetic adventure, and the action scenes all look really good in the 3D motion capture format. The script is quite funny in parts, and the characters all maintain the same charm as they did in the comics. The film suffers some from some pacing issues early on, as we barely given a second to absorb the setting the action has already started, and more could have been done to establish the character. Also, there's never really much of a feeling that there's anything at stake, meaning there's no real tension created at any point and no real reason to root for the good guys. However, this was an extremely fun ride and a good popcorn movie that I can imagine would have a wide ranging appeal, so any criticism of this film is pretty much redundant anyway.
***1/2 out of *****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)