2014 Oscar Picks

Most of this year’s Oscar categories, especially in the major awards, seem to have a sure-thing winner. . As covered in my last post, Birdman is making a late surge at Boyhood but I think it’s too little too late for the Avian-themed film.

Two other major races of note: In the Best Director race, Boyhood’s Richard Linklater and Birdman’s Alejandro G. Iñárritu are the clear frontrunners, which makes sense since their movies are the clear front runners for Best Picture. In a perfect world, it would make sense to split the prizes, i.e. Boyhood gets picture and Birdman gets director. Even though popular consensus is Best Picture and Best Director go hand-in-hand, they have not the last two years. However, since the Oscars are a massive, semi-blind vote, I don’t think the synchronicity of a split vote will happen, and Linklater, who dedicated TWELVE YEARS OF HIS LIFE to making Boyhood, will get the statue.

The tightest race is definitely in Best Actor between Michael Keaton (Birdman) and Eddie Redmayne (The Theory of Everything). Redmayne’s portrayal of Dr. Stephen Hawking checks off many major milestones to win Best Actor – handicap, real person, British – but Keaton has the inspiring comeback/lifetime achievement award on his side. Keaton also gave a moving acceptance speech at Golden Globes to make him more sympathetic to voters (like Matthew McConaughey last year). I’m going with Keaton, but I don’t feel at all sure about him.

My rundown for all awards:

1.) Picture: Boyhood

2.) Director: Richard Linklater, Boyhood

3.) Actor: Michael Keaton, Birdman

Michael Keaton, Birdman

4.) Actress: Julianne Moore, Still Alice

                Note: The most shoe-in-est of all shoe-ins, I can’t see any way Moore doesn’t walk away for her portrayal of an Alzheimer’s patient.

Julianne Moore, Still Alice

5.) Supporting Actor: JK Simmons, Whiplash

                Note: Villains often do well, especially in supporting roles and Simmons never-ending menace is what gives Whiplash its tone

JK Simmons, Whiplash

6.) Supporting Actress: Patricia Arquette, Boyhood

                Note: A pretty weak category. The Meryl Streep factor is always present, but I think Arquette pulls it out.

Patricia Arquette , Boyhood

7.) Original Screenplay: The Grand Budapest Hotel

                Note: Boyhood doesn’t appear to have a script and Birdman’s visual trickery detracts from the writing. GBH has the great rat-a-tat-tat dialogue.

8.) Adapted Screenplay: The Imitation Game

Note: This was a toughie. All the controversies about historical accuracies should logically DQ Imitation Game but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

9.) Best Animated Feature: Big Hero 6

Note: Lego Movie getting left out is the big snub of the year. I don’t even know two of these movies and sequels don’t really do well.

10.) Best Foreign Film: Ida

Note: A critically beloved movie plus the Nazi rule is in full affect.

11.) Cinematography: Birdman

12.) Costume Design: Grand Budapest Hotel

                Note: I am uneasy giving all the design awards to GBH but all the colors were so bright in this movie compared to the drab costumes of the other movies.

13.) Documentary Feature: Citizen Four

14.) Documentary Short Subject: Crisis Hotline: Veterans Press 1

15.) Film Editing: Boyhood

                Note: Birdman really should be in this category. Boyhood I guess.

16.) Makeup and Hairstyling: Grand Budapest Hotel

Note: I thought Foxcatcher’s makeup was a deterrent. GBH has Tilda Swinton’s amazing aging job.

17.) Music Score: Interstellar

                Note: Nobody seems to think Interstellar will win, but I liked the score so I’m going with my foolish heart.

18.) Original Song: “Glory”, Selma

                Note: The controversy over Selma’s numerous snubs makes a bone thrown here likely

19.) Production Design (aka the sets): Grand Budapest Hotel

20.) Animated Short Film: The Dam Keeper

21.) Live Action Short: The Phone Call

22.) Sound Editing: American Sniper

23.) Sound Mixing: American Sniper

Note: War movies always do well in sound categories, what with the whizzing bullets and all

24.) Visual Effects: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Enjoy the show!

 

2014 Best Picture Race

Just like last year, the Best Picture race has come down to two films: Boyhood and Birdman. Unlike last year, where the race between Gravity and 12 Years a Slave could be reduced to style versus substance (which wasn’t really fair since Gravity did have a lot of substance), both of this year’s front runners are very stylistically unique and innovative from a filmmaking standpoint. Where they differ is in their respective styles: Birdman (or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (let’s get the full title out of the way, just this once), is very experimental with exotic filmmaking techniques (like presenting the movie as one continuous take) and many surreal aspects (like a flying Birdman that follows Michael Keaton around). Boyhood is an attempt to capture real life on film as close as possible. Everything in the movie is “as it would” be in real life, down to following the characters as they age for an entire 12 years.

Before we get into the real meat of the race, I would like to point out that more than most years, this year’s eight nominees closely resemble recent previous winners.

• A brilliant scientist overcomes physical adversity to triumph in his professional field even as his personal life is strained. Past Winner: A Beautiful Mind. Current Nominee: The Imitation Game, The Theory of Everything
• A soldier becomes addicted to the adrenaline and “glory” of life in combat. Past Winner: The Hurt Locker Current Nominee: American Sniper
• A famous star falls from grace in a movie that uses meta-textual elements to explore the story. Past Winner: The Artist; Current Nominee: Birdman

	Bio-Pic	Societal Ill	20th Century Setting	Modern Setting	Pre-20th Century	Stylistically Unique	About Holly -wood/Fame
12 Years A Slave	X	X			X
Argo	X		X				X
Artist			X			X	X
Kings Speech	X		X
Hurt Locker		X		X
Slumdog Millionaire		X		X
No Country for Old Men				X		X
Departed				X
Crash		X		X
Million Dollar Baby				X

Here’s how recent Best Picture trends match up with this year’s nominees:

	Bio-Pic	Societal Ill	20th Century Setting	Modern Setting	Pre-20th Century	Stylistically Unique	About Holly -wood /Fame
American Sniper	X	X		X
Birdman				X		X	X
Boyhood				X		X
The Grand Budapest Hotel			X			X
The Imitation Game	X	X	X
Selma	X	X	X
The Theory of Everything	X		X
Whiplash				X			X

Heading into the nominations, Boyhood was considered the clear front runner for the race. However, following the nominations, a late surge was made by Birdman. In strict numbers, Birdman captured the Directors Guild, Producers Guild and Screen Actors Guild Awards for Best Picture (or award that most directly corresponds to Best Picture). The last movie to claim this holy trifecta and NOT get the Best Picture Award was Apollo 13 back in 1995 (lost to Braveheart).

Here are my thoughts about what each movie has going for it:

Birdman

• About how terrible being famous is. Hollywood loves movies about itself (in fact two of the last three Best Pictures are about Hollywood). Further bonus points for slamming the movies snotty brother, theater (see All About Eve).
• The awards listed above
• Only two movies where a kid is the main character have won Best Picture (How Green Was My Valley and Oliver)
• Feel good vibes from Michael Keaton comeback

Boyhood

• Inspiring making-of story
• Feel good
• Makes you look smart to like it
• Hollywood isn’t presented all that positively in Birdman

Even though Hollywood loves movies about itself, I think they will ultimately chose the feel-good nature of Boyhood over Birdman’s downer movie about spoiled brats. Both the behind the scenes story of Boyhood and the movie on screen storyline are cheery, life affirming stuff, which should push it over the edge. The Oscars are rarely able to stop early momentum and Birdman’s push came too late, I think.

Your winner:

2014 Best Picture Nominee Countdown #1: Whiplash

Whiplash is not winning the (non-existant) Oscar for Best Poster. Show some humility!

“There are no two words in the English language more harmful than good job.” – Terence Fletcher discussing his teaching philosophy, Whiplash

And so here we are…the end of my 2014 Best Picture nominee countdown. Only one movie remains, my favorite of the lot (not my pick to win, which will come in my next post). It seems only appropriate to ask for a drumroll…

In a year of moving and powerful biopics and strange revolutionary filmmaking, my favorite movie is neither. Whiplash uses a more-or-less traditional filmmaking style to tell a very original story. A thriller without any dead bodies (but lots of blood via blisters), a sense of dread nevertheless permeates Whiplash, centered around the very unhealthy relationship between a jazz drumming prodigy and his mentor, a man willing to use psychological and physical torture to coax greatness out of his students. Whiplash asks a number of questions without every becoming pretentious or preachy and maintaining a nail biting story.

This is actually one of the kinder scenes between Andrew (Miles Teller) and Fletcher (JK Simmons) in Whiplash

Andrew Neiman (Miles Teller) is a freshman student drummer at the country’s most prestigious jazz academy. He is promoted to the academy’s top big band, conducted by the frightening, impersonal Terence Fletcher (JK Simmons). Fletcher is unrelentingly abusive to his students, constantly berating and even attacking them. When he first meets Neiman, he chats him up and learns some of Andrew’s family history, only to use these facts to berate him in front of the entire ensemble. Instead of quitting, Andrew, who is determined to become a jazz legend, practices harder and after the first chair drummer loses his music, Andrew is promoted to first chair because he has memorized all the charts. Andrew’s success is short lived, as Fletcher creates a competition between Andrew and two other drummers to coax the ultra-fast “double time swing” out of them. Andrew triumphs but loses his spot after being involved in a car accident and physically attacking Fletcher. Andrew is given a final shot at redemption but to do so, must overcome his mentor/nemesis.

JK Simmons is not expounding the virtues of Farmers Insurance in Whiplash

From the scene of Andrew’s first practice under Fletcher, Whiplash is drenched in unrelenting dread and edge-of-your-seat tension. Each of Andrew’s triumphs is undercut by the fear of what Fletcher will throw at him next. Fletcher’s motivations are never fully understood and keep us at ill-ease. Is he merely trying to push his students to greatness? Is he a sadistic control freak who gets a perverse thrill from getting students to bend and suffer to his will? Is Andrew a blameless pawn in Fletcher’s games or is he partially at fault for being so driven? How aware is Andrew of what Fletcher is doing to him? Is Fletcher’s theory of the extra sacrifices needed to become great correct? Is it a price worth paying? Whiplash asks so many fascinating questions in a way you aren’t really aware they are being asked until you leave the theater and think about it all.

Whiplash is not as innovative or stylistic as some of its fellow nominees. As almost a direct counter to Boyhood’s epic shooting length, the movie was shot in just 19 days. But of the 8 nominees, Whiplash was the one I thought about the most, worrying away at plot points, debating the issues and themes the movie raised.

In my Casablanca review, I said that I believed if a movie could set the right tone and immerse the viewer in the moment, the viewer wouldn’t even notice when that movie falters. Whiplash reinforces this belief. The movie has some plot holes. What did happen to the missing folder that propels Andrew to the band’s forefront? Most likely Fletcher took it to produce another “dare-to-be-great” moment, although it’s never made clear. It actually suits Fletcher’s forever blurry motivations that we don’t know. It is incredibly far-fetched to believe Fletcher had a revenge plot up his sleeve, just in case he met Andrew again before the Lincoln Center performance. But the movie is so tense and engaging, I honestly was not bothered by these things. The movie’s intentional tunnel vision reflects the character’s own unrelenting, almost-psychotic drive. No movie captures a mood or tells as compelling a story as Whiplash did this year.

Other Nominations: Best Supporting Actor (JK Simmons); Best Adapted Screenplay; Best Sound Mixing; Best Film Editing;

I’ll be back tomorrow with all my picks (in two posts!!!!) and then Sunday is the big night!

2014 Best Picture Countdown #2: Birdman (or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

There are two Birdman posters out there, but I like this one better because it more directly addresses what this movie is about

People, they love blood. They love action. Not this talky, depressing, philosophical bullshit. – Birdman (Michael Keaton), Birdman

The Oscars have long (and rightfully) been criticized for failing to recognize ingenuity and innovative filmmaking. Star Wars? Pulp Fiction? Citizen Kane? All considered groundbreaking, game changing movies that the Oscars either totally ignored or nominated with no chance of victory. So it is somewhat remarkable that in 2015, when the Oscars seem as stodgy as ever that several quirky, unique, genre-challenging, insert-positive-adjective-movies are not only among the top nominee grabbers but among the most likely contenders to win best picture.

The parade of creativity in the top of the nomination pile continues and is culminates with Birdman (or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) a fourth-wall shattering meditation on fame, celebrity and creative endeavors in the 21^st century. Birdman features the comeback story of the year in Best Actor nominee Michael Keaton, starring as a one-time action movie star trying for a comeback. Aside from the trippy meta-premise, Birdman is a triumph of creative camera work, as the movie appears to be one continuous shot for almost the entire duration of its two hour run time. This is the film of 2014 that will be dissected in film studies classes for a long time to come. And it may bring home one (or several) Oscars.

Best Actor Nominee Michael Keaton is Riggan Thomson, haunted by his fictional alter ego, Birdman

Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is an aging, fading movie star who is directing and starring in a serious stage play (based on a real short story by Raymond Carver, a real writer) in an attempt to forge a comeback. Thomson is haunted by visions of Birdman, the superhero he played on screen, and appears to be able to levitate and move things with his mind. With the play crumbling around him, Thomson is forced to bring in Mike Shiner, a temperamental method actor to shore up the production. Shiner however begins hogging the spotlight and wreaking havoc during previews. Thomson is further stressed by the stormy relationship with his daughter, recovering-addict Sam (Emma Stone) who is working as his assistant. Sam often snipes at her father, considers him out of touch with the modern celebrity (“You don’t even have a Facebook page!” she cries) and thinks the play is a vanity project. Thomson meets a Broadway critic who tells him she will kill his play with a negative review because she hates hack movie stars taking away parts from “real” theater actor. Thomson has a total break, seeing himself as Birdman, flying through the city. On opening night, he reveals his final plan to make the play a success.

Best Supporting Actress nominee Emma Stone is Sam. Thomson’s angry, spoiled daughter, in Birdman

Birdman is some crazy, experimental shit. In English literature, postmodern pieces often use meta-narratives, the act of using a story to comment on storytelling or the tropes of a story itself (Sorry to get so smarty-pants here). The television show Community is an excellent example of meta-narrative, where characters often talk about being characters on a TV show or act out particular TV genres to explore the genre’s makeup. Well Community don’t have nothing on Birdman in terms of meta-narrative. Obviously, Michael Keaton is more or less playing a heightened version of himself, an actor who once made a successful superhero and has now faded with age from public consciousness and in some ways is doomed by his most successful role (Although, interestingly, Keaton claims to be nothing at all like Riggan). Birdman goes much deeper in an almost spiraling nautilus shell of storytelling to explore what being famous entails and the battle of art versus commerce.

Director Alejandro González Iñárritu also uses crazy filmmaking techniques, like the aforementioned continuous take that traverses space and time. It’s an amazing feat of high wire trickery that at times serves to reinforce the stress Thomson is undergoing and reinforce its own meta-storytelling – real life has no edits or time cuts, and this movie appears not to. Would this movie have been as effective if edited like a normal movie? Probably, but it’s still a tremendous accomplishment.

The biggest flaw in Birdman is that I wish it had stayed committed to fully being from Riggan’s point of view. At a certain point in the movie, Iñárritu pulls back the curtain to reveal Birdman is all in Riggan’s mind, when I wish it would have been left to the viewer to decide if Birdman was really haunting Riggan or not. Iñárritu also employs a score made entirely of snare drums (sometimes coming from a character on stage) that is just as annoying as all hell. There’s only so much drum solos a man can take (unless you are in a certain other Oscar nominated movie…FORESHADOWING!). What can I say, not all innovations work.

I loved Birdman because it’s just so damn weird. I can’t even pretend to know exactly everything that went on in this movie and I think repeat viewings would serve to shed light on new references, ideas and inside jokes. As it stands, this is a funny, weird, completely unique movie about being a movie star.

Fine, here’s the other Birdman poster. Happy now?

Other Nominations: Best Actor (Michael Keaton); Best Supporting Actress (Emma Stone); Best Supporting Actor (Edward Norton, Jr.); Best Director (Alejandro González Iñárritu); Best Sound Editing; Best Sound Mixing; Best Original Screenplay; Best Cinematography

2014 Animated Shorts

This year’s crop of animated shorts is probably the collective best in my (very short) time being able to review the whole set of nominees. The top three in particular are all outstanding, in my opinion. The cartoons delve into a variety of themes and topics, ranging from sweet and sill to very dark, using a variety of mediums from what looks like pastel chalk drawings to collage to “traditional” computer animation. I really can’t say enough how impressed I was by these movies. Here’s a rundown, from my least to most favorite:

Me and My Moulton

a.) Me and My Moulton is a Norwegian-Canadian movie about a hippie family growing up in 1960s Norway. The three daughters, who narrate the tale collectively, want a bicycle, but their parents keep delaying getting them one. The movie is a slice-of-life piece that feels like a cartoon from Sesame Street (except for a couple of adult jokes). The girls talk about their neighbors and their lives and their architect father and nothing of note really happens. They eventually get their bike, which is naturally some sort of ergonomic wonder (the titular Moulton) that the parents sent away for, and even though the bike isn’t exactly what the girls wanted, they are happy that their parents are happy. There’s nothing wrong with the movie, except it was a little slow, but it doesn’t have the “wow” factor for me like the other movies in this set.

The Unusual visual style of The Bigger Picture

b.) The Bigger Picture is a very morose British movie about two estranged brothers, whose relationship is further strained, but finally strengthened, by caring for their dying mother. This movie had the most unique animation style, an animated collage style that was significantly more impressive than the story being told. I like the style a lot because it was so different. That said, I thought the storyline was lacking and difficult to grasp. The mother clearly favors one brother over the other, even though the less favored one is the one who takes better care of her, basically. Sometimes, the stylish moments also seemed to be commenting on the story itself, but when they did I couldn’t quite get my head around what it was trying to say. A strong effort for the actual method of animation used, but needed work in content.

c.) A Single Life is a cute and dark little movie about a record that travels through time. More specifically, it causes the person listening to it to skip through time as the record jumps (i.e. the listener starts as a little girl but when the record jumps to midway through, she is suddenly an adult). The movie builds to a hilarious but very dark joke at the end. The movie is only two minutes long, making it among the shortest nominees for any Oscar. 2012’s Fresh Guacamole was also only two minutes long, but that movie had no real storyline. This one impressively lays out a whole story in just that short a span.

The fox and the pig become friends in The Dam Keeper

d.) I’m afraid I will come off badly trying to explain the storyline of The Dam Keeper but trust me, if you just go with it, you are rewarded with a powerful, strong movie. The titular hero is an orphaned, school-age pig who is in charge of protecting his town from an onslaught of darkness that he keeps at bay by perpetually winding a windmill on a dam at the end of town. But the pig still goes to school, where he is constantly berated by his peers (also animals) for being the only pig. Why they don’t know about his importance to the town’s survival is never made clear. One day, a new girl arrives at school and befriends the pig. When she apparently betrays him, the pig loses all hope and allows the town to be swallowed into darkness. There’s actually a redemptive ending to the movie, but if the pig had just let the town be consumed and the movie ended there, I would have sworn up and down about this being the greatest thing I had ever seen. There is something to be said for a happy ending with a positive message, so the real ending of the movie doesn’t detract too much. Even though the storyline is fairly crazy, this is an emotionally complex and dramatic film. When the big is betrayed by his friend, I felt like I was punched in the gut from the moment. The movie uses what appears to be charcoal drawings (probably computer animation) to make a simple form that is quite poetic. I think this movie will win the Oscar, although it seems like very much of a toss-up among several of the movies, including…

My personal fave, Feast

e.) Feast is a Disney movie that is frankly adorable. The movie details a dog and his relationship with food, which in turn relates back to his relationship with his master, the controller of the food. When the master falls in love, the dog is put out because the food he gets suddenly changes for the worse (in the Dog’s opinion). A breakup seems to spell a return to good times for our canine hero, but the dog ultimately learns to put others before himself and his stomach. This movie was so sweet and cheery with a concept all dog owners can relate to. It might be a little corny by some standards, but I was totally smitten with it. The Dam Keeper is probably the better overall movie, but there is something to be said for Feast’s concise storytelling and visual shorthand. Sometimes you just have to go with your heart.

2014 Best Picture Countdown #3: The Grand Budapest Hotel

You’re looking so well, darling, you really are… they’ve done a marvelous job. I don’t know what sort of cream they’ve put on you down at the morgue, but… I want some. – M. Gustave (Ralph Fiennes), flattering a deceased lover, The Grand Budapest Hotel

No one makes movies quite like Wes Anderson.

Unique in a very different way from Boyhood, Anderson’s movies are intricately plotted and highly stylized comedies of manners with elaborate and delicately detailed sets and perfect constructed shots. Despite their cult following and critical acclaim, Anderson’s films, using a mostly stable corps of actors, have never received their due from the Academy, until The Grand Budapest Hotel. This is by far the lightest of this year’s nominees, although it carries a real sense of melancholy along with its wit and clever charm.

The complete, star-studded cast of the Grand Budapest Hotel

Structured in a highly unusual fashion of an old man’s memoir, recounting a story told to him as a young man, the core of Grand Budapest Hotel takes place in the fictional country of Zubrowka right before the start of World War II. M. Gustave is the concierge of the luxurious Grand Budapest Hotel, where he enjoys the favors, both monetary and sexual, from many of the hotel’s (mostly older) female clientele. Gustave takes Zero (Tony Revolori), a poor immigrant from another fictitious war-torn country, under his wing as a page boy. When the elderly Madame D (Tilda Swinton under layers of makeup), one of Gustave’s “patrons”, is murdered, Gustave is left a valuable painting by the old lady. Madame D’s greedy relatives scheme to get the painting back by framing him for her murder. Gustave is sent to prison (where he advances up the social ladder by using his concierge skills in one of the film’s funniest gags), but is aided in escape by Zero and Zero’s baker girlfriend, Agatha (Saorise Ronan). The trio must clear Gustave’s name and find the real murderer.

Ralph FIennes, Tilda Swinton, Tony Revolori and some dude who doesn’t matter

The Grand Budapest Hotel is a zippy comic adventure. It’s not my favorite Anderson movie (which is probably Moonrise Kingdom), but I rank it very highly in the director’s catalogue. I love the sets, which often look like children’s toys and the characters almost-lyrical rat-a-tat-tat style dialogue. Ralph Fiennes is always a tremendously talented and charismatic actor, but he rarely gets to display his comedic chops as he does here. The sets of each scene, very elaborate in color and staging, cannot be over-praised. Just pausing and looking at the hotel’s marvelous layout is a fascinating exercise.

One of the Grand Budapest Hotel’s crazy, symmetrical shots.

The movie’s primary drawback is its occasionally shocking violence, including dismemberment and death, which undermines its whimsical, comedic tone. Tackling a mystery in a comic manner is certainly not easy, but the scenes of real violence are pretty upsetting (perhaps more upsetting because the audience is unprepared for them) and at times took me out of the movie. This is a matter of personal preference, but the ending is a real downer and not really what I wanted from the film. It’s not a bad ending, but I didn’t love it either.

I really really enjoyed The Grand Budapest Hotel, which manages to seem like a simple story but is actually a complex mystery that peels off one layer at a time. It has an unmatched charm among this year’s nominees.

Other Nominations: Best Director (Wes Anderson); Best Original Screenplay; Best Art Direction; Best Makeup; Best Score; Best Editing; Best Cinematography; Best Costume Design;

2014 Best Picture Countdown #4: Boyhood

Mason: So what’s the point?

Dad: Of what?

Mason: I don’t know, any of this. Everything.

Dad: Everything? What’s the point? I mean, I sure as shit don’t know. Neither does anybody else, okay? We’re all just winging it, you know? The good news is you’re feeling stuff. And you’ve got to hold on to that. – Ellar Coltrane and Ethan Hawke discuss life (and possibly this movie), Boyhood

 

Oh God, this movie.

Boyhood is unquestionably the most unique movie to come along in years and the front runner in this year’s Oscar race, bolstered by an incredible making-of story that is more fascinating than anything on the screen. Director Richard Linklater, opting to come as close to capturing a “slice-of-life” as possible, took a cast, including a six-year-old boy and filmed them for a short time a year, every year, for 12 years, capturing the boy’s journey to adulthood. It’s a fascinating and ambitious concept to be sure. But, truth be told, I feel the gimmick, more than the result, is what has catapulted the movie to its likely Oscar. It’s very well done and all, but it’s not my favorite movie of the year by a long shot.

Patricia Arquette and a young Ellar Coltrane, Boyhood

Mason (Ellar Coltrane) is a dreamy six-year-old. A child of divorce, he lives with his mother (Patricia Arquette), who is trying to get her life together, while his father (Ethan Hawke) is irresponsible and immature. Over the next few years, Mason’s mom attends college and marries a professor, who we later learn is an abusive alcoholic. Mason and his sister (Lorelei Linklater) have a typical sibling relationship of love and petty fights. Mason’s mother becomes a college professor and ultimately leaves her second husband. Mason’s dad finally begins to mature and starts a second family, but remains involved in his son’s life, offering philosophical guidance. In high school, Mason develops an interest in photography and whiny, self-righteous emo sneering while his mom marries yet another alcoholic bore. Mason falls in love but chases her away (likely by being such a pretentious d-bag). He ultimately graduates, does a lot of drugs, goes to college and does more drugs.

A lot of people absolutely love this movie. I am not in that camp. It is a long movie and let’s be honest here, nothing really happens. At three hours, the movie drags in places, especially towards the end during an extended visit Mason and his girlfriend take to see his sister and bang and Mason drones on endlessly about how amazing he is. He ultimately becomes a pretentious prick, which took me out of the movie. I suppose it could be argued that all 18 year old boys are in fact pretentious pricks, but that still doesn’t make it likeable. The movie ends about three scenes too late in my opinion. Once Mason graduates, there really isn’t much more to say, but there’s another 20 minutes to go.

An 18-year-old Ellar Coltrane and his shockingly uncool dad (Ethan Hawke), Boyhood

My favorite part is actually Mason’s father journey, as he progresses from irresponsible, but unquestionably cool dude, to very nerdy, but stable and responsible family man. I like the actual growth displayed by Hawk, who is a solid actor, but the feeling that his portrayal is actually how Mason sees him, from a man who can do no wrong, to another lame-o grownup. Patricia Arquette, a favorite for Best Supporting Actress, also gives a strong performance as a woman who grows professionally but is doomed to repeat the same personal mistakes over and over and pays dearly for this failure to grow (a realistic trait and outcome to be sure).

Boyhood is definitely to be commended for the dedication it took to make a movie over 12 years. I can even appreciate its dedication to capture life in the most realistic way possible (certainly more realistic than the three movies I favor above it). It’s very arty and will probably spawn a million film studies and child psychology papers. It also captures both timeless themes of growing up and very specific quandaries of growing up in the 2000s. It just ultimately isn’t the Best Picture nominee I want to watch again and again.

Other Nominations: Best Supporting Actor (Ethan Hawke); Best Supporting Actress (Patricia Arquette); Best Director (Richard Linklater); Best Original Screenplay; Best Editing

2014 Live Action Short Nominees

This year’s Oscar Live Action Short nominees are a mixed bag. I generally liked the movies, although I sometimes felt there were some cultural notes I was missing. All of the films are from outside the US, again, although 3 of the five are in English. There’s a real eclectic mix, and unlike the Documentary Shorts, not all of them were brutally depressing (although the best one was). Here’s a rundown, in order of my least to most favorite.

The movie is mostly in English, but the poster is not.

a.) Aya is a strange and long (at 40 minutes! ) Israeli film with a premise that feels like it comes from a sitcom. The titular Aya is standing at an airport, presumably waiting for someone, and is mistaken for a hired car driver there to pick up a musician/musical competition judge and take him to his hotel. The movie is about their car ride together. When I first heard the premise, I was expecting a broad comedy, but while funny in places, it’s also a strange character study of Aya, who is a woman at loose ends in her life. She reveals her character and her secret to her passenger as the ride progresses. It was an engaging movie but at the end I felt, so what? What did it all mean? Despite the length, something was ultimately lacking from the final product. I also thought the ending plot action was the laziest possible that the story could have taken.

b.) Parvaneh is a Swiss movie about a teenage immigrant living in Switzerland, possibly illegally (I have no idea what is going on with Swiss/Afghani relations in real life or this movie). Parvaneh, the immigrant, needs to send money to her ailing father, but lacks the necessary government id to do so. She finds assistance in a punk rock teen, who is initially aiding Parvaneh for money. Over a night together, the two grow to become friends and understand each other. The movie’s fairly predictable but entertaining.

c.) Butter Lamp is a cute Chinese movie about a travelling photographer working in a remote area of the country (Tibet, maybe?). The movie is shot from the perspective of the photographer’s still camera and doesn’t have a real storyline, just a series of short, usually funny pieces about different characters and groups getting their picture together in front of a collection of wild backdrops, ranging from the Great Wall of China to DisneyWorld. The punchline to the movie – what’s behind all the backdrops – is a good kicker. A fun, unusual little movie.

d.) Boogaloo and Graham is an Irish family comedy that also includes some cultural references I didn’t quite “get”. Set in 1970’s Northern Ireland, a pair of boys receives two chickens – Boogaloo and Graham – from their father. The boys raise the chickens in a series of comedic adventures where they treat the birds like dogs. Some Yearling-style hijinks is mixed in with drama involving the IRA (I guess). This is a sweet, mostly silly movie with a very serious section that I found strange. Due to my long standing aversion to birds, I can’t rank this higher than second, but it’s a nice, well done film.

Sally Hawkins in the Phone Call. The poster was terrible, so I opted for this still.

e.) The Phone Call is head and shoulders the cream of the Live Action Short crop. The movie stars Sally Hawkins (an actual famous British actress who was nominated for an Academy Award last year for Supporting Actress in Blue Jasmine) as a worker at a Suicide Crisis hotline. Hawkins receives a call from a suicidal man who slowly unspools his story during the course of the phone call. The movie is heartbreaking , tense and incredibly well acted. The theater I was in was in stunned silence by the end of this twenty minute film. This is a powerful and mesmerizing piece of film making.

2014 Best Picture Countdown #5: American Sniper

I was just protecting my guys, they were trying to kill… our soldiers and I… I’m willing to meet my Creator and answer for every shot that I took. – Chris Kyle (Bradley Cooper), American Sniper

American Sniper is probably the most controversial of this year’s Best Picture nominees. As I’ve noted many times, movies about ongoing wars don’t do particularly well in Oscar races (even the movies that won during World War II were only tangentially related to World War II), and in recent times haven’t fared too well at the Box Office either. American Sniper has bucked both of these trends by pulling in several nominations and scoring well over $100 million at the box office. The movie has a more heroic approach to the war then most other war movies out right now, which has perhaps roused the sense of patriotism among moviegoers and voters needed to succeed. It is also a very strong action movie with a strong central figure that steers it through the controversial waters.

Say what you will about Bradley Cooper’s performance, but he is very buff.

American Sniper is based on the true story of Chris Kyle, the “most lethal sniper in American history.” After growing up in a very strict disciplinarian home, Kyle and his brother lead aimless lives as rodeo cowboys until an attack on a US embassy convinces Chris he needs to serve his country. Kyles enlists in the Navy Seal program and despite his relatively advanced age, excels at the program, particularly as a sniper. He meets and eventually weds Taya (Sienna Miller) and is then called to his first tour of duty in Afghanistan. Kyle becomes known as the Legend among US troops (and their enemies) for his supposed unmatchable skills as a sniper and the aura of protection soldiers on the ground feel when he is “watching over them.” But Kyle becomes obsessed with an enemy sniper Mustafa, whose prowess matches Kyle’s, as well as the Butcher, an Al Qaeda commander. An attempt to kidnap the Butcher goes awry and many of Kyle’s comrades are shot. Kyle tries to return to family life (Taya is pregnant) but struggles with PTSD and opts to repeatedly return to duty to “finish the mission.” But is Kyle’s mission really protecting the US anymore or just a personal act of vengeance that has gotten out of hand?

Chris Kyle (Bradley Cooper) and long-suffering wife Taya (Sienna Miller) in American Sniper.

American Sniper has elicited quite a bit of controversy for being pro-war and too eager to embrace the violent lifestyle of its main character. I honestly think the movie can be whatever you want it to be with regards to a stance on the War on Terror. In a certain sense Kyle is absolutely portrayed as a hero, a sort of old West gunslinger in the modern world who never backs down or questions his own personal code. But by the same token, Kyle’s unwillingness to question what’s going on is a failing. He is the only one of his comrades to not finally tire of the life and stress of the war. Is this a trait of a hero or a man so one-sidedly obsessed he can no longer make sense of his own life? Kyle’s mission becomes less and less about protecting America and American soldiers and his own personal vendetta against Mustafa and the Butcher. Is he a hero or a man out of control? The movie never really answers this question and is all the better for it.

I did think some of the claims of the movie were fairly outrageous, such as the assertion that Kyle at one point ignored orders to keep a rooftop guard and instead started searching houses with other marines. The ending of the movie is also incredibly cheesy and really detracts from the film as a whole. For those who haven’t kept up with the news, the real Chris Kyle was killed by another veteran with PTSD who he was mentoring. The movie ends on the last day of Kyle’s life, with Kyle talking with his family and “going out to help this guy.” It’s so very melodramatic and unnecessary when ending the movie two scenes earlier – with Kyle readjusting to life at home, perhaps helping some other vets – and then a simple title card explaining his fate would have been more poignant.

American Sniper is a fast-paced and exciting film. It bears more than a little resemblance to The Hurt Locker, which won Best Picture but was a total box office failure (it was the lowest grossing Best Picture ever at the time of its release and may still be). Both are ultimately about soldiers who don’t know when or how to give up the fight. Hurt Locker’s tone is far more critical of its main character than American Sniper which does hold Kyle in a reverence for his actions. I think the recent win of the Hurt Locker coupled with anti-war sentiment in Hollywood and the general higher quality of some other movies will ultimately cost American Sniper a Best Picture victory.

Other Nominations: Best Actor (Bradley Cooper); Best Adapted Screenplay; Best Film Editing; Best Sound Editing; Best Sound Mixing

2014 Best Picture Countdown #6: Selma

Our lives are not fully lived if we’re not willing to die for those we love, for what we believe. – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (David Oyelowo), Selma

Selma is, surprisingly, the first major motion picture I can recall to try and tackle Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. It is peculiar that a de facto American saint and a true American and global hero would not garner more attention from Hollywood, although perhaps it is his vaunted position that makes him a difficult subject to tackle. Whereas contemporaries like Malcolm X are more openly controversial – and thus more open to having an interesting story told about them – any story about Martin Luther King runs this risk of being boring, if presenting the man in too saintly a fashion, or open to huge protests and controversy if it lingers too long on his faults. Lincoln, the closest movie to tackle similar problems, at least had the space of 150 years between its subject and the time the movie was released to smooth over the flaws.

Like Lincoln, Selma wisely condenses its portrayal of its protagonist to a short time window instead of the older bio-pic standard of trying to condense an entire life into a 2-3 hour window. This tactic, when handled correctly, gives a greater sense of the personality of its subject instead of coming off like a shallow, thumbnail sketch of a person. Selma’s greatest strength is its portrayal of King and the tremendous performance of David Oyelowo as the great man who has flaws but is able to overcome them to lead and inspire.

The great David Oyelowo as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Selma

Selma covers the time after what we usually think of King’s greatest triumph, the passage of the Civil Rights Act. King, who has just won the Nobel Peace Prize, is at the height of his power and influence, and decides to muster himself for one more great battle – ensuring equal voting rights, which King believes will lead to a more equal government and judicial system. King is stymied in his fight by President Lyndon Johnson (Tom Wilkinson), who believes championing an equal voting rights act will lose the support he needs for many of his other progressive programs. Undeterred, King rallies a groundswell of support in Selma, Alabama, where African-Americans are systematically denied the right to vote on a number of spurious reasons. The fight is not easy. A brutal racist sheriff (Stan Houston) runs the town and Alabama Governor George Wallace (Tim Roth) is also conspiring to shut King down. As people are physically beating and even killed, King must fight internal fractioning within the movement and his own loss of faith in his ability to advance the cause.

I liked Selma because of the window into King’s genius as a political strategist with deep insight into psychology. At an early meeting with a student action group, King explains he needs to stage the fight for voting rights in a town with a risk of a violent outburst because only that will draw the national media attention he needs. In my opinion, David Oyelowo was absolutely snubbed an Oscar nomination for his portrayal as King as a man who could never let his own internal doubt show to his friends and followers. The movie also does a good job in characterizing the marriage of King and his wife Coretta Scott (Carmen Ejogo), who provides firm support for her husband, even when making huge sacrifices to advance his position and the cause.

David Oyelowo and Carmen Ejogo as Dr. Martin Luther King and Coretta Scott King in Selma

Selma has taken some controversy for its historical accuracy, particularly its portrayal of Lyndon Johnson and how much he did or did not support King’s cause. Historical accuracy in a movie is a thorny issue. On the one hand, trying to condense months of events into two hours necessarily causes events and characters to be given short shrift. On the other hand, no matter the disclaimer about the how events are portrayed , the general public is going to perceive the events they see in a movie as being the truth behind what happened. If I was Lyndon Johnson’s family, would I be happy to see my father presented as a political coward when he actually gave King more backing, even if it improves the story being told? Absolutely not. I do think a filmmaker holds a responsibility to try and stick to the facts as much as possible, especially when not doing so will slander someone. And besides, what’s the point of making a movie based on a true story, when the story it tells is actually not true at all (see The Imitation Game or Foxcatcher).

Strangely, in other ways Selma tries too hard to include historical events that don’t add to the story. One side story includes Malcolm X’s involvement in Selma which really adds nothing to the story and could have been excised without incident. It almost felt like an excuse to include another historical famous name in the mix.

Selma offers some interesting insight into Martin Luther King, Jr., but as a movie it is a little plain for my taste. It ultimately didn’t leave a deep impression on me, other than Oyelowo’s performance and certainly didn’t leaving me pondering its meaning as much as fellow bio-pic American Sniper.

Other Nominations: Best Original Song (“Glory”)