Django Unchained (Jo****1/2)

Quentin Tarantino is on a roll. From the outlandish success of Inglourious Basterds comes Django Unchained, a spaghetti-western style film set in the deep South, where slavery was the economy of the time. While not a perfect film, Tarantino definitely employs all his cinematic tricks to create one of the more visceral and iconic films of the year.

Set a few years before the Civil War, Dr King Shultz (the ever-perfect Christoph Waltz), a bounty hunter, seeks the slave Django (Jamie Foxx in one of his better performances) to help identify a band of outlaws only he would recognize. The two quickly become a team, eventually working their way south to help buy Django's wife from a plantation owner, the eccentric and colorful Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio).

The film uses subtitles, music, and camera tricks to recreate the looks of spaghetti westerns and blaxsploitation films from the 1970's. This blending of genres, as well as an eclectic soundtrack mixing modern and classical scores, makes Django something we have never seen; a Tarantino-style film with a much more apparent directorial style (if that's even possible from Tarantino).

Technically, the film is a marvel, and the actors are all top notch. DiCaprio breaks away from his long stretch of criminally-burdened characters to play something completely new. While not the absolute best performance of his career (Gilbert Grape, The Aviator), this is something that should cause people to start talking about when he will finally win his first Oscar. Waltz, of course, carries the film in stride and reminds us why we love Tarantino so much for discovering him in the first place. Samuel L Jackson, though, is the true star of the film. Playing an elderly house slave and only appearing in perhaps 1/4th of the film, he undoubtedly steals every scene he shares and demonstrates some of the most manipulative and fiery acting of the year.

The film is brutally violent, and is in no way a film meant for a broad audience. Though nearly 3 hours long, there is never a dull moment in the plot, and the story keeps the audience entertained all the way to the end. Again, not perfect, but remains a gem in this truly remarkable Holiday lineup of great movies!

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (DiCaprio, Waltz, Jackson), Best Original Screenplay, Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, Best Editing, Best Makeup, Best Sound Mixing, Best Sound Editing)

The Impossible (Jo*****)

There has been no more moving film this year than The Impossible, a true story about one family whose idyllic vacation is transformed into a week of tragedy and unimaginable horror amidst the 2004 tsunami. Yes, this is dark material and the film does not shy away from the bitter truths of the event, but here is a film that is an absolute joy to watch. A testament to the power of cinema and the great talent in the industry, The Impossible is easily one of the year's best. 

With very little setup, we learn about this family. Maria and Henry, two parents raising 3 sons in Japan, have picked the Asian coast to spend their Christmas holiday. The trip, though, is soon interrupted by the sudden wave that completely destroys the resort and separates the family. In one of the film's most horrifying scenes, we see Maria (played by Watts) being swept along by the waves like a rag doll, with debris and glass shards pummeling her body under water as she tries to reach her son. 

Though the family is all alive, they are separated by miles, each eventually ending up at a local hospital overrun with the victims. Maria and her son, Lucas, witness the countless people lost and injured while in the hospital - Maria falling ill due to her severe injuries from the initial wave. Henry (McGregor) has survived with his two youngest sons and stay behind in hopes to locate the rest of their family, alive or dead. 

The film is totally dependent on the cast, and here is the film's true strength. As the father, McGregor brings an unparalleled grief to his role. There is no doubt this is his best performance to date, and easily one of the best male leads of the year. There is one scene where he manages to get hold of a phone to call his family at home, and his sudden outpouring of emotion is so brutally honest and poignant, it is simply heartbreaking. Naomi Watts, one of Hollywood's most talented actresses, has truly outdone herself. Through her eyes, we see absolute terror and the dramatic weight, and her commitment to every single scene makes it hard to remember she is simply acting. Though much of her performance takes place in a hospital bed, she singlehandedly creates the film's heart. Could she be the new Best Actress frontrunner? I have no reason to doubt. And Tom Holland, the oldest son, what a breakthrough! Why this young actor hasn't received more credit for this role, I don't know. Here is a performance that is challenging both physically and emotionally, and he manages to breathlessly navigate the story. 

I have nothing but praise to give this film. I understand some of the criticisms regarding this film focusing on a white family in the midst of an Asian disaster. That makes no difference. This is a story of love, humanity, and passion. The Impossible is definitely a 'do-not-miss!'

(Awards Potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actress (Watts), Best Actor (McGregor), Best Supporting Actor (Holland), Best Original Screenplay, Best Visual Effects, Best Makeup, Best Original Score, Best Sound Mixing, Best Sound Editing)

Beasts of the Southern Wild (Jo*****)

What a marvelous little film this turned out to be. Released smack - dab in the middle of the year, here is another shining example of the power of cinema and the creativity of films. Despite the numerous rereleases, sequels, and remakes Hollywood is pumping out, Beasts of the Southern Wild is a nearly flawless example of all that is right with cinema today. No recognizable actors, filmmakers, or plot devices, yet here is a movie that is truly a work of art.

Set in an almost apocalyptic New Orleans, a small group of people live in the 'Bathtub,' a makeshift town barricaded from civilization by levees. Here, a community is developed, and we meet Wink and his daughter Hushpuppy. We are not watching this film to follow a story, rather to drink up a setting so vividly captured through film that it virtually tangible. The Bathtub is just a collection of broken down shacks and tents, but to Hushpuppy, her entire world is filled by it. She is not your typical child for a film, with her head full of daydreams of a better world. She is fierce, determined, and molded by her oftentimes brute father. He may not be nurturing in the way we expect of a single parent, but through him, she learns all that is necessary to survive.

The story is difficult to explain, so perhaps it's best to watch it, instead. I can talk about the marvels of the film itself, though- so beautifully filmed and scored, this is a movie with so many rivets and intricacies they could definitely go overlooked. The smallest details of a father teaching his daughter how to fish with her hand, to the preparations Bathtub goes through to prepare for a storm, or Hushpuppy attempting to document her life through cardboard drawings...

And then to the cast, itself. All newcomers to film, the two leads are simply unparalleled in their acting abilities. Dwight Henry as Wink brings such a strong presence to the screen, that even in scenes he is absent from he is never far from the forefront of the story. And Quvenzhane Wallis, the 5 year-old Hushpuppy. Simply put, this girl is a force of nature. Easily one of the strongest child performances I have ever seen and one of the most honest portrayals I have seen all year. Can the Academy bring themselves to nominate a Kindergartner for Leading Actress? It would be a momentous occasion, but how fulfilling a nomination it would be.

I can't fully describe my feelings about Beasts of the Southern Wild. Perhaps there were minor aspects that threw me off or perhaps dwindled too long. All I know is that here is a movie so complete in its concept and so full of passion, that any flaws simply disappear by the time the credits begin to role.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actress (Wallis), Best Supporting Actor (Henry), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Original Score)

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (Jo***)

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, is an unexpected stumble from the gifted Peter Jackson, who's original Middle Earth trilogy managed to win just about every Oscar possible back in 2003. Back at the helm, and divided into yet another trilogy, the quaint Hobbit novel is being transformed into something it is not:  a story massive enough to span three 3-hour films. Just because you have the power to make something, doesn't necessarily make it good. The Hobbit, though, is full of remarkable images, places, and moments, but the sum of their parts is little more than icing on a burnt cake. It might look good, but it's flawed all the way to the center. 

The story begins in present time (or not?) when the elder Bilbo begins writing down the tale 'There And Back Again,' and Jackson cleverly tries to tie in the original trilogy, with an immediate eye-rolling cameo from Elijah Wood (who is not the only returning cast member). We see this is the day of his long expected party from 'Fellowship,' just moments before Gandalf arrives on his carriage. The film does offer lots of nostalgia in that regard, but for a 3 hour movie with its own story to tell, it's clear the writers (the original crew in addition to Guillermo Del Toro) had wiggle room to add what they wished. 

The cast is superb, but it lacks the charisma an charm of the original Fellowship. The 13 dwarves all seem to have their own personality, but there is absolutely NOT enough screen time for each of them, and we only get to know maybe 3 or 4 as characters. The rest are merely fillers. 

Middle Earth is just as we left it: green, lush, but dangerous at every turn. The design of the landscape is no less impressive, as is the technical aspects behind the film - from costumes to makeup. It is clear no detail went unnoticed. Take, for instance, one of the final battle scenes - set in an underground system of caves inhabited by thousands of goblins. Our heroes run through mazes of tunnels and bridges, effortlessly navigating foreign terrain, and the audience is simply overwhelmed by the details put into each shot. It is truly remarkable even to such minute details. 

It must be said about the battle scenes though, more than Lord of the Rings, that the sense of danger is almost always lost. The choreography of each sword swing or punch is so perfectly timed, as are the dwarves narrow escape from certain death time and again. How is it that amid those thousand goblins, the dwarves manage to kill hundreds, while their small group of a dozen escapes unharmed?

And then to the high frame rate… Oh goodness. Of course I had to check out the film at 48 frames a second - its a whole new novelty to the filmgoing experience. I had an idea what to expect, but there is no amount of preparation that can prepare you for the feeling. It is truly jarring for the first few minutes - almost to the point that I considered telling the projectionist that they were playing the film too fast. The image quality is stunning, but the actual movement on screen really does feel like a video game or television show. There is something beautiful about the motion blurs now lost from 24 frames a second, and this new clarity is almost too much. Visual effects become all the more blatant, as do green-screen effects. There were several times throughout the film that it felt like I was watching special effects from 1980's, but there were also times I was amazed at what I was seeing. Do I think this will become the new standard? I can't say for sure, but I sincerely hope not. Seeing a movie like this at 48 frames a second is like getting a sneak peak at the making of a movie - you KNOW you're watching actors running around manmade sets, it takes you out of the experience. 

Overall, what can I say. Perhaps a year or 2 from now when the other films are released, I will have a better grasp of The Hobbit as a whole. It is clear the filmmakers are still clinging to the original trilogy as a crutch-assuming it will aid these films. Howard Shore's score has entire sections pulled from the original film - and usually poorly done. The Hobbit could have been a much more unique and invigorating experience. As of now, I am left somewhat disappointed, confused, and yet still curious for more.

(Awards potential: Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Visual Effects, Best Makeup, Best Sound Editing)

Skyfall (Jo*****)

James Bond is undoubtedly the most enduring film series of all time. There is iconic appeal: women, weapons, thrills, it's not hard to understand why people have continued to return time and again. With Skyfall, the series has truly taken off, and though I haven't seen many of the Bond films, this is undoubtedly a great film, regardless of it being the 20th-something installment in the series.

Breathed new life by director Sam Mendes (of Oscar-winning American Beauty) the film takes a grittier approach, dealing less with the high tech gadgetry and fight scenes and focusing more on the man. The approach is similar to all Bond films, I imagine. A mind-boggling opening scene, the establishment of a new villain, and Bond's test in trying to find and conquer said villain.

And what a villain we have. Javier Bardem, another Oscar-winner known for his own take on iconic screen villains, plays Silva, a computer hacker with a homosexual flair and disregard for the law, entirely. Here is an actor at the top of his form, and following the recent Oscar win for Heath Ledger, it seems like even action movies can be recognized for their talent on screen as well as off.

Even Dame Judi Dench shines as 'M,' her recurring character. We spend much more time with her outside of headquarters, exploring her own persona as she travels with Bond. It is a reserved performance, but one that manipulates the audience at every turn and shines as a high point of the film.

Technically, this is one of the most effective films of the year. From art direction (ranging from WWII tunnels converted into government headquarters) to the music (Thomas Newman carries the Bond theme proudly and adds his own beautiful flair), the film comes together at all the right points. And Roger Deakins, of course. Always a nominee, never a winner. With his nomination for this film (I guarantee his nomination, which will be his 10th), he will continue his reign as the greatest living cinematographer in my mind. From the very introduction to Bond (see above) to the climax, which is an action scene shot in virtual darkness in the country until orange flames beautifully silhouette everything in sight, there is no doubt that this is the best-photographed film of the year. There is a clear evolution of color and image throughout the film, and even though it seems likely the Academy will overlook Deakins once again, this film would be a significant achievement for any photographer.

Forget The Dark Knight Rises or any of the other summer action movies from earlier this year. Skyfall ranks not only as the best action film of the year, but easily as one of the year's best, period.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor (Bardem), Best Supporting Actress (Dench), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Original Score, Best Sound Mixing, Best Sound Editing, Best Visual Effects)

Hope Springs (Jo *1/2)

Hope Springs is an alarmingly misguided film. A story about two lovers lost in the midst of a flat marriage, the story follows predictable curves with little originality to become of the years most confused romantic comedies (or dramas?). Here are two stars in the golden years of their careers, yet not even the talent they bring to such a project is able to provide reasonable redemption.

We see a husband. And his wife. She makes his breakfast every morning, while he reads the paper. They have dinner together, he falls asleep in front of the TV, then they part ways to sleep in their own bedrooms for the night. Here is a film that makes observations about what it expects married life is like, yet makes no assertions of its own. We as an audience are not watching a film made by story tellers, rather a film that is content to just sit and watch what the script provides.

On a whim, Kay (Meryl Streep) reads a book about successful marriages and books a therapy weekend with the author (an uninspired Steve Carrell). Finally convincing her husband, Arnold (Tommy Lee Jones) to come with, the film settles into clunky scenes of therapy while we are supposed to find Tommy Lee Jones talking about oral sex amusing. The comedy employed is simply flat, and the dramatic moments are equally stiff.

As with any summer movie starring Meryl Streep, the ending is happy (though I won't spoil anymore here). Streep, fresh off her Oscar win for The Iron Lady, gets a pass here. The actors try their best, but there is nothing in Hope Springs that excited or amused me, even in the slightest. This was one movie I wish I didn't feel obligated to have seen.

(Awards potential: No awards potential)

Moonrise Kindgom (****)

Wes Anderson is undoubtably a visionary filmmaker, one who's style is instantly recognizable with its flat camera setups, dry humor, and quirky music. Moonrise Kindgom provides nothing less - a highly polished and efficient story of young love, family, and adventure.

The story finds us in an Anderson-esque New England setting somewhere in the mid 1900's. A young boy escapes from his 'Khaki Scout' camp in search of a girl he met a year prior. Having only talked through letters and postcards, the two have decided they are in love and set up a plan to run away to Moonrise Kingdom, a place they named and what will become their sanctuary.

This is, of course, trouble for the boy's supervisors and the girl's family, all of whom go searching for the young lovers as they flee on foot. Much of the humor is found in the actual settings and the commitment of the child actors to the seriousness of their roles. We forget these are young people as they disappear behind truly dramatic and oftentimes perfectly-timed performances.

The cast is exemplary, including Bruce Willis, Frances McDormand, Ed Norton, Tilda Swinton (whose character is simply named 'Social Services'), and Bill Murrary. For such limited release, this is truly a wonderful film through and through. Of course the film will have detractors, and the distinct style of Anderson is one that seems to polarize audiences. In a time when films aim higher and higher in scope, visual effects, and action, here is a small film that aims to be nothing more than the simplest of love stories.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography)

Brave (Jo***)

Disney/Pixar's Brave is a delightful movie for children. Filled with colorful imagery of the Scottish highlands and following an easily-accessible story of acceptance and love, Pixar seems to be missing out on their prime audience: adults who have grown to love the originality of their previous films. While Brave is a wonderfully crafted movie, its ranking alongside its counterparts is almost surely at the very bottom.

The story follows young Princess Merida, a free-spirited girl who refuses to be bethrothed to any of the men from the nearby kingdoms. Though her mother insists it is the tradition of her people, Merida would rather live a playful life without the responsibilities her parents are trying to force on her. When she finally runs away, she encounters a witch in the forest who promises to help Merida's situation and change her mother's mind. This being a children's movie, it is no surprise her mother is transformed into a bear, and the two must figure out a way to right their mistakes.

While I can admire the animation and technical skills behind the making of Brave, I found little I could fully immerse myself in. Coming from a company that has made some of the best films of the past decade (Wall-E, Ratatouille, Toy Story 3, The Incredibles....), this film felt like one from a lesser company. Perhaps if the exact same film had been produced by Dreamworks Animation, for example, I would have found myself more engrossed. I understand how harsh a criticism this seems, but I do believe that in Pixar, the audiences expect something more.

First Cars 2, now Brave, I am concerned that perhaps Pixar is slipping from the top of the animation world in favor of more commercially promising films that appeal to a younger audience. While I sincerely hope Pixar has the potential to reclaim the title of best filmmaking company in the world, word that they are creating more and more sequels (Monsters University), perhaps it is a sad, cold fact that even the mighty can fall. Brave is not a bad film in any regard, but at the same time there is little to remember about it, either...

(Awards potential: Best Animated Feature, Best Original Score, Best Original Song ('Touch the Sky'))

Anna Karenina (Jo**1/2)

Anna Karenina marks the third collaboration of director Joe Wright and Kiera Knightly, a pairing that made much more reserved and dare I say beautiful films (Pride & Prejudice & Atonement). A film made with bold images and ideas, this is not to say Karenina is not a joy to watch or experience. For once though, Wright has made a film where the border of substance and style has been reached, and perhaps we lost out on much of the humanism that Tolstoy's novel brings.

Set in a turbulent Russian setting, the stage is set for Anna, a lavish woman living with a husband she may not love and a child she cares the world for. Through truly melodramatic form, she meets and falls in love with a young Count, and the two strike up a tragic affair - the type of scenario that only ever ends in tragedy.

Unlike previous adaptations of the work, director Joe Wright attempts to reimagine the story, largely through his staging and set pieces. Nearly all of the film plays out inside a hollowed out theater, with sets and transitions changing within shots. We learn how formal each character's life is - how bound they are to traditions and rules - and the theater aspect truly becomes apparent. It is an interesting concept and creates an experience not unlike watching a great play. The film doesn't attempt to reveal us to the beauty of Russia, instead, it tries to make the screen as close as possible. It is a confusing concept and one that audiences will have to get accustomed to, no doubt.

The highlights of the film are the technical aspects. You can almost assure an Oscar win for the vivid costume design - with dresses billowing out and flowing like water. The progression from scene to scene is remarkable as each new wardrobe for the characters is all the more impressive. The same can be said for the art direction - so innovative in its ideas and execution that it seems so likely to receive awards' attention.

The film reminded me somewhat of another piece of eye candy: Marie Antoinette. A beauty to watch, even on mute - the only difference being that one film truly explores the meaning of being bound by society and wealth, the other chooses a far safer route. There was endless potential for this retelling of the Anna Karenina story, and in the end, I think the film turned out to be a simple misstep.

(Awards potential: Best Costume Design, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Original Score)

Lincoln (*****)

What Steven Speilberg creates with 'Lincoln' is nothing short of brilliant. His best work in years, coupled with a refined performance from the great Daniel Day-Lewis, crafts a history lesson as well as a captivating legal story. While the title suggests this is a story about the life of a man, it is moreso a story of the life of a nation, divided by war, struggling with immense issues that only such a war could bring out. Telling the story of a mere month or two during the height of the Civil War, 'Lincoln' aims high and beautifully reaches its target.

Set in January of 1865, the Civil War has already taken its toll on Lincoln. Gray-haired and sullen, Daniel Day-Lewis plays almost against type and captures a man who uses logic and loves telling stories to accent his ideas. The film opens with an intense battle scene, black soldiers fighting alongside whites, and bodies piling up in the rainy puddles of mud turning red from all the death. We then see two black soldiers, talking to an unknown man, discussing the position, pay, and rights they lack, even though they fight alongside white soldiers for the same cause. They speak bluntly with this unknown man, joke with him, stand close and understand his words. The camera pans to the great reveal of Lincoln's silhouette. It's a great scene, sharply written, ending with several of the soldiers proving their wisdom by quoting his recent Gettysburg address.

Abraham Lincoln believes that in order to end the Civil War once and for all, he must make permanent his actions of the Emancipation Proclamation and legally free slaves forever. His stance is met by harsh criticism from not only his colleagues, but his wife (played by Sally Field), who's tenacity both comforts Lincoln but reminds him of the losses he has already faced.

Needing a majority in the House of Representatives to pass the Amendment, we follow the Republican party as they try to win the handful of Democratic votes to win a majority. Many of those in Lincoln's cabinet advise him to drop the matter entirely and focus on ening the war. Lincoln believes this is the ONLY way he can end the war, once and for all.

I admire Speilberg's direction of this film. Lacking his usual cinematic flair we have come to recognize from him, 'Lincoln' instead focuses on the quieter moments. How any President can handle a civil war while coping with the loss of a child seems impossible, but we admire the man all the more for it. Historically the film seems to whitewash certain issues. Aside from a few servants of the Lincoln household, the cast is entriely white, with the only true Abolitionist being Thaddeus Stevens (played by a truly brilliant Tommy Lee Jones). Stevens believes in racial equality totally, but in order to help the Amendment pass, he curiously must remove emotion from it and reason that we are equal 'only under the law.'

'Lincoln' is a beautiful film, photographed in a shadowy darkness that seems foreshadowing of the dark future ahead. We feel the atmosphere of the sets, cold and gloomy - characters walk around the White House draped in blankets and hats to keep warm. The attention to detail is truly astounding, both in the reality of the film and the rich experience it creates for the audience. John Williams perfectly accompanies the film with a somber score - Speilberg and Williams truly have reached a perfect understanding of the sound of movies. The cast never falters, and altogether this is one of the most relevant films of the year.

The film seems to have something for all. It teaches us about a dark time in our country's history, but reminds us that there are heroes from all walks of life. It isn't often that a truly great man also sits in a position of immense power. In 'Lincoln,' we're glad he did.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Day Lewis), Best Supporting Actor (Lee Jones), Best Supporting Actress (Field), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, Best Makeup, Best Editing, Best Original Score)

Silver Linings Playbook (Jo****1/2)

What a remarkable filmgoing experience this was. A film that has received generally positive buzz so far this awards season is undoubtedly one of the most poignant and effective films of the year, a feel-good movie with brains as well as heart. 'Silver Linings Playbook,' a warped romantic comedy of sorts, may not seem like much in summary, but here is a film that stands alongside the best of Billy Wilder or Woody Allen or Cameron Crowe.

The film follows a bipolar man named Pat (played by an effective Bradley Cooper), who is recently released from a rehabilitation clinic by his mother in hopes of aiding his recovery. Pat, who is on a restraining order from his wife, caught her cheating in their home, an action which revealed the darker side of his mental instabilities. Still tormented by the idea of winning her back, Pat works to settle back into his childhood home.

He meets a quirky heroine, as is the case for most romances, in this case an equally disfunctional character named Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence). Pat is helpless to the idea of meeting someone new, and in truly cinematic quality, they share perhaps the most uncomfortable introduction ever filmed. We see their friendship build, all while Pat's parents (Robert De Niro & Jacki Weaver) watch in concern, fearful of another relapse.

The film's success is entirely in the script, written by director David O. Russell, who you might remember hearing about for his Oscar-nominated work in 'The Fighter.' Here is a true triumph. The film contains dialogue so fresh and witty that each moment and new character interaction never feels written at all. Russell has a clear understanding of tone and how to maneuver his actors through the script, and his eye for a director is crystal clear.

And his actors, how they have delivered. Bradley Cooper is truly stepping into his own as a respected actor, and his work is occasionally brilliant. Robert De Niro, also, delivers some of his best work in years, and at least two of his scenes are truly eye-watering work.

Jennifer Lawrence, though, can absolutely take a bow for her truly immaculate performance. The balance between comedy and drama is a tricky maneuver, and Lawrence doesn't just balance on the edge, she dances across it. Already nominated for an Oscar for 'Winter's Bone' few years back, Jennifer Lawrence is proving to be a force to be reckoned with. I suspect a Best Actress nomination to come her way, and truly this could be a winning performance. She takes control of every scene with absolute fearlessness, even stepping up to the famous De Niro in one of the film's most hilarious scenes.

This is a truly visceral film, guided by a great director and an even stronger script. Any flaws to be found with this film can be brushed off, for truly this is one of the year's best films, and one audiences will absolutely fall in love with.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Cooper (long shot)), Best Actress (Lawrence), Best Supporting Actor (De Niro), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Editing)

Life of Pi (Jo*****)

Life of Pi is quite possibly the best achievement on film this year. The story, based on the allegedly 'unfilmable' book, takes risks throughout its 2 hour running time, but the level of sophistication in the filmmaking by Ang Lee and his remarkable cast it truly astounding. Entering the film with no back story other than what I saw in the trailer, I was taken on a cinematic journey that truly rivals some of the best movies I have ever seen.

Following the recollections of a man who claims to have a story proving God exists, we learn of Pi, a young boy raised on a zoo in India. Once grown, we learn his father has decided to sell the zoo and move his family to Canada via cargo ship. The ship enters a severe storm and sinks, leaving only Pi and a handful of animals drifting in a small life boat. While the other animals fail to make the journey, the one that does is Richard Parker, a fully grown bengal tiger. And the story is set.

I won't go into details on how such a plot is able to fill a full-length movie, or what possible beauty could be found watching a starved boy floating at sea, but this is truly a film filled with the most awe-inspiring cinematography and visual effects. There is beauty to be found in the most plain settings, and Ang Lee truly understands the visual aspects of filmmaking. As does his effective use of visual effects. Of course several shots (if not all, I couldn't tell) of the tiger were digitally created, but the seams were truly invisible by the end. I wasn't watching a large cat created in a computer, rather one with weight, desires, instincts, and a soul.

This is a film I cannot wait to see again, and again. 3D, which has failed in the past, is in top form here, rivaling the stunning depth created in 'Avatar.' There aren't so many things coming out of the frame towards the audience as they are going away. The depth of the ocean and the sight of fish swimming just below the surface is so effectively rendered, and it adds just another level of realism to which such an absurd story is being told.

I doubt I will see another film that will have such an impact on me, definitely not this year. Here is a film for the ages. Forger 'Brokeback Mountain,' this is a film that Ang Lee will be remembered for.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Irrfan Khan), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Original Score, Best Editing, Best Visual Effects, Best Sound Mixing, Best Sound Editing)

Hitchcock (Jo**1/2)

Alfred Hitchcock is undoubtably one of cinema's most iconic characters. We knew so much about his films, his style, his creative processes, but the man himself was little more than a silhouette. What Hitchcock then sets out to do is admirable, but ultimately lost in its own sensationalism. Here is a film that had potential for greatness but failed to see where.

The film, of course, is a chronicle of the making of Hitchcock's most famous film, 'Psycho,' based on a Wisconsin serial killer named Ed Gein. Finding his next project after the enormous success of 'North By Northwest,' Hitchcock ultimately stumbles upon the novel, and without further debate, settles on the film as his next project. Much of the film's humor comes from the macabre topics the story is ultimately based on, as Hitchcock casually shows backers photographs of severed heads when trying to raise money for the project.

The film, which could have elaborated the struggles to make the film and the creative processes behind it, instead veers towards Hitchcock's marital problems. There is no doubt that Alma Hitchcock, his wife, was an integral part of his life, but when you are making a film about the behind the scenes aspect of a famous film, we as an audience do not necessarily want to spend an hour watching suspicions of an affair. In fact, little of the film even focuses on 'Psycho,' itself. And there's the problem. The film fails to recognize its target audience: film buffs. How much of Alma's story portrayed in the film is speculative? The same goes for Alfred. It is very easy to find a film about a troubled marriage, but how many films deal with the creative processes of Alfred Hitchcock, himself?

The acting, however, is exemplary. Anthony Hopkins all but disappears in the role (and makeup) to create a convincing Hitchcock, though at times it does feel a bit more caricature. Helen Mirren, likewise, is once again stunning in her co-leading role. Her character undoubtedly deals with much of the film's conflict, and in many ways she could be the film's actual protagonist.

Though there are a few nominations that could be had with Hitchcock, I would not be surprised to see it passed by entirely. The film had potential, but it truly failed to deliver what could have easily been one of the best films of the year.

(Awards potential: Best Actor (Hopkins), Best Actress (Mirren), Best Makeup)

Flight (Jo*****)

'Flight' is one of those rare movies where I entered with somewhat neutral expectations and left in awe of the power of cinema. The trailer promised nothing more than a plane crash and some pretty realistic special effects. That and Robert Zemekis' triumphant return to live-action cinema (God help us if he makes another animated Holiday movie). Yes, the film is dark, and at times difficult to watch, but Zemekis and Washington take the reins entirely and succeed in creating one of the best movies of the year.

Denzel Washington stars as Whip Whitaker, a man who's morning routine involves lines of coke like it's coffee. His life is unstable, he is divorced, and his well-being seems to come second to the pleasure he finds with his flight crew. On board a morning flight at the film's start we learn so much about his character, simply by his actions in flying a plane. Whip is in no way a character we are meant to warm up to, though he is definitely a man who's confidence could perhaps become inspiring.

Of course, the plane takes an unexpected turn as it descends into a nose-dive. The sequence, no more than 5 or 10 minutes, is perhaps one of the most intense crash scenes I can recall in a movie. The complete absurdity of the situation couples with the sharp detail Zemekis smartly finds in the chaos - creating a tense and gripping sequence.

Crashing the plane just beyond a small church's baptismal pool, Whip survives - saving all but 6 lives on board. His heroic actions, though, are quickly dampened when it is discovered he had been flying with a blood alcohol content above 0.2, and life in prison is suddenly an option.

The film develops into a strong character study, and Washington simply hits it out of the park in his best performance to date. There is never a time he is not fully in control of any scene, and even the most subtle actions or stutters in speech are simply masterful. Any other year an Oscar win would be guaranteed, depending on how winter films fare, this could be an extremely tight race to watch.

John Goodman, likewise, rises to the occasion as Whip's quirky drug dealer. His screen time is limited to no more than 2 or 3 scenes, but here is a character actor in top form. Yes, it's a comedic performance, but Goodman has been around the block several times, and an Oscar nomination would not be out of line. The same goes for relatively unknown Kelly Reilly, who plays a fellow addict Whip befriends. Her story is just as heartbreaking, but her performance rises to the occasion and is equal to her costars.

In terms of comparing 'Flight' to 'Forrest Gump' or 'Cast Away,' Robert Zemekis clearly has a rich cinematic language and is a master of his craft. 'Flight' may not be the most pleasant movie-going experience, but this is a film I cannot wait to see again.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Washington), Best Supporting Actor (Goodman), Best Supporting Actress (Reilly), Best Original Sceenplay, Best Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Sound Editing, Best Visual Effects, Best Original Score)

Argo (Jo*****)

Ben Affleck has almost positively settled into his niche - an accomplished director who is fully capable of great acting and creating solid movies. From 'The Town' to 'Gone Baby Gone' and now 'Argo,' Affleck is a man to watch out for, and certainly comparisons to Robert Redford are no longer blasphemic.

Argo is set in a not too unfamiliar time when Iran was in conflict with America, a time when clashing political beliefs and anger set the world into the seemingly never-ending spiral downward. The film opens on the storming of an American Embassy in Iran by protestors from the street. Seeing this as the opening of the film was simply astounding, and I shivered from the level of sophistication with which the sequence is assembled. From those held hostage, 6 Americans manage to escape and flee to the Canadian Embassy, where they hide for months with no hope of escape. Though they shredded nearly all American paperwork and documents, we see Iranian children busy sifting through the shreds to reassemble the photographs and papers - papers that show they have 6 hostages missing…

And here the film truly shines. Back in the United States, the CIA is busy to think of any way to smuggle these 6 out of the country, but to no avail. Riding bikes several hundred miles to the border is sheer absurdity, and everyone knows it. Ben Affleck stars as Tony Mendez, the agent responsible for getting these people out, using an idea concocted while watching a movie with his son. Under the disguise of a film crew, they will pretend to be location scouts for the science fiction film 'Argo,' and using Canadian passports, will fly out of Tehran in plain sight.

The tension of the film is coupled by truly hilarious moments, mostly from the Hollywood side of the story. John Goodman plays John Chambers, an Oscar-winning makeup artist, who forms a fake production company with director Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin). Under an increasing time constraint, it is amazing how much Affleck fits into the film without ever overwhelming the audience with too much information.

Yes, the film follows a fairly predictable pattern and the ending is all but assured, but here is a film that audiences truly appreciate. A film that understands the language of movies, and drama, and writing, and with great ease succeeds in being one of the most surprising and entertaining movies of the year.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Arkin), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Original Score)

The Sessions (Jo***)

'The Sessions' has been a small film making big impressions on film festivals this year, so it was no surprise that I eagerly sought it out. The film, about a bed-ridden man suffering from polio, follows his journey to lose his virginity through the use of a sex surrogate. Consulting all the while with his priest (of the Catholic Church, no less), the film makes light of a potentially grim subject matter, and succeeds in being a potential heart-warmer, though it mostly just skims the surface of truly fascinating subject matter.

Mark O'Brien (played by a truly dedicated John Hawkes), is an accomplished poet with a college degree and high levels of respect. Though he is a charming and sociable man, we learn of his desires to more fully explore female relationships, as the only women he has known pity him or his condition. O'Brien is a very religious man, and therefore consults with his priest (William H. Macy) for his truthful response to his wish. Macy laughably gives him the 'A.O.K.' and thinks God will give him a free pass. I don't know what Catholic Church O'Brien attends, but this is definitely a church many should consider attending.

Mark then meets Cheryl (Helen Hunt), a character we would immediately assume to be a prostitute, if not for her complete professionalism and suave. Here is a movie where eroticism could have completely taken over, but the act of sex is reduced down to a mere science experiment. Cheryl learns about Mark and his wishes and desires, and in turn Mark discovers that simple kindness and accepting could be all he really needs to be happy.

The film, based on a true story, glamorizes the story into a feel-good romp about a man essentially losing his virginity. The ending is fairly predictable and the short run time lends very little insight into the characters we are seeing. That is not to say the acting is nothing short of superb. John Hawkes is truly dedicated to the performance, and you can see glimmers of Sean Penn or Daniel Day-Lewis in his role. Hawkes recently became a more widely-known actor with his Oscar-nominated appearance in 'Winter's Bone,' but he is truly an accomplished actor regardless. The same should be said for Helen Hunt, who's film appearances following her Oscar win are few and far between. Here she truly shines, and don't be surprised to see both receive Oscar nominations (if nothing else, for the extended nudity throughout the film. Oscar voters love that, you know).

The film is simple, straight-forward, and predictable, but is does succeed on acting merits alone. If nothing else, see it for Hawkes and Hunt. If not, you are at no great loss.

(Awards Potential: Best Actor (Hawkes), Best Supporting Actress (Hunt), Best Adapted Screenplay))

Cloud Atlas (Jo****)

Just when you thought you understood what a movie could be, along comes 'Cloud Atlas,' a dense and precarious film that has so many ideas and images and characters and stories, I don't know if repeated viewings can even decipher the truth behind it all. With no less than 3 directors and actors playing 6 or 7 separate characters, this is a movie unlike any other, endlessly ambitious, and certainly a movie people will remember for some time.

The setting ranges from Colonial America to the far distant future, past the rise of civilization to a point where man has reverted to nature. Discussing plot is simply impossible, as each story is connected with mere thoughts, or actors, or ideas. To think about the meaning behind several characters sharing a shooting star-shaped birthmark is puzzling enough, but to then contemplate how each character's action could potentially effect their counter-character in the future or past is simply unnerving.

Babbling on about this film in cryptic riddles and my own puzzled ideas will be no good for a review, so let me just heap praises on the technical aspects. Titled as one of the most expensive independent movies ever made, 'Cloud Atlas' soars with its sheer beauty in setting and photography. The same goes for the visual effects and makeup - top notch work in the way they work to seamlessly incorporate one actor in to many settings.

Is this a film for everyone? Of course not. People today like their films straight forward and linear in their story. No one wants to be scratching their heads hours after seeing a film, but that is truly the success here. 'Cloud Atlas' creates a dizzying story, but one that sticks with you long after you have finished. Reading the novel upon which it is based may or may not shed some light, I'm not sure. All I can really tell you about this film is that it is one I need to see again, soon. If that isn't some sort of compliment, then perhaps I should just go ahead and recommend it.

(Awards Potential: Best Picture, Best Actor (Hanks), Best Actor (Broadbent), Best Actress (Berry), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Editing, Best Original Score, Best Sound Mixing, Best Sound Editing, Best Makeup)

The Dark Knight Rises (Jo***)

Jo Says:

At 2 hours and 45 minutes and nearly 5 years in the making, The Dark Knight Rises had all the potential to be one of the best movies this decade, bringing closure to one of the most acclaimed film series and concluding perhaps the best superhero/crime film of all time: The Dark Knight. Of course expectations for this film were undeniably high, perhaps too high to match, but ultimately I can't help but feel that the final Batman installation was flawed from its inception.

Set 8 years after the second film (and absolutely void of any reference to the Joker (luckily)), the film finds Bruce Wayne a recluse along the lines of Howard Hughes, shut in by the loss of his love Rachel as well as the ever-decreasing crime rate in Gotham. Harvey Dent, now honored with his own holiday, is remembered only as the hero Batman and Commissioner Gordon intended. Of course, the arrival of Bane, the new antagonist, brings Batman out of retirement, and it is no surprise what 8 years can do to a body. Literally taking over Gotham and closing its borders, Bane expels Batman and tells Gotham citizens to 'take back their city.' Of course scenes are reminiscent of the Occupy movement from the past year, and Nolan's script undoubtedly attempted to incorporate many current political issues.

Among the many characters introduced are Selina Kyle, a 'cat' burglar who has one too many encounters with Bruce Wayne. Her presence in the film is a mere hindrance, and her allegiance to either side is never quite known. Joseph Gordon Levitt plays Blake, a young cop who is mentored by the aging Commissioner and becomes involved with Bruce Wayne, casually letting slip he even recognizes him as the caped crusader from years past. Miranda Tate rounds out the newcomers as a new corporate head of Wayne Enterprises and a possible love interest for the humbled Bruce.

Without spoiling any of the film's plot, I simply believe too much was crammed into one movie to fulfill the eagerness of the waiting audiences. Christopher Nolan has undoubtedly made one of the best trilogies of all time, but his final installment feels overweighted by plot, characters, information. The excitement and pure entertainment felt by The Dark Knight is almost all gone, exchanged for an increasingly dark and complex plot. Yes, the Joker and Bane are two entirely different villains with different goals, but the two movies as companion pieces simply feel imbalanced.

Bane, as a villain, is terrifying: intense, brute, straight-forward, and intimidating. How much of this is lost, then, when we see Bane cry? Or when we learn his back story? Attempting to create more depth for his character almost works to weaken his screen presence, humanizing him nearly to the point of sympathy. Then again, who is the true villain of this film, and how do we find balance between them? Not to name names, but perhaps this film could have functioned perfectly fine without the inclusion of certain characters who's own back story work merely for shock value and nothing more. How many villains does one superhero movie need?

Technically, the film still upholds the fine standards the rest of the series holds, and there are surely applause-worthy moments, namely our re-introduction to Batman, himself. For such a lengthy movie, though, one would almost wish for more Batman and less Bruce Wayne. Afterall, isn't the movie called The Dark Knight Rises and not "Bruce Wayne Rises?" Hours could be spent discussing each character and plot piece, discerning their purposes and whether or not they are warranted in the film. Maybe instead of leaving me wanting more, the film instead left me wishing 'what if?'

Will this movie be the juggernaut it's predecessor was? The answer is almost undoubtedly no. Only so rarely does a movie come along that works on so many levels as The Dark Knight, and Christopher Nolan should only be so proud to have such an impressive film repertoire. Technically the movie is astounding, but for a fan of the film series that began so many years ago, perhaps Nolan lost sight of the ultimate goal he set out to reach with these films and pushed the envelope one too many times. The film is great, but it is nothing extraordinary.

(Awards potential: Best Supporting Actor (Michael Caine), Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Visual Effects, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Editing, Best Original Score)

84th Academy Awards Reactions

Yet again, the awards season has come and gone, and the Oscars are already long over. In a year of remarkably few 'great' films, the Academy was able to determine perhaps the best in each category, making this year seem much better than it actually was. The show itself went on with relatively few shocks, a nice easygoing atmosphere, and the usual sense of dragging on (especially in the last half hour). The shocks that did occur, though, were significant enough that they threw even MoJo off guard. If you hapened to have used our predictions for your awards games, congratulations, as you probably won. MoJo was correctly able to predict 20 out of the 24 final winners, with misses only due to major upsets or wins we simply did not see coming.

The show was off to a dangerous start, sidestepping the usual supporting acting Oscar to instead present Best Cinematography. The entire year, everyone knew one thing: The Tree of Life was guaranteed to win this award. It was one of the only sure things of the night. Apparently not, as a surprised Tom Hanks read off Rob Richardson for Hugo. Immediately, the night was off to an uncertain start, as Hugo began to rake in more and more technical awards. It seemed like the film could even be on track to win Best Picture by the night's end.

But, just like our precursor awards, The Artist began to pick up steam, with wins in Costume Design and Original Score (though Editing was won completely out of the blue by Girl With The Dragon Tattoo). Wasn't Rise of the Planet of the Apes supposed to win Best Visual Effects? Nope, as MoJo pointed out, this award has ALWAYS been won by the Best Picture nominee of the group, in this case, Hugo. Coupled with that fact that Hugo had already won the Guild award for the same category? Sealed.

The second most surprising and completely thrilling upset was, of course, Meryl Streep winning her long-awaited third Oscar for her brilliant turn in The Iron Lady. Beating out a clearly thrown-off Viola Davis, Streep accepted her award with humility and her ever-present sense of humor. At long last (and 29 long years later), Streep has broken her losing streak to become tied as the second most awarded actor in the Academy's history.

Of course, the Artist concluded the night with 5 wins (tied with Hugo), and all else went according to plan. Will The Artist be remembered in years to come as one of the great Best Picture winners? Most likely not. Here was a film with a simple plot that was pure entertainment. The Academy rewarded a feel-good movie (and the first movie NOT rated R since Million Dollar Baby in 2004) and in the end, it feels like the right choice. We thank everyone for staying with us this Awards season, and will continue to keep updates in the hopes that 2012 will be even better!

Final Oscar Predictions

The time has come. The Oscars are mere days away, and we have finally assembled our predictions for the likely winners to be announced this Sunday. Unlike last year, many of the top races are still wide open, and there are many opportunities for upsets and surprises. Without further ado, here we go!


BEST PICTURE

The steam has continued throughout awards season, and The Artist faces virtually no competition for the top prize. There is almost no possibility for an upset at this point.

1. The Artist
2. Hugo
3. The Descendants
4. Moneyball
5. Midnight In Paris
6. The Help
7. The Tree of Life
8. War Horse
9. Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close

BEST DIRECTOR

As we learned last year with Tom Hooper's final victory, it is futile to predict against the DGA Awards, in this case the winner being Michel Hazanavicius for The Artist. If The Tree of Life would have had a stronger showing in nominations, perhaps Terrence Malick could have pulled in a surprise.

1. Michel Hazanavicius (The Artist)
2. Martin Scorsese (Hugo)
3. Terrence Malick (The Tree of Life)
4. Woody Allen (Midnight In Paris)
5. Alexander Payne (The Descendants)

BEST ACTOR

This could be one of the closest races of the night. Coming up to the awards season, George Clooney was the clear frontrunner with Brad Pitt serving as a possible upset. However, with the recent awards given by BAFTA and SAG, Jean Dujardin seems poised for a well-deserved win.

1. Jean Dujardin (The Artist)
2. George Clooney (The Descendants)
3. Brad Pitt (Moneyball)
4. Gary Oldman (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy)
5. Demian Bichir (A Better Life)

BEST ACTRESS

Is there a chance for Meryl Streep to FINALLY win her coveted third Oscar? Perhaps, but the chances are slimming with each day as Viola Davis inches closer to becoming only the second black Best Actress winner in history - and a well-deserved win it would be, too. Interesting fact, Viola Davis is only the second black actress to receive a second Academy Award nomination (the first being for Doubt). The other woman to accomplish this was Whoopi Goldberg, who won on her second nomination for Ghost.

1. Viola Davis (The Help)
2. Meryl Streep (The Iron Lady)
3. Glenn Close (Albert Nobbs)
4. Michelle Williams (My Week With Marilyn)
5. Rooney Mara (The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo)

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Christopher Plummer has locked himself in for the win, which will be his first Oscar win in his illustrious career. Out of all the acting categories, this is perhaps the most locked. Max Von Sydow could provide an upset (interestingly, both men are 82 and would become the oldest acting winners in history), but his lack of other nominations suggests otherwise.

1. Christopher Plummer (Beginners)
2. Max Von Sydow (Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close)
3. Kenneth Branagh (My Week With Marilyn)
4. Nick Nolte (Warrior)
5. Jonah Hill (Moneyball)

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Octavia Spencer has won a slew of awards and is the technical lock. However, depending on the support for The Artist, Berenice Bejo could be swept in and win in an Oscar upset. The same could be said for Melissa McCarthy, winning for a comic turn a la My Cousin Vinny. The problem is (like so many other dark horses) is the fact that they have all failed to win any major precursors. Thus, Spencer is our winner.

1. Octavia Spencer (The Help)
2. Berenice Bejo (The Artist)
3. Melissa McCarthy (Bridesmaids)
4. Jessica Chastain (The Help)
5. Janet McTeer (Albert Nobbs)

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Probably the toughest category to call, as a case could be made for virtually every nominee. Woody Allen has won this award every time the film has also been nominated for Best Picture (Annie Hall, Hannah and Her Sisters, etc), so should we bet on him? Then again, the Artist is the Best Picture winner, thus is it the presumed front-runner? Or will they truly pick the 'best' and award A Separation? Any of the top three are viable contenders, but Woody should be the safest bet.

1. Midnight In Paris
2. The Artist
3. A Separation
4. Bridesmaids
5. Margin Call

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Again, there is a two, potentially three-horse race in this category, with The Descendants, Moneyball, and perhaps Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy standing to be the victor. As praised as the Moneyball script was, The Descendants won the Writer's Guild Award, thus boosting it to a frontrunner status. Either could still win and as of now it's an incredibly close call.

1. The Descendants
2. Moneyball
3. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
4. Hugo
5. The Ides of March

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

Rango. Case closed.

1. Rango
2. A Cat In Paris
3. Puss In Boots
4. Kung Fu Panda 2
5. Chico & Rita

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM

A Separation currently sits on rottentomatoes with a perfect 100% score. It is also the only other foreign nominee with an additional Oscar nomination (for the screenplay). Then again, the Academy sure loves the Holocaust subject matter as seen in In Darkness...

1. A Separation
2. In Darkness
3. Footnote
4. Bullhead
5. Monsieur Lazhar

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

At long last, Emmanuel Lubezki will win his much-deserved Oscar for the absolute best photographed film of the year. There is no chance of upset here.

1. The Tree of Life
2. War Horse
3. Hugo
4. The Artist
5. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

BEST EDITING

Best Picture and Best Editing usually align, so by process of elimination The Artist should be our winner. All of the nominees would be deserving, but no film seems to stand a chance in this category.

1. The Artist
2. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
3. Moneyball
4. Hugo
5. The Descendants

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS

Interesting fact-ever since this category's creation, the best picture nominee of the group always wins. Always. That bodes well for Hugo, but the clear love for Apes leads many to believe otherwise. After all, Weta Digital is the juggernaut in this category... Hugo's win at the guild awards, however, makes it a fairly clear pick.

1. Hugo
2. Rise of the Planet of the Apes
3. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
4. Transformers: Dark of the Moon
5. Real Steel

BEST ART DIRECTION

Bigger is usually better, and with Hugo's elaborate train station set alone, this category seems all locked up.

1. Hugo
2. The Artist
3. War Horse
4. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
5. Midnight In Paris

BEST COSTUME DESIGN

As we have seen from past winners, the Academy doesn't care about the quality of the film here, just how many goddamned frills they can fit on a costume (i.e. Elizabeth The Golden Age). So, could W.E. win the category, after recently taking the Costume Designers Guild Award, or Anonymous? (what movie was that again?) Jane Eyre seems like the next best bet after The Artist, which has picked up awards from many major groups already. It's anyone's guess, though.

1. The Artist
2. Jane Eyre
3. W.E.
4. Hugo
5. Anonymous

BEST MAKEUP

This category seems like the only viable chance Harry Potter has at winning an Oscar (for any of the 8 films). However, it has never received a makeup nomination before and there's nothing too different in this film. Albert Nobbs is too subtle and not the type the Academy usually rewards. The Iron Lady is the only clear winner, as it transformed Meryl Streep into a believable elderly woman very much like past makeup winner La Vie En Rose did for Marion Cotillard.

1. The Iron Lady
2. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
3. Albert Nobbs

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE

For a silent movie, music is everything, and for The Artist, its score was one of its shining aspects. John WIlliam's two nominations will cancel each other out, and not much has been said about Tinker Tailor or Hugo in terms of musical aesthetic.

1. The Artist
2. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
3. War Horse
4. Hugo
5. The Adventures of Tintin

BEST ORIGINAL SONG

This category truly needs to be eliminated or seriously reformatted. Out of all the songs from this past year, these are two of the weakest. Muppets wins or this category simply loses all respect. Listen to 'Real In Rio' and you'll understand the frustration.

1. 'Man or Muppet' (The Muppets)
2. 'Real In Rio' (Rio)

BEST SOUND MIXING

Hugo has won key sound awards this season, thus it seems like the logical choice.

1. Hugo
2. War Horse
3. Transformers: Dark of the Moon
4. Moneyball
5. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

BEST SOUND EDITING

Hugo again, but any of the top three could be victorious.

1. Hugo
2. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
3. Transformers: Dark of the Moon
4. Drive
5. War Horse

BEST FEATURE DOCUMENTARY

After Project Nim's shocking omission, this category was thrown into the air slightly. Pina has been praised for its unconventional documentary style and 3D, but Undefeated has Weinstein support and a feel-good attitude. Then again, Paradise Lost 3 could prove to be a bigger contender.

1. Undefeated
2. Pina
3. Paradise Lost 3
4. Hell and Back Again
5. If a Tree Falls

BEST ANIMATED SHORT

1. The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore
2. La Luna
3. A Morning Stroll
4. Dimanche
5. Wild Life

BEST LIVE ACTION SHORT

1. The Shore
2. Pentecost
3. Tuba Atlantic
4. Raju
5. Time Freak

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT

1. The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom
2. Saving Face
3. God is the Bigger Elvis
4. Incident In New Baghdad
5. The Barber of Birmingham

John's Favorite Movies of 2011

1. Drive
2. Hugo
3. Moneyball
4. The Descendants
5. A Separation
6. The Artist
7. The Tree of Life
8. The Help
9. Take Shelter
10. Beginners

Take Shelter (****1/2)

Perhaps no movie released in 2011 was more carefully paced than Take Shelter, a little-seen but important film that addresses many issues so carefully that it never once feels laden with plot. Here, suspense is built so carefully that it would undoubtedly put Hitchcock in a state of unease. Slow moving but ever forward, the film works to understand the mind of a man who may be losing it, or perhaps has become simply misunderstood.

Michael Shannon stars as Curtis, husband to his wife Sam and father to a hearing-impaired child. His life plays out in the rural settings of nowhere America, and his life revolves around work and his family. Strange visions begin plaguing his life, filling his dreams, forcing him to seek medical help. He sees almost apocalyptic images of storms, attacks, and death, all involving the people most important to him in his life. That he loses sleep is a given, but the level of skill Shannon demonstrates as an actor playing out each moment is astonishing. Never before have I understood what it is like to wake up out of a night terror until seeing it perfectly captured in one small moment. Already an Oscar-nominee for Revolutionary Road, Michael Shannon undoubtedly is at his career-best.

Jessica Chastain, in one of her many brilliant 2011 roles, is humbling as the concerned wife who only cares for her family's well-being. Seeing her husband begin construction on a storm shelter in their backyard when other expenses seem more pertinent certainly raises issues, but never does she neglect her duties as a mother.

There are few scenes that will shock you, and perhaps many will find this film boring. The ending is ambiguous to say the least, and in the best way possible. Is it possible for the last moments of a film to completely change everything we have seen up until that point? Take Shelter most definitely fits the bill. A story of almost biblical proportions and ideas, here is a movie that will make you think and become actively involved. Unfairly denied mention at this year's Oscar ceremony, but no less potent for it. This is a film that will definitely have people talking for years to come.

(Awards potential: Best Actor (Shannon), Best Supporting Actress (Chastain), Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score)

Drive (*****)

A man, a woman, a bag of money, and a crime gone wrong. Like so many heist films in the past, "Drive" doesn't stray too far from the normal. At the same time, it does something most films can only dream of succeeding: crafting a story so spellbinding that every moment feels important in and of itself. Every frame is carefully choreographed. Every line masterfully delivered. In terms of genre, this is a defining work in modern cinema.

For a film so simply titled, you will find few moments of actual 'driving,' and in fact, the film is only lightly sprinkled with scenes of our Driver (the unnamed character played by Ryan Gosling) actually operating any form of vehicle. As a profession, he works as a stunt driver in film. At night, he takes on the seedy underbelly of Los Angeles, working as a successful getaway driver for various heists and cons. Shannon (Bryan Cranston), his boss and colleague, supplies him with various means of transportation and income.

He gets to know his neighbors, a young and beautiful Irene (Carey Mulligan), and her son, whose dad is in prison for a variety of crimes. Perhaps the Driver is falling in love, or perhaps the innocence of a mother and daughter reminds him of simpler times. With so few actual lines of dialogue, it's sometimes difficult to interpret what the Driver is thinking. In a role so filled with physical extremes, it's almost unsettling to have a protagonist that is so unchanged from start to finish.

As the driver begins one business venture (entering the world of speed car racing), he finds himself in a situation in which a crime goes awry, where nothing goes according to plan, a moment where this film could definitely mark the spot where "all Hell breaks loose." The Driver is essentially pitted against the crime world he has come to know all too well, and a wave of death and destruction flows through to the very climax of the film.

The film juggles various themes and ideas, and all silhouetted against a nearly David Lynch-type 1980's retrospective. While cars are modern, the very senses of the film (from costume to soundtrack) come to evoke a decade of filmmaking gone by, and the Director (Nicolas Winding Refn) masterfully crafts a film that is so unique in and of itself. Justly winning the Directing prize at the Cannes Film Festival, his snub by the Academy is all the more tragic and alarming.

This is not a film for everyone, and in fact its bubble-gum visual style and graphic violence is sure to polarize its viewers. There is so much more to realize in this film, and repeated viewings have only strengthened my appreciation for this gem of a movie (and caused me to rewrite an entire review for it, no doubt). This was my favorite movie of 2011, and remains so nearly 3 years later.

Shame on the Academy for such unruly snubs across the board...

*indicates an actual nomination received from the Academy

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Gosling), Best Supporting Actor (Brooks), Best Supporting Actress (Mulligan), Best Original Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Sound Mixing, *Best Sound Editing)

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (***1/2)

I'm actually upset over how much I was able to tolerate this film. Okay I'll admit it, I actually liked it. Having received much criticism from critics and an extremely negative post-Oscar campaign, I was hesitant to see it, but after the credits began to silently role, I was undoubtedly moved.

We've all heard the story by now. Oskar Shell is a young boy who debatably duffers from Asperger's. His father (Tom Hanks) died in the 9/11 attacks, and a year later he finds a key in his closet, a key that sets Oskar on a citywide adventure. Oskar believes that finding the lock could keep the memory of his father alive longer, and creates a mathematical brain twister to logically fulfill his quest - including journeying to visit every person with the last name 'Black' in all of New York City. On foot. Good luck.

I can understand where disapproval of the film comes from. The World Trade Centers are featured so prominently in emotional scenes, almost beating emotions from the audience. Reoccurring images of Tom Hanks falling (even during the opening credits) are in bad taste, even for me. Yes, it's a movie about the aftermath, but how early is too soon? Thomas Horn, the film's star, delivers a believably detailed performance. Many could find his character annoying or 'loud,' but that's simply his nature. There's a reason he's an outsider. Think about the pro's of the film, like the soundtrack. Perhaps one of Alexandre Desplat's most effective original scores, the music speaks to audiences and lifts the images on screen to higher levels. How he did not receive an Oscar nomination is baffling.

The supporting cast is stellar but perhaps underused, with poignant moments from Viola Davis, Tom Hanks, and Sandra Bullock, who continues to fight to prove her Oscar win was for a reason. Max Von Sydow, however, is spectacular. In a performance completely free of dialogue, his performance as 'the Renter' is as complete as any other Oscar-nominated role this year. It's beautiful, brief, and touching, and I suspect Sydow could easily give Christopher Plummer a run for his money.

Steven Daldry, what to say.... Each of his 4 films have received at least 1 acting nomination, and every one has received a nomination in either Best Picture or Best Director (or both). The Academy obviously loves him, and it's not too difficult to see why. Yes, this film is controversial and has moments that fall flat (a child running around the city banging a tambourine can only work for so long), but there are also moments of pure brilliance (like Oskar's moment of revelation of all his bottled emotions to the Renter, or the Tom Hanks' last phone call to his wife).

Whatever the case may be, I have decided it is a good film, after all. Perhaps I will change my mind in time. Sandra Bullock in a Best Picture nominee usually means I'll end up hating it after a good initial viewing (Crash, The Blind Side). We'll see. For now, all I can say is that this is a film intended for an open mind.


Oscar nominations have been announced, but here is what I believe the film had potential nominations in.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Actor (Horn), Best Supporting Actor (Sydow), Best Original Score)

Jo's Oscar Nominations Reaction

Well, the day has come, and the Academy's favorites from last year finally come into focus. Overall, I believe almost each category has some sort of surprise, which is rather exciting given the Academy's dry, boring past with nominees. There were a few notable snubs, some deserving, some not. Listed are the nominees and my current predictions as of now for Oscar glory:

Best Motion Picture
“The Artist”
“The Descendants”
“Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close”
“The Help”
“Hugo”
“Midnight in Paris”
“Moneyball”
“The Tree of Life”
“War Horse”

Easily the most surprising nomination of them all: Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close popping up on the Best Picture list. Steven Daldry must truly have incriminating photos of Academy members or be damn good at blackmailing. Out of his 5 films made in his career, EVERY ONE has been nominated for an acting award and either Best Picture, Best Director, or both. At 48% on Rotten Tomatoes, the film easily takes the cake as the lowest rated Best Picture nominee in history (even beating The Reader's 62%). Other than that, nominees went as planned, and the front runners are officially Hugo and The Artist.

Prediction: The Artist


Best Achievement in Directing
Michel Hazanavicius – “The Artist”
Alexander Payne – “The Descendants”
Martin Scorsese – “Hugo”
Woody Allen – “Midnight in Paris”
Terrence Malick – “The Tree of Life”

Terrence Malick made a shocking jump forward in the race, beating Steven Spielberg to the punch. As of now, the race is wide open. Hugo received the most nominations, and who can argue with another Scorsese win? I believe other than Woody Allen, any one of the four remaining directors could easily win the award.

Prediction: Michel Hazanavicius


Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role
Demian Bichir – “A Better Life”
George Clooney – “The Descendants”
Jean Dujardin – “The Artist”
Gary Oldman – “Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy”
Brad Pitt – “Moneyball”
Predicted: Clooney, Dujardin, Fassbender, Pitt, Shannon

One of the most shocking snubs was Michael Fassbender NOT included in this list, with many citing his role in Shame as the best of the year. Thankfully the Academy dropped Leo in favor of a more deserving man, namely Gary Oldman in his first Oscar nomination. Though he has no chance of a win, it's nice to finally see him get some credit. This is a three way race between Clooney, Pitt, and Dujarin.

Prediction: George Clooney


Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role
Glenn Close – “Albert Nobbs”
Viola Davis – “The Help”
Rooney Mara – “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”
Meryl Streep – “The Iron Lady”
Michelle Williams – “My Week with Marilyn”

NO TILDA?! Easily the most upsetting omission for me. Apparently the Academy doesn't appreciate Swinton as an actress as much as they led us to believe when they awarded her with her first Oscar. Mara is not a surprise, but in a field where the nominees have been consistent throughout various awards, her inclusion is a surprise. Streep and Viola will continue to battle it out, unless Glenn Close can win some sympathy. The Help's poor showing in nominations, though, suggests less love for the movie than we were led to believe.

Prediction: Meryl Streep


Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role
Kenneth Branagh – “My Week with Marilyn”
Jonah Hill – “Moneyball”
Nick Nolte – “Warrior”
Christopher Plummer – “Beginners”
Max Von Sydow – “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close”

Well my God they snubbed Albert Brooks after all - and for Max Von Sydow, no doubt a deserving nomination. Ironically, two of this category's nominees are 82 years old; Sydow, and the presumed front runner Christopher Plummer. Sydow has the advantage of being in a Best Picture nominee, while Plummer is his film's only nomination. Sandra Bullock-style spoiler in the future? We'll see.

Prediction: Christopher Plummer


Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role
Bérénice Bejo – “The Artist”
Jessica Chastain – “The Help”
Melissa McCarthy – “Bridesmaids”
Janet McTeer – “Albert Nobbs”
Octavia Spencer – “The Help”

They did it - they nominated Bridesmaids afterall. Out of the four acting categories this was the least surprising, as all five were presumably the front runners coming in. This category makes up 50% of The Help's total nominations, pretty grim considering its potential. Perhaps Octavia doesn't have the advantage afterall.

Prediction: Berenice Bejo


Best Original Screenplay
“The Artist”
“Bridesmaids”
“Margin Call”
“Midnight in Paris”
“A Separation”

All equally deserving nominees, aside from Bridesmaids - I don't necessarily see the brilliance in the screenplay or story, it was just funny. That's all. The Artist and Midnight In Paris will be the only two possible winners.

Prediction: The Artist


Best Adapted Screenplay
“The Descendants”
“Hugo”
“The Ides of March”
“Moneyball”
“Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy”

We correctly predicted George Clooney to receive double nominations this year, so the Ides of March should come as no surprise. The Descendants may be a frontrunner, but don't count out Moneyball, which made a strong showing with 6 nominations. This could be the film to beat.

Prediction: Moneyball


Best Animated Feature
“A Cat in Paris”
“Chico & Rita”
“Kung Fu Panda 2”
“Puss in Boots”
“Rango”

No Tintin?! Just when you think this category had a clear front runner, it is excluded entirely. Yet again, we see the Academy's love to nominate obscure films next to no one has heard of.

Prediction: Rango


Best Achievement in Art Direction
“The Artist” Production Design: Laurence Bennett; Set Decoration: Robert Gould
“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2″ Production Design: Stuart Craig; Set Decoration: Stephenie McMillan
“Hugo” Production Design: Dante Ferretti; Set Decoration: Francesca Lo Schiavo
“Midnight in Paris” Production Design: Anne Seibel; Set Decoration: Hélène Dubreuil
“War Horse” Production Design: Rick Carter; Set Decoration: Lee Sandales

All strong nominees, and aside from Midnight In Paris, completely expected. Will the Academy finally award Harry Potter an actual Oscar? Or will the Artist's power take hold here as well?

Prediction: Hugo


Best Achievement in Cinematography
Guillaume Schiffman – “The Artist”
Jeff Cronenweth – “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”
Robert Richardson – “Hugo”
Emmanuel Lubezski – “The Tree of Life”
Janusz Kaminski – “War Horse”

The Academy veered slightly from the Cinematographer's guild, picking War Horse over Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. All solid nominees with some of the best camerawork seen in years. There's no doubt of the winner, however.

Prediction: The Tree of Life


Best Achievement in Costume Design
Lisy Christl for “Anonymous”
Mark Bridges for “The Artist”
Sandy Powell for “Hugo”
Michael O’Connor for “Jane Eyre”
Arianne Phillips for “W.E.”

Prediction: Hugo


Best Achievement in Film Editing
Anne-Sophie Bion & Michael Hazanavicius – “The Artist”
Kevin Tent – “The Descendants”
Kirk Baxter & Angus Wall – “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”
Thelma Schoonmaker – “Hugo”
Christopher Tellefsen – “Moneyball”

Prediction: The Artist


Best Music (Original Score)
John Williams – “The Adventures of Tintin”
Ludovic Bource – “The Artist”
Howard Shore – “Hugo”
Alberto Iglesias – “Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy”
John Williams – “War Horse”

John Williams getting double the nominations? A pleasant surprise!

Prediction: The Artist


Best Music (Original Song)
“Man or Muppet” from “The Muppets” Music and Lyric by Bret McKenzie
“Real in Rio” from “Rio” Music by Sergio Mendes and Carlinhos Brown Lyric by Siedah Garrett

Dear Academy. What the f**k? Passing over great songs from The Help and Albert Nobbs in favor of 'Real in Rio?' Good night. This category needs serious revision, fast. The Muppets wins easily, though it is far from the year's best song.

Prediction: The Muppets


Best Achievement in Sound Mixing
“The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” – David Parker, Michael Semanick, Ren Klyce and Bo Persson
“Hugo” – Tom Fleischman and John Midgley
“Moneyball” – Deb Adair, Ron Bochar, Dave Giammarco and Ed Novick
“Transformers: Dark of the Moon” – Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers, Jeffrey J. Haboush and Peter J. Devlin
“War Horse” – Gary Rydstrom, Andy Nelson, Tom Johnson and Stuart Wilson

Prediction: Transformers: Dark of the Moon


Best Achievement in Sound Editing
“Drive” – Lon Bender and Victor Ray Ennis
“The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” – Ren Klyce
“Hugo” – Philip Stockton and Eugene Gearty
“Transformers: Dark of the Moon” – Ethan Van der Ryn and Erik Aadahl
“War Horse” – Richard Hymns and Gary Rydstrom

Prediction: Hugo


Best Achievement in Makeup
“Albert Nobbs” – Martial Corneville, Lynn Johnston and Matthew W. Mungle
“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2″ – Edouard F. Henriques, Gregory Funk and Yolanda Toussieng
“The Iron Lady” – Mark Coulier and J. Roy Helland

No surprises here, though it was shocking to see The Artist passed over in a category it could have easily been nominated.

Prediction: The Iron Lady


Best Achievement in Visual Effects
“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2″ – Tim Burke, David Vickery, Greg Butler and John Richardson
“Hugo” – Rob Legato, Joss Williams, Ben Grossman and Alex Henning
“Real Steel” – Erik Nash, John Rosengrant, Dan Taylor and Swen Gillberg
“Rise of the Planet of the Apes” – Joe Letteri, Dan Lemmon, R. Christopher White and Daniel Barrett
“Transformers: Dark of the Moon” – Scott Farrar, Scott Benza, Matthew Butler and John Frazier

Somewhat upsetting to see The Tree of Life snubbed in favor of something like 'Real Steel.'

Prediction: Rise of the Planet of the Apes


Best Foreign Language Film
“Bullhead” from Belgium
“Footnote” from Israel
“In Darkness” from Poland
“Monsieur Lazhar” from Canada
“A Separation” from Iran

Prediction: A Separation


Best Documentary Feature
“Hell and Back Again” – Danfung Dennis and Mike Lerner
“If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front” – Marshall Curry and Sam Cullman
“Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory” – Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs
“Pina” – Wim Wenders and Gian-Piero Ringel
“Undefeated” – TJ Martin, Dan Lindsay and Richard Middlemas

Prediction: Pina


Best Documentary (Short Subject)
“The Barber of Birmingham: Foot Soldier of the Civil Rights Movement” – Robin Fryday and Gail Dolgin
“God Is the Bigger Elvis” – Rebecca Cammisa and Julie Anderson
“Incident in New Baghdad” – James Spione
“Saving Face” – Daniel Junge and Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy
“The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom” – Lucy Walker and Kira Carstensen

Best Animated Short Subject
“Dimanche/Sunday” – Patrick Doyon
“The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore” – William Joyce and Brandon Oldenburg
“La Luna” – Enrico Casarosa
“A Morning Stroll” – Grant Orchard and Sue Goffe
“Wild Life” – Amanda Forbis and Wendy Tilby

Best Live Action Short Subject
“Pentecost” – Peter McDonald and Eimear O’Kane
“Raju” – Max Zähle and Stefan Gieren
“The Shore” – Terry George and Oorlagh George
“Time Freak” – Andrew Bowler and Gigi Causey
“Tuba Atlantic” – Hallvar Witzø