Here Comes the Family (Films)

This is a great time to go to the movies if you've got families.  "The Muppets" was released to great critical acclaim and has re-introduced the characters in a way that means they'll be coming back in a big way after the dust settles with this film.  "Arthur Christmas" was released to great critical acclaim and is poised to become a new holiday classic for many families.  And Martin Scoresese's "Hugo" was released to great critical acclaim and is hailed as one of the best films of the year.  In fact, these three films are three of the best reviewed films of the year.  I know, I was sort of surprised too.  We're lucky to get one great family film a YEAR (much less three in a WEEK)!

So people have wondered that since the reviews are great, where do these films stand with Oscar?  Well, "Arthur Christmas" is officially the front-runner to win Best Animated Feature.  Provided that Spielberg's "The Adventures of Tintin" doesn't pull a surprise win, I think this is the one to beat.  "The Muppets" will get a Best Song nomination for "Pictures in My Head," but I think the witty screenplay has a chance of being nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay as well.  As for "Hugo"...well folks, this is the big one.  I think "Hugo" will be running in the race for Best Picture.  Word-of-mouth is going to make this film a sensation.  The 3D may wake the Academy up and make them realize this style of film making needs its own award.

Despite being pretty reliable, Scoresese is an underdog because he's directing a family film instead of a gritty drama (the Academy loves underdog stories).  Finally though, this is a movie (as Sasha Stone constantly reminds us) is a movie the Academy could just "like."  The trick to winning in this race is to be a movie that everyone can like (if not outright love), and in this respect "Hugo" has a lot going for it.  Either way, ignoring the Oscar race altogether, this is rare time when family films are plentiful in theaters, and parents need to take advantage of this because who knows when this much quality family entertainment will just fall into our laps again?

"Happy Feet Two" is NOT Winning Best Animated Feature (But it Might Win Best Song)!

I saw "Happy Feet Two" tonight on IMAX 3D.  You can read my full review here, but to sum it up: "Happy Feet Two" will NOT be nominated for Best Animated Feature!  It's not as dull as "Cars 2" was, but it certainly failed to live up the quality of the original film.  That said, I DO believe that P!nk has got Best Song in the bag with her downright moving song "Bridge of Light."  Listen to the song below...

...and tell me that's not one of the most things you've heard all year.  And trust me, this is BETTER in the movie itself!  Hey, I said the movie wasn't good, I didn't say it was terrible.  There were some great scenes in that movie...just not enough to make it a good movie, and competition is still even without Pixar in the race this year.  But Best Song...man, I'm almost tempted to say this win is in stone, but maybe the Broadway song from "Captain America: The First Avenger" will sneak in there.  Who knows?

Billy Crystal Hosting 2011 Oscars!

So, to recap:

• Brett Ratner makes homophobic slur.
• Academy and gay community get pissed off (rightfully so).
• Ratner quits.
• Eddie Murphy quits.
• Brian Grazer (who produced "Tower Heist") steps in.
• Billy Crystal comes back as host.

Alright, got all that?  Good.  Now then, all that aside, now that Billy Crystal is back on board, I'm feeling pretty good about the Oscars again.  I don't want to belittle any of the current hosts, but I truly feel that Billy Crystal and Steve Martin have made for the best modern day Oscar hosts, so this just made my day.  I would have been interested in seeing what Murphy was going to do with the show, but with Crystal back...well, I'm not so curious anymore.  *phew* Well, THAT was a mess the Academy got themselves into, but it looks like they might just pull out of it just fine now!

Brett Ratner Resigns As Oscar Producer

Looks like Brett Ratner's thoughtless remark that rehersing was for "fags" finally caught up with him.  Despite a public letter apology, he resigned as producer today.  The Academy had this to say:

“He did the right thing for the Academy and for himself,” Sherak said. “Words have meaning, and they have consequences. Brett is a good person, but his comments were unacceptable. We all hope this will be an opportunity to raise awareness about the harm that is caused by reckless and insensitive remarks, regardless of the intent.”

No word yet on whether or not this incident will hurt his current film "Tower Heist," or whether or not Eddie Murphy will still be interested in hosting with him.  I wish him luck in the future, but he really needs to be careful of what he says from this day on.

Know What's My Favorite Animated Number: 5!

Well folks, there are eighteen films up for Best Animated Feature, which means there will be five nominations.  Yay!  I always like five more than three, it's just a shame that five seems like a stretch this year.  For the record, here's what's up for consideration:

“The Adventures of Tintin”
“Alois Nebel”
“Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked”
“Arthur Christmas”
“Cars 2″
“A Cat in Paris”
“Chico & Rita”
“Gnomeo & Juliet”
“Happy Feet Two”
“Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil”
“Kung Fu Panda 2″
“Mars Needs Moms”
“Puss in Boots”
“Rango”
“Rio”
“The Smurfs”
“Winnie the Pooh”
“Wrinkles”

Looking over that list, conventional wisdom goes that the Academy will go in this direction:

The Adventures of Tintin
Arthur Christmas
Happy Feet Two
Rango
Winnie The Pooh

However, if the voting is done correctly, and based purely on quality and does not let popularity effect the voting at all, then this will be our five nominees:

The Adventures of Tintin
A Cat in Paris
Chico & Rita
Kung fu Panda 2
Rango

Yes, I fully expect "Cars 2" to sit this one out.  If it gets in, it will be because Pixar is loved by the Academy, but it has no serious chance of winning.  Of course there are some eyebrow raisers in there (wasn't the whole selling point of "The Smurfs" that it was a LIVE ACTION movie of the cartoon?!), but not a bad list. What's frustrating is that if "How To Train Your Dragon" was released this year, then there is no doubt in my mind it would have won.  Most of these films seem second nature to that one (although, in all fairness, "Toy Story 3" wasn't as good as "The Illusionist" either).  It will be interesting to see whether or not the Academy goes for the popular films, the smaller films that are of stunning quality, or a little of both.

And keep in mind folks, this category has made major mistakes in the past, just like every other award in this show.  In 2004 the list of nominees were "The Incredibles," "Shark Tale," and "Shrek 2."  "The Incredibles" walked home with the gold and was the obvious winner.  But look at those films and ask yourself this: How the heck did the Academy not have room for THIS movie?!

I know, it boggles the mind sometimes.

Oscar Going NC-17?

This is sort of old news, but Steve McQueen's controversial and haunting film "Shame" was given an NC-17 by the MPAA about a month ago.  Fox Searchlight decided not to edit the film or appeal it for the less restrictive R.  "Shame" has been screened at several film festivals prior to getting the rating.  It was cited as an early Oscar contender for Best Picture, and Michael Fassbender's performance was considered the first performance that could seriously be considered for a nomination for Best Actor.  The new rating could potentially hurt its chances with Oscar.  It could potentially hurt its box office potential as well, but Fox feels differently.  They feel that the NC-17 is a badge of honor, and that its time to take a chance and show that real adult films can have this rating attached to it without being labeled smut.

I didn't comment on the rating because I didn't think it mattered much, but now that I've had some time to think about it (and let all this discussion of the rating overpower the film itself), I have to ask this of the people who are worried about the NC-17: What's the big deal?  Does anyone here know what NC-17 stands for?  It stands for 'No Children Under 17 Admitted.'  Now then, what does the R rating stand for?  'Restricted: No Children Under 17 Admitted Without Parent or Guardian.'  Really folks, is this really that different?  The only real difference these two ratings share is that one parents can take their kids into the film, and the other one they can't.  And really, would any sane parent actually take their kids to this film?  Depending on how much award talk it gets, I don't think getting the R rating would have helped this film much anyway.

We went through this dance last year when "Blue Valentine" received an NC-17.  The Weinstein Company managed to appeal the rating though, and got an R rating for the film without any cuts.  The film ended up grossing more than $10 million dollars at the box office and made some money on DVD and BluRay.  The film only cost $1 million to make though.  Would the NC-17 rating have REALLY hurt that film much?!  I doubt it. Oddly enough, this situation is also similar to that of "Midnight Cowboy" from 1969, when that film was predicted to be totally shut out of the Oscars because of its X rating.  And what happened?  Well, the power of the film was too much to ignore, and "Midnight Cowboy" became the first X rated film to win Best Picture (a year after the very G rated "Oliver!" took home the prize).

I make no claims that "Shame" will be the first NC-17 film to win Best Picture.  I attribute that more to some heavy competition then the films rating though.  I am looking at this film though and believe that this could potentially be the start of the NC-17 curse being broken.  Ang Lee's "Lust, Caution" creaked the door open, and I think "Shame" will fully open it.  "Lust, Caution" made around $4 million dollars in the US and $67 million worldwide on a budget of $15 million.  That's successful, regardless how you look at it.  Actually, considering that was rated NC-17 AND was in Taiwan, $4 million dollars looks pretty impressive to me.  Of course, this is all speculation until the film actually opens, but I've got a funny feeling we can expect big things from "Shame."

Sizing Up The Directors 2011 (Midyear Predictions)

Well, it's time for our annual tradition of sizing up the directors and which ones stand a chance of getting a Best Director nomination.  Though the Academy has kind of/sort of reduced the Best Picture nominees down to five again, it could STILL go as high as ten, which makes the Best Director race all the more complicated!  There are so far NINE directors who (thus far) have a good chance at a nomination.  I'm going to discuss the first six whose films I've seen and tackle the last few in the next article

Name: Woody Allen
Current Film: "Midnight In Paris"
Nominated Before?: Yes, for "Annie Hall," "Interiors," "Broadway Danny Rose," "Hannah and Her Sisters," "Crimes and Misdemeanors," and "Bullets Over Broadway"
Won Before?: Yes, for "Annie Hall"

Going For Him/Her:  Woody Allen is one of Hollywood's best directors. He's directed many classic comedies and dramas, and has been nominated for this award even when some of his films aren't nominated for Best Picture.

Going Against Him/Her:  With a potential ten nominees, there's a chance the direction nominations will lean once more towards spectacle rather then acting.  Except for the picture and the screenplay, there's not a whole lot to suggest this is a directors film.  Has won this award before.

My Verdict:  I'm going to say yes, but Allen could easily lose his footing in this race as more films open.

Name: George Clooney
Current Film: "The Ides of March"
Nominated Before?: Yes, for "Good Night, and Good Luck"
Won Before?: No

Going For Him/Her:  Clooney composes of the entire package of his film.  This makes his film more of a directors film than all the others.

Going Against Him/Her:  Some people feel "The Ides of March" says nothing new.  Visually his film is the least exciting potential Best Picture nominee.

My Verdict:  Unless other films just drown him, he's in.

Name:  Terrence Mallick
Current Film:  "The Tree of Life"
Nominated Before?:  Yes, for "The The Thin Red Line."
Won Before?:  No.

Going For Him/Her:  "The Tree of Life" is one of the most visually stunning films of the year.  He's one of the most acclaimed directors who have never won an award. He's riding high on his win of the Palm d'Or.

Going Against Him/Her:  The movie has - for lack of a better term - been received lukewarmly.  Some love it, some hate it.  Most are confused.  He refuses interviews.

My Verdict:  I think he's in.  Even if "The Tree of Life" isn't an awards favorite the direction can not be ignored.

Name:  Bennett Miller
Current Film:  "Moneyball"
Nominated Before?:  Yes, for "Capote."
Won Before?:  No

Going For Him/Her:  "Moneyball" is a critical hit.  This movie has that "whole package" feel that voters love.

Going Against Him/Her:  It's not a flashy or stylish film compared to other movies this year.  Of all the things discussed, the direction is not one of them.

My Verdict:  Miller may have directed a great movie, but I don't think that will translate to a Best Director nomination.

Name: Nicolas Winding Refn
Current Film:  "Drive"
Nominated Before?:  No
Won Before?:  No

Going For Him/Her:  "Drive" is one of the most visual films of the year.  It's critically acclaimed for creating a new form of action genre.  He came out of nowhere.

Going Against Him/Her:  He came out of nowhere.  Is a relative unknown.  "Drive" has not caught on with audiences.  Film is very dark.

My Verdict:  He's in.  Of this I'm pretty confident.

Name:  David Yates
Current Film:  "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II"
Nominated Before?:  No
Won Before?:  No

Going For Him/Her:  "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II" is the most successful film of the year.  It's one of the best reviewed.  It ends the most successful movie franchise on a high note.

Going Against Him/Her:  It's Harry Potter.  Not to be mean but...well, that's kind of a tough sell to the Academy no matter how good the direction is.

My Verdict:  No.  Just...no.

The Double Hitter Oscars?

Never before in all the years I've been watching the Oscars have I seen anything like the potential number of double nominees this year. We have not one, not two, not three, but FOUR actors who are battling themselves in Oscar potential!

George Clooney is the one who stands to get the most Oscar nominations next year. He's a strong contender to be nominated for Best Actor in “The Descendants” and Best Supporting Actor in “The Ides of March.” He also is favored to get nominations for Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay for “The Ides of March,” and that film is looking like a Best Picture candidate (of which he is one of the producers). Left untouched, Clooney could be looking at FOUR Oscar nominations next year!

Another actor who could pull off a double nomination is Brad Pitt, who is getting rave reviews in his starring role for “Moneyball” and his supporting role in “The Tree of Life.” I think he's got a better chance at winning Best Actor, but a renewed interest in “The Tree of Life” could give this film an unexpected come awards time (and Pitt a Best Supporting Actor nomination).

Philip Seymore Hoffman is also on a role as he delivers two stand out performances in “Moneyball” as a skeptical coach, and in “The Ides of March” as a campaigner who values loyalty above all else. Since both these performances could be run in the Best Supporting Actor category, he can only be nominated for one. If it comes down to it, I think his performance in “The Ides of March” is the juicier role (and Jonah Hill is getting more praise for his supporting role in “Moneyball”).

The true wild card in all this is Ryan Gosling though. He delivers two star making performances in “Drive” and “The Ides of March.” While I believe his performance in “Drive” is the better performance, both performances are so loved that he might split the vote and wind up getting nominated for neither film.

 

There's some talk that Jessica Chastain could be nominated for Best Supporting Actress for either “The Tree of Life” or “The Help,” but I'm not completely buying it. Her performance in “The Tree of Life” is poetic, but since its silent the Academy could rule that Terrence Malicks direction is giving the real performance there. As for her performance in “The Help”...its more likely, but Octavia Spencer is running away with the Oscar talk here, so I'm skeptical. Either way, its going to be VERY interesting to see how this all plays out!

What Are Chances of Oscar Love For "50/50": About 50/50 I'd Say

So one of the movies that I'm going to cautiously be keeping an eye on during this Oscar race is "50/50."  I haven't written my review yet (it should come in at around three and a half stars for me), but spoil it a bit for you, this is a good movie.  It may not be the greatest film in the world, but its amazing how it takes a serious situation that is so bleak for everyone, and manages to make it funny while also acknowledging the despair that comes along with such bad news.  Again, it may not be a great film, but its a good film in what it ends up doing.  Seth Rogan was his usual funny self (though maybe a bit too routine to get an Oscar nomination), and Anna Kendrick was good as a young psychiatrist trying to help the main character.

However, the standout performance is obviously that of Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who not only brings humor to the role, but also frustration and despair.  A role like this is tricky because the main character has to be confident enough for us to believe he can survive this, but vulnerable enough that we feel his pain.  He carries this movie so well, that I want to seriously consider his chances at getting a Best Actor nomination for the role.  This is the sort of juicy role the Academy loves, and we shouldn't discredit this one just because its a comedy.  A think other potential nominees include Best Original Screenplay and Best Makeup.  Will it make the Best Picture lineup?  Hmm...maybe.  It is a movie that would appear to get some number one votes, so you never know.  For now though, Levitt's performance is the one to watch out for.

I Want To Be A Paperback Writer...PAPERBACK WRITER!!!

So faithful readers, I have an announcement to make: I'm writing a book.  An Oscar book to be more precise.  See, its like this...

Alright, so the picture quality is not all that great (and I know I misspelled "presents," and I'm more ashamed of that than anything else I've done recently).  Just because because I understand film, doesn't mean I'm good at making it.  I actually meant to bring this up earlier, but every time I would have time to work on this blog, there would be a topic I wanted to discuss.  I didn't have time to pimp my book, so I put the Kickstarter link on the right hand side and hoped someone would see it (unlike the short story, this had an actual reason to be there).  As mentioned in the video, this book is supposed to be the first in an 83+ book series.  After the initial book I want to write two a year until they are all published.  If this Kickstarter project succeeds, then I can have future books preordered in the same method (though much lower starting costs, since I'll have an established account with the book publisher).

I picked the 60 day option because I wasn't sure if 30 days would be enough.  Turns out, it wasn't.  After 24 days the project has stalled at $721.  That's 14% of the whole project funded.  That's a good start, but it's not promising.  Its sat there for several days untouched and unmoved.  Kickstarter itself has buried the project due to lack of activity on it.  My mom says that I should be patient, that lots of people wait until the last minute.  It's true that I expect to see a bump during the final days...but a $4,300 bump?  I don't know.  My dad doesn't believe the project will succeed, but encourages me to publish the book as an e-book.  He has a point.  I mean, e-books are slowly becoming the way of the future (even if most authors find they make next to no money publishing this way).

I'm sort of old fashioned though, and would love to see the book go to print, even if its just a small amount.  A digital copy would be available either way, but having something to put on the shelf just feels more right.  Since a good portion of the book has been online for free for awhile, the difference between having the e-book as opposed to reading most of the book online for free is...well, the reason for purchasing a copy is much less (though there WILL be exclusive commentary and reviews that will never go on my site).  This book is another reason I started updating the blog again: It was to promote this project.  There's also a sense that - should this succeed - this could all be new material for next years book.  Granted, it would be extra material, but that's fine by most people I think.

The point of this post is to let you all know that this project exists.  Maybe its also a way for me to wonder out loud whether or not it will succeed.  I'm hoping it does.  So far all the movie sites I've e-mailed to help promote the project haven't even gotten back to me.  So now I'm in my own underdog story.  Maybe I'll write a screenplay about it someday?  Who knows.  But anyways, there's the project.  If you'd be interested in a book, please consider pledging.  It goes without saying that projects like this could help support the site, all while giving you something in return.  Well...I guess that's that.  Tune in later for some thoughts I have about "Moneyball" and its Oscar potential.

Academy To Members: Dinner Bribes Are Over

I know I'm a little late to the party, but I want to take a moment to comment on the Academy's recent new rule that says once a film is nominated the studio can't throw any elaborate parties for Academy members.  Which means if the nominations aren't announced yet, you can throw a dinner party (or something to that effect) for Academy members to attend.  Once the films are nominated though, this will be against the rules.  The Academy's reasoning for doing this - they claim - is to encourage voting members to go to the theater to see movies.  A noble quote, but quite untrue.  If this were the case, then they would also put on a ban on "For Your Consideration" screeners, which gives members the biggest excuse to not go to the theater to see a nominated film.

No, this was done for a very simple reason: They want to try and eliminate bribery.  The fact of the matter is, these big parties are almost like hidden bribes.  The companies would invite members to a fancy dinner, social event, and maybe throw in some dancing.  Sometimes there would be a screening of the film that was up for Best Picture, but not always.  Big companies could afford to make these parties as big as they wanted to, giving the illusion of the event representing how good the movie is.  For a movie like "Winter's Bone," which was released as an independent film, the studio can't afford these big parties and dinners to sway the voting branch (and don't deny it, that's what these parties are for).

The Academy basically is getting tired of the over-the-top campaigning that involves events that have little to do with the actual movie itself.  The parties could still be thrown BEFORE the nominations are announced (so I guess the studios can still buy a nomination), but once nominated the parties have to come to a halt!  The studios can set up screenings of their movies with Q & A's with the film makers, but once dinner is provided for free its considered a bribe.  So while this may not be about getting voters back in the theaters, it IS a step to get excess campaigning under control and making the voting about the movies once more!  And despite all the grumblings from within, that's a GOOD thing!  Look Academy members, it only costs about $20 per person to eat at Olive Garden, so save your breath for a rule change that's worth complaining about.

Why Harry Potter Is NOT Getting A Best Picture Nomination!

This is going to hurt me to say it, more than it will hurt you to read it, but it must be said: "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II" is NOT going to be one of the ten nominees for Best Picture!  I know its not a done deal until the nominations are actually announced, but its so close to a done deal its worth dealing with now rather than later.  We had a brief flirt with the idea that it could get in (even Entertainment Weekly and Awards Daily briefly considered the possibility), but now its time to climb off that cloud and face the reality.  To understand why we flirted with this idea and why it's not going to happen.  First of all, there was that opening weekend.  Never before had we gotten such a strong opening that made so much money.  The Academy respects money and success.

However, even though "The Dark Knight" and "Shrek 2" are in the top ten biggest money makers of all time, neither one got a Best Picture nomination.  Movies like this tend to have a better Oscar chance when the film has legs.  It sends a strong message to the Academy that the film is being watched, re-watched, and is being recommended to everyone.  This movie, frankly, dropped like a brick the second weekend.  It stuck around for a few weeks, but there were no real legs and no momentum at all.  That suggests that the fans - and ONLY the fans - really went to see this!  Considering that the Academy has yet to award any of the films a single award in the past eleven years, I think its safe to say there aren't as many fans in the Academy as we'd like to think there are.

Also folks, this is not only the 8th film in the franchise, its the second part of a two part film.  This film is hostile to newcomers.  It makes little to no sense if you haven't been watching it all this time, and even if it does make sense you don't get the emotional depth from the film without having committed to the previous films.  I know "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" swept several years ago, but even that movie is somewhat friendly to newcomers.  This one...isn't.  I'm sorry, but its not.  I know I gave the film a five star review, but before you bring that I up I want to mention the note at the bottom of the review that said the star grade was variable at best, and that whether you had seen the previous films or not could significantly alter the grade for someone.

Finally, there are just some better movies coming out.  "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II" may be a very good movie, but is it better than "The Tree of Life," "Drive," or even "Bridesmaids?"  Probably not (though again, its a matter of personal opinion).  With upcoming films like "The Artist," "The Idles of March," and "Moneyball" getting rave reviews, do you really think the Academy is going to remember a film to a series they've largely ignored?  I feel there's more I could say (and you Potter fans are likely to debate me to death in the comments section below), but it's a sad fact we have to get used to: "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II" is not getting a Best Picture nomination.  And the sooner we can accept that, the sooner we can move on.

Here Comes The "Bridesmaids"

After a hard night as work (don't ask), I went home to my humble house and popped in a movie that I picked up Tuesday: "Bridesmaids."  I saw this movie earlier in the year and deemed it the surprise hit of the year.  I gave it four stars in my review, but considering how few great comedies we've gotten this year, maybe I should have added an extra half star to the grade.  The year is almost complete and there hasn't been a more funny film I've seen this year (the film is very likely to make my Top Ten list).  Re-watching it on BluRay made me realize something: This film may have Oscar potential.  I know, I know, comedy is a tough sell for the Academy.  But you know what?  Once in awhile you just sort of have to go with your heart.  It seems unlikely on paper that this would get nominated for anything, but considering the shallow competition we've gotten so far, it seems more crazy not to predict it at this point.

It has box office success.  It has a breakout performance by Kristen Wiig.  It's also one of two big hits this year starring mostly women ("The Help" being the other one).  And by golly, this is such a funny movie that I'm starting to feel like a bitter old man not predicting it to get nominated for SOMETHING!  So first I'm going to predict Kristen Wiig getting a nomination for Best Actress.  This was a breakout role for her, and she just won an Emmy a few nights ago, so she may have momentum to get a nomination here.  I'm also throwing in a prediction for Best Original Screenplay, since the screenplay categories are where comedies tend to fare very good.  Don't believe me: "Shrek" got a nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay.  No joke, look it up.  My last prediction is a long shot, but I'm going to predict a nomination for Melissa McCarthy for Best Supporting Actress.

I know, that last one sounds more crazy than anything else, but think about it: She STEALS the movie!  Every scene she's in she's upstaging the entire cast of characters, and she's the most complex woman in the whole film without getting all serious and depressing.  Way back in 1960 Peter Ustinov won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for the Stanley Kubrick film "Spartacus."  You may think that for an epic that must have been a serious role, but you'd be wrong.  It was comical.  VERY comical!  Kevin Kline and Alan Arkin won Oscars in this category for playing largely goofy roles, so if a comedy performance is going to get a nomination, it will normally be as a supporting character.  Whether it gets these nominations or not is up in the air, but one thing should be obvious: If you haven't seen "Bridesmaids" yet, you are missing out on the best comedy of the year.  No joke, you really are.

Update: I made a mistake in the article.  It wasn't Kristen Wiig who won an Emmy it was actually Melissa McCarthy.  I'm sort of glad I was wrong about this though, as it gives McCarthy's chance at a Best Supporting Actress nod more weight.

"J. Edgar" Trailer

Today we get our first real look at Clint Eastwood's "J. Edgar."  While Eastwood has not had a film in serious competition since "Letters From Iwo Jima," never underestimate him.  That's how so many people lost money the year "The Aviator" was supposed to sweep the Oscars and give Marty his much coveted Oscar.  This film is an Eastwood film, and he's directed two Best Picture winners.  It stars Leonardo DiCaprio, who routinely shows up in the Best Actor category.  It has a screenplay by Dustin Lance Black, who won an Oscar just a couple of years ago for "Milk."  Finally, it's a biopic about a VERY controversial figure!  Yeah, we haven't seen it yet, but it might be best to consider it a contender.

Best Picture Prediction Count

I've got more articles to write (one that Harry Potter fans might be upset with me once written), but for statistics sake, here's where my personal Oscar count would be fore my (current) five Best Picture nominees:

• Drive: 8 nominations
• Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II: 11 nominations
• The Help: 4 nominations
• Midnight In Paris: 3 nominations
• The Tree of Life: 6 nominations

Again, these are just predictions, and just because I would nominate one film with more than double the nominations than other films, that does not make that film the best film of the year.  It only means I think there are more individual aspects of that film that are worth nominating that the others don't have ("Midnight In Paris" is one of the best films of the year DESPITE not being a very flashy film).

State of the Race: Best Picture Midyear

I was supposed to do this in the middle of the year, but there were so few contenders in the race I delayed it a bit. Now more films have come out, so lets look at how the Best Picture race is shaping up.

Film: Drive
Going For It: Film opened to rave reviews. Audiences love it! Critics are getting giddy! Released late enough in the year that voters can remember it. Ryan Gosling is a favorite to win Best Actor.
Going Against It: Film is dark. So far the opening box office has been soft at best. Might not have staying power.
Chances of Getting Nominated: Right now it's looking good, but we'll have to see if it keeps its traction against new contenders as they come out.

Film: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part II
Going For It: Final installment of long running series. Most successful movie of the year. Critics love it and audiences...well, you know how audiences responded to it. Had a great opening week to almost half a billion dollars...
Going Against It: ...and then dropped like a brick the following week. Fantasy movies don't do well with the Academy. Harry Potter has yet to win any Oscars...PERIOD! The high praise was fleeting at best.
Chances of Getting Nominated: Sorry Potter fans, but I think this ones out.

Film: The Help
Going For It: Strong word-of-mouth. Surprise hit of the year. Cast features mostly women and practically everyone is going to see it.
Going Against It: Cast features mostly women (men outnumber women in the Academy). There's concerns about how race and relations are portrayed.
Chances of Getting Nominated: I'll be surprised if this one isn't in.

Film: Midnight In Paris
Going For It: Smart script. Weird premise that works. Woody Allen usually gets at least a screenplay nomination.
Going Against It: Movie might be too lighthearted. Allen is still a somewhat controversial figure in the movie world.
Chances of Getting Nominated: Eh...bit of a toss up at the moment.

Film: The Tree of Life
Going For It: Extremely artsy. Critics love it. Terrence Malick alone carries a lot of respect with the Academy members. Won the Palm d'Or for Best Picture at the Cannes Film Festival.
Going Against It: Audiences hate it. Most people don't get it. About as non-traditional an Oscar movie as you get.
Chances of Getting Nominated: Very little...much as I hate to admit it.

Ryan Gosling To “Drive” To Oscar

Well folks, there's another movie to keep an eye on: “Drive.” This action film has opened soft at the box office (a little over $4 million on the opening day), but the rave reviews are piling up. It appears to be a “love or hate it” film, but so far more people seem to love it than hate it. It's not even polarizing female audiences, which is amazing since “Drive” is being advertised as a more mature version of “The Fast & The Furious” (though I still conclude that “Fast Five” was the most pleasant surprise for me this year). The general praise from all the reviews Rotten Tomatoes picked up on is “a hyper-stylized blend of striking imagery and violence, Drive represents a fully realized vision of arthouse action.”

So what we have is a summer movie that was so artsy, that the studios decided to release it later in the year to capitalize more on the awards than the summer crowds. Did the studio do this because they trusted the more serious movie fans to carry this better than the teenage summer crowd that normally abandons movies after their opening weekend? Who knows. Aside from people commenting on how artful the film is though, the main praise is going to Ryan Gosling. His performance is considered the driving force behind this movie (no pun intended...if you want to believe me), and though he's young, there are few major performances so far this year that are challenging it. So far his biggest competition is George Clooney (ironically, his co-star of the upcoming “The Idles of March”) in “The Descendants,” Jean Dujardin in “The Artist,” and Michael Fassbender in “Shame.”

So what chance does he stand of winning? So far...hard to say, the movies listed above have yet to be seen by the audiences, so its hard to decide how this will swing. Here's a few things to consider though. First of all, George Clooney is clearly the biggest threat because his film HAS been seen by a good chunk of critics, and the buzz is already building! That said, he's won an Oscar, and that (sadly) sometimes counts against you). Jean Dujardin is riding high on the praise of “The Artist,” but he's largely an unknown, and that could hurt him. Michael Fassbender is known to audiences as Magneto from “X-Men: First Class,” but his role in “Shame” is that of a sex addict, which might be a rather challenging film for members of the Academy to go for.

One thing seems certain though: Gosling is in for a Best Actor nomination. Maybe more performances will come along, but this seems like a safe bet. “Drive” also seems to be in a good position for supporting nods, art direction nods, and even a Best Picture nod doesn't seem out of the question at this point. It will all come down to a couple big things: Whether the Academy and audiences embrace the film, and whether or not they “like” it enough to give it the nominations.

Are The Oscars Stone Cold Deaf? #2: 1985

elcome to the feature on this blog I like to call "Are The Oscars Stone Cold Deaf?" This is a feature that is dedicated to one of the most highly publicized awards in the Oscar season that is (for some reason) still underrated. This may have more to do with the fact that the Best Song category is the reason we still have dance numbers in the Oscar telecast (and people hate those dance numbers), but it doesn't change the fact that there are many great songs that get nominated for Best Song that never win. Sometimes the winners are either of lesser quality, not nearly as good, or so inferior to a fellow nominee that you just have wonder if the Oscars are just stone cold deaf. For our second installment we're going to look at the year 1985 (again, where the winner was not a total loss). Here's what won:

Now I love Lionel Richie as much as the next guy, but good as that song is its sort of a lightweight to honor it with a "Best Song" Oscar.  Another song that would have been a slightly better choice is this one...

...which ironically comes from the same movie.  "White Nights."  Now these are both good songs.  I'm not disputing that.  However, there was a song nominated here that was so catchy, so memorable, that it took the world by storm and hasn't left since.  And that is...

..."The Power of Love" by Huey Lewis and the News.  From the classic film "Back To The Future," this is what good memorable music is.  It's become not only an iconic movie song, but an iconic song in general that is still played on the radio as if it were brand new to this very day.  In this case, I think Oscar really blew it.

Viola Davis's Oscar Campaign Needs 'Help'

This week "The Help" crossed the $100 million dollar mark.  It shows once again that making smart films for older women is an untapped market that Hollywood needs to stop ignoring.  It's avoided a lot of controversy on the basis that people of different ages, colors, and genders love it.  It makes you feel good, but it doesn't sugarcoat things.  All these reasons make it one to watch for Best Picture, and few will argue that.  However, there IS an argument that is circling the web: Viola Davis's performance!  Many people agree that it is an Oscar worthy performance and worthy of a nomination.  The debate is this: Will be be nominated in the lead category or the supporting category?  I find this to be a stupid question to ask, but one that is being asked none-the-less.

Davis's character narrates the film.  The film opens with her.  It closes with her.  She is instrumental to getting Skeeters (Emma Stones character) book project off the ground.  She tells the most personal stories in the film.  In my mind there is no question: She is the lead performance in this film.  You can't even describe the film without mentioning her.  Yet the debate is that she might get put in the supporting category because its easier to win there.  That may be a good publicist move, but in my eyes its a huge disservice to what this film is trying to say.  I'm wondering if the irony of this debate has registered with anyone but me, but am I the only one who finds it odd that we're considering putting Davis in the supporting category when the film really is about her?  Isn't this the kind of lower class profiling that the film fights so hard against?

This whole movie is about black women making their voice heard in a world that is unwilling to listen to them.  That a white woman helps get their voice out does not take away from the fact that its their stories that are being told.  In a sense, that makes this movie their movie as well.  I don't mind Octavia Spencer getting all the buzz for being a potential nominee for Best Supporting Actress.  She deserves all the praise she's getting, but her part is much smaller compared to other characters in this film.  Davis though...without her character there is no movie.  Period.  It's really about her in every single way.  How society dictated what she does with her life.  The dilemma that she spends more time raising white kids then her own son.

That being a maid is not what she wants to do, but its the only thing she CAN do at this point!  It's her journey we sympathis most with.  If Davis does get an Oscar nomination she will have deserved it.  If she wins it will be because she gave the best performance of the year.  If it's in the supporting category though I think it will be a sad commentary on how much society REALLY views black women these days!

Patriotism Never Sounded So Catchy

For those who are feeling particularly patriotic this morning, take a listen to "Star Spangled Man," a catchy Broadway-style tune by Alan Silvestri (the Oscar-nominated composer who wrote the "Back To The Future" theme) for the new film "Captain America: The First Avenger."  And yes, I would SO love to see this nominated for Best Song and performed with lots of flamboyant glee at the Oscar telecast next year!

Memo To The Academy: Honor the Voice Actors

Alright Academy: It's time to get over your old fashioned beliefs about animation and create a category for honoring voice over work.  I think it became painfully obvious after "Rango" was released that voice acting is crucial to these animated movies.  More than ever before, big established actors are giving out Oscar worthy performances in voice over work.  Yet none of it is being recognized, and the Academy is too busy deciding whether five movies are enough or not in the Best Picture category, and are thus overlooking awards that would obviously be good for the show.  Think about it: If you start awarding Oscars to voice actors it gives you a chance to have a whole new branch in the Academy to sell memberships to.

You can attract lots of big name talent who might make poor live action films, but in animation shine.  You could attract kids to watching the Oscars because animation will now have a very prominent role at the awards.  And - because many voice actors are also face actors in real life - you honor more actors, which are the main reason anyone not as interested in movies watch the Oscars anymore (Editor's Note: The hosts haven't been a major draw for this show in YEARS).  I'm going to make a list of what a potential award category would look like, complete with nominees.


Best Actor In An Animated Feature

Antonio Banderas - "Puss In Boots" (I'm making an educated guess on this one based on his previous work)
Jack Black - "Kung Fu Panda 2"
Jim Cummings - "Winnie The Pooh"
Johnny Depp - "Rango"
Jesse Eisenberg - "Rio"


Best Actress In An Animated Feature

Emily Blunt - "Gnomeo & Juliet"
Isla Fisher - "Rango"
Anne Hathawy - "Rio"
Salma Hayek - "Puss In Boots" (Again, this one's a guess)
Angelina Jolie - "Kung Fu Panda 2"


Best Actor Featured In An Animated Feature

Ned Beatty - "Rango"
Michael Caine - "Cars 2"
Dustin Hoffman - "Kung Fu Panda 2"
Tom Kenny - "Winnie The Pooh"
Gary Oldman - "Kung Fu Panda 2"


Best Actress Featured In An Animated Feature

Abigal Breslin - "Rango"
Joan Cusak - "Mars Needs Moms"
Leslie Mann - "Rio"
Emily Mortimer - "Cars 2"
Michelle Yeoh - "Kung Fu Panda 2"




Now some of those names I'm just tossing out there because we haven't seen ALL the animated films that are supposed to come out, but take a moment and look at that list!  That's not only good acting, it's a considerable amount of talent you're drawing.  You can't tell me this category wouldn't catch on when you have nominees like that?  Who knows, maybe you could give some of the "de faco" awards to actors who get nominated in the voiceover category, instead of wasting it on the main acting awards (*cough* Paul Newman's Best Actor win for "The Color of Money"*cough*).  Just a thought.

Best Song Frontrunner

Disney's "Winnie The Pooh" is currently out in theaters.  Chances are you haven't seen it (it DID open opposite of "Harry Potter and the Death;y Hallows Part II" after all).  Well, I did, and though it's not the best animated film I've seen, I wouldn't be too surprised to see it win Best Animated Feature.  It's not complicated but it's so charming and sweat that it's hard not to leave with a big smile on your face, which could go a long way with the increasingly aging Academy members.  One aspect I did like though was the music, which was written but Kristen and Robert Lopez (who was one of the co-writers of the "Avenue Q" score if you can believe it).  I don't know if this song is going to be groundbreaking, but it's fun and catchy enough that I think it would be a lot of fun to see this nominated for Best Song.

Back In Game: The State of the Race

Well, more than a year after I stopped updating this blog I thought I would never return to it. To be honest, I almost deleted this blog because I felt it was just taking up space.  Well, a recent book project I'm working on (which I'll discuss more about in a few days) sort of jolted me back to this blog, and I realized that this blog still may have some usefulness to it.  So how do I make my grand return?  Why, but discussing the state of the race.  And there are three films I want to focus on.  The first two are the closest things to locks on a Best Picture nomination, with a third that sounds like a sure thing on paper (but a long shot in practice).  The first is Terrence Malick's very polarizing "The Tree of Life."  Though praised by many (including myself) as a masterpiece that must been seen to be believed, it never-the-less has not caught on with the public.

They don't get it.  They wonder what the point of it is.  The non-linear structure confuses them.  I think most people go in expecting a story and don't realize that "The Tree of Life" is a movie more about ideas than what happens to the characters on screen.  I know that sounds strange, but that's pretty much what it is.  Despite it clearly being the best film of the year so far, this is the same Academy who awarded "The King's Speech" (a good movie by the way) a Best Picture nomination over the more ambitious "The Social Network."  Why?  Hard to tell, but there was a lot of talk that most members of the Academy didn't even know what Facebook was.  If THAT was a problem, I see "The Tree of Life" having a much steeper climb!  The other movie that seems like a good bet right now is Woody Allen's "Midnight In Paris."  Ironically, this is the polar opposite of "The Tree of Life."

This is a movie that is story driven, has well defined characters, and have a journey and destination in mind.  That fact that it's popular AND smart makes this a good bet even if the coming months should bring us more ambitious films!  Part me is still a little cynical of the idea that the Academy would nominate this for Best Picture when they couldn't bring themselves to nominate "Match Point" for anything other than it's screenplay, but with the Best Picture number that could be anywhere between five to ten films...well, anythings possible.  And then we have...

..."Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II."  None of the Harry Potter films have won Best Picture.  None of the Harry Potter films have won any Oscars.  Most of the movies are critically mixed.  But "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II" could change all that.  It's opened to the best reviews of the franchise.  It's got some of the best reviews of the year.  They match up (if not pass) the previous ten years Best Picture winners.  Not to mention audiences around the world are eating it up to the point where it could potentially make more money than "The Dark Knight" and "Avatar."  If this was any other movie, it would be automatically considered a strong Best Picture nominee (if not winner).  Since it's Harry Potter though, we're just going to have to wait and see if the Academy follows the audiences cheers.

With so little competition nobody knows anything yet.  Well, actually, I do know one thing: For the first time I can think of, Pixar has absolutely no chance of being nominated in Best Animated Feature.  That may make that race at least a little more interesting.