Amy Adams, Hugh Grant, Aaron Taylor Johnson and Silence were the two biggest snubs, still its great that the 5 in lead actor were the ones that we wanted.
I’m looking forward to see your ranking, here is mine (part of):
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Ali – 5 He gives a very subtle performance as a troubled gangster in a powerful movie. Never plays a mentor, rather a guy who knows what is good, but for some reasons chose doing bad. Sometimes one can think he is equally lost as Chiron. Amazing dinner scene when he admits to Chiron that he sells drugs. It is really pity that Juan disappears so early in a story.
Bridges – 5 He has already played a sheriff in “True Grit”, but overdid mannerisms. Here he’s much more disciplined. He creates lovely relationship with Alberto, whom he hates and loves in the same time. For most of the film he plays a grumpy old fellow, but I love single moments when he shows his more sensitive face. The scene when he kills the Ben Foster’s character is a little masterpiece.
Shannon – 4.5 He gives disciplined, though delightful performance, almost tragic at the end, in a surprisingly bad movie (especially Amy Adams’ part). As a smart, but somehow retreated sheriff he never overdoes his accent, never does anything to show off, unlike Taylor-Johnson. His relationship with Jake Gyllenhaal’s character evolves properly from lack of trust from both sides to sort of friendship. The Academy made surprising, but very good decision to choose Shannon over Taylor-Johnson.
Hedges – 4 He’s believable as a troubled teenager, having enough anger, intelligence and timidity to show Patrick’s struggle with his father’s death and Casey Affleck’s terrible performance. Although he’s got moments of madness, vulgarity and sadness, he never goes too much in one side, portraying Patrick as a conglomerate of mixed feelings. He tries to show Patrick as an ordinary kid under extraordinary pressure.
Patel – 3 He is charming and introverted enough to honestly play older Saroo. Fine love relation with Rooney Mara and mother-and-son with Nicole Kidman. He’s doing bit too much in his final scene, planned as heartbreaking. Generally, he is ok, but, truly, never does nothing more than the script requires.
GOLDEN GLOBE WINNER: Taylor-Johnson – 2.5 I think someone told him to play another version of Heath Ledger’s Joker. Very mannered, over-the-top, almost caricatured performance. He doesn’t bother to show any sort of motivation of what Ray is doing. He’s got one more subtle scene, though, when Ray confronts Jake Gyllenhaal’s character; he’s able to put all the Ray’s evil in one glance. He gives unbridled, but empty performance.
BEST LEADING ACTOR
Washington – 3.5 In what was planned by Washington-director as Washington-actor’s one man show, he gives much over-the-top performance in a very theatrical fashion. Everything says: look at me, I can act. He is dominative, witty, angry, but generally too much calculative. I’m not surprised he was awarded Tony for this character, but it doesn’t fully work in a movie.
Gosling - 3 He gives quite a charming performance, though not very much as an actor. He proved he can dance well enough to attract the viewer, but when it comes to singing and acting it’s more questionable. Sebastian’s transformation from idealist to opportunist playing in a teenage band is not very believable. He bases on his charm, look and fitness skills, but doesn’t really have any chance to prove acting abilities.
Affleck – 2 He gives a terrible deadpan performance lacking any emotional depth whatsoever. Critics say this is a triumph of minimalism, but, truly, this is very mannered performance. I watched this movie twice and every time I was astonished how limited his reactions are. It’s full of lazy lingering looks, sudden suspensions of voice, and not much more.
Davis – 4.5 In a Washington’s one man show, she gives a surprisingly quiet, though strong performance. She’s got one naturalistic Oscar-like scene, but I like more her final dialogue with younger son, when she explains her and her late husband’s choices. She’s realistic, doesn’t show off like Washington, but doesn’t let her character to be pushed to the corner either. It’s a fine supporting performance.
Kidman – 4 I was surprised to see Kidman in such a good acting shape. She is believable as a troubled mother, despite dreadful hairstyles. I like her subtle reactions, she’s still able to show all the emotions in the character’s face. It would be almost perfect performance, if not her final monologue. There are indeed strong moments there, but also very weird story about ghost she saw when she was 12. I started to think if she’s mentally stable. It wasn’t the point, I guess.
Harris – 3.5 Unlike Ali, she was given a chance to show a dark side of her character, but for most of the movie she screams and yells in sort of caricatured way. She has, though, a truly breathtaking final scene, when her aged character says sorry to Chiron.
Williams – 2 People tend to love her final scene, but what I see there is acting. And not very good acting. She acts crying, but doesn’t cry at all. I wouldn’t believe her for a second. She was given only 10 minutes altogether, but either didn’t do anything special, or preferred much too mannered, not believable fashion to show Randi’s chaotic character.
Spencer – not seen yet
BEST LEADING ACTRESS
Stone – 4 Her Mia is natural and kind of charming, I suppose. Stone tends to play very irritating figures, but this time she succeeded in imposing some discipline on her character. She’s funny, sometimes sexy, crazy and reflective. She is not a master of singing, but it somehow fits Mia. From what wasn’t the biggest acting challenge, she made an interesting character.
Huppert – not seen yet Portman – not seen yet Negga – not seen yet Streep – not seen yet
Costner - 4(I feel he definitely would have been nominated back in the 90's for this performance. It is good work from him though in a very traditional supporting type of performance. He is able to make the combination of kind of a certain no nonsense attitude to get the work done, and a real warmth revolving around his care for the people working for him quite natural. He does a lot with just reactions, such as when his character takes an immediate action Costner makes it absolutely believable just through his reaction to Henson's character's anguish.)
On the nominations. First just in general I was very disappointed by the lack of Silence, though at this point I expected it.
Documentary:
Actually have seen two of them the 13th which starts off strong but I feel gets a little unwieldy near the end, and O.J. which is altogether outstanding.
1. O.J. Made in America 2. The 13th
Foreign:
ERDMANN!!!! EHHHHHHH
Makeup And Haristyling:
Haven't seen Ove. I'm actually a bit mixed on Star Trek since although the Jaylah's makeup was pretty great, I felt the designs of Krall's and the other villains seemed terribly uninspired and even phony looking.
Suicide Squad I think is a bit mixed as well in that the Croc design didn't work at all, what was with how large they made his head in comparison to the rest of his body, the same goes for the second Enchantress and Incubus though I think the majority of those two were CGI. I do think the first Enchantress makeup was decent though. Joker and Harley I don't think brought anything new to those characters. The previous iterations for Joker I'd argue had superior designs and execution.
1. Star Trek 2. Suicide Squad
A fairly weak line up from those two hopefully old Ove offers something better.
All fine choices to be sure particularly Hacksaw and Arrival, Haven't seen 13 Hours though there usually isn't anything wrong with Michael Bay's techs.
1. Arrival 2. Hacksaw Ridge 3. La La Land 4. Rogue One
Sound Editing:
I don't La La Land had to be here, though there isn't anything wrong with its "edited sounds" otherwise a strong lineup again particularly Arrival and Hacksaw Ridge.
1. Hacksaw Ridge 2. Arrival 3. Deepwater Horizon 4. Sully 5. La La Land
Visual Effects:
Didn't notice Kubo got in, that's a great nod since it recognizes the work around the stop motion that helped to amplify it.
Deepwater Horizon I think was pretty strong work outside of one exterior bit of CGI, of the Horizon in a day time scene, that looked wonky.
Doctor Strange's visuals were all together spellbinding (pun intended) and mind bending so a nomination well deserved.
Rogue One is a funny case actually, and kind of goes into one's philosophy on appraising the effects. The thing is the recreations technically are top of the line technology, but to me they were one of the worst parts of the film. They still did not look good, and how the visuals look within the film is how I feel they should be appraised. Though everything else within the film looked quite good to be sure.
The Jungle Book is funny in that it just a few sets and a couple humans from being an animated film. That said it is some stunning work to be sure. Every animal is excellent looking and blend so well with both the environment and even the real human.
1. Doctor Strange 2. The Jungle Book 3. Kubo and the Two Strings 4. Deep Water Horizon 5. Rogue One
One of the worst snubs of all the nominations has to be "Drive it like you Stole it".
For the record my reaction to the other three is based solely on hearing the song.
"Can't Stop the Feeling" - Really did not care for it. Just sounded very standard to me.
"How Far I'll Go" - An excellent addition to the "Something More" style Disney song. Lovely work to be sure.
"The Empty Chair" - Really did not care for it. A tiresome ballad. If they wanted a ballad they should have gone for the much superior "To Find You" from Sing Street.
"Audition" - Beautiful song altogether with such an emotional power it to it as well. I love it.
"City of Stars" - Really like the single version but adore the duet. So I must know which one is it?
1. "Audition" 2. "City of Stars" - Duet 3. "How Far I'll Go" 4. "City of Stars" - Single 5. "Can't Stop the Feeling" 6. "The Empty Chair"
Score:
I guess I have to watch Passengers now. Any who. Moonlight, even if I did not take to it as much as everyone else seems to have, I still found to be very strong, and La La Land is such a beautiful score that is so memorable and so essential to the success of that film.
1. La La Land 2. Moonlight
Production Design:
Again I guess I have to watch Passengers.
Arrival's production was sheer brilliance in terms of the minimalist design.
La La Land was gorgeous set after gorgeous set, especially those featured in the epilogue.
Hail Caesar, an extremely deserving nomination. Such lovely yet still original feeling creations of the grand Hollywood sets of old. Not to forget the excellent period work all around it.
Fantastic Beasts, also very strong work to be sure. This a great lineup, hopefully Passengers is not a spoiler. Anyway terrific work in terms of creating both the magical world, but also a magical world of the 1920's.
1. La La Land 2. Hail Caesar! 3. Arrival 4. Fantastic Beasts
Costume Design:
Allied, Kudos to recognizing this very deserving aspect of the film. Downright beautiful period work, and feels unique which is an accomplishment given the amount of costumes from the period.
Florence Foster Jenkins - Some fine tuxedos but I suppose it is all about Florence's dresses and costumes which are all very nice or ridiculous depending on the need.
Fantastic Beasts, again like its production design strong work in its capture of period, but with the right twist on top. I have particular affection for Newt's blue coat, I'll admit.
La La Land, excellent all the way as making costumes in a modern setting can be difficult in terms of making them actually stand out, and boy do they. Lovely work and like the score just another great addition to the film.
1. La La Land 2. Allied 3. Fantastic Beasts 4. Florence Foster Jenkins
Seeing as I've only seen Hell or High Water from this batch, my predictions may just be screwed.
Delighted that Viggo Mortensen got in, I hope he's Louis's win out of the nominees. I'm also pleased that La La Land equalled the nominations record, it's probably the most deserving film out of the ones that got so many nods.
And to be honest, there's something nostalgic about the Nicholsons/Brennans rating pictures, even though I like the new rating pictures just as much. I reckon Ali or Bridges's will get reviewed first, due to Louis having seen Moonlight recently.
I also find Amy Adams's snub beyond ridiculous, Meryl Streep did not need another nomination for another undeserving performance. Louis: What categories do you think La La Land will win? I see it winning 8 or 9 Oscars at the most, even though I'd love for it to surpass Titanic.
Silence, Finally Finally Finally, but really it should have been in so many more categories than this. Best work of the decade if you ask me. Such breathtaking atmospheric visuals as it captures the grandeur of its setting but also the grit of it. Incredible work without a doubt, and deserves to win. It won't though but hey at least it will lose to something great, Lion sight unseen.
La La Land, amazing work as well. Such vibrancy that is basically the musical incarnate, yet I'd argue far better. Such gorgeous work but also plays into the emotional content of the film. I particularly love the blue hues in the more melancholy moments in the film. Every color used always seems to be the right one to craft such an incredible looking film. It will be a very deserving winner.
Arrival, also incredible work. It's use of light is so effective in creating the atmosphere of that ship, and giving this otherworldly feeling. It manages to have a definite beauty, but its use of darkness infuses it with just the right ominous quality beneath it all.
Moonlight, Excellent as well. It finds such a unassuming style that is beautiful as well. It has this grit to it that is weaved into that beauty though, it's amazing work.
1. Silence 2. La La Land 3. Arrival 4. Moonlight (hate to put it fourth but they are all great.)
Editing:
Again an excellent set of five.
Arrival, brilliantly precise work, and so essential to the film's power. The way it weaves the scenes together ends up being a beautiful symphony of emotion leading to quite the unforgettable climax.
Hacksaw Ridge, the early scenes I do think are paced well enough, but come on this is all about the war scenes. Not only does that portion of the film move along so well, the sequences are so brilliantly put together. You are never lost within them and it keeps its emotional current engaging and always moving forward. Special mention for the incredible montage of victory at the end of the film, which if it had not been pulled correctly would have greatly hindered the power of the film's ending.
La La Land, I know some have said there is a lull, I did not feel it, and I did not notice scenes that one should take out or move along faster. I found the film incredibly well paced, but further than that the musical sequences were brilliantly put together. They were so smoothly rendered, forgetting the obnoxious constant cutting of a Moulin Rouge, to help make every sequence something quite special.
Moonlight, excellent editing in that it managed to make every time period feel whole onto itself yet connected, never too long yet never too brief. Also special credit for its editing of the more visual moments of the film which it never allowed to be indulgent in anyway.
Hell Or High Water, loved the film's pacing and its effective tempo of sorts in cutting between the lawmen and the outlaws. Very low key work, but absolutely excellent.
Tahmeed:
I'd say nine seems like a reasonable number.
Picture Director Actress Score Song Sound Mixing Production Design Cinematography Editing
Though I do believe it could potentially go as high as 12 if they love it as much as the Globes did.
Hell Or High Water, the screenplay technically isn't quite flawless, but that's okay. I mean the "what you won't have" waitress scene for me feels like too much of an attempt at a Coen brothers moment, and there just a couple of lines that shoot for the sky and miss. Again that's okay because so many of the lines shoot for the sky and hit their target beautifully. It's brilliantly written picture since it so effectively creates the dramatic tension, we understand completely where both sides are coming from, and we get to know and kind of love all four of the characters. Just through their interactions we get to understand both sets of men so well. To top it off though it is a downright hilarious movie too, which, aside from the aforementioned moment, feels natural. To top it all off it builds to such a powerfully realized conclusion with that final exchange which alone deserves an award.
La La Land, I know this got a few sniffy reactions when it won the Globe, you know since the songs, the dialogue free sequences, and the direction do provide a great of the film's magic. The screenplay though should not be hand waved. It is witty work, with so much wonderful dialogue between our two leads. The screenplay also gives us the core structure, that eventually grants us the power of the epilogue. The screenplay though defines the characters, their dreams, their passions, and their love incredibly well, even if everything else goes on to amplify all the more.
The Lobster, ah it's my old nemesis the Lobster, it's been awhile. Actually I rather enjoy the first half of the film. It's got some very funny moments, off-beat characters, and some enjoyable satire to be sure. It's world is sort of intriguing even, at first. Then he leaves the hotel and it all goes down hill. Repetitive lifeless scene after repetitive lifeless scene with just another set of weird rules that just makes the world set up as very boring, which is maybe the point, but its central "escaping" romance isn't developed, by the writing, into anything of note. It's an exercise in style that loses its way, and never quite reaches its purpose in a natural fashion.
Manchester By The Sea, I would say this is stronger than something else regarding the film which I will get to in a moment. There are certain what ifs regarding the screenplay, what if we got more focus upon the wife for example, what if we got more on the other characters in general outside of Lee and Patrick. The screenplay maybe indulges in too much misery, and at the same time there are certain story elements that just are simply tiresome, I don't care about Patrick trying to get laid twice. With that said, Lonergan definitely has an ear for dialogue, there are many small moments that work so well, and despite the misery involved I do like that the film never feels misanthropic. Also there is an overarching aspect that I think is rather interesting, which I will get too in a certain review.
I do look forward to seeing 20th Century Women.
1. Hell Or High Water 2. La La Land 3. Manchester By The Sea 4. The Lobster
Arrival, I do believe the screenplay is the weakest element of the film. The moment, which is what I'll call it here, was from the source material even the way in which that aspect is realized in terms of tense. I actually felt the screenplay gave it away early for me, through one line, which made it so it did not hit me right when it was intended to do so. That's not my major problem with the screenplay. I have a greater issue with the lack of development for the characters and otherwise outside of the main personal story, which is quite effective. There are only three real other characters besides our lead, the government official who is there to be grumpy I guess, the army official who is there to not be so grumpy well delivering exposition and the other scientist which I wish there had been just a bit more in terms of his interaction with another character. I also find the world conflict aspects almost absurdly simple, and underdeveloped. I had a particular lack of affection for the coup being established through a single scene of soldiers listening to talk radio. Having said that almost everything involving our lead, her narration, and the whole idea of opening communications with aliens is quite strong.
Fences, It does not quite break the barrier of a great play adaptation, which is when the fact that it is a play adaptation is forgotten. It is clearly a play, the strength of the play though hasn't been lost which is good, and the setting of the scenes is fine though unremarkable. It's better than say a Great White Hope, which really feels like a play, but it's not any where near an Amadeus.
Hidden Figures, A perfectly acceptable inspirational take on the material. It doesn't do anything extraordinary and everything you've seen before except really except for the exact story its telling. It definitely deals in tropes, but it deals in them well. The dialogue, the characters, you've seen them before more or less, but these are good examples of them. It doesn't go further like its companion piece, The Right Stuff which had certain satirical edge to it and a real originality in its approach, but it's a good, if standard script.
Moonlight, A truly remarkable piece of work. What it does with its structure alone is quite fascinating. In that it does start again in each one even though it builds in each one. There are gaps in the story that it allows, and fills in without unnatural exposition. When they essentially catch up it never feels forced instead it feels rich with character. It's an effective work in how understated it is in ways, yet still so raw with emotion. In dealing with such themes it shows quite the restraint at times making the more overt moments all the more palatable in the end.
Again a fine lineup, considering there weren't many alternatives in terms of the Academy's viewpoint, though I would not have minded Monae sneaking in.
1. Davis 2. Williams 3. Harris 4. Spencer
Actress:
Such a shame. If Adams had gotten in over Streep this would have been an all time great line up, though kudos to the Negga and Huppert recognition, especially since they could have gone with Emily Blunt.
Fuck the Oscars are on this one, Silence gets 1 skimpy nomination? And extremely shocked Shannon got in. Predictions - 1. Ali 2. Bridges 3. Patel 4. Hedges 5. Shannon
I'm not that shocked that Shannon got in, he got a lot of praise for his role in NA and he stole the show along with Johnson, so no problem for me. The Amy Adams snub and the fact that Silence has as many nominations as Suicide Squad, on the other hand...oh god.
Charles: I'd say its late release and running time screwed its chances from the get-go. When it comes to long, contemplative films like Silence, early releases would actually help. Although one could easily make the argument that The Wolf of Wall Street also got in being released this late and being three hours long, that's a different beast of a film altogether.
Villeneuver - Arrival, I'm glad I was wrong about his snub, though I knew Arrival would miss somewhere key. His work here though is impeccable, and I find even elevates its weakest elements, or at the very least overrides them. He captures the ominousness of the visitors, but also grants this sense of wonder to them. He builds the tension both in terms of the actual stakes but also the emotional connection. He engages the various aspects so beautifully essentially to reach that moment, and does so brilliantly.
Gibson - Hacksaw Ridge, Come back achieved I suppose. This is brilliant work by him as he once again proves his measure as one of the best visual directors in the business. The man knows how to put you there, and does so once again.
Jenkins - Moonlight, His work is rather outstanding in the way he crafts almost a wondrous nightmare or a grim dream. In that Jenkins does not shy away from the difficulty of the life depicted and its most terrible elements. There is this vibrancy that he finds within it though that is quite astonishing at times, showing even a beauty that can be found in unlikely circumstances.
Lonergan - Manchester by the Sea, A weaker nomination, in a strong lineup, I feel in that he does make some awkward choices here and there, and his use of music feels overdone at point. There are few moments where he grants you the opportunity to feel it for yourself, he wants to make sure that you do, which does feel a little at odds with the general tone of the story. Plus that cameo was gratuitous.
Chazelle - La La Land, Brilliant brilliant work that's all there is to it. He crafts movie magic, widely entertaining yet in the end poignant as well.
Still need to see Lion, but otherwise this is a pretty strong lineup, despite the unfortunate lack of the best film of the year. I don't dislike any of the films.
1. La La Land 2. Hell or High Water 3. Hacksaw Ridge 4. Arrival 5. Moonlight 6. Fences 7. Hidden Figures 8. Manchester By The Sea
I'm also very interested to see how several of these will play out on re-watch.
Michael:
Will do just give me some time to sort through, and ask me about Taylor-Johnson in Shannon's review.
I am very happy for the Best Actor nominees, the perfect set of nominees, Best Supporting Actor is great this year, I think all of these will get 4 or higher so, people need to be thankful that there are great nominees, we didn't get an Eddie Redmayne or Mark Ruffalo this year =D.
RatedRStar: It seems like i'm finally in agreement with your statement about this being the best lead actor line up, But 1939 and 1962 are still holding up well.
Am I the only one who felt that Casey Affleck was obviously acting in 'Manchester By The Sea". Same with Michelle Williams and her final scene, it is great acting... but it dos not feel real to me.
No, I feel pretty much the same. Some say this is a triumph of minimalism, but, truly, this is very mannered performance. I watched this movie twice and every time I was astonished how limited his reactions are. It’s full of lazy lingering looks, sudden suspensions of voice, and not much more.
John: I don't find Casey Affleck to be a real 'ACTING' type actor, Although some of his scenes in Manchester seem to have a rehearsed quality to them. Nonetheless it's a great performance.
I think the good points of Casey's performance outweigh the bad ( I agree on the reactions he made with his face being mannered) but he makes up for it with such power. I would give him a 5.
I am still so so happy that the lead actor lineup is what it is, I was so nervous that Affleck, Garfield, Gosling, Viggo and Denzel wouldnt be the complete set but oh man I am so happy =D, sometimes I just ignore some of the other category faults of the Academy nominations if one category is 100% perfect.
Robert: You could think of Garfields nomination in the same vein as 2006 Dicaprio or Oskar Werners nomination, still awesome that he was recognised rather than snubbed completely.
My predictions: 1. Bridges 2. Ali 3. Shannon 4. Hedges 5. Patel
For Affleck's performance, I also think he's really showing too little of expression on his face, but really not in that bad way. Watching the movie, especially after knowing his haunted past, I really feel for him and his reaction, after all the pain and sins he had to endured from all those time. Even just a moment of silience and stunning on the screen, I can still feel it through his eyes. I will definitely call this is a great example of how truly could an actor understand his character.
Haven't yet seen Patel, but I'll try to do a prediction:
1. Bridges 2. Ali 3. Patel 4. Hedges 5. Shannon
Bridges gives the best performance of his life, Ali was very strong but it felt like it lacked a proper denouement (as though they ran out of time with him on-set and had to hurriedly explain his fate after the fact) which kinda hurts it in retrospect. Hedges veered from affecting to affectation so often that it was crazy, and Shannon was like a third-rate SNL skit portrayal of Bridges's more nuanced, realized work.
Gonna have to disagree with that, Charles. Bridges and Pine are the co-leads, as the film is about both sides of that coin. Foster and Birmingham are mirror images of one another, just as Chris and Jeff are.
Psifonian: I have to agree. I was struggling on whether Foster was lead or supporting and I finally decided that he's supporting when I realized that the in the only scene where he's not seen through Pine's perspective he's seen through Bridges' perspective.
Psifonian: So you've seen Manchester, eh? Looking forward to the review, although we clearly disagree about Hedges, who I thought was utterly fantastic.
I'm posting my ranking of these nominees on my blog soon, followed by maybe my personal rankings (though I might want to wait and check out Hidden Figures).
I think Bridges is co-lead with Pine, but I'm not ultra steadfast in that opinion. Then again, I also think that Bridges was good but not great and was more impressed with Pine.
Psifonian: Foster stole the film for me, He dominated most of the film along with Pine, I'm staying with my original post that Bridges is supporting, Foster and Pine co-lead.
I have not seen "Silence" yet. I dunno if I'm going to write a "Manchester" review; I rarely feel myself motivated to write a whole lot of in-depth film reviews these days (case in point, I've done maybe a good half-dozen since January of last year). I think I'd prefer to have discussion rather than just write several paragraphs of my own thoughts that I cringe to read after the fact.
I will say that if "Manchester" had gotten an editing nomination, I'd consider it one of the worst of all time in that category. A good third of that film, if not more, could've been trimmed. Lonergan (who made one of my ten least favorite films of all time in "Margaret") needs to learn to kill his darlings.
Matt: Not just that, but watch the final scene of "Hell or High Water." The proverbial "final staredown" between Bridges and Pine, and it is ENTIRELY from Bridges's POV. His character is the one who truly evolves throughout the film, even more than Toby does. Jeff ain't supportin' nobody.
The Jungle Book I thought was watchable enough. I didn't love it by any measure, great looking in terms of the effects to be sure, but nothing made it stand out beyond being just good enough entertainment.
Sethi - 2(His performance I found to be actually rather awkward and stilted)
Murray - 3.5(Despite his lack of singing ability perfectly cast otherwise. Brings exactly what you want from Baloo a nice bit of humor and just a real warmth.)
Kingsley - 3.5(Perfectly cast as well. His Bagheera has that regal command needed for the role, while also having just the right understated care beneath it all)
Elba - 3.5(A more vicious take than the purring Sanders. A good performance that certainly brought an added bit of menace to the role.)
Nyong'o - 3(Nice heartfelt performance.)
Walken - 2.5(Miscast I felt. I prefer when he's not used for his Walkenisms and is actually used for his considerable acting ability. This was a case of the former.)
Johansson - 3(Brief but does a creepy seductive voice rather well.)
103 comments:
YES Viggo Mortensen got in, the greatest best actor lineup is here =D.
1. Bridges
2. Ali
3. Shannon
4. Hedges
5. Patel
Unsure about predictions, but I'll give it a shot:
1. Ali
2. Bridges
3. Hedges
4. Shannon
5. Patel
Louis: Rating and thoughts on Kevin Costner in Hidden Figures.
Varun Neermul
1.Bridges
2.Shannon
3.Ali
4.Patel
5.Hedges
No Amy Adams? Seriously? Her performance in Arrival was brilliant.
A particularly painful snub given the love Arrival got otherwise. Needless Streep nomination strikes again.
BULLSHIT.
Louis: Your thoughts on the nominations per category.
1.Ali
2.Bridges
3.Hedges
4.Shannon
5.Patel
1. Jeff Bridges
2. Mahershala Ali
3. Lucas Hedges
4. Michael Shannon
5. Dev Patel
Amy Adams, Hugh Grant, Aaron Taylor Johnson and Silence were the two biggest snubs, still its great that the 5 in lead actor were the ones that we wanted.
Louis: I will be honest I have always liked the Nicholson/Brennan ratings more than the Shaw/Mifunes.
Complete shut out for Silence. And surprising to see Suicide Squad and Passengers have nominations.
Anonymous: Louis' doing Day-Lewis' instead of Nicholsons for the lead actor category.
Ruthiehenshallfan99: It received one nomination for Cinematography, so it's not exactly a complete shut out.
Anonymous: I prefer the Mifunes/Shaws to be honest.
1. Bridges
2. Ali
3. Shannon
4. Hedges
5. Patel
1. Mahershala Ali
2. Jeff Bridges
3. Michael Shannon
4. Lucas Hedges
5. Dev Patel
Hi, Louis,
I’m looking forward to see your ranking, here is mine (part of):
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Ali – 5
He gives a very subtle performance as a troubled gangster in a powerful movie. Never plays a mentor, rather a guy who knows what is good, but for some reasons chose doing bad. Sometimes one can think he is equally lost as Chiron. Amazing dinner scene when he admits to Chiron that he sells drugs. It is really pity that Juan disappears so early in a story.
Bridges – 5
He has already played a sheriff in “True Grit”, but overdid mannerisms. Here he’s much more disciplined. He creates lovely relationship with Alberto, whom he hates and loves in the same time. For most of the film he plays a grumpy old fellow, but I love single moments when he shows his more sensitive face. The scene when he kills the Ben Foster’s character is a little masterpiece.
Shannon – 4.5
He gives disciplined, though delightful performance, almost tragic at the end, in a surprisingly bad movie (especially Amy Adams’ part). As a smart, but somehow retreated sheriff he never overdoes his accent, never does anything to show off, unlike Taylor-Johnson. His relationship with Jake Gyllenhaal’s character evolves properly from lack of trust from both sides to sort of friendship. The Academy made surprising, but very good decision to choose Shannon over Taylor-Johnson.
Hedges – 4
He’s believable as a troubled teenager, having enough anger, intelligence and timidity to show Patrick’s struggle with his father’s death and Casey Affleck’s terrible performance. Although he’s got moments of madness, vulgarity and sadness, he never goes too much in one side, portraying Patrick as a conglomerate of mixed feelings. He tries to show Patrick as an ordinary kid under extraordinary pressure.
Patel – 3
He is charming and introverted enough to honestly play older Saroo. Fine love relation with Rooney Mara and mother-and-son with Nicole Kidman. He’s doing bit too much in his final scene, planned as heartbreaking. Generally, he is ok, but, truly, never does nothing more than the script requires.
GOLDEN GLOBE WINNER:
Taylor-Johnson – 2.5
I think someone told him to play another version of Heath Ledger’s Joker. Very mannered, over-the-top, almost caricatured performance. He doesn’t bother to show any sort of motivation of what Ray is doing. He’s got one more subtle scene, though, when Ray confronts Jake Gyllenhaal’s character; he’s able to put all the Ray’s evil in one glance. He gives unbridled, but empty performance.
BEST LEADING ACTOR
Washington – 3.5
In what was planned by Washington-director as Washington-actor’s one man show, he gives much over-the-top performance in a very theatrical fashion. Everything says: look at me, I can act. He is dominative, witty, angry, but generally too much calculative. I’m not surprised he was awarded Tony for this character, but it doesn’t fully work in a movie.
Gosling - 3
He gives quite a charming performance, though not very much as an actor. He proved he can dance well enough to attract the viewer, but when it comes to singing and acting it’s more questionable. Sebastian’s transformation from idealist to opportunist playing in a teenage band is not very believable. He bases on his charm, look and fitness skills, but doesn’t really have any chance to prove acting abilities.
Affleck – 2
He gives a terrible deadpan performance lacking any emotional depth whatsoever. Critics say this is a triumph of minimalism, but, truly, this is very mannered performance. I watched this movie twice and every time I was astonished how limited his reactions are. It’s full of lazy lingering looks, sudden suspensions of voice, and not much more.
Garfield – not seen yet
Mortensen – not seen yet
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Davis – 4.5
In a Washington’s one man show, she gives a surprisingly quiet, though strong performance. She’s got one naturalistic Oscar-like scene, but I like more her final dialogue with younger son, when she explains her and her late husband’s choices. She’s realistic, doesn’t show off like Washington, but doesn’t let her character to be pushed to the corner either. It’s a fine supporting performance.
Kidman – 4
I was surprised to see Kidman in such a good acting shape. She is believable as a troubled mother, despite dreadful hairstyles. I like her subtle reactions, she’s still able to show all the emotions in the character’s face. It would be almost perfect performance, if not her final monologue. There are indeed strong moments there, but also very weird story about ghost she saw when she was 12. I started to think if she’s mentally stable. It wasn’t the point, I guess.
Harris – 3.5
Unlike Ali, she was given a chance to show a dark side of her character, but for most of the movie she screams and yells in sort of caricatured way. She has, though, a truly breathtaking final scene, when her aged character says sorry to Chiron.
Williams – 2
People tend to love her final scene, but what I see there is acting. And not very good acting. She acts crying, but doesn’t cry at all. I wouldn’t believe her for a second. She was given only 10 minutes altogether, but either didn’t do anything special, or preferred much too mannered, not believable fashion to show Randi’s chaotic character.
Spencer – not seen yet
BEST LEADING ACTRESS
Stone – 4
Her Mia is natural and kind of charming, I suppose. Stone tends to play very irritating figures, but this time she succeeded in imposing some discipline on her character. She’s funny, sometimes sexy, crazy and reflective. She is not a master of singing, but it somehow fits Mia. From what wasn’t the biggest acting challenge, she made an interesting character.
Huppert – not seen yet
Portman – not seen yet
Negga – not seen yet
Streep – not seen yet
Luke: Really? It must have been at the time I was out of the room.
Ruthiehenshallfan99: Cinematography was announced after Supporting Actor.
Luke: Oh, yeah now I remember. I guess I wasn't paying complete attention at that moment.
Luke:
Costner - 4(I feel he definitely would have been nominated back in the 90's for this performance. It is good work from him though in a very traditional supporting type of performance. He is able to make the combination of kind of a certain no nonsense attitude to get the work done, and a real warmth revolving around his care for the people working for him quite natural. He does a lot with just reactions, such as when his character takes an immediate action Costner makes it absolutely believable just through his reaction to Henson's character's anguish.)
On the nominations. First just in general I was very disappointed by the lack of Silence, though at this point I expected it.
Documentary:
Actually have seen two of them the 13th which starts off strong but I feel gets a little unwieldy near the end, and O.J. which is altogether outstanding.
1. O.J. Made in America
2. The 13th
Foreign:
ERDMANN!!!! EHHHHHHH
Makeup And Haristyling:
Haven't seen Ove. I'm actually a bit mixed on Star Trek since although the Jaylah's makeup was pretty great, I felt the designs of Krall's and the other villains seemed terribly uninspired and even phony looking.
Suicide Squad I think is a bit mixed as well in that the Croc design didn't work at all, what was with how large they made his head in comparison to the rest of his body, the same goes for the second Enchantress and Incubus though I think the majority of those two were CGI. I do think the first Enchantress makeup was decent though. Joker and Harley I don't think brought anything new to those characters. The previous iterations for Joker I'd argue had superior designs and execution.
1. Star Trek
2. Suicide Squad
A fairly weak line up from those two hopefully old Ove offers something better.
1. Bridges
2. Ali
3. Hedges
4. Patel
5. Shannon
1. Bridges
2. Ali
3. Patel
4. Hedges
5. Shannon
Amy Adams </3
Luke:
Sound Mixing:
All fine choices to be sure particularly Hacksaw and Arrival, Haven't seen 13 Hours though there usually isn't anything wrong with Michael Bay's techs.
1. Arrival
2. Hacksaw Ridge
3. La La Land
4. Rogue One
Sound Editing:
I don't La La Land had to be here, though there isn't anything wrong with its "edited sounds" otherwise a strong lineup again particularly Arrival and Hacksaw Ridge.
1. Hacksaw Ridge
2. Arrival
3. Deepwater Horizon
4. Sully
5. La La Land
Visual Effects:
Didn't notice Kubo got in, that's a great nod since it recognizes the work around the stop motion that helped to amplify it.
Deepwater Horizon I think was pretty strong work outside of one exterior bit of CGI, of the Horizon in a day time scene, that looked wonky.
Doctor Strange's visuals were all together spellbinding (pun intended) and mind bending so a nomination well deserved.
Rogue One is a funny case actually, and kind of goes into one's philosophy on appraising the effects. The thing is the recreations technically are top of the line technology, but to me they were one of the worst parts of the film. They still did not look good, and how the visuals look within the film is how I feel they should be appraised. Though everything else within the film looked quite good to be sure.
The Jungle Book is funny in that it just a few sets and a couple humans from being an animated film. That said it is some stunning work to be sure. Every animal is excellent looking and blend so well with both the environment and even the real human.
1. Doctor Strange
2. The Jungle Book
3. Kubo and the Two Strings
4. Deep Water Horizon
5. Rogue One
I reckon Jeff Bridges will finally win.
1. Jeff Bridges
2. Mahershala Ali
3. Michael Shannon
4. Dev Patel
5. Lucas Hedges
People think Lucas Hedges will finish third and Michael Shannon will finish last, are you serious??? Shannon was way better than Hedges.
Anonymous: Thing is, Some on the blog go with their personal rankings anyway, because they're hoping for the best outcome from their point of view.
Anonymous: And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I just can't see Patel finishing above last.
1. Bridges
2. Ali
3. Shannon
4. Hedges
5. Patel
Luke:
Song:
One of the worst snubs of all the nominations has to be "Drive it like you Stole it".
For the record my reaction to the other three is based solely on hearing the song.
"Can't Stop the Feeling" - Really did not care for it. Just sounded very standard to me.
"How Far I'll Go" - An excellent addition to the "Something More" style Disney song. Lovely work to be sure.
"The Empty Chair" - Really did not care for it. A tiresome ballad. If they wanted a ballad they should have gone for the much superior "To Find You" from Sing Street.
"Audition" - Beautiful song altogether with such an emotional power it to it as well. I love it.
"City of Stars" - Really like the single version but adore the duet. So I must know which one is it?
1. "Audition"
2. "City of Stars" - Duet
3. "How Far I'll Go"
4. "City of Stars" - Single
5. "Can't Stop the Feeling"
6. "The Empty Chair"
Score:
I guess I have to watch Passengers now. Any who. Moonlight, even if I did not take to it as much as everyone else seems to have, I still found to be very strong, and La La Land is such a beautiful score that is so memorable and so essential to the success of that film.
1. La La Land
2. Moonlight
Production Design:
Again I guess I have to watch Passengers.
Arrival's production was sheer brilliance in terms of the minimalist design.
La La Land was gorgeous set after gorgeous set, especially those featured in the epilogue.
Hail Caesar, an extremely deserving nomination. Such lovely yet still original feeling creations of the grand Hollywood sets of old. Not to forget the excellent period work all around it.
Fantastic Beasts, also very strong work to be sure. This a great lineup, hopefully Passengers is not a spoiler. Anyway terrific work in terms of creating both the magical world, but also a magical world of the 1920's.
1. La La Land
2. Hail Caesar!
3. Arrival
4. Fantastic Beasts
Costume Design:
Allied, Kudos to recognizing this very deserving aspect of the film. Downright beautiful period work, and feels unique which is an accomplishment given the amount of costumes from the period.
Florence Foster Jenkins - Some fine tuxedos but I suppose it is all about Florence's dresses and costumes which are all very nice or ridiculous depending on the need.
Fantastic Beasts, again like its production design strong work in its capture of period, but with the right twist on top. I have particular affection for Newt's blue coat, I'll admit.
La La Land, excellent all the way as making costumes in a modern setting can be difficult in terms of making them actually stand out, and boy do they. Lovely work and like the score just another great addition to the film.
1. La La Land
2. Allied
3. Fantastic Beasts
4. Florence Foster Jenkins
Seeing as I've only seen Hell or High Water from this batch, my predictions may just be screwed.
Delighted that Viggo Mortensen got in, I hope he's Louis's win out of the nominees. I'm also pleased that La La Land equalled the nominations record, it's probably the most deserving film out of the ones that got so many nods.
And to be honest, there's something nostalgic about the Nicholsons/Brennans rating pictures, even though I like the new rating pictures just as much.
I reckon Ali or Bridges's will get reviewed first, due to Louis having seen Moonlight recently.
Drive It Like You stole It's snub is the one that upset me the most. Even more than Adams.
I also find Amy Adams's snub beyond ridiculous, Meryl Streep did not need another nomination for another undeserving performance.
Louis: What categories do you think La La Land will win? I see it winning 8 or 9 Oscars at the most, even though I'd love for it to surpass Titanic.
Cinematography:
Silence, Finally Finally Finally, but really it should have been in so many more categories than this. Best work of the decade if you ask me. Such breathtaking atmospheric visuals as it captures the grandeur of its setting but also the grit of it. Incredible work without a doubt, and deserves to win. It won't though but hey at least it will lose to something great, Lion sight unseen.
La La Land, amazing work as well. Such vibrancy that is basically the musical incarnate, yet I'd argue far better. Such gorgeous work but also plays into the emotional content of the film. I particularly love the blue hues in the more melancholy moments in the film. Every color used always seems to be the right one to craft such an incredible looking film. It will be a very deserving winner.
Arrival, also incredible work. It's use of light is so effective in creating the atmosphere of that ship, and giving this otherworldly feeling. It manages to have a definite beauty, but its use of darkness infuses it with just the right ominous quality beneath it all.
Moonlight, Excellent as well. It finds such a unassuming style that is beautiful as well. It has this grit to it that is weaved into that beauty though, it's amazing work.
1. Silence
2. La La Land
3. Arrival
4. Moonlight (hate to put it fourth but they are all great.)
Editing:
Again an excellent set of five.
Arrival, brilliantly precise work, and so essential to the film's power. The way it weaves the scenes together ends up being a beautiful symphony of emotion leading to quite the unforgettable climax.
Hacksaw Ridge, the early scenes I do think are paced well enough, but come on this is all about the war scenes. Not only does that portion of the film move along so well, the sequences are so brilliantly put together. You are never lost within them and it keeps its emotional current engaging and always moving forward. Special mention for the incredible montage of victory at the end of the film, which if it had not been pulled correctly would have greatly hindered the power of the film's ending.
La La Land, I know some have said there is a lull, I did not feel it, and I did not notice scenes that one should take out or move along faster. I found the film incredibly well paced, but further than that the musical sequences were brilliantly put together. They were so smoothly rendered, forgetting the obnoxious constant cutting of a Moulin Rouge, to help make every sequence something quite special.
Moonlight, excellent editing in that it managed to make every time period feel whole onto itself yet connected, never too long yet never too brief. Also special credit for its editing of the more visual moments of the film which it never allowed to be indulgent in anyway.
Hell Or High Water, loved the film's pacing and its effective tempo of sorts in cutting between the lawmen and the outlaws. Very low key work, but absolutely excellent.
Tahmeed:
I'd say nine seems like a reasonable number.
Picture
Director
Actress
Score
Song
Sound Mixing
Production Design
Cinematography
Editing
Though I do believe it could potentially go as high as 12 if they love it as much as the Globes did.
Louis: Your thoughts on The Jungle Book and ratings and thoughts on the cast.
Luke:
Original Screenplay:
Hell Or High Water, the screenplay technically isn't quite flawless, but that's okay. I mean the "what you won't have" waitress scene for me feels like too much of an attempt at a Coen brothers moment, and there just a couple of lines that shoot for the sky and miss. Again that's okay because so many of the lines shoot for the sky and hit their target beautifully. It's brilliantly written picture since it so effectively creates the dramatic tension, we understand completely where both sides are coming from, and we get to know and kind of love all four of the characters. Just through their interactions we get to understand both sets of men so well. To top it off though it is a downright hilarious movie too, which, aside from the aforementioned moment, feels natural. To top it all off it builds to such a powerfully realized conclusion with that final exchange which alone deserves an award.
La La Land, I know this got a few sniffy reactions when it won the Globe, you know since the songs, the dialogue free sequences, and the direction do provide a great of the film's magic. The screenplay though should not be hand waved. It is witty work, with so much wonderful dialogue between our two leads. The screenplay also gives us the core structure, that eventually grants us the power of the epilogue. The screenplay though defines the characters, their dreams, their passions, and their love incredibly well, even if everything else goes on to amplify all the more.
The Lobster, ah it's my old nemesis the Lobster, it's been awhile. Actually I rather enjoy the first half of the film. It's got some very funny moments, off-beat characters, and some enjoyable satire to be sure. It's world is sort of intriguing even, at first. Then he leaves the hotel and it all goes down hill. Repetitive lifeless scene after repetitive lifeless scene with just another set of weird rules that just makes the world set up as very boring, which is maybe the point, but its central "escaping" romance isn't developed, by the writing, into anything of note. It's an exercise in style that loses its way, and never quite reaches its purpose in a natural fashion.
Manchester By The Sea, I would say this is stronger than something else regarding the film which I will get to in a moment. There are certain what ifs regarding the screenplay, what if we got more focus upon the wife for example, what if we got more on the other characters in general outside of Lee and Patrick. The screenplay maybe indulges in too much misery, and at the same time there are certain story elements that just are simply tiresome, I don't care about Patrick trying to get laid twice. With that said, Lonergan definitely has an ear for dialogue, there are many small moments that work so well, and despite the misery involved I do like that the film never feels misanthropic. Also there is an overarching aspect that I think is rather interesting, which I will get too in a certain review.
I do look forward to seeing 20th Century Women.
1. Hell Or High Water
2. La La Land
3. Manchester By The Sea
4. The Lobster
So Louis, in addition to Costner are there any other "just in case" performances you've been saving that you'd like to share ratings and thoughts on?
Luke:
Adapted Screenplay:
Arrival, I do believe the screenplay is the weakest element of the film. The moment, which is what I'll call it here, was from the source material even the way in which that aspect is realized in terms of tense. I actually felt the screenplay gave it away early for me, through one line, which made it so it did not hit me right when it was intended to do so. That's not my major problem with the screenplay. I have a greater issue with the lack of development for the characters and otherwise outside of the main personal story, which is quite effective. There are only three real other characters besides our lead, the government official who is there to be grumpy I guess, the army official who is there to not be so grumpy well delivering exposition and the other scientist which I wish there had been just a bit more in terms of his interaction with another character. I also find the world conflict aspects almost absurdly simple, and underdeveloped. I had a particular lack of affection for the coup being established through a single scene of soldiers listening to talk radio. Having said that almost everything involving our lead, her narration, and the whole idea of opening communications with aliens is quite strong.
Fences, It does not quite break the barrier of a great play adaptation, which is when the fact that it is a play adaptation is forgotten. It is clearly a play, the strength of the play though hasn't been lost which is good, and the setting of the scenes is fine though unremarkable. It's better than say a Great White Hope, which really feels like a play, but it's not any where near an Amadeus.
Hidden Figures, A perfectly acceptable inspirational take on the material. It doesn't do anything extraordinary and everything you've seen before except really except for the exact story its telling. It definitely deals in tropes, but it deals in them well. The dialogue, the characters, you've seen them before more or less, but these are good examples of them. It doesn't go further like its companion piece, The Right Stuff which had certain satirical edge to it and a real originality in its approach, but it's a good, if standard script.
Moonlight, A truly remarkable piece of work. What it does with its structure alone is quite fascinating. In that it does start again in each one even though it builds in each one. There are gaps in the story that it allows, and fills in without unnatural exposition. When they essentially catch up it never feels forced instead it feels rich with character. It's an effective work in how understated it is in ways, yet still so raw with emotion. In dealing with such themes it shows quite the restraint at times making the more overt moments all the more palatable in the end.
1. Moonlight
2. Arrival
3. Hidden Figures
4. Fences
Best Supporting Actress:
Again a fine lineup, considering there weren't many alternatives in terms of the Academy's viewpoint, though I would not have minded Monae sneaking in.
1. Davis
2. Williams
3. Harris
4. Spencer
Actress:
Such a shame. If Adams had gotten in over Streep this would have been an all time great line up, though kudos to the Negga and Huppert recognition, especially since they could have gone with Emily Blunt.
1. Stone
2. Huppert
3. Negga
4. Streep
Hoping Bridges gets his first 5.
Fuck the Oscars are on this one, Silence gets 1 skimpy nomination? And extremely shocked Shannon got in.
Predictions -
1. Ali
2. Bridges
3. Patel
4. Hedges
5. Shannon
I'm not that shocked that Shannon got in, he got a lot of praise for his role in NA and he stole the show along with Johnson, so no problem for me. The Amy Adams snub and the fact that Silence has as many nominations as Suicide Squad, on the other hand...oh god.
Ben Foster gets his 4th or 5th snub again, Oscars refuse to notice him.
Alex: Damn right, Oscars really shitted up with Silence.
Charles: I'd say its late release and running time screwed its chances from the get-go. When it comes to long, contemplative films like Silence, early releases would actually help. Although one could easily make the argument that The Wolf of Wall Street also got in being released this late and being three hours long, that's a different beast of a film altogether.
Tahmeed: Great point there. The release really messed it's chances.
Director:
Villeneuver - Arrival, I'm glad I was wrong about his snub, though I knew Arrival would miss somewhere key. His work here though is impeccable, and I find even elevates its weakest elements, or at the very least overrides them. He captures the ominousness of the visitors, but also grants this sense of wonder to them. He builds the tension both in terms of the actual stakes but also the emotional connection. He engages the various aspects so beautifully essentially to reach that moment, and does so brilliantly.
Gibson - Hacksaw Ridge, Come back achieved I suppose. This is brilliant work by him as he once again proves his measure as one of the best visual directors in the business. The man knows how to put you there, and does so once again.
Jenkins - Moonlight, His work is rather outstanding in the way he crafts almost a wondrous nightmare or a grim dream. In that Jenkins does not shy away from the difficulty of the life depicted and its most terrible elements. There is this vibrancy that he finds within it though that is quite astonishing at times, showing even a beauty that can be found in unlikely circumstances.
Lonergan - Manchester by the Sea, A weaker nomination, in a strong lineup, I feel in that he does make some awkward choices here and there, and his use of music feels overdone at point. There are few moments where he grants you the opportunity to feel it for yourself, he wants to make sure that you do, which does feel a little at odds with the general tone of the story. Plus that cameo was gratuitous.
Chazelle - La La Land, Brilliant brilliant work that's all there is to it. He crafts movie magic, widely entertaining yet in the end poignant as well.
1. Chazelle
2. Villeneuve
3. Gibson
4. Jenkins
5. Lonergan
Picture:
Still need to see Lion, but otherwise this is a pretty strong lineup, despite the unfortunate lack of the best film of the year. I don't dislike any of the films.
1. La La Land
2. Hell or High Water
3. Hacksaw Ridge
4. Arrival
5. Moonlight
6. Fences
7. Hidden Figures
8. Manchester By The Sea
I'm also very interested to see how several of these will play out on re-watch.
Michael:
Will do just give me some time to sort through, and ask me about Taylor-Johnson in Shannon's review.
Luke:
Will give you those Jungle Book thoughts relatively soon.
I was totally on the ATJ bandwagon when I first saw Nocturnal Animals, but since then he's dropped to about the same solid 4.5 as Shannon.
ATJ I still like a lot in Nocturnal Animals, and frankly I responded to him a lot more than Shannon. He's in my top 10 in spite of me hating the film.
(I will say that my response to Taylor-Johnson might be because he looks exactly like a misogynistic douchebag I went to community college with)
1. Bridges
2. Ali
3. Shannon
4. Patel
5. Hedges
I am very happy for the Best Actor nominees, the perfect set of nominees, Best Supporting Actor is great this year, I think all of these will get 4 or higher so, people need to be thankful that there are great nominees, we didn't get an Eddie Redmayne or Mark Ruffalo this year =D.
I personally consider Garfield in Hacksaw this year's Redmayne/Ruffalo.
Robert: Just imagine he's being nominated for Silence. (Haven't seen Hacksaw yet)
RatedRStar: It seems like i'm finally in agreement with your statement about this being the best lead actor line up, But 1939 and 1962 are still holding up well.
Charles: 2013 is #1.
If I had to make a prediction now for Lead, I'd go:
1. Affleck
2. Mortensen
3. Washington
4. Garfield
5. Gosling
Luke: I thought Bale was horrid in the 2013 line-up.
Charles: Fair enough. He was just fine IMO.
Luke: If only Oscar Isaac replaced him in 2013 then i'd confidently call it the best lead actor line-up ever.
If i made my lead predictions now -
1. Mortensen
2. Affleck
3. Washington
4. Garfield
5. Gosling
Maybe i'd switch 4 and 5.
I hope Garfield ranks higher than fourth, although admittedly it is a strong lineup, my favourite in Academy history probably at this point in time.
Calvin: I agree, I think it's my favorite line-up too. My top 3 =
1. 2016
2. 1962 (Close to number 1)
3. 1939
Am I the only one who felt that Casey Affleck was obviously acting in 'Manchester By The Sea". Same with Michelle Williams and her final scene, it is great acting... but it dos not feel real to me.
John Smith:
No, I feel pretty much the same. Some say this is a triumph of minimalism, but, truly, this is very mannered performance. I watched this movie twice and every time I was astonished how limited his reactions are. It’s full of lazy lingering looks, sudden suspensions of voice, and not much more.
Can't wait to see what Louis thinks.
John: I don't find Casey Affleck to be a real 'ACTING' type actor, Although some of his scenes in Manchester seem to have a rehearsed quality to them. Nonetheless it's a great performance.
Finally finished seeing Hacksaw Ridge. I loved it, and I will sleep on it before giving my thoughts.
I think the good points of Casey's performance outweigh the bad ( I agree on the reactions he made with his face being mannered) but he makes up for it with such power. I would give him a 5.
I honestly found Affleck to be wonderfully unfussy. I have no clue anyone can say he was overly mannered with that specific performance.
100% with Robert on this. I found Affleck's work to be wonderfully lived in, possibly more so than anyone else in this lineup.
Here is my prediction for Louis:
Best Actor -
5) Garfield (3/5)
4) Washington (3.5/5)
3) Gosling (4/5)
2) Mortensen (4.5/5)
1) Affleck (4.5/5)
Best Supporting Actor -
5) Patel (3/5)
4) Shannon (3/5)
3) Hedges (3.5/5)
2) Bridges (3.5/5)
1) Ali (4.5/5)
Mitchell: Are you on crack, 4.5s at least for all of the Lead Actor Nominees and 4s for the Supporting Nominees
Maybe not Patel, but definitely the other 4.
http://actorvsactor.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/oscar-nominationsmy-oscar-reactions.html
My initial Oscar reactions.
Calvin: Self advertising! Nah, Just kidding i'll check that out.
Haha, as always Charles, as always. I essentially use Louis' name as a springboard to fame.
Tahmeed: When you wake, your thoughts/ratings on Garfield, Bracey, Vaughn, and Weaving in HR.
Calvin: I sent you a message on your blog =)
I am still so so happy that the lead actor lineup is what it is, I was so nervous that Affleck, Garfield, Gosling, Viggo and Denzel wouldnt be the complete set but oh man I am so happy =D, sometimes I just ignore some of the other category faults of the Academy nominations if one category is 100% perfect.
Robert: You could think of Garfields nomination in the same vein as 2006 Dicaprio or Oskar Werners nomination, still awesome that he was recognised rather than snubbed completely.
My predictions:
1. Bridges
2. Ali
3. Shannon
4. Hedges
5. Patel
For Affleck's performance, I also think he's really showing too little of expression on his face, but really not in that bad way. Watching the movie, especially after knowing his haunted past, I really feel for him and his reaction, after all the pain and sins he had to endured from all those time. Even just a moment of silience and stunning on the screen, I can still feel it through his eyes. I will definitely call this is a great example of how truly could an actor understand his character.
Haven't yet seen Patel, but I'll try to do a prediction:
1. Bridges
2. Ali
3. Patel
4. Hedges
5. Shannon
Bridges gives the best performance of his life, Ali was very strong but it felt like it lacked a proper denouement (as though they ran out of time with him on-set and had to hurriedly explain his fate after the fact) which kinda hurts it in retrospect. Hedges veered from affecting to affectation so often that it was crazy, and Shannon was like a third-rate SNL skit portrayal of Bridges's more nuanced, realized work.
Just real quick, we're all agreed that Bridges is really lead, right?
Matt: Yes, but category fraud or not, he's being reviewed now instead of later.
Matt: Ehhhh..... I think Pine and Foster are closer to lead then Bridges.
luke: Yes, I know that he's being reviewed now:P I just didn't know how clear-cut everyone was on his placement.
Gonna have to disagree with that, Charles. Bridges and Pine are the co-leads, as the film is about both sides of that coin. Foster and Birmingham are mirror images of one another, just as Chris and Jeff are.
Psifonian: I have to agree. I was struggling on whether Foster was lead or supporting and I finally decided that he's supporting when I realized that the in the only scene where he's not seen through Pine's perspective he's seen through Bridges' perspective.
Psifonian: So you've seen Manchester, eh? Looking forward to the review, although we clearly disagree about Hedges, who I thought was utterly fantastic.
I'm posting my ranking of these nominees on my blog soon, followed by maybe my personal rankings (though I might want to wait and check out Hidden Figures).
Psifonian: Have you seen Silence yet.
I think Bridges is co-lead with Pine, but I'm not ultra steadfast in that opinion. Then again, I also think that Bridges was good but not great and was more impressed with Pine.
Psifonian: Foster stole the film for me, He dominated most of the film along with Pine, I'm staying with my original post that Bridges is supporting, Foster and Pine co-lead.
Foster probably impressed me the least of the cast. He's far from bad, but I'm kind of sick of him in psycho roles.
Robert: I felt like there was much more to him than just being a psycho.
I have not seen "Silence" yet. I dunno if I'm going to write a "Manchester" review; I rarely feel myself motivated to write a whole lot of in-depth film reviews these days (case in point, I've done maybe a good half-dozen since January of last year). I think I'd prefer to have discussion rather than just write several paragraphs of my own thoughts that I cringe to read after the fact.
I will say that if "Manchester" had gotten an editing nomination, I'd consider it one of the worst of all time in that category. A good third of that film, if not more, could've been trimmed. Lonergan (who made one of my ten least favorite films of all time in "Margaret") needs to learn to kill his darlings.
Matt: Not just that, but watch the final scene of "Hell or High Water." The proverbial "final staredown" between Bridges and Pine, and it is ENTIRELY from Bridges's POV. His character is the one who truly evolves throughout the film, even more than Toby does. Jeff ain't supportin' nobody.
Psifonian: Great point, and that's a spectacular scene too.
Psifonian: I see where you're coming from, Good points.
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:
5 - Hidden Figures
4 - Lion
3 - Fences
2 - Arrival
1 - Moonlight
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY:
5 - 20th Century Women
4 - La La Land
3 - Hell or High Water
2 - Manchester By the Sea
1 - The Lobster
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS:
5 - Spencer
4 - Kidman
3 - Harris
2 - Williams
1 - Davis
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR:
5 - Hedges
4 - Patel
3 - Bridges
2 - Ali
1 - Shannon
I saw Jackie.
Luke:
The Jungle Book I thought was watchable enough. I didn't love it by any measure, great looking in terms of the effects to be sure, but nothing made it stand out beyond being just good enough entertainment.
Sethi - 2(His performance I found to be actually rather awkward and stilted)
Murray - 3.5(Despite his lack of singing ability perfectly cast otherwise. Brings exactly what you want from Baloo a nice bit of humor and just a real warmth.)
Kingsley - 3.5(Perfectly cast as well. His Bagheera has that regal command needed for the role, while also having just the right understated care beneath it all)
Elba - 3.5(A more vicious take than the purring Sanders. A good performance that certainly brought an added bit of menace to the role.)
Nyong'o - 3(Nice heartfelt performance.)
Walken - 2.5(Miscast I felt. I prefer when he's not used for his Walkenisms and is actually used for his considerable acting ability. This was a case of the former.)
Johansson - 3(Brief but does a creepy seductive voice rather well.)
1. Jeff Bridges
2. Mahershala Ali
3. Lucas Hedges
4. Michael Shannon
5. Dev Patel
Post a Comment