Rock solid line up, honestly, even without Kang-Ho or Dafoe. I predict:
5) Hopkins 4) Pitt 3) Hanks 2) Pacino 1) Pesci
Also, Louis, what would be your thoughts on the final "rumble in the jungle" fight from "Ali"? Personally, its my favourite scene in the movie, in that I like its choreography and music, but it's still nowhere near as exciting as the real deal.
Never thought I'd feel this sorry for JLo. Also Joker getting in for Editing over 1917....AH. The categories I went 100% on were Picture, Visual Effects, and International Film.
1. Al Pacino 2. Joe Pesci 3. Tom Hanks 4. Brad Pitt 5. Anthony Hopkins
Louis, do you know if you'll be reviewing Pacino and Pesci together or separately? I'd actually vote for separate reviews, since the two performances are almost entirely independent from one another, and even in their big scene together they both have enough going on individually that can be addressed without talking too much about the other performance.
Michael: I guess he'll do 2 reviews in one, a la Harrelson and Rockwell, for convenience. Although I would agree that there's A LOT to be said about both performances, so separate reviews would make sense as well.
1. 1917 2. Ford V. Ferrari 3. The Rise of Skywalker 4. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 5. Joker
Branch deserves a Neptune's curse for ignoring The Lighthouse. Still 1917 has incredible work there across the board, giving every single sound just the extra bit of intensity of visceral. Ford V. Ferrari has some great car sounds it must be said. Rise of Skywalker's faults do not lie in its Sound Editing, which doesn't have much new, but at least some fine laser sounds. Once Upon a Time and Joker, I guess to get some decent gruesome sounds out there, and Taratino does often do his focused sound moments that is more than decent work, like giving so much detail to Cliff Booth preparing dinner. Still a bit excessive recognition for both.
Sound Mixing:
1. 1917 2. Ad Astra 3. Ford V. Ferrari 4. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 5. Joker
Outstanding work for 1917 in terms of putting you right within every sequence, and particularly such brilliant use of Newman's score in terms of leveling it within those sequence. Give you that right visceral sting of the environmental sounds, but also knowing when to increase the intensity through the use of score. Extremely deserving work. I didn't care for Ad Astra, but its Mixing is terrific. Really delivers on the atmosphere of the various scenes particularly the opening, lunar chase and the stowaway sequence. Ford V. Ferrari has some great work in every racing scene to make you all the more within those moments. Deserved work. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood has some fine work in this regard, though not amazing. Still Tarantino typically creates more atmosphere with it like Cliff Booth's ride home, so not a terrible nomination. Joker, what mixing? I thought it was just play the score as loud as possible...I joker a little (no pun there), as the making the gun shots louder was an effective touch, still the score didn't need to be as overbearing in the mix as it is.
Did not react well to a lot of this. The nods for Parasite and Little Women are the only things keeping me sane. The abundant love for Joker and Jojo Rabbit hurts more than I could have imagined, and the Lopez/Farewell/Nyongo'o snubs hurt even worse.
Okay maybe I’m overreacting but I guess I meant how there were so many better contenders whereas last year I’d resigned myself to fate. Also they seem to be going back to their old excessively conservative ways now.
RatedRStar: I guess I’m more unhappy with snubs than anything. Bates, Hopkins and Pryce, I’m unhappy with Awkwafina getting snubbed I suppose and I guess I was excited at the prospect of three Asian actors getting into the lineups, but I can’t overly chastise anyone in the Actress lineup because I’m pretty sure Erivo was the one who made it in last, and she was very good.
The only acting snub that I was bothered by was De Niro's in The Irishman. I get that it's a really subdued performance, but it's beyond me how the Academy can recognize intense subtlety, (in the form of Pesci's turn), and ignore it from the same damn film.
I guess I should be grateful that a lot of great performances got in. Still it’s going to be grumpy Calvin from here on out (working on a pissy blog post as we speak lol)
Think of it this way; if you can survive the ugly trio from last year's awards season, you can make it through Joker receiving 11 nominations. I don't know about you, but Phoenix by himself is better than anything in those movies.
1. 1917 2. The Irishman 3. Rise of Skywalker 4. The Lion King 5. Avengers: Endgame
1917 invisible work there, so quite impressive there, sans the CGI rat, however even that as the low point was hardly distracting. The Irishman is a major step forward, though not a perfect step forward in its technology. Still work to be done there, though they perhaps flew too close to the sun with De Niro's blue eyes in addition to the rest of him. The Pesci and Pacino work though is where it definitely shines. Rise of Skywalker's space battles are all good, just in terms of tech, as its environmental stuff, although some of the alien stuff felt lazy, though I think that has more to do with design. The Lion King is partially the same idea, though again it is how it was used as well, and there it was so hollow. Avengers, is a better film than the two above it, but there was clearly a rush in many regards. Namely like Pepper pots in the Iron Maiden suit, which is terrible, and there is the occasional just sort of stuff look to it, which has become more common with Marvel's absurdly swift schedule.
Makeup and Hairstyling:
1. Bombshell 2. 1917 3. Joker 4. Judy
And no, I won't be watching Maleficent. Bombshell, as much as the film is eh, does have impressive makeup, particularly on Theron, who is just extremely convincing in that transformation. Lithgow fat makeup is a lot a better than most, like Crowe's for example. Kidman's chin is probably the weakest aspect, but even that is fine. 1917 is more subtle work, or more brutal work. excels in both, like just the scar on Cumberbatch or the wounds throughout. Joker has some fine blood work it must said, and the Joker makeup job is a memorable one. Zellweger's transformation, is just fine, not incredible by any measure, though certainly does its job.
Animated Film:
1. Klaus 2. Toy Story 4 3. I lost My Body 4. Missing Link 5. How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World
Still a eh category by design, if Weathering with You is great however, I will be annoyed that it missed out.
Might be a little early, but who does everyone think Louis's Lead and Supporting Actor wins will be? For Lead, I'm predicting either Sandler, or one of Dafoe/Pattinson to take it. For supporting, I reckon Pesci's a safe bet.
Best Supporting Actor and Lead are way better than last years mess. I will take that and accept that 2016 Best Actor may be the best in our lifetimes lol
You know, lets look on the bright side here - these nominations aren't perfect, but a lot of them are much better than last year's unholy trinity of sorts. At least we didn't get Margot Robbie (OUATIH) in supporting actress, or Foxx as a last minute replacement in supporting actor...
Again, I could've done without the 10 extra nominations for "Joker" when really it should've only gotten 1 - not to mention Bates in supporting actress - but overall, these fields aren't that bad.
1. Little Women 2. Jojo Rabbit 3. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 4. Joker 5. The Irishman
Little Women has gorgeous work across the board that hits so many sweet spots. This just looking great, reflecting period, yet being unique, creating a more vibrant look to the film, granting character through the costumes particularly for Laurie and Amy. This in creating each sense of period in the film as well. Fantastic work across the board.
Have given my thoughts before, but as the vibrant take, this is some vibrant work, effectively in contrast as well to McKenzie's clothes. Also some extra points for the particularly unique Rockwell's "who cares anymore" costume and the cardboard delivery uniforms.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood has a particularly elaborate and wonderful set of more modern period costumes across the board. This in managing to be beautiful work, though reflective of each character. This just like in Dalton's attempted flashier suits against Booth's to the point clothes, or against Tate's beautiful everything. Also just some terrific extra bits in recreating the styles in Dalton's films and tv shows.
Joker's joker costumes are memorable, particularly his main Cesar Romero suit. Also some fine 80's period work below that, though nothing too notable there.
The Irishman's costumes are good, and do add a bit here and there, but this is one nomination I'm not sure the film needed.
Production Design:
1. 1917 2. Parasite 3. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 4. The Irishman 5. Jojo Rabbit
Actually a pretty stellar lineup here, even if it would've been great to see Little Women and The Lighthouse here. 1917 though is hard to deny through the sheer size, detail and greatness of it all. It not only is grand and impressive in the sheer design of it all, but also so essential in the minute details of every bit of the mine, No man's land, or a destroyed town. Just amazing work across the board.
LOVED that Parasite made it here, as the design of the basement versus the house, and its basement, is one of the essential elements within the film. Both realized in such brilliant detail that are both lived in yet so unique. The basement being a true memorable hole of a house, against the house being so gorgeous and painfully pristine in every way. That living room set in particular, is unforgettable bit of work. It isn't just a house, but both are truly part of the thematic weight of the story.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, well Booth's drive home alone is amazing detail, and the comparison between his place and Rick's house is similar to Parasite though not *quite* as dynamic. Still fantastic work in giving character and period in such vivid surroundings. Add to that the lush detail of both the most pristine 60's elements, of the high class theater, to the less so, like the Spahn ranch, that still is created so vividly. Add on to that the detail of the recreated sets of various kinds, stellar work as well.
The Irishman's work is less abundant in a way, but also fantastic in creating the sense of time in the production design. This granting detail to each locale they stop at throughout the year, and creating an essential sense of place and period. Not as expansive as Hollywood but still incredible work.
Jojo's work overall is a bit more limited, though still great work in its realization of the detailed appearance of Jojo's house, and the more fairy tale Germany the film offers, that later becomes the more bombed out version. A fine bit of Wes Anderson esque bit of design.
I mean, half the Best Picture nominees are in my personal top ten for the year (still have a lot to see though). But overall, as long as Joker goes 0-11 on Oscar night (a man can dream), I'd say I'm happy.
What upsets me about Phoenix is that literally any performance between The Master and Joker would’ve been a deserving Oscar nod. Okay maybe not Irrational Man. Which is what I am today, incidentally.
1. Parasite 2. The Irishman 3. Jojo Rabbit 4. Ford V. Ferrari 5. Joker
Parasite blows all of its competition out of the water. This is Swiss watch editing, (I'll bring the Swiss up again in regards to this film) as the film just runs, in every sequence being so brilliantly constructed individually, while also just having such a fantastic flow as a film. Every scene is just pitch perfect in terms of cutting between characters, between moments, and montage construction here is flawless. Amazing work, that should win handily unfortunately it probably won't.
The Irishman is very long, though with a clear intention in the pacing that is realized by the editing. This with a sentimental memory sort of pacing much of the time, though brilliant sequences realized in this pacing, like the Tony Pro intro and the boat assassination in particular. Could there have been some tightening, I'd say probably to make it a bit shorter (the final Hoffa sequence, though I think this was to show Frank was purposefully trying to be late to tip Hoffa off, though they perhaps could have made this clearer), but for the most part, the approach is extremely well realized by Schoonmaker.
Jojo Rabbit is a finely edited film. Not nearly as showy as some of the other films I will get to in a moment, but finds a nice pace, realizes its individual sequences well, and has a few nice bits of overt editing like the final battle.
Ford V. Ferrari, is one where I compare to Irishman as to misquote JK simmons "are you dragging, or are you atmosphere building", I thought here the editing really often dragged sequences out. The racing moments certainly are well cut in the moment, and the sort of in the moment editing is well done. It does have an odd lack of urgency for a racing film. Now I do also think scenes could've been cut, the whole trying to buy Ferrari subplot for example, but that's more on Mangold.
Joker's editing is often very sloppy in its attempt to replicate classic Scorsese, this in montages that often come off as silly in their over cutting, looking at you stair dance, but also has a fundamental problem in the way it actually hones in too closely on Phoenix at times in terms of losing the reaction of what he is doing. This again is on Phillips as well (I'll get to him), but is inherent in the editing choices.
1. 1917 2. The Lighthouse 3. Joker 4. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 5. The Irishman
1917 is yet another tour de force from Roger Deakins, who perhaps saw Birdman and Gravity and said "challenge accepted". This is one of his great achievements, of a cinematographer who has so many. This is that once again the composition of his work is simply incredible. This as it brings your right within every shot, every shot that is so gorgeous in its visual details of so many kinds. I mean he has amazing scenes of the grey no man's land, he also somehow finds the most photogenic way to show foxhole gridlock, it is fascinating. He creates just one painting after another here. This once again with his lighting here that is amazing in creating a beauty to every time or type of day, the changing flares/fire in the bombed out city alone would be deserving of a win. Then just to some how take one more step, this is all while constantly moving, the camera movements, which hasn't typically been Deakins's specific focus, are outstanding in gripping you right within every single sequence of the film. Astonishing work across the board.
Hate that the Lighthouse had to be in the same year as 1917, as it would win most years for me. I've given my thoughts before, but its recreation and sort of adaptation of the classic horror cinematography is outstanding and such an inspired nomination.
Joker's cinematography nomination is one part I will defend against any detractors, though I'm pretty sure Lawrence Sher sold his soul to achieve it, because nothing in his body of work suggests he was capable of this. I will actually say this element is so good, it probably helped convince many it is a better film than it is. This as the film achieves such a vibrant color palette that really does pop, and give the film a distinct atmospheric appearance. The shots are well composed, even when poorly designed, like take Phillips's dumb inclusion of Phoenix's kick dance on the stair, well lit, just a dumb idea on the director's part.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is possibly Tarantino's best work with Richardson, who can occasionally underwhelm with him. This as again some terrific recreation work in creating some of the different films, and the different tv show styles. The film itself work though is beautifully done for the most part, having a nice sort vibrant relaxed palette, and some dynamic, if seemingly purposefully relaxed lighting choices. All very well realized though in crafting sort of a 60's look though with enough of a modern change up to it.
I've settled on 4 for Pitt because, thinking back on his character, there are some weirdly glossed over elements to Cliff's past that perhaps could've been expanded, thereby given the role/performance more complexity. That said, Pitt still has a great deal of ease, charisma and humour in his performance, and does especially well his penultimate scene of drugged out antics.
Jesus, OUATIH needed to be shorter, not longer. I'll give Pitt a lot of credit for keeping me invested in it throughout its rather laborious second act.
However, after rewatching the film, I have to say, DiCaprio would have honestly deserved the Oscar more for OUATIH than The Revenant. It's one of his most resonant turns in a while.
War Dogs and The Hangover are well-shot to be sure. I agree though that this is a whole new level for Sher.
Pitt’s a 4.5 to me, and the reason for that is because I think he does have quieter moments that let him go a bit further (the scene with Bruce Dern, his “breakup” with Rick, etc.) Otherwise, I think he’s pretty entertaining.
Tahmeed: As an earnest fan of his "Revenant" performance, I think he's equally great in OUATIH - he rides that fine line of being just comedic enough in his yelling and cursed filled tyraids, yet bringing a genuine emotional weight and desperation for the character all the same.
1. 1917 2. Little Women 3. Joker 4. Marriage 5. Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker
This is where they leave Jojo Rabbit off? Anyway, 1917 may be Newman's crowning achievement in his impressive set of scores, that actually managed to achieve something I had just recently criticized, in that his sort of ambient atmosphere work is great here as well in delivering us right into each scene. Of course he does get to show off, and thankfully so, in some of the most invigorating and engaging pieces of work here. This in creating such gorgeous pieces of work, that does definitely owe a debt to Zimmer's work for Thin Red Line and Dunkirk, making use of every bit of his orchestra, yet he also makes it his own. This in creating work essential to each scene in building the tension of every sequence, while also just being incredibly beautifully grand pieces on their own.
Desplat's take on Little Women definitely is in a similar line to Newman's own, though so what, both are delightful. Desplat's work here is just wonderfully warm and emotional work. It is as vibrant as the costumes in its almost Christmas songeque instrumental choices. It is a playful work that is almost a confectionery in how sweet it is, but sweet in the right way. He also nicely balances that with a bit of misterioso, to suggest it won't all be perfect. Is just an essential element in the realization of the warm, though not without hardship, world of the film. Lovely, lovely work.
Joker, is a score I will not prescribe to either extreme. I've given my thoughts on it before, but it is bluntly obvious, though not ineffective in the obviousness.
Marriage Story's score is a lot of Randy Newman, that is a little more suited to Pixar in its level of whimsy here I think. Doesn't make it terrible, but it is a little much at times, without being memorable in itself. Honestly I think the film might've benefited from no score at all, as Newman's work at its best sounds like some vague instrumental version of a Beatles's song I can't quite remember.
Rise of Skywalker...what score? I mean what original score? I've listened to the new tracks, mostly recycled to begin with, and even what's new sound just like some generalized Star Wars sound.
Okay, I actually saw 1917 yesterday, and... I didn’t think it was that technically masterful? I did like it more than I was expecting, but the gimmick doesn’t really add or detract from anything and mostly just seems needlessly show-offy. Dunkirk was better.
1. "(I'm Gonna) Love me again" - Rocketman 2. "Stand Up" - Harriet 3. "I'm Standing With You" - Breakthrough 4. "Into the Unknown" - Frozen II 5. "I Can't Let You Throw Yourself Away" - Toy Story 4
Though Rocketman under performed, I'm glad that this made it in its very rousing and likable tune. This with enough of a passionate through within the verses, though maintaining the same fun pace, of the very enthusiastic the just about perfect for the film lyrics of the chorus of the character of Elton John coming to terms with himself.
"Stand Up", it must be said that Erivo has a great voice, but this is really strong soulful ballad. This in creating a real build, with lyrics that actually do make sense, and even rather powerful like including Harriet's final words at the end of it. The build though as the sort of spiritual of the verses to the sort of fight song of the "stand up" chorus makes it a pretty good song.
"I'm Standing With You" is an okay ballad on its own measure. It's verses do a get a little vague, though its chorus is rousing enough at least. It doesn't really build to anything mind you, as the introduction of more voices, get a bit muddled at times, but it's better than...
"Into the Unknown" is like the version of "Let It Go" that everyone claimed they heard, who hated that song after it became so popular. This is as its actual verses in the introduction is some standard rambling, then the repetition of "Into the Unknown" is egregious at an attempt at a chorus I guess. I mean how about anything more, or a cohesive song of any sort to go around that tiresome lyric, and musical motif.
"I Can't Let You Throw Yourself Away", they nominated Newman for this? Mary Steenburgen and Bong Joon-ho were robbed. This is as generic Newman as it gets, and I already find that a little hard to take at times. Repetitive and a whole lot of nothing riffs on other songs he's done for Pixar.
Well obviously disagree entirely there, but particularly with the gimmick, which elevated itself beyond the initial idea there for me, by offering an entirely different perspective and approach for a war film.
1. The Irishman 2. Little Women 3. Jojo Rabbit 4. The Two Popes 5. Joker
The Irishman's screenplay is a few different things, but above all a sprawling work. This built around the idea of the recollections of a single man who takes from World War II, to his near demise that seems so meaningless. The latter element is the overarching premise of the film and an effective one as this sort of requiem for a hitman, of a man whose life is just moving towards nothingness. Within that though we have history of the gangsters the man comes along with, given the typical, to Scorsese films, details of the life and the process. This though differed a bit to the connection of Hoffa that is personal, business and of historical importance. The crux of the story of seemingly the best of life of Frank, though that with his association with the gangster of Bufalino, each important in their own ways, though each realized around Frank as typically the observer who follows orders to actions. Zallian building the story then around the observer, crafting an alternate gangster story though with the details that one would hope, the revelations, the characters, and of course the dialogue.
Little Women is fantastic work by Gerwig as she does the unthinkable and changes the whole thing up. Her choices to re-write the structure though actually does wonders in both changing up the story, not just re-telling the same thing, but also hitting the emotional moments in fresh and powerful ways. For example, Jo's two long nights with different results. This also having the mirroring relationship of Jo/Laurie and Amy/Laurie rather than the same, and the meta-commentary, that never goes too far, of the publisher that adds a nice touch to the proceedings. Gerwig's sort of pushes into some modern sense also never feels like too much, as she always realizes through the right characters and through natural sequences. Exceptional work, that I honestly would be fine with if she took the win as well.
Jojo Rabbit's screenplay takes a book, that I've taken only cursory glance at overall, but is technically more serious just by virtue of how a book's perspective is different than film's. Waititi's major changes seem to be bringing a lot stronger sense of the absurdity within the material, that I would say is necessary for the attempt, same in the way of Chaplin with The Great Dictator, and that seems to be his main inspiration in his overall approach. In that the Nazis are a joke, but the horrors they inflict are real. That is the choice, and in turn it is a very funny film in reveling in the absurdity of it all, making fun of the supporting Nazis and Jojo's silly delusions, quite effectively I will say. It does render its dramatic story though in the idea of humanizing that in which you've dehumanized. I do think this works based on how it realized specifically in the relationship, which becomes more of a boy in love with a girl that slowly prevails, with the expected jealousy and bitterness in that. This also with his relationship with his mother, that simply is very sweet, and I think the film does work as written with the absurdity of the evil characters played for comedy, above, the earnest story of the boy and his mother, boy and a girl.
The Two Popes has three things in its screenplay. Two Popes acting like two dudes. Two Popes honestly discussing their faith, their faults, their politics, and a whole lot unneeded exposition or setting up sequences to things we either know, or could be handled in a quick caption. The two dudes stuff is occasionally fun, a little too cute at times, but at least I see its point. The honest discussion is the best stuff. It's not Sunset Limited, but there is something there, if a bit too general in the discussions. The third just gets in the way of the second and brings it down to hit some plot points, when character points should have been the focus.
Okay now the Joker, which is actually worse in screenplay form as the "joker looks in the mirror" but even more on the nose dialogue than present in the film. The story itself though is a whole lot of rambling and underdeveloped ideas about class, "I hate the world" and mental health wrapped with some Batman mythos for random measure. Of course this is all as a film where we get where its going then it goes there, with no surprises other than maybe the Joker's specific origin...I guess. This technically being some obviously recycled ideas from other films, Taxi Driver and King of Comedy, which it doesn't revolutionize, modernize, or utilize to tell something new. It is rather a hodgepodge of those and the Killing Joker into a "let's watch some acting", until the credits roll.
1. Parasite 2. Knives Out 3. Marriage Story 4. 1917 5. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Parasite is a no brainier for the top tier. The scenario is original, and brilliantly realized in every twist and switch. It is rich in its themes yet never does it weigh down the narrative in self-importance, it just adds to the depth of the piece. This realized all the better to realizing each character of the family so well, along with the comparison to the rich family, and the other basement dwellers. The themes though also invigorate it all creating the progression of the story, and so many brilliant pieces that are so naturally realized around the idea of class. It is also just an entertaining and often very funny film, with such vibrant interactions between the characters, or who they claim to be. An outstanding screenplay that works on every front that a screenplay should, being a great character piece, a great story, well just being great.
Knives Out it exists very much within the screenplay that seeks to subvert the mystery genre, although its been subverted so many times, I'd say it is more of just part of the genre. This with one revelation only created another revelation. It hits all the right points though that one would want in the mystery genre. A good mystery, check, a good twist or two, it has a least one check, a proper "I've solved it monologue", definitely check, wit, check, and hopefully some good characters to bounce off of, definitely check. It is the last that probably where the film most excels, in partially the likable nurse of Marta, the dogged P.I., the straight man detective, but of course the flawed family, which I liked that Johnson humanized enough as much as he also skewered them.
Marriage Story's screenplay I would say is pretty great, as even the caricatures I dislike in the film are more so through the performances, particularly the court observer than the screenplay. The screenplay that tells its story simply yet effectively of the two people that love each other, but go through the brutal process of legally trying to destroy this. It works by first realizing the relationship, well done in just the "why I love" letters that are brilliantly written. The dissection of that though then is as effective in how Baumbach write the natural, and gradual process of it helping to destroy the relationship. This in not engaging in simple answers but rather showing the perspective as they are, even within the lawyers, who in the end are there just to gain for themselves except Alda's seasoned pro, therefore will tell whatever they believe will win their case. This realized best in the great courtroom proceeding of two pros throwing everything they got at each other. This though while maintaining the personal descent that keep a cordiality that slowly festers towards the climatic fight, that I think is wholly earned as the worst words each has of an explosion of pent up disdain for each other.
1917's screenplay is part of its tautness and I do think excels in realizing its scenario with each set piece. This though within it careful moments of realization of characters and a bit humanity to each bit, that nicely fleshes it out beyond an exercise. Whether this be the final conversation of the film, his conversation with the spent Lieutenant, or the delivery moment. Each are naturally part of the flow of the story but with more than just a perfunctory statements, finding character even with the clock ticking so to speak. Simple and straight forward to be sure, but shows how to do simple and straight forward.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is one that does frustrate me in that I think it was a chance for Tarantino to mature a bit, but he didn't, and really this would not be a criticism if it was made by some no name with the same exact script. If that were the case I would appreciate the vividness of the world created, with the detail granted to Hollywood of the time, and the terrific duo, as written, at the center of it all. These all work, with memorable dialogue and scenes aplenty. Looking at as Tarantino though he does indulge though in everything involving Tate, as even giving her a "life" just is scenes of some true navel gazing, and the other element is kind of a strange tension built on whether or not you think he is going to do something really distasteful that only exists because it's Tarantino. It is a back and forth, but there is definitely a lot to love, and it isn't as though I hate the things don't love.
1. Bong Joon-ho - Parasite 2. Sam Mendes - 1917 3. Martin Scorsese - The Irishman 4. Quentin Tarantino - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 5. Todd Phillips - Joker
I'll right let's frame each of these by what's the point.
Bong Joon-ho's point is to make an compelling, entertaining, funny film that also manages to be a class commentary. Well what a success in this bit of Swiss directing here. In that this is just one where Bong refines this system that just makes a movie that is why one loves movies. Bong's work takes the great script he co-wrote, and elevates it even further. This with so many moments of brilliance in terms of his choices in song, such as the peach poisoning montage, staging, the whole flooding sequence, or any sequence for that matter. Bong always maintains this careful sense of character, plotting, and themes that is masterful. Like Memories of Murder, his use of tone shifts in particular is stunning that he pulls it off, but like that film he knows when to pull back the comedy and right when to use it. I also must take special mention to his work in the finale, that took an epilogue that could've struggled, and instead turned into perhaps the crowning achievement in the film. In his whole dreamlike approach, in so much of it, grants such a powerful poignancy and in the end haunting quality, as he crafts it not what will happen, but what probably will never happen other than in the dreams of the young man still living in a basement.
Mendes really is like a 1b for me, and would be as deserving in my book. This in crafting a unique take on a genre that has been told. And yes, influences there, as there always are however his point is specific appreciation for the soldier, and puts us within one's soldier's perspective and keeps us there in a way we have not seen before, definitely not to this extent. This fashioned within a hopeful story built around that appreciation, even if hardship are not forgotten or ignored, through both the intensity he fashions through this perspective, along with the horrors of it. Mendes is able to keep us there as we must go every treacherous step of the journey, just as we must witness every corpse that will go unremoved from the brutalized No Man's Land. This telling a grand action epic, through this fascinating combination of both the grand and the intimate. An outstanding work in that sense, that doesn't waste one thing at his disposal, whether it be the production design, Deakins, the sound, the score, the effects and even the editing that makes it all invisible.
Scorsese's point seems to be to revisit the gangster genre for one last go around, though now very much as the seasoned veteran taking one more look at that life where age is an essential element to it all. Although with this thematic emphasis, that he takes even further than Zaillian establishes in his script, of the nostalgic journey of the hitman. This is seen in each choice, from the production design, to the cinematography which both have this sort of appreciative quality to them of memory. This is furthered though in his choices of music and editing, that are at a slower pace, more instrumental and sentimental. This again reinforcing this idea of the memory of nostalgia. This though as something he peels away at the same time as false memory in a way, by peppering in the truth in a way such as the markers of death, that is increased from Zaillian's script, and through the essential epilogue where he takes time with just an old lonely man with nothing but those memories. This is incredible work from Scorsese as well, less precise than those above, but less precise with purpose, in finding new ground in his well worn genre, by looking back at it from an endpoint.
Tarantino's point seems to be to make a love letter to the late 60's, the movies, the tv shows, the music, the fashion. Well achieved in that he does use all those resources at his disposal to do this in great detail, funneled through the rougher story of Rick's difficult fame, and the seemingly easy story of Sharon Tate's fame. Tarantino does succeed there in finding fun in the sort of flashback cinema, that is almost like, well actually just is at some points, watching old clips in appreciation. He then treats the Manson family as this unwelcome and unpleasant intruders. These moments that he effectively realizes initially with genuine unnerving horror, by using silence of this unknown quantity. He then though is dishonest with this as he then turns them into a different comical tone, in bringing Tarantino's over the top violence that had been dormant before that scene back in, that I'll say feels a touch disingenuous in a way, as he kicks what seems to be him "party poopers" violently out of his fantasy of the period, and returns to the easy going fairy tale he's crafted for the ending. Definitely imperfect, and in some ways questionable, but definitely not without qualities of worth.
Alright now what's Phillips's point...I mean what is it. Is this an examination of a disturbed mind that we should be disturbed by. Maybe. Or are we to sympathize given most the people he kills did him wrong...maybe. Is it just a super villain origin. Maybe. The point is Phillips does really seem to know what he is trying to say or what type of film he is trying to make. So he just decides instead to run the story, he doesn't have a path for, through his own Scorsese playbook. This with some absurdly one the nose song choices, white face paint "WHITE ROOM" OF COURSE! Life's rough "That's life" Of course, and with that just random visual choices, that suggest a man whose seen good movies but doesn't know why they're good. For example, the stair dance in particular where he's seen movies where people dance as some symbolic gesture, but doesn't have any idea how to realize it himself, to not look rather silly. A real sour apple, in what otherwise, even with my reservations regarding Tarantino's work, is an impressive grouping.
1. Florence Pugh - Little Women 2. Scarlett Johansson - Jojo Rabbit 3. Laura Dern - Marriage Story 4. Kathy Bates - Richard Jewell 5. Margot Robbie - Bombshell
I'll admit to having been too generous to Robbie initially, as I really didn't not care for the first half of her performance in the slightest, a 3 by the way Luke. I have to say the top two are great, so I can't say this is a bad lineup, there's definitely been far worse in the category, as even the bottom three aren't bereft of merit though there were more deserving choices (Zhao Shuzhen, Lopez, Octavia Spencer, Parasite Ladies).
Actress:
1. Scarlett Johansson - Marriage Story 2. Saoirse Ronan - Little Women 3. Renee Zellweger - Bombshell 4. Cynthia Erivo - Harriet 5. Charlize Theron - Bombshell
Again top two are great, and Ronan is the slight surprise, that I loved seeing. The other three are all more than decent as well, so I can't hate this lineup even if it could've been better (Awkwafina, Buckley).
Picture:
1. Parasite 2. 1917 3. The Irishman 4. Jojo Rabbit 5. Little Women 6. Marriage Story 7. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 8. Ford V Ferrari 9. Joker
Again, I guess I'll be Mr. Positive this year, because I thought, even with the needless Joker love, the academy overall did a very good job overall. Where last year, only one best picture nominee even touched my top ten, five did here, with 2 in my top 20. Ford V. Ferrari, I'd even classify as a good film, with Joker being the only true blight in my book, and even then there's been far worse films nominated for best picture.
Yesh...Louis' reservations towards "Joker" are making me nervous for Phoenix. I'm still hoping he'll get a 4.5 at least, which I could understand.
Its funny..I don't disagree with anything said against the film's writing, direction and technical aspects..the movie's very messy, and at times its hard to gauge where it wants to take its story, or what to say about its protagonist. HOWEVER....I'm not going to lie....it has stayed with me somewhat. There is "something" that keeps me from fully detesting the film. Maybe its just reminding of the great work's from Scorsese...maybe I just like the character of Joker so much that I'm open to most any attempt at his backstory...maybe I just like Phoenix so much that I'm seeing a lot more in his performance than others are...
I don't know...I agree that the film's 11 oscar nominations are ridiculous, but I'm also holding my ground with finding the movie decent as a whole.
Spirit sounds like a rejected alternate choice for the opening song, but far inferior. It quite frankly sound like ripoff, but with just Beyonce saying spirit over that repetitively towards creating an immensely forgettable knockoff.
Can't quite say Speechless worked within the scheme of the film, nor can I say it completely fit in musically with the other songs of the film. Having said that it is a good dramatic Disney ballad on its own merits, as this real power ballad of sorts, not unlike a Let it Go. This much better than "Into the Unknown" this with its particularly wonderful chorus, that is quite good, in fact seems like a much better heir to Let It Go, as it is a pretty invigorating song.
I'll start on the other request next post.
Tahmeed:
The dance sequence at the end of Boy was more fitting. This one was a little like, hmmm not sure how to exactly end, let's dance again. Not that it is terrible, and makes sense as sort of a "joy to the world Hitler's dead" so lets dance, but just hardly executed perfectly for me.
111 comments:
1. Pesci
2. Pacino
3. Hanks
4. Hopkins
5. Pitt
1.Pesci
2.Pacino
3.Hanks
4.Pitt
5.Hopkins
1. Pacino
2. Pesci
3. Hanks
4. Pitt
5. Hopkins
Too bad for no Song Kang-Ho, not that I really expected it tbh.
1. Joe Pesci
2. Al Pacino
3. Brad Pitt
4. Tom Hanks
5. Anthony Hopkins
1. Pesci
2. Pacino (really hope he'surprises and is #1 instead though)
3. Hanks
4. Pitt
5. Hopkins
I'm happy enough with the lineup, Song getting in would've been nice although I'm relieved we're getting a Dafoe/Pattinson double review.
1. Pesci
2. Hanks
3. Pacino
4. Pitt
5. Hopkins
This is still a great lineup though. Should have know Kang-Ho had no chance, it does break the Oscar curse for Hanks though which is nice.
1. Pesci
2. Pacino
3. Hanks
4. Hopkins
5. Pitt
Parasite gets Production Design and Editing (can't believe 1917 missed the latter)
Love that The Lighthouse got Cinematography.
Wow no Frozen II in animated feature lol thats a shock.
Rock solid line up, honestly, even without Kang-Ho or Dafoe. I predict:
5) Hopkins
4) Pitt
3) Hanks
2) Pacino
1) Pesci
Also, Louis, what would be your thoughts on the final "rumble in the jungle" fight from "Ali"? Personally, its my favourite scene in the movie, in that I like its choreography and music, but it's still nowhere near as exciting as the real deal.
Joker for Adapted Screenplay? Seriously?
Glad that Little Women and Jojo got in though.
Original Screenplay:
Happy with Knives Out, Marriage Story and PARASITE.
Lead Actor
Banderas
DiCaprio
Driver
Phoenix
Pryce
Pryce and Banderas are in!!!
Actress:
Erivo
Johannson
Ronan
Theron
Zellweger
I reckon someone here will be very glad about one of the Best Actor nominees
Phillips got in for Director? Ugh
Yes, Bong Joon Ho!!!!
Wow, The Farewell really got shut out... No Zhao Shuzhen and Theron over Awkwafina is just...
Picture
Ford v Ferrari
The Irishman
Jojo Rabbit
Joker (ugh)
Little Women
Marriage Story
1917
OUATIH
Parasite
Louis: Thoughts on the nominees and ratings & thoughts on any saves you want to get rid of.
Your thoughts on Speechless from Aladdin.
Very lame to see The Farewell get shut out, but unfortunately that was the trend.
Though, again Nolan couldn't get in for the Dark Knight, but Phillips can for the Joker...
What awful acting lineups. Not happy.
Mitchell: I'm pretty sure there's something else Louis wishes to cover before "Ali" right now lol
Where was this superhero love fest for Logan in 2017, I wonder. At least that would have been far, far more deserving on every level.
And fuck Joker. Officially the worst Oscars in awhile on so many fronts (though the strength of that Best Picture lineup is undeniable).
Never thought I'd feel this sorry for JLo. Also Joker getting in for Editing over 1917....AH. The categories I went 100% on were Picture, Visual Effects, and International Film.
1. Al Pacino
2. Joe Pesci
3. Tom Hanks
4. Brad Pitt
5. Anthony Hopkins
Louis, do you know if you'll be reviewing Pacino and Pesci together or separately? I'd actually vote for separate reviews, since the two performances are almost entirely independent from one another, and even in their big scene together they both have enough going on individually that can be addressed without talking too much about the other performance.
Michael: I guess he'll do 2 reviews in one, a la Harrelson and Rockwell, for convenience.
Although I would agree that there's A LOT to be said about both performances, so separate reviews would make sense as well.
Alright let's get started:
Sound Editing:
1. 1917
2. Ford V. Ferrari
3. The Rise of Skywalker
4. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
5. Joker
Branch deserves a Neptune's curse for ignoring The Lighthouse. Still 1917 has incredible work there across the board, giving every single sound just the extra bit of intensity of visceral. Ford V. Ferrari has some great car sounds it must be said. Rise of Skywalker's faults do not lie in its Sound Editing, which doesn't have much new, but at least some fine laser sounds. Once Upon a Time and Joker, I guess to get some decent gruesome sounds out there, and Taratino does often do his focused sound moments that is more than decent work, like giving so much detail to Cliff Booth preparing dinner. Still a bit excessive recognition for both.
Sound Mixing:
1. 1917
2. Ad Astra
3. Ford V. Ferrari
4. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
5. Joker
Outstanding work for 1917 in terms of putting you right within every sequence, and particularly such brilliant use of Newman's score in terms of leveling it within those sequence. Give you that right visceral sting of the environmental sounds, but also knowing when to increase the intensity through the use of score. Extremely deserving work. I didn't care for Ad Astra, but its Mixing is terrific. Really delivers on the atmosphere of the various scenes particularly the opening, lunar chase and the stowaway sequence. Ford V. Ferrari has some great work in every racing scene to make you all the more within those moments. Deserved work. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood has some fine work in this regard, though not amazing. Still Tarantino typically creates more atmosphere with it like Cliff Booth's ride home, so not a terrible nomination. Joker, what mixing? I thought it was just play the score as loud as possible...I joker a little (no pun there), as the making the gun shots louder was an effective touch, still the score didn't need to be as overbearing in the mix as it is.
Calvin: I'm not sure how you can say that after last year's lackluster showing, but to each their own.
Seriously, though, I liked "Joker", but picture, director and screenplay is to much.
Did not react well to a lot of this. The nods for Parasite and Little Women are the only things keeping me sane. The abundant love for Joker and Jojo Rabbit hurts more than I could have imagined, and the Lopez/Farewell/Nyongo'o snubs hurt even worse.
Calvin:
Woah, Calvin, remember last year, I know it was worse for me than you but still, this is a major uptick in a lot of ways.
Guys, Out of Bale and Egerton, who do you want for that 10th spot in the alternates.
1. Al Pacino
2. Joe Pesci
3. Tom Hanks
4. Anthony Hopkins
5. Brad Pitt
Luke: I can live without either one, to be honest.
Okay maybe I’m overreacting but I guess I meant how there were so many better contenders whereas last year I’d resigned myself to fate. Also they seem to be going back to their old excessively conservative ways now.
Luke: Egerton but I think he’ll be a 4.5 and probably doesn’t need a review.
Robert/Calvin: Fair enough.
Luke: Out of those two, I'd prefer Egerton, but whatever floats Louis' boat by then is fine by me.
Calvin: Which ones you not happy with? Bates is the only one that I am unhappy with since Lopez was way better.
I am somewhat glad that Christian Bale wasn't nominated since he will get plenty more down the road.
RatedRStar: I guess I’m more unhappy with snubs than anything. Bates, Hopkins and Pryce, I’m unhappy with Awkwafina getting snubbed I suppose and I guess I was excited at the prospect of three Asian actors getting into the lineups, but I can’t overly chastise anyone in the Actress lineup because I’m pretty sure Erivo was the one who made it in last, and she was very good.
Always wanted 2 newcomers in the Best Actor lineup between Banderas, Pryce, Egerton and Sandler.
And 11 nominations for Joker, Oh fucking hell.
The only acting snub that I was bothered by was De Niro's in The Irishman. I get that it's a really subdued performance, but it's beyond me how the Academy can recognize intense subtlety, (in the form of Pesci's turn), and ignore it from the same damn film.
I guess I should be grateful that a lot of great performances got in. Still it’s going to be grumpy Calvin from here on out (working on a pissy blog post as we speak lol)
Think of it this way; if you can survive the ugly trio from last year's awards season, you can make it through Joker receiving 11 nominations. I don't know about you, but Phoenix by himself is better than anything in those movies.
Tahmeed: Plus...he's the TITULAR character. I can't believe he got in for SLP and not this, although he's good in the former.
Alternate Supporting will look like this:
Song/Choi
Downey/Evans
Waititi/Rockwell
Brown
Chalamet
Visual Effects:
1. 1917
2. The Irishman
3. Rise of Skywalker
4. The Lion King
5. Avengers: Endgame
1917 invisible work there, so quite impressive there, sans the CGI rat, however even that as the low point was hardly distracting. The Irishman is a major step forward, though not a perfect step forward in its technology. Still work to be done there, though they perhaps flew too close to the sun with De Niro's blue eyes in addition to the rest of him. The Pesci and Pacino work though is where it definitely shines. Rise of Skywalker's space battles are all good, just in terms of tech, as its environmental stuff, although some of the alien stuff felt lazy, though I think that has more to do with design. The Lion King is partially the same idea, though again it is how it was used as well, and there it was so hollow. Avengers, is a better film than the two above it, but there was clearly a rush in many regards. Namely like Pepper pots in the Iron Maiden suit, which is terrible, and there is the occasional just sort of stuff look to it, which has become more common with Marvel's absurdly swift schedule.
Makeup and Hairstyling:
1. Bombshell
2. 1917
3. Joker
4. Judy
And no, I won't be watching Maleficent. Bombshell, as much as the film is eh, does have impressive makeup, particularly on Theron, who is just extremely convincing in that transformation. Lithgow fat makeup is a lot a better than most, like Crowe's for example. Kidman's chin is probably the weakest aspect, but even that is fine. 1917 is more subtle work, or more brutal work. excels in both, like just the scar on Cumberbatch or the wounds throughout. Joker has some fine blood work it must said, and the Joker makeup job is a memorable one. Zellweger's transformation, is just fine, not incredible by any measure, though certainly does its job.
Animated Film:
1. Klaus
2. Toy Story 4
3. I lost My Body
4. Missing Link
5. How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World
Still a eh category by design, if Weathering with You is great however, I will be annoyed that it missed out.
FUN FACT: all the nominees in this category are 356 years in total, which make this line one of the oldest in the Oscar's history, if not the oldest.
Pesci waited for this nomination 29 years, Pacino 27, Hopkins 22 and Hanks 19 (Pitt 8).
My line:
1. Pesci, 4.5
2. Pacino, 4
3. Hopkins 4
4. Pitt 3.5
5. Hanks 3
Might be a little early, but who does everyone think Louis's Lead and Supporting Actor wins will be?
For Lead, I'm predicting either Sandler, or one of Dafoe/Pattinson to take it.
For supporting, I reckon Pesci's a safe bet.
Lead: Dafoe
Supporting: Pesci
5) Hopkins
4) Pitt
3) Hanks
2) Pacino
1) Pesci
Tahmeed: Same guesses for Lead & Supporting, though I could see Pacino taking it if he surprises here.
Best Supporting Actor and Lead are way better than last years mess. I will take that and accept that 2016 Best Actor may be the best in our lifetimes lol
RatedRStar: I wholly agree.
And no one's under a 4 either which is great.
You know, lets look on the bright side here - these nominations aren't perfect, but a lot of them are much better than last year's unholy trinity of sorts. At least we didn't get Margot Robbie (OUATIH) in supporting actress, or Foxx as a last minute replacement in supporting actor...
Again, I could've done without the 10 extra nominations for "Joker" when really it should've only gotten 1 - not to mention Bates in supporting actress - but overall, these fields aren't that bad.
Luke: Your thoughts on the makeup & hairstyling for Maleficent 2? I’ll just take your word for that nomination :)
Costume Design:
1. Little Women
2. Jojo Rabbit
3. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
4. Joker
5. The Irishman
Little Women has gorgeous work across the board that hits so many sweet spots. This just looking great, reflecting period, yet being unique, creating a more vibrant look to the film, granting character through the costumes particularly for Laurie and Amy. This in creating each sense of period in the film as well. Fantastic work across the board.
Have given my thoughts before, but as the vibrant take, this is some vibrant work, effectively in contrast as well to McKenzie's clothes. Also some extra points for the particularly unique Rockwell's "who cares anymore" costume and the cardboard delivery uniforms.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood has a particularly elaborate and wonderful set of more modern period costumes across the board. This in managing to be beautiful work, though reflective of each character. This just like in Dalton's attempted flashier suits against Booth's to the point clothes, or against Tate's beautiful everything. Also just some terrific extra bits in recreating the styles in Dalton's films and tv shows.
Joker's joker costumes are memorable, particularly his main Cesar Romero suit. Also some fine 80's period work below that, though nothing too notable there.
The Irishman's costumes are good, and do add a bit here and there, but this is one nomination I'm not sure the film needed.
Production Design:
1. 1917
2. Parasite
3. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
4. The Irishman
5. Jojo Rabbit
Actually a pretty stellar lineup here, even if it would've been great to see Little Women and The Lighthouse here. 1917 though is hard to deny through the sheer size, detail and greatness of it all. It not only is grand and impressive in the sheer design of it all, but also so essential in the minute details of every bit of the mine, No man's land, or a destroyed town. Just amazing work across the board.
LOVED that Parasite made it here, as the design of the basement versus the house, and its basement, is one of the essential elements within the film. Both realized in such brilliant detail that are both lived in yet so unique. The basement being a true memorable hole of a house, against the house being so gorgeous and painfully pristine in every way. That living room set in particular, is unforgettable bit of work. It isn't just a house, but both are truly part of the thematic weight of the story.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, well Booth's drive home alone is amazing detail, and the comparison between his place and Rick's house is similar to Parasite though not *quite* as dynamic. Still fantastic work in giving character and period in such vivid surroundings. Add to that the lush detail of both the most pristine 60's elements, of the high class theater, to the less so, like the Spahn ranch, that still is created so vividly. Add on to that the detail of the recreated sets of various kinds, stellar work as well.
The Irishman's work is less abundant in a way, but also fantastic in creating the sense of time in the production design. This granting detail to each locale they stop at throughout the year, and creating an essential sense of place and period. Not as expansive as Hollywood but still incredible work.
Jojo's work overall is a bit more limited, though still great work in its realization of the detailed appearance of Jojo's house, and the more fairy tale Germany the film offers, that later becomes the more bombed out version. A fine bit of Wes Anderson esque bit of design.
Bryan: Just a retread on the original which was good but honestly I've put that film out of my mind.
I mean, half the Best Picture nominees are in my personal top ten for the year (still have a lot to see though). But overall, as long as Joker goes 0-11 on Oscar night (a man can dream), I'd say I'm happy.
Tahmeed: It really does pain me to go against Phoenix when Driver moved the hell out of me.
1. Pesci
2. Pacino
3. Hanks
4. Pitt
5. Hopkins
Kang-ho :(
Luke: Understandable.
What upsets me about Phoenix is that literally any performance between The Master and Joker would’ve been a deserving Oscar nod. Okay maybe not Irrational Man. Which is what I am today, incidentally.
Calvin: He's overdue. He deserves it this time, even if its for work not considered his best.
Editing:
1. Parasite
2. The Irishman
3. Jojo Rabbit
4. Ford V. Ferrari
5. Joker
Parasite blows all of its competition out of the water. This is Swiss watch editing, (I'll bring the Swiss up again in regards to this film) as the film just runs, in every sequence being so brilliantly constructed individually, while also just having such a fantastic flow as a film. Every scene is just pitch perfect in terms of cutting between characters, between moments, and montage construction here is flawless. Amazing work, that should win handily unfortunately it probably won't.
The Irishman is very long, though with a clear intention in the pacing that is realized by the editing. This with a sentimental memory sort of pacing much of the time, though brilliant sequences realized in this pacing, like the Tony Pro intro and the boat assassination in particular. Could there have been some tightening, I'd say probably to make it a bit shorter (the final Hoffa sequence, though I think this was to show Frank was purposefully trying to be late to tip Hoffa off, though they perhaps could have made this clearer), but for the most part, the approach is extremely well realized by Schoonmaker.
Jojo Rabbit is a finely edited film. Not nearly as showy as some of the other films I will get to in a moment, but finds a nice pace, realizes its individual sequences well, and has a few nice bits of overt editing like the final battle.
Ford V. Ferrari, is one where I compare to Irishman as to misquote JK simmons "are you dragging, or are you atmosphere building", I thought here the editing really often dragged sequences out. The racing moments certainly are well cut in the moment, and the sort of in the moment editing is well done. It does have an odd lack of urgency for a racing film. Now I do also think scenes could've been cut, the whole trying to buy Ferrari subplot for example, but that's more on Mangold.
Joker's editing is often very sloppy in its attempt to replicate classic Scorsese, this in montages that often come off as silly in their over cutting, looking at you stair dance, but also has a fundamental problem in the way it actually hones in too closely on Phoenix at times in terms of losing the reaction of what he is doing. This again is on Phillips as well (I'll get to him), but is inherent in the editing choices.
Cinematography:
1. 1917
2. The Lighthouse
3. Joker
4. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
5. The Irishman
1917 is yet another tour de force from Roger Deakins, who perhaps saw Birdman and Gravity and said "challenge accepted". This is one of his great achievements, of a cinematographer who has so many. This is that once again the composition of his work is simply incredible. This as it brings your right within every shot, every shot that is so gorgeous in its visual details of so many kinds. I mean he has amazing scenes of the grey no man's land, he also somehow finds the most photogenic way to show foxhole gridlock, it is fascinating. He creates just one painting after another here. This once again with his lighting here that is amazing in creating a beauty to every time or type of day, the changing flares/fire in the bombed out city alone would be deserving of a win. Then just to some how take one more step, this is all while constantly moving, the camera movements, which hasn't typically been Deakins's specific focus, are outstanding in gripping you right within every single sequence of the film. Astonishing work across the board.
Hate that the Lighthouse had to be in the same year as 1917, as it would win most years for me. I've given my thoughts before, but its recreation and sort of adaptation of the classic horror cinematography is outstanding and such an inspired nomination.
Joker's cinematography nomination is one part I will defend against any detractors, though I'm pretty sure Lawrence Sher sold his soul to achieve it, because nothing in his body of work suggests he was capable of this. I will actually say this element is so good, it probably helped convince many it is a better film than it is. This as the film achieves such a vibrant color palette that really does pop, and give the film a distinct atmospheric appearance. The shots are well composed, even when poorly designed, like take Phillips's dumb inclusion of Phoenix's kick dance on the stair, well lit, just a dumb idea on the director's part.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is possibly Tarantino's best work with Richardson, who can occasionally underwhelm with him. This as again some terrific recreation work in creating some of the different films, and the different tv show styles. The film itself work though is beautifully done for the most part, having a nice sort vibrant relaxed palette, and some dynamic, if seemingly purposefully relaxed lighting choices. All very well realized though in crafting sort of a 60's look though with enough of a modern change up to it.
Gave my thoughts on the Irishman before.
1.Pesci
2.Pacino
3.Hanks
4.Pitt
5.Hopkins
Calvin: I....agree with that, honestly. The fact he didn't get in for "Her" still bugs me.
Also, I'll just throw out my official rankings/ratings of the nominees I've seen.
Actor:
1) Driver (5)
2) DiCaprio (5)
3) Phoenix (5)
4) Pryce (4, but could go up to 4.5)
Actress:
1) Johansson (5)
2) Ronan (5)
4) Zellweger (4)
Supporting Actor:
1) Pacino (5)
2) Pesci (4.5)
3) Pitt (4)
4) Hopkins (4)
Supporting Actress:
1) Pugh (5)
2) Dern (3)
I've settled on 4 for Pitt because, thinking back on his character, there are some weirdly glossed over elements to Cliff's past that perhaps could've been expanded, thereby given the role/performance more complexity. That said, Pitt still has a great deal of ease, charisma and humour in his performance, and does especially well his penultimate scene of drugged out antics.
Also, I would say OUATIH is now Pitt's strongest nominated turn (though that might not be saying much), or is at least on par with "Moneyball" for me.
Mitchell: The possibility of a four hour cut could change that.
Jesus, OUATIH needed to be shorter, not longer. I'll give Pitt a lot of credit for keeping me invested in it throughout its rather laborious second act.
However, after rewatching the film, I have to say, DiCaprio would have honestly deserved the Oscar more for OUATIH than The Revenant. It's one of his most resonant turns in a while.
Tahmeed: I think the Lancer scenes are some of the absolute best of his career.
War Dogs and The Hangover are well-shot to be sure. I agree though that this is a whole new level for Sher.
Pitt’s a 4.5 to me, and the reason for that is because I think he does have quieter moments that let him go a bit further (the scene with Bruce Dern, his “breakup” with Rick, etc.) Otherwise, I think he’s pretty entertaining.
Tahmeed: As an earnest fan of his "Revenant" performance, I think he's equally great in OUATIH - he rides that fine line of being just comedic enough in his yelling and cursed filled tyraids, yet bringing a genuine emotional weight and desperation for the character all the same.
That trailer breakdown = terrific.
International Film:
1. Parasite
2. Pain and Glory
3. Honeyland
Score:
1. 1917
2. Little Women
3. Joker
4. Marriage
5. Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker
This is where they leave Jojo Rabbit off? Anyway, 1917 may be Newman's crowning achievement in his impressive set of scores, that actually managed to achieve something I had just recently criticized, in that his sort of ambient atmosphere work is great here as well in delivering us right into each scene. Of course he does get to show off, and thankfully so, in some of the most invigorating and engaging pieces of work here. This in creating such gorgeous pieces of work, that does definitely owe a debt to Zimmer's work for Thin Red Line and Dunkirk, making use of every bit of his orchestra, yet he also makes it his own. This in creating work essential to each scene in building the tension of every sequence, while also just being incredibly beautifully grand pieces on their own.
Desplat's take on Little Women definitely is in a similar line to Newman's own, though so what, both are delightful. Desplat's work here is just wonderfully warm and emotional work. It is as vibrant as the costumes in its almost Christmas songeque instrumental choices. It is a playful work that is almost a confectionery in how sweet it is, but sweet in the right way. He also nicely balances that with a bit of misterioso, to suggest it won't all be perfect. Is just an essential element in the realization of the warm, though not without hardship, world of the film. Lovely, lovely work.
Joker, is a score I will not prescribe to either extreme. I've given my thoughts on it before, but it is bluntly obvious, though not ineffective in the obviousness.
Marriage Story's score is a lot of Randy Newman, that is a little more suited to Pixar in its level of whimsy here I think. Doesn't make it terrible, but it is a little much at times, without being memorable in itself. Honestly I think the film might've benefited from no score at all, as Newman's work at its best sounds like some vague instrumental version of a Beatles's song I can't quite remember.
Rise of Skywalker...what score? I mean what original score? I've listened to the new tracks, mostly recycled to begin with, and even what's new sound just like some generalized Star Wars sound.
ALSO....I'll just go on record and say DiCaprio has one of my favourite line deliveries of the year, and I think you guys can guess what that is.
We'll have to disagree on Richardson/Hollywood, I actually much prefer his previous collaborations.
Okay, I actually saw 1917 yesterday, and... I didn’t think it was that technically masterful? I did like it more than I was expecting, but the gimmick doesn’t really add or detract from anything and mostly just seems needlessly show-offy. Dunkirk was better.
Best Song:
1. "(I'm Gonna) Love me again" - Rocketman
2. "Stand Up" - Harriet
3. "I'm Standing With You" - Breakthrough
4. "Into the Unknown" - Frozen II
5. "I Can't Let You Throw Yourself Away" - Toy Story 4
Though Rocketman under performed, I'm glad that this made it in its very rousing and likable tune. This with enough of a passionate through within the verses, though maintaining the same fun pace, of the very enthusiastic the just about perfect for the film lyrics of the chorus of the character of Elton John coming to terms with himself.
"Stand Up", it must be said that Erivo has a great voice, but this is really strong soulful ballad. This in creating a real build, with lyrics that actually do make sense, and even rather powerful like including Harriet's final words at the end of it. The build though as the sort of spiritual of the verses to the sort of fight song of the "stand up" chorus makes it a pretty good song.
"I'm Standing With You" is an okay ballad on its own measure. It's verses do a get a little vague, though its chorus is rousing enough at least. It doesn't really build to anything mind you, as the introduction of more voices, get a bit muddled at times, but it's better than...
"Into the Unknown" is like the version of "Let It Go" that everyone claimed they heard, who hated that song after it became so popular. This is as its actual verses in the introduction is some standard rambling, then the repetition of "Into the Unknown" is egregious at an attempt at a chorus I guess. I mean how about anything more, or a cohesive song of any sort to go around that tiresome lyric, and musical motif.
"I Can't Let You Throw Yourself Away", they nominated Newman for this? Mary Steenburgen and Bong Joon-ho were robbed. This is as generic Newman as it gets, and I already find that a little hard to take at times. Repetitive and a whole lot of nothing riffs on other songs he's done for Pixar.
Robert:
Well obviously disagree entirely there, but particularly with the gimmick, which elevated itself beyond the initial idea there for me, by offering an entirely different perspective and approach for a war film.
Calvin:
Hope you're not referring to Django, as that Hans doing tricks shot at the end of the film, is a dire piece of work.
I’m referring more to Hateful Eight and Basterds. But I don’t have a problem with that shot at all.
Adapted Screenplay:
1. The Irishman
2. Little Women
3. Jojo Rabbit
4. The Two Popes
5. Joker
The Irishman's screenplay is a few different things, but above all a sprawling work. This built around the idea of the recollections of a single man who takes from World War II, to his near demise that seems so meaningless. The latter element is the overarching premise of the film and an effective one as this sort of requiem for a hitman, of a man whose life is just moving towards nothingness. Within that though we have history of the gangsters the man comes along with, given the typical, to Scorsese films, details of the life and the process. This though differed a bit to the connection of Hoffa that is personal, business and of historical importance. The crux of the story of seemingly the best of life of Frank, though that with his association with the gangster of Bufalino, each important in their own ways, though each realized around Frank as typically the observer who follows orders to actions. Zallian building the story then around the observer, crafting an alternate gangster story though with the details that one would hope, the revelations, the characters, and of course the dialogue.
Little Women is fantastic work by Gerwig as she does the unthinkable and changes the whole thing up. Her choices to re-write the structure though actually does wonders in both changing up the story, not just re-telling the same thing, but also hitting the emotional moments in fresh and powerful ways. For example, Jo's two long nights with different results. This also having the mirroring relationship of Jo/Laurie and Amy/Laurie rather than the same, and the meta-commentary, that never goes too far, of the publisher that adds a nice touch to the proceedings. Gerwig's sort of pushes into some modern sense also never feels like too much, as she always realizes through the right characters and through natural sequences. Exceptional work, that I honestly would be fine with if she took the win as well.
Jojo Rabbit's screenplay takes a book, that I've taken only cursory glance at overall, but is technically more serious just by virtue of how a book's perspective is different than film's. Waititi's major changes seem to be bringing a lot stronger sense of the absurdity within the material, that I would say is necessary for the attempt, same in the way of Chaplin with The Great Dictator, and that seems to be his main inspiration in his overall approach. In that the Nazis are a joke, but the horrors they inflict are real. That is the choice, and in turn it is a very funny film in reveling in the absurdity of it all, making fun of the supporting Nazis and Jojo's silly delusions, quite effectively I will say. It does render its dramatic story though in the idea of humanizing that in which you've dehumanized. I do think this works based on how it realized specifically in the relationship, which becomes more of a boy in love with a girl that slowly prevails, with the expected jealousy and bitterness in that. This also with his relationship with his mother, that simply is very sweet, and I think the film does work as written with the absurdity of the evil characters played for comedy, above, the earnest story of the boy and his mother, boy and a girl.
The Two Popes has three things in its screenplay. Two Popes acting like two dudes. Two Popes honestly discussing their faith, their faults, their politics, and a whole lot unneeded exposition or setting up sequences to things we either know, or could be handled in a quick caption. The two dudes stuff is occasionally fun, a little too cute at times, but at least I see its point. The honest discussion is the best stuff. It's not Sunset Limited, but there is something there, if a bit too general in the discussions. The third just gets in the way of the second and brings it down to hit some plot points, when character points should have been the focus.
Okay now the Joker, which is actually worse in screenplay form as the "joker looks in the mirror" but even more on the nose dialogue than present in the film. The story itself though is a whole lot of rambling and underdeveloped ideas about class, "I hate the world" and mental health wrapped with some Batman mythos for random measure. Of course this is all as a film where we get where its going then it goes there, with no surprises other than maybe the Joker's specific origin...I guess. This technically being some obviously recycled ideas from other films, Taxi Driver and King of Comedy, which it doesn't revolutionize, modernize, or utilize to tell something new. It is rather a hodgepodge of those and the Killing Joker into a "let's watch some acting", until the credits roll.
Calvin:
Hence though why I used "possibly" but I would put it up there with Basterds and Eight.
Original Screenplay:
1. Parasite
2. Knives Out
3. Marriage Story
4. 1917
5. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Parasite is a no brainier for the top tier. The scenario is original, and brilliantly realized in every twist and switch. It is rich in its themes yet never does it weigh down the narrative in self-importance, it just adds to the depth of the piece. This realized all the better to realizing each character of the family so well, along with the comparison to the rich family, and the other basement dwellers. The themes though also invigorate it all creating the progression of the story, and so many brilliant pieces that are so naturally realized around the idea of class. It is also just an entertaining and often very funny film, with such vibrant interactions between the characters, or who they claim to be. An outstanding screenplay that works on every front that a screenplay should, being a great character piece, a great story, well just being great.
Knives Out it exists very much within the screenplay that seeks to subvert the mystery genre, although its been subverted so many times, I'd say it is more of just part of the genre. This with one revelation only created another revelation. It hits all the right points though that one would want in the mystery genre. A good mystery, check, a good twist or two, it has a least one check, a proper "I've solved it monologue", definitely check, wit, check, and hopefully some good characters to bounce off of, definitely check. It is the last that probably where the film most excels, in partially the likable nurse of Marta, the dogged P.I., the straight man detective, but of course the flawed family, which I liked that Johnson humanized enough as much as he also skewered them.
Marriage Story's screenplay I would say is pretty great, as even the caricatures I dislike in the film are more so through the performances, particularly the court observer than the screenplay. The screenplay that tells its story simply yet effectively of the two people that love each other, but go through the brutal process of legally trying to destroy this. It works by first realizing the relationship, well done in just the "why I love" letters that are brilliantly written. The dissection of that though then is as effective in how Baumbach write the natural, and gradual process of it helping to destroy the relationship. This in not engaging in simple answers but rather showing the perspective as they are, even within the lawyers, who in the end are there just to gain for themselves except Alda's seasoned pro, therefore will tell whatever they believe will win their case. This realized best in the great courtroom proceeding of two pros throwing everything they got at each other. This though while maintaining the personal descent that keep a cordiality that slowly festers towards the climatic fight, that I think is wholly earned as the worst words each has of an explosion of pent up disdain for each other.
1. Pesci
2. Pacino
3. Hanks
4. Pitt
5. Hopkins
1917's screenplay is part of its tautness and I do think excels in realizing its scenario with each set piece. This though within it careful moments of realization of characters and a bit humanity to each bit, that nicely fleshes it out beyond an exercise. Whether this be the final conversation of the film, his conversation with the spent Lieutenant, or the delivery moment. Each are naturally part of the flow of the story but with more than just a perfunctory statements, finding character even with the clock ticking so to speak. Simple and straight forward to be sure, but shows how to do simple and straight forward.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is one that does frustrate me in that I think it was a chance for Tarantino to mature a bit, but he didn't, and really this would not be a criticism if it was made by some no name with the same exact script. If that were the case I would appreciate the vividness of the world created, with the detail granted to Hollywood of the time, and the terrific duo, as written, at the center of it all. These all work, with memorable dialogue and scenes aplenty. Looking at as Tarantino though he does indulge though in everything involving Tate, as even giving her a "life" just is scenes of some true navel gazing, and the other element is kind of a strange tension built on whether or not you think he is going to do something really distasteful that only exists because it's Tarantino. It is a back and forth, but there is definitely a lot to love, and it isn't as though I hate the things don't love.
Director:
1. Bong Joon-ho - Parasite
2. Sam Mendes - 1917
3. Martin Scorsese - The Irishman
4. Quentin Tarantino - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
5. Todd Phillips - Joker
I'll right let's frame each of these by what's the point.
Bong Joon-ho's point is to make an compelling, entertaining, funny film that also manages to be a class commentary. Well what a success in this bit of Swiss directing here. In that this is just one where Bong refines this system that just makes a movie that is why one loves movies. Bong's work takes the great script he co-wrote, and elevates it even further. This with so many moments of brilliance in terms of his choices in song, such as the peach poisoning montage, staging, the whole flooding sequence, or any sequence for that matter. Bong always maintains this careful sense of character, plotting, and themes that is masterful. Like Memories of Murder, his use of tone shifts in particular is stunning that he pulls it off, but like that film he knows when to pull back the comedy and right when to use it. I also must take special mention to his work in the finale, that took an epilogue that could've struggled, and instead turned into perhaps the crowning achievement in the film. In his whole dreamlike approach, in so much of it, grants such a powerful poignancy and in the end haunting quality, as he crafts it not what will happen, but what probably will never happen other than in the dreams of the young man still living in a basement.
That director ranking is exactly how I’d rank ‘em. I’m glad these nominations are pleasing. Hopefully Bong or Mendes pulls it off.
Mendes really is like a 1b for me, and would be as deserving in my book. This in crafting a unique take on a genre that has been told. And yes, influences there, as there always are however his point is specific appreciation for the soldier, and puts us within one's soldier's perspective and keeps us there in a way we have not seen before, definitely not to this extent. This fashioned within a hopeful story built around that appreciation, even if hardship are not forgotten or ignored, through both the intensity he fashions through this perspective, along with the horrors of it. Mendes is able to keep us there as we must go every treacherous step of the journey, just as we must witness every corpse that will go unremoved from the brutalized No Man's Land. This telling a grand action epic, through this fascinating combination of both the grand and the intimate. An outstanding work in that sense, that doesn't waste one thing at his disposal, whether it be the production design, Deakins, the sound, the score, the effects and even the editing that makes it all invisible.
1.Pesci
2.Pitt
3.Pacino
4.Hanks
5.Hopkins
All five nominees range from very Good to great (:
5.
Scorsese's point seems to be to revisit the gangster genre for one last go around, though now very much as the seasoned veteran taking one more look at that life where age is an essential element to it all. Although with this thematic emphasis, that he takes even further than Zaillian establishes in his script, of the nostalgic journey of the hitman. This is seen in each choice, from the production design, to the cinematography which both have this sort of appreciative quality to them of memory. This is furthered though in his choices of music and editing, that are at a slower pace, more instrumental and sentimental. This again reinforcing this idea of the memory of nostalgia. This though as something he peels away at the same time as false memory in a way, by peppering in the truth in a way such as the markers of death, that is increased from Zaillian's script, and through the essential epilogue where he takes time with just an old lonely man with nothing but those memories. This is incredible work from Scorsese as well, less precise than those above, but less precise with purpose, in finding new ground in his well worn genre, by looking back at it from an endpoint.
Tarantino's point seems to be to make a love letter to the late 60's, the movies, the tv shows, the music, the fashion. Well achieved in that he does use all those resources at his disposal to do this in great detail, funneled through the rougher story of Rick's difficult fame, and the seemingly easy story of Sharon Tate's fame. Tarantino does succeed there in finding fun in the sort of flashback cinema, that is almost like, well actually just is at some points, watching old clips in appreciation. He then treats the Manson family as this unwelcome and unpleasant intruders. These moments that he effectively realizes initially with genuine unnerving horror, by using silence of this unknown quantity. He then though is dishonest with this as he then turns them into a different comical tone, in bringing Tarantino's over the top violence that had been dormant before that scene back in, that I'll say feels a touch disingenuous in a way, as he kicks what seems to be him "party poopers" violently out of his fantasy of the period, and returns to the easy going fairy tale he's crafted for the ending. Definitely imperfect, and in some ways questionable, but definitely not without qualities of worth.
I would say the single best piece of direction in Once Upon a Time... is the Spahn ranch sequence.
Alright now what's Phillips's point...I mean what is it. Is this an examination of a disturbed mind that we should be disturbed by. Maybe. Or are we to sympathize given most the people he kills did him wrong...maybe. Is it just a super villain origin. Maybe. The point is Phillips does really seem to know what he is trying to say or what type of film he is trying to make. So he just decides instead to run the story, he doesn't have a path for, through his own Scorsese playbook. This with some absurdly one the nose song choices, white face paint "WHITE ROOM" OF COURSE! Life's rough "That's life" Of course, and with that just random visual choices, that suggest a man whose seen good movies but doesn't know why they're good. For example, the stair dance in particular where he's seen movies where people dance as some symbolic gesture, but doesn't have any idea how to realize it himself, to not look rather silly. A real sour apple, in what otherwise, even with my reservations regarding Tarantino's work, is an impressive grouping.
Thoughts on the Morbius trailer.
Supporting Actress:
1. Florence Pugh - Little Women
2. Scarlett Johansson - Jojo Rabbit
3. Laura Dern - Marriage Story
4. Kathy Bates - Richard Jewell
5. Margot Robbie - Bombshell
I'll admit to having been too generous to Robbie initially, as I really didn't not care for the first half of her performance in the slightest, a 3 by the way Luke. I have to say the top two are great, so I can't say this is a bad lineup, there's definitely been far worse in the category, as even the bottom three aren't bereft of merit though there were more deserving choices (Zhao Shuzhen, Lopez, Octavia Spencer, Parasite Ladies).
Actress:
1. Scarlett Johansson - Marriage Story
2. Saoirse Ronan - Little Women
3. Renee Zellweger - Bombshell
4. Cynthia Erivo - Harriet
5. Charlize Theron - Bombshell
Again top two are great, and Ronan is the slight surprise, that I loved seeing. The other three are all more than decent as well, so I can't hate this lineup even if it could've been better (Awkwafina, Buckley).
Picture:
1. Parasite
2. 1917
3. The Irishman
4. Jojo Rabbit
5. Little Women
6. Marriage Story
7. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
8. Ford V Ferrari
9. Joker
Again, I guess I'll be Mr. Positive this year, because I thought, even with the needless Joker love, the academy overall did a very good job overall. Where last year, only one best picture nominee even touched my top ten, five did here, with 2 in my top 20. Ford V. Ferrari, I'd even classify as a good film, with Joker being the only true blight in my book, and even then there's been far worse films nominated for best picture.
Luke:
Watching it...another super generic looking 90's throwback super villain refashioned as super hero movie...oh there's Michael Keaton...
Louis, Your thoughts on Spirit & Speechless from The Lion King & Aladdin respectively and thoughts on any saves that you've decided not to keep.
Louis: Could I have your thoughts on the ending of Jojo Rabbit?
Bradley Cooper being nominated as a producer of Joker is really funny to me for some reason.
5º Hopkins
4º Pitt
3º Hanks
2º Pesci
1º Pacino (please Louis give him the victory in the Overall Ranking!)
Yesh...Louis' reservations towards "Joker" are making me nervous for Phoenix. I'm still hoping he'll get a 4.5 at least, which I could understand.
Its funny..I don't disagree with anything said against the film's writing, direction and technical aspects..the movie's very messy, and at times its hard to gauge where it wants to take its story, or what to say about its protagonist. HOWEVER....I'm not going to lie....it has stayed with me somewhat. There is "something" that keeps me from fully detesting the film. Maybe its just reminding of the great work's from Scorsese...maybe I just like the character of Joker so much that I'm open to most any attempt at his backstory...maybe I just like Phoenix so much that I'm seeing a lot more in his performance than others are...
I don't know...I agree that the film's 11 oscar nominations are ridiculous, but I'm also holding my ground with finding the movie decent as a whole.
Anonymous:
Spirit sounds like a rejected alternate choice for the opening song, but far inferior. It quite frankly sound like ripoff, but with just Beyonce saying spirit over that repetitively towards creating an immensely forgettable knockoff.
Can't quite say Speechless worked within the scheme of the film, nor can I say it completely fit in musically with the other songs of the film. Having said that it is a good dramatic Disney ballad on its own merits, as this real power ballad of sorts, not unlike a Let it Go. This much better than "Into the Unknown" this with its particularly wonderful chorus, that is quite good, in fact seems like a much better heir to Let It Go, as it is a pretty invigorating song.
I'll start on the other request next post.
Tahmeed:
The dance sequence at the end of Boy was more fitting. This one was a little like, hmmm not sure how to exactly end, let's dance again. Not that it is terrible, and makes sense as sort of a "joy to the world Hitler's dead" so lets dance, but just hardly executed perfectly for me.
1. Pesci
2. Pacino
3. Hanks
4. Pitt
5. Hopkins
1. Pesci
2. Pacino
3. Hanks
4. Hopkins
5. The category-frauding stuntman
Post a Comment