I love seeing Mescal, Riseborough, and Armas there. I can't say I'm shocked about Decision to Leave being snubbed anywhere besides International Feature. A bit of a head scratcher. They must REALLY love Triangle of Sadness to have nominated Ostlund.
Nice to see All Quiet On Western Front and also EO (biased, but still) getting recognition, but at the same time Decision to Leave was utterly ignored, so these cancel each other out.
ruthiehenshallfan99: Its 16 Michelle Yeoh Ana de Armas Andrea Risebrough Brendan Fraser Colin Fraser Austin Butler Bill Nighy Paul Mescal Kerry Condon Hong Chau Jamie Lee Curtis Stephanie Hsu Ke Huy Quan Brendan Gleeson Barry Keoghan Brian Tyree Henry.
Riseborough's nomination is the kind of shock I like to see at the Oscars, but Deadwyler not being there is quite unfortunate the more I'm thinking about it.
Luke: Of course anything can happen but I just had a premonition that Banshees loses all 9 of its nominations which I think would be a bit of a gut punch lol.
Just a couple of other things: Cool to see TÁR in Editing and Cinematography, really strong craft that largely went less talked about beforehand from what I saw and I'm glad to see it recognized. Nice to see This is a Life in Original Song too. The more love for David Byrne the better.
Decision to Leave getting shut out is painful but Everything Everywhere All At Once getting 11 nominations brings me lots of joy, alongside finally seeing Hong Chau and Brian Tyree Henry getting recognised. So there's that.
There really is a lot to love within these nominations. TÁR getting Editing and Cinematography is a great surprise. Both went overlooked beforehand. All Quiet did well like expected.
So, EEAAO has all momentum to win on their side, right? Like, unless we have a surprise at the PGAs, is there really anything else that will contend with it?
Emi: I'd personally love a TÁR or Banshees win but highly doubt that's happening by the look of things. I think the only competition for EEAAO is Fabelmans.
EEAAO winning would make it the first BP winner that's my number 1 since...well, Parasite. I think it's between EEAAO, Banshees and Fabelmans, though TÁR did really well too.
Couple stray thoughts -Would've much preferred Dano over Hirsch, but oh well. -Top Gun in screenplay is RIDICULOUS but I am kinda glad it missed out on cinematography -They really loved Triangle of Sadness
Emi: Welllll, keep in mind that the most nominated movie last year was The Power of the Dog and it ended up winning in a whopping 1 category.
Nothing against Riseborough, and her campaign was entertaining, but her getting in over 2 Black actors is pretty unfortunate.
Guess I'll have to eat crow on de Armas, in some ways her nomination was more surprising to me than Riseborough's.
Haven't seen Fabelmans yet, but it's a pity about Dano. Guy's been doing solid work in beloved films for like 20 years. I'm sure he'll get a nom eventually.
Glad I called the Director lineup, the S. Actress lineup, BTH getting nominated, and Avatar 2 underperforming.
YES to Tar in Cinematography and Editing. But who wins Cinematography now that Top Gun was snubbed?
Speaking of which, Top Gun getting nominated in Screenplay is a bit much.
1. All Quiet on the Western Front 2. The Quiet Girl 3. Argentina, 1985 4. Close
From what I've seen this isn't a terrible set BUT Decision to Leave was still robbed (though I did always think that might happen).
Documentary:
1. Fire of Love 2. All The Beauty and Bloodshed 3. All That Breathes 4. A House Made of Splinters
Glad the top two made it. Didn't love "house" but it's not a terrible choice either.
Sound:
1. Top Gun: Maverick 2. The Batman 3. All Quiet on the Western Front 4. Avatar: The Way of Water 5. Elvis
A pretty strong category, though an easy #1 for me. So much of the film is its sound design that makes every flying scene so visceral. Incredible work for both its editing of all the different sounds and how the mix brings it all together.
The Batman also is great work, easy to think of some of the individual sounds like The Riddler's neck bomb and the rev of the Batmobile. Mixed together beautifully to create an extremely immersive experience.
All Quiet I think could be divisive based on how one feels about the synth notes. I loved the synth notes including how they're mixed as so overpowering and as an audio cue for the Warmachine. Otherwise beyond that potent atmospheric work for both the edits and the mix.
I won't say anything negative on this front for Avatar, the sound work is all strong as is the mix. I personnel don’t get immersed but not due to any flaws with the sound.
Elvis is the weak nominee for me. Most of the work is absolutely fine if unremarkable but when the film messes around with the mix I find it absolutely nauseating.
Makeup & Hairstyling:
1. The Batman 2. All Quiet on the Western Front 3. The Whale 4. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever 5. Elvis
Easy #1, because The Penguin transformation is 100% convincing. A complete transformation that you'd never second guess. Great work.
All Quiet is all about the viscera, and impressively visceral viscera it is.
The Whale fat transformation I found more convincing than another one down below, but I would say the overall suit does look more fake than real. Not bad work by any means, however.
Hmm, not sure how it made it honestly, but it certainly isn't bad work. The tribal paints again add to the opening scene...and I guess the bit of non-CGI Atlantian stuff is decent. And....it's fine if just kind of functional.
Easily last place. One is Hanks falls into the classic balloon boy look. With Butler oddly, his makeup actually gets better as it gets more intense for the fatter Elvis which I didn't think was 100% convincing but did think was okay. The early makeup though looks just kind of bizarre, to the point I'm not sure what they were going for. I think it was to make him look like Elvis, but it makes Butler look more like he has some kind of infection on his face at times.
1. Babylon 2. Everything Everywhere All At Once 3. Mrs. Harris Goes to Paris 4. Elvis 5. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Alright now, this I thought was altogether fantastic period wear, stylized yet overdone in that regard. Having a sense of character for each character, such as the aggressively suggestive, and quite successful outfits for Robbie, the old-fashioned refined look for Pitt, and the evolution of each of Calva's clothes as he gets closer to his success. Combine that with all the different looks for the period features, the random insane party clothes, and the lowest grim clothes in the Maguire sequence and you have a grand mixture of memorable clothes that emphasize the style of the film in the right way. They also just stand out in the right way, and it does what great costume designing should do.
Everything Everywhere All At Once's gives you the best of several worlds. Because it's great modern work, in that everyone has a distinct look just in their "normal" clothes which itself is notable and not something that should be shrugged off. That's just starters though as it successfully has more fashionable clothes for its "In the Mood For Love" transport, or more silly clothes like the 2001 ape costumes and many other random assortments. It then has its very specifically stylized clothing which is all rather eye-catching such as the bagel cult clothing or, slightly ironically, the Elvis impersonation clothes. The work is very all over the place in styles and works as very everything or anything.
Jenny Beavan's turn at Phantom Thread was not quite as spectacular as that work, but certainly quite striking. Properly luscious purposefully showy work.
Elvis's I'd classify as deserving. Very specific recreations, but strong recreations across the board when it comes to recreating the various looks of Elvis. Otherwise more standard period work, but fine period work in that regard.
Black Panther's work in the funeral scene is fantastic. I imagine that is how it earned the Oscar nomination. The design and the use of white everything there creates a combination of grief and celebration, with a continuation of the original film's work in a powerful way. Beyond that, though the rest of the work is pretty rudimentary I find. The Ironman suits though I found borderline atrocious. Don't know whose decisions they were, but they are costumes regardless, poor costumes that seem a better fit for the power rangers.
1. Babylon 2. All Quiet on the Western Front 3. Elvis 4. The Fabelmans 5. Avatar: The Way of Water
Babylon's work is much like its costumes, which is a whole lot but a whole lot that worked for me. All periods were respectful but dynamic in going to an extreme. Whether that be the various luxury suites and ballrooms, filled with different elements of debauchery to top things off, the various film sets big and small, the old studio sets as well and of course the very pit of hell that is the Maguire sequence. Every set is distinct and speaks to the period and character of the pieces. It is what great production design should be.
All Quiet on the Western Front did a lot of practical choices in terms of the work, however, there is a reason location is considered part of it. The work can exist against any other production design of World War I and top it in many regards. That is just in finding every bit of grime and dirt in the setting and showing just how bleak it all is. Combining that with other period-appropriate sets that I think effectively at times stand in contrast to the decay we see with the war sets.
Elvis I think managed to be held together by the respecting of the period, so the extravagance is befitting towards where Elvis actually performed and lived in. Largely even with those recreations of work, but strong in that sense.
The Fabelmans I'm surprised made it because it is extremely low-key period work, those extremely specified right down to the production designs of Spielberg's home movies. It is all strong work though within that specificity, and in particular the more subdued work, like the Fabelman homes, feel very lived in and filled with history.
I don't like the majority of the designs of Avatar. I'm not impressed by its generic video game aesthetic on any front. I don't think the new animals are particularly of note. Hey it's a slightly different-looking Whale kids! There were worse choices but this is nothing special to me.
1. "Naatu Naatu" - RRR 2. "Hold My Hand" - Top Gun: Maverick 3. "This Is A Life" - Everything Everywhere All At Once 4. "Lift Me Up" - Black Panther: Wakanda Forever 5. "Appaulse" - Tell It Like A Woman
"Naatu Naatu" is kind of the ideal song to win an Oscar, because it legitimately works as a song, but even more so as a sequence. That is the amount of triumphant energy and just plain fun. Love the percussion that introduces it then the duet of singing together with such potent energy. An incredible sense of fun every time he goes into its chorus which just is a genuine toe taper in the best way. What is more amazing is that it manages to only build on that to kind of a nuclear explosion of energy that so naturally realized.
Previously covered "Hold My Hand".
This is a Life is relatively simple yet beautiful in its strange meandering manner. This is with its relatively simple lyrics that work in their simplicity. Much like the instrumentation that moves from the simplest of percussion towards this build that becomes a mix between atonal and a more harmonic mix together that has a strange bending quality, that all works in its very strange way, before returning to its simple spoke truth to close it out.
Life Me Up is probably a song I won't remember in some time, which I think the three above it. I also don't like the intensity of the autotune at times. Having said that I do think overall all it still works as a ballad, I do particularly like how it builds with richer instrumentation as it goes along, to the point of creating a certain emotional catharsis in the song itself.
I'll say it again, I don't think Diane Warren is the most overdue in this category, I'd say she's the most over-nominated. I really don't care for this that sounds like the most generic thing you might find on a pop countdown. Think it has a massive overproduced sound to the point even the lyrics just blend into nothingness.
1. The Batman 2. Top Gun: Maverick 3. Avatar: The Way of Water 4. All Quiet On The Western Front 5. Black Panther Wakanda Forever
For me, The Batman better imagined its own world than other films below with its VFX and felt far more tangible to me. And also didn't have creepy faces...well ones that were meant to not be creepy. It is a created world as well as another nominee but never felt like a created world.
Maverick's work is only not largely invisible in you're guessing they didn't have the money to blow up such expensive jets, but with how much real was done, the VFX if they were off at all would've been immediately noticeable. They are absolutely never noticeable though and just refine the images.
Yes, do I have a bias against the film, absolutely. I'll admit that. And this is an example of the most money and the most time. In that endeavor is there objective success. Yes. The environments are impressive just from an objective standpoint. I will say though some of the extra techniques used by Cameron, don't look any better to me than video games without such expensive reference points. But the reason it really isn't number one, is I still find the Na'Vi faces in the uncanny valley, particularly on a lot of the less main characters, and find their movements actually too smooth at times. Although I'll admit this is a deserved nomination, I do have reservations regardless.
All Quiet on The Western Front delivers almost entirely invisible work, flamethrowers/tanks, mostly inserted pretty impeccably as is every other amplification. Not quite perfect work, but very good work.
Black Panther has a lot of seams, although maybe better than the first one as there's nothing as dreadful as the final fight there. But the less "supporting" and more focused effects are typically not great. Like the blue CGI people or the various robot suits here that look super fake. The environmental shots though are decent enough, though definitely not spectacular.
1. Top Gun: Maverick 2. The Banshees of Inisherin 3. Everything Everywhere All At Once 4. Tar 5. Elvis
Maverick's editing is frankly a key to its success. It just moves from scene to scene without getting caught up on a particular moment but never seeming to bypass a moment. In that even the romantic scenes, which are the least of the scenes, are cut to never wear out their welcome despite having no spark, to begin with. The actual progression of the mission scenes though is just taut and tight every step of the way. The mission itself is masterful work. Maintaining the tension, creating a completely cohesive sense of what is going on, and just cutting in the most impactful ways throughout the scene. Unlike the original, which I think gets very ropey at times, this one knows exactly how to cut its sequences but also progresses through them as smoothly as possible.
The Banshees' nom definitely shows the support for the film given that it is definitely not at all showy work in any respect, the majority of the editing just being conversational editing. There I think it succeeded in that I didn't notice the cuts within scenes, maintaining proper reactions within a conversation and making the change of speaker smooth within the cuts. While also the overall film moves along nicely, partly because it is indeed compelling but also because the edit moves it along in the right way. I think a particular danger was in moments of say the animal reaction shots, which could be something that gets in the way (like the environment shots in She Said) however here were executed naturally.
I previously discussed EEAO's editing, and I'll see how it lives on re-watch for me, but on my initial watch anyways, I think the more intense editing is all very well done, and the action editing is the same. The cutting between cutaways though I occasionally thought dragged a bit, and again like the Batman, I don't think it alleviates the double climax for me entirely. Again like The Batman, definitely a script thing but the editing doesn't save for me either. Having said that, still a very deserving nomination.
Tar is an interesting choice that I think shows just HOW strong that vein of love for it in the academy is. That is because the film definitely a lot of long takes to put together, where it typically is not one focused on the cut. Of course, a lot of editing does not mean the best editing. At the same time, the work has a very gradual pace, however, I would say it is edited effectively within that pace. I wouldn't say it is a perfect example of such, but it definitely is a success.
Elvis when it calms down is pretty straightforward work and the final montage sequence is very well done. The first fifteen minutes and other crazy montages, I find absolutely nauseating in the way they are cut together.
1. The Fabelmans 2. Babylon 3. The Banshees of Inisherin 4. All Quiet on The Western Front 5. Everything Everywhere All At Once
First of all great lineup, EEAO was the only one that wasn't in my personal five from the shortlist (sorry Nope). For me, Williams's work is his very best in quite a long time, and in turn, might be one of his most minimalistic. I loved the choice to be so low key, to largely use the piano with some orchestral support that offers a sentimental but also very melancholic tone to the score. It's beautiful but there's also a real sadness to it at times, particularly with the segments involving the older Sammy. I also love the final bit that is actually quite a bit different but feels like Williams saying "here's what's to come" in being more classic Spielberg/Williams style, however in a way that I think fit just right for the film's ending.
Babylon's score is everything and the kitchen sink, but it works for me. The over-the-top jazz score is "too much" however it was one aspect that felt too much in the right way in that opening sequence. There is so much energy to it and it is memorable in itself with that repeated bass repetition. The main "love" theme also is another memorable and wonderful little ditty on Hurwitz's part. The King of Circus is insane yet again quite memorable and powerful as this larger-than-life sort of thing. The titular piece is basically a reworking of La La Land, however, I don't mind because it works as a thematic twist. The same with his riff on Bolero, which he does still make his own mark with. That isn't even mentioning all the sorts of other period riffs throughout. It is a WHOLE lot, and I think successful in that whole lot. Chazelle best never let go of Hurwitz because he may be his greatest asset.
Glad to see McDonagh get Burwell more recognition once again. Love this score, which is only limited in terms of how many really original pieces are in it, however, it is one where the repeated idea wholly works for me in that strange mixture between sort of playful and deeply sad. That with an unexpected mixture of instrumentation that again is beautiful in its sort of quiet and unusual simplicity. Wonderful work that I think is memorable in itself, yet in its memorability i think fits so well tonally with the piece in its choice of instrumentation again but also that unusual mix between something more fun and something quite haunting.
Again one's affection for this score is all about how one feels about the repeated synth, I love the repeated synth. That is of course on top of some effective ambient work that is filled with a mix of a striking sense of melancholy and more intense dread. Again less melodic than those above but effective in creating this distinct sense of emotional space with the work.
EEAO's score was a surprising inclusion to me because it is largely very ambient work and often even rather atonal. I will say that compared to the rest of the work here it is less memorable, I think the most memorable aspect of it is using Clair de Lune. It definitely works in very much this almost subconscious mood quality for much of it, occasionally mixing some more direct moments in the fight scenes, however still pretty reserved largely. The score though does definitely serve its purpose, and while it wasn't at the top of the shortlist for me, it was higher than most other potential nominees.
Bardo All Quiet on the Western Front Empire of Light Tar Elvis
Genuinely surprised by the lack of Top Gun, I kind of wonder if the actors doing the camerawork in the cockpits might've detracted some votes since it is pretty surprising to go from presumed winner to snub. Anyway, Bardo makes for an easy #1 for me, and glad it was not forgotten due to its reception. It's indeed a showoff, and I don't care, I loved what it was showing off. That is the grandeur of every single frame is so very great and ambitious, and succeeding visually on that ambition every time. How much it captures per frame? How it captures such striking and downright beautiful lighting. How potent every image is and every movement of the camera is so fluid and natural. It is outstanding work on every front. I think you particularly have to give Darius Khondji special mention as he shoots beautiful films often, but in a very different way from what we see with Bardo. I thought he took up the ideas of Lubezki and actually for the most part bested a lot of them.
All Quiet's cinematography I think hits the right blend in its color grading and lighting to find the appropriate bleakness without resorting to just being ugly. It grants you an immediate sense of how harrowing of a place it all is but doesn't use it as an excuse to make the film difficult to look at. That is combined with camerawork that comprises grand images that give such a sense of place, however ones that never compromise it for any sense of visceral intensity within the war scenes. Again finding the right combination to create a particularly potent visualization of World War I.
Empire of Light is not Deakins being pushed his hardest by Sam Mendes who gives him a lot of different scenes of people talking. But man those scenes certainly have such vibrant colors and lighting. Every money shot, such as the fireworks, or the various shots of the grandeur of the movie theater, Deakins gives it all he's got in terms of the colors, the intensity of the lighting, and the magnificence of the composition. Gorgeous work, even if it is not in the service of the most interesting of ideas.
I'm genuinely surprised by Tar's recognition here, again that love is as deep well. I say that because it is decidedly straightforward work for the most part. That is the color grading and general lighting just goes for a typical kind of basic picturesque "reality", without that being an intensely unique idea in this respect. Now don't get me wrong, in terms of the film going for such an aesthetic, it is well done in a direct sense. I certainly would never complain about the cinematography, but typically the branch goes for something more inventive/expressive in a more overt way. This isn't that, but it is well done at not being that. A choice by the way I think was more important to Field's direction than what makes great cinematography, in that I think he was going with a purposeful reality to which then he subverts. More on that in a bit.
Elvis, I think mostly isn't terrible work. When again it is straightforward, or doing its "historical" recreations, I do think it is more than just fine in the former and somewhat remarkable in the latter. It is all the gimmicky nonsense that I hate. The zoom-ins feel like the most obvious and gratuitous of zoom-ins. The movement of the camera here just nauseating. Anytime the camera does something weird, it is weird.
Louis: My faith in the Oscars has been recovered thankfully, I mean, I was so disappointed by last years nominations, whew I think they are back on track, for the most part.
Eh, I honestly didn't love the score for All Quiet on the Western Front. Not bad by any means but I felt it was a bit too much at times, especially towards the start of the film. Think it was more effective in later parts but I wish Pinocchio were there instead. Ah well.
1. All Quiet on the Western Front 2. Top Gun: Maverick 3. Glass Onion 4. Women Talking
Still look forward to seeing Living.
All Quiet's screenplay I think makes the right choice in understanding that a great adaptation was already made out of the original novel. It accepts that, as it should, and instead seeks to find its own path. And those who criticize it solely for making the change, I'd say "why to make it at all then?". Shaking up the structure to build the overall idea of the Warmachine that exists around our protagonists I think is a brilliant idea, particularly in the execution of the opening sequence where we trade one cog for another, as realized by a coat. That is genius in not only setting up our lead in his circumstance but also showing the nature of the machine that recycles the coats of dead men like it was nothing. Also the idea of just pushing our young men right into it as a progressive machine. It still takes time to setup and realize our "Boys" and Kat within the war frame that are mixed in scenes of the horrors of war, but also the horrors of just trying to survive waiting for war. Mixed in, an essential ingredient to bleak stories is a natural sense of joy in their interactions still with what joy they do find in their lives. A lot of the key moments are changed up a bit, particularly the ending, however, the screenplay finds its own separate power done in a separate way. The overarching story of Bruhl's character, I think again shakes things up in the right way in establishing the ongoing bureaucratic nonsense, through the eyes of the goodman trying to stop things against the other men caught up in their own egos with a blithe disregard for their own young men. Showing successfully the big picture and the small picture both with appropriate detail, that eventually collide in such a cruel, yet also appropriate ending.
You may take your Knives Out (wocka wocka) against me for this placement, but a more ambitious script does not mean a superior script, also since Top Gun took The Whale's spot, I won't be here for any besmirching. Is this an amazing screenplay? Definitely not. Is it a good screenplay? Largely yes. Maverick is the only character who has that much to him, and in that, you see a proper sequel, which shows a progression of the character, while still showing his flaws that makes him who he is. His journey isn't the most complex, however each spot involving how he learns through his relationship Rooster, and a final talk with Iceman (which is the best writing in the film), isn't relatively simple but convincing. Each of the pilots are a sliding scale, they either are Rooster, or have a single character trait ego (Hangman), ill-fitting (Bob), or Woman (Phoenix). But the screenplay doesn't put pressure on these limitations. As the screenplay is about the mission, which it tells as precisely as it can and does it well. Everything else just provides *enough* weight, however almost a mathematical perfection of such, as in most cases that isn't all that much, but it is just enough. Wrapped into Maverick's arc, which also is just enough for you to care once the planes fly. I will say the dialogue is bluntly earnest, however in a way that fresh air in the time of quips, I particularly on re-watch found the natural bits of humor such as "you told me not to think" particularly enjoyable in the age of "no one takes things seriously" MCU. it's not an amazing screenplay, but it is an efficient one that gets the job done.
Glass Onion, I think I've stated my objections in terms of the mystery, which uses the glue of stupidity to keep everything together, and a couple of even weaker contrivances (Blanc's power in the press/tell-all journal). Even if a bit rickety it still holds together. Less impressed is the social satire that is better than McKay, but does come down to Billionaires are dumb, models are dumb, and dude-bros are dumb. And politicians and scientists are....underwritten? Blanc though remains a fun character written in a fun way. Although the sister twist is dumb as well, aspects of the character are fun. The billionaire's dumbness is fun, even if say the model's dumbness is less so. I don't love it as noted, but I don't hate this nomination by any means.
I actually started to read Women Talking the book, which I found far more compelling than the film, though not fundamentally different, to the point I read at least, however different in the choice of narrator. And I think that the problem was it needed more adapting. Its moments of poetic description work far better in novel form than they do onscreen. The conversation itself needed more drama, and more conflict, rather than just sort of reaching a conclusion that everyone already decided on. That can work in a book, but in a film, you need something more active than what Polley did with it. What's worse is the structure of the piece that makes every inclusion of a side description seem a bit forced, but also overdone because it feels, and in some cases, is straight out of a novel without adaptation. This also breaks up the conversation in the wrong way disrupts the flow, and even limits your ability to grasp the characters in the right way. Again I haven't finished the novel but it was largely working for me in that form, but it needed changes, not due to quality, but rather what works for a film opposed to a novel.
1. The Banshees of Inisherin 2. Tar 3. The Fabelmans 4. Everything Everywhere All At Once 5. Triangle of Sadness
The Banshees of Inisherin's screenplay is basically everything I do love about Martin McDonagh's writing though here fashioned quite differently from In Bruges. Possibly in some ways his most comedic work, and it is indeed hilarious in its dialogue. I mean I love every interaction on that level alone and just carry itself with the comedy as far as I'm concerned. The development I love here in realizing each of these relationships, particularly the central one between two friends. What this does though is far more than some allusion towards civil war, but actually succeeds in this examination of depression, sense of mortality, and loneliness through men who have no idea how to process such things. The development of that comes from the men not being able to deal with it and we see that result in a usual breakdown between the nice man doing mean things, against his friend taking non-violence to the next level through violence. McDonagh though is also subverting really the Irish small-town tale, playing off tropes found in Ryan's Daughter, The Quiet Man, and Darby O'Gill and The Little People even. Does it in his own way, and fashions his own tale through using them however in his own way. A tale that is comedic, very successfully so, but slowly moves towards tragic in a way that McDonagh realizes so naturally through his characters. We naturally see the progression if not more accurately regression of the two men, however in a way where the bit that might not be that, breadcrumbs even, end up earning the ending which is a pitch-perfect climax. Now as a great screenplay can be, it there is plenty more to contemplate with the ideas of artistry over real pleasantry, what leads to feuds if not war, the destructive nature of community, and the nature of loneliness. McDonagh naturally explores these themes, but he also just tells a compelling tale. With some fecking good dialogue.
One best watch out for Tar, as I think this is legitimately a three-horse race between The Daniels, McDonagh, and Field considering how well each film did. Anyway on the actual screenplay, which is a truly ambitious piece befitting this ambitious character. Of course, let's mostly forget the character of Tar for a moment. I mean take alone how much there is in terms of classical music references, and other literary references, that alone is so much, and never feels like showing off, rather feels essential to mention when telling this particular story. I think something can be overlooked but what is great, is actually how much sense of appreciation and community there is in the classical music community scenes outside of Tar. It appreciates their creative process and really their sense of camaraderie without considering Linda for a moment. Now let's consider Linda. Linda that Field uses several ways. One is just an examination of a unique character sort that of the artistic "genius". It takes time to look at her method, her sort of facade, but also her truth, even before any deconstruction. He also uses her to analyze cancel culture, but never simplistically. Tar ends both being guilty and not guilty of what she is accused of. She makes legitimate points, however, while coming from a place of illegitimacy. Field allows for contradiction in his screenplay and in turn, doesn't allow for easy answers to complex questions. He rather asks you to think about them. It analyzes her successfully as the artist who fashions herself as such, as the exploitative boss, and as a potentially guilt-ridden woman (or at least haunted). Pulling these threads together and unwrapping them in unexpected ways. Field writes in weird moments even, such as the desolate wasteland home of the cellist, and while I think there is probably a truth, it also allows for the right kind of interpretation in that it can exist without it. And the ending deserves mention which is left field in a way few films are successful, and this film is successful. Both in terms of the change in venue but more so that ending, which was completely surprising, yet also so perfect in its surprising hilarity. This is anything but a simple script, it's the kind that isn't written often, and a great unique beast it is.
The Fabelmans has definitely a loose structure, though the thread that holds it together is Sammy's filmmaking as related to where it makes him fit in with his family, that being the calm logic minded dad and the flighty artistic mom. The screenplay is not traditionally structured other than general aging I guess, however, I don't view it as a flaw as this is essentially memories of childhood fashioned as such. There are moments of sudden change, such as the revelation with his mom, or the change of school. Things are not always smooth, and I think it earns by being true to the sentiment throughout. As other moments are of remembering back such as just random family moments, like clearing the table in their own way, to his filmmaking progress, to just the earliest memory of cinema. Some moments are just fun, some moving, but also some a little more. In that what works is seeing the progression of his filmmaking ambition combined with his shattering of the happy family. The latter is filled with such surprising and often painful emotions. Going in I never expected to see the scene where Spielberg's dad is on the edge of the situation being brought up directly to him, but Spielberg does explore that with Kushner, and quite powerfully. Also, the Ford/Lynch scene is just a thing of beauty that actually summarizes the take nicely. There is the nostalgia of seeing John Ford's films, then there's a blunt, in this case hilarious, truth of it all when John Ford shows up.
EEAO for me is something like Network, and I'll be interested to see how I react on re-watch because Network one is where the great is so great, I can largely ignore the excessive (the communists, Dunaway's orgasm monologue). That is EEAO for me in terms of any praise you want to throw at the film's completely unorthodox look at one examining their own life in such a completely deranged yet emotional way, that is both literally multi-universal while also being deeply personal, I'm there for it. I'm there even for the revelation of love because it is illustrated so effectively through a brilliant reference while also being honest emotionally. So many of the extremes do work for me in the fun that comes from kung fu multi-dimensional madness and there is enjoyment to be had with the sheer fun of it. Certain excesses, the bagel, the plugging of butts, the hotdog fingers, I don't like as much quite bluntly, and I do wish the Daniels were like 10% less juvenile in their writing. Personal preference of course, but that's what this is all about. The other aspect I will mention again is I don't think it balances momentum perfectly, as again I think it makes the point that loves wins out one way, and then it does it again... And the problem is the first time is more potent. Again though I think it needs both but it needed in a way that wrapped the two as one, rather than feeling separate.
Okay odd many out. I do like Triangle of Sadness though so this isn't a bashing. The screenplay is divided into three parts. The first is a relationship story told with a purposeful shallowness where gender politics are worn on the sleeve. A whole relationship that I think we get just as quickly in the midsection, and in turn I do think you could just simply cut it out. The second part is about bits. There's a bit of structure in the actions building toward the vomit/diarrhea fest and finally the shipwreck. Mostly it is about different bits. The influencer's jealousy-based relationship. The drunk Captain. The commie v. the capitalist. The genteel arms dealers. The exasperated if obliging crew. I enjoy some of these if a bit on the nose at times. The climax in it though is a joke that goes on for too long and is told too many times, however. Then there is the island where roles a reversed and it has fun with this, while also not making it simple as the servant immediately begins to become the exploiter and has fun with the previous relationships in a new light. Of course, that doesn't build toward anything other than a not ambiguous, ambiguous ending. Each part does what it does, and I think most of it is enjoyable, not truly insightful, however, I'll take it over other social commentaries not named The Menu, now that's a multi-course delight.
I'm going to hold off on director just for a little bit, mainly because I'm tired and want to give proper thoughts when I do. So for the record:
Supporting Actress:
1. Kerry Condon - The Banshees of Inisherin 2. Hong Chau - The Whale 3. Jamie Lee Curtis - EEAO 4. Angela Bassett - Black Panther: Wakanda Forever 5. Stephanie Hsu - EEAO
Shame De Leon missed (despite Triangle getting the picture nod) as I would've easily taken her over any of the bottom three.
Actress:
1. Cate Blanchett - Tar 2. Michelle Yeoh - EEAO 3. Ana De Armas - Blonde 4. Andrea Riseborough - To Leslie 5. Michelle Williams - The Fabelmans
Well Riseborough has potentially changed the game. Anyway, Deadwyler is sorely missed.
Picture:
1. The Banshees of Inisherin 2. The Fabelmans 3. All Quiet on the Western Front 4. Everything Everywhere All At Once 5. Tar 6. Top Gun: Maverick 7. Triangle of Sadness 8. Elvis 9. Women Talking 10. Avatar: The Way of Water
7 out of 10 being good films, with 6 being in my top ten, I can't complain, this is a strong lineup. It's hard not to side-eye Women Talking's nomination though, with its one other nomination, but hey I'll take it over The Whale, and I'll just be happy that Ben Whishaw wasn't nominated FOR HIS CAREER WORST PERFORMANCE, finally I can say it!
He got vetted out, similar to Dench over Balfe last year, and The Fabelmans didn't quite have enough gas to get two nominations (although I think he very well might've been #6.
I'm far less versed with this year's field as most of you, but while I was genuinely surprised by some nods, a lot of the nominated performances were in the conversation. Nonetheless, it's quite refreshing to see so many first timers in the acting nods. Also, there's a strong chance I'll be watching EEAAO pretty soon, so I'm excited to finally check it out.
Oh yeah...supporting actor predictions.
1) Quan 2) Gleeson 3) Henry 4) Keoghan 5) Hirsch
Seems like a reasonable guess, I think. I mostly placed Gleeson second because I personally like his "In Bruges" work more - though Banshees is a great turn from him still. Likewise, I'll be interested to see "Causeway" for Henry, since he's been very reliable in recent years, and his nomination wasn't a surefire thing.
A lot of people on social media seem to be hating on de Armas but I'm not going to fault her nomination. She carried Blonde. Davis' performance isn't far off but it's not a performance that absolutely needed to be nominated. Riseborough's nomination I'm fine with because it's a game changer and she gave a pretty strong performance. Williams is the real problem. Deadwyler undoubtedly should've been there instead of her.
Whishaw - 2(What a painfully mannered from him here, and unlike his other lesser performances, it isn't the script that's the problem it's him. It starts with his strange accent and delivery, where he is so labored about it I thought he was playing the part with a mental deficiency of some kind. That's not the case though it is just his strange choices. Every aspect though feels the worst tendencies as every aspect he accentuates so aggressively. His reactions are really basically twee with how out there he is in so many moments, particularly overplaying the sense of romantic attraction to Mara's character. An aspect that I thought was wholly lacking in chemistry even in one sided chemistry. I hated his "boys" monologue because it was the worst of them in terms of just making the whole thing seem as artificial as possible and not at all poetic even for a moment. Then his reactions throughout are so big and overdone, I honestly couldn't believe how little of his performance was working for me, because I usually find him so on point. This character needed something a lot more withdrawn, understated and well real, then Whishaw's theatrical and overly stagy work.)
Regarding the Dano snub, it seems to me there just wasn't a lot of passion for his performance, considering he also got snubbed by the Globes. Hirsch and Williams' showier performances simply overshadowed him. Looking back he honestly should've had a more high-profile campaign that emphasized how due he is for a nomination.
93 comments:
1. Gleeson
2. Quan
3. Keoghan
4. Henry
5. Hirsch
OMG Andrea Risebrough....
I am glad I kept Paul Mescal in as well.
Risebrough made me jump out of my seat lol.
Mescal :)
1.Gleeson
2.Quan
3.Henry
4.Keoghan
5.Hirsch
I'm pretty pleased with both categories
I actually did quite well in my Gold Derby predictions, but oh gosh Supporting Actor and Best Actress got me good.
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Henry
4. Keoghan
5. Hirsch
Super bummed about Dano and especially Decision to Leave. Glad Mescal was able to pull it off, though. And Andrea Riseborough... my God.
Let us take a moment to pause and honor Dano for getting snubbed for Fabelmans, despite the initial setup being pitch perfect.
1) Quan
2) Gleeson
3) Henry
4) Keoghan
5) Hirsch
16 First Time acting nominees, which is the most in Academy History!!!!!!!!
15 was the original highest in 1940 and 1995.
Elated for Mescal, just knew it had to be him.
Can't believe Decision to Leave got snubbed.
Also, I'm super happy that IO got in, with Skolimowski getting recognition.
Paul Dano and Decision to Leave missing are my only complaints, I am quite pleased compared to last years nominations.
It sucks but I have to look on the bright side, a review of his turn in The Batman is likely.
I love seeing Mescal, Riseborough, and Armas there. I can't say I'm shocked about Decision to Leave being snubbed anywhere besides International Feature. A bit of a head scratcher. They must REALLY love Triangle of Sadness to have nominated Ostlund.
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Keoghan
4. Henry
5. Hirsch
First time since 1934 that all best actor nominees are first-timers.
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Henry
4. Keoghan
5. Hirsch
Nice to see All Quiet On Western Front and also EO (biased, but still) getting recognition, but at the same time Decision to Leave was utterly ignored, so these cancel each other out.
Was not expecting Riseborough.
Still happy for Henry and Mescal.
Andrea Risborough is the new Sally Kirkland.
Apparently, there are 17 first time Oscar nominees in the acting category.
LET'S GO, HENRY. I'm also at awe at the fact that Andrea Riseborough got nominated after a campaign that was essentially a copypasta. Kudos to that.
1. Gleeson
2. Huy Quan
3. Keoghan
4. Hanry
5. Hirsch
Louis, how would you rank this year’s Leadong and Supporting Actress nominees? And what is your top 20-25 for the year overall?
Save the overall rankings until the end of the alternates.
1.Quan
2.Gleeson
3.Keoghan
4.Henry
5.Hirsch
ruthiehenshallfan99: Its 16
Michelle Yeoh
Ana de Armas
Andrea Risebrough
Brendan Fraser
Colin Fraser
Austin Butler
Bill Nighy
Paul Mescal
Kerry Condon
Hong Chau
Jamie Lee Curtis
Stephanie Hsu
Ke Huy Quan
Brendan Gleeson
Barry Keoghan
Brian Tyree Henry.
And my final Alternate picks are:
Dano/Lynch
Dano/Turturro
Schuch
Hoult
Hopkins
Redmayne
Moura
Rylance
Pattinson
Skarsgard
Song
Park
Chalamet
Fiennes
Kammerer
Rylance
Bajestani
Calva or Abbott
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Keoghan
4. Henry
5. Hirsch
And my overall win predictions are:
Farrell
Blanchett
Dano (Louis utterly loves the kind father role when done exceedingly well)
Condon
Luke: What you reckon will win Original Screenplay at the Oscars?
Riseborough's nomination is the kind of shock I like to see at the Oscars, but Deadwyler not being there is quite unfortunate the more I'm thinking about it.
Also, did Alexandre Desplat upset some people in the music branch? Third year in a row he's missed now.
RatedRStar: Whoops. Not sure who I counted twice, haha
RatedRStar: I want to say Banshees but I have a feeling that they're gonna go with Triangle Of Sadness.
Deadwyler getting snubbed was the biggest shock imo, I thought her nomination was a given.
Aidan: I noticed that too. Did not expect that.
Luke: Of course anything can happen but I just had a premonition that Banshees loses all 9 of its nominations which I think would be a bit of a gut punch lol.
Just a couple of other things: Cool to see TÁR in Editing and Cinematography, really strong craft that largely went less talked about beforehand from what I saw and I'm glad to see it recognized. Nice to see This is a Life in Original Song too. The more love for David Byrne the better.
I was worried that the nominations would have a JK Simmons/Judi Dench nomination but it didn't so I am thankful for that.
1. Ke Huy Quan
2. Brendan Gleeson
3. Brian Tyree Henry
4. Barry Keoghan
5. Judd Hirsch
isn't it weird that out of all categories, Top Gun missed out on CInematography of all things?
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Keoghan
4. Henry
5. Hirsch
Where are the pictures?
Anonymous: Give it time. Louis said yesterday that he was going to be busy.
Thanks Luke. Sorry I thought my iPad was playing up!
Decision to Leave getting shut out is painful but Everything Everywhere All At Once getting 11 nominations brings me lots of joy, alongside finally seeing Hong Chau and Brian Tyree Henry getting recognised. So there's that.
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Keoghan
4. Henry
5. Hirsch
My personal ranking would be
1. Quan
2. Henry
3. Gleeson
4. Keoghan
5. Hirsch
There really is a lot to love within these nominations. TÁR getting Editing and Cinematography is a great surprise. Both went overlooked beforehand. All Quiet did well like expected.
My predictions for this lineup:
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Henry
4. Keoghan
5. Hirsch
Also Deadwyler and Davis getting snubbed for Riseborough and De Armas will not age well.
So, EEAAO has all momentum to win on their side, right? Like, unless we have a surprise at the PGAs, is there really anything else that will contend with it?
Emi: I'd personally love a TÁR or Banshees win but highly doubt that's happening by the look of things. I think the only competition for EEAAO is Fabelmans.
EEAAO winning would make it the first BP winner that's my number 1 since...well, Parasite. I think it's between EEAAO, Banshees and Fabelmans, though TÁR did really well too.
Calvin: Oh yeah I had forgotten that both Deadwyler and Davis, as well as their films got 0 nominations.
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Keoghan
4. Henry
5. Hirsch
Couple stray thoughts
-Would've much preferred Dano over Hirsch, but oh well.
-Top Gun in screenplay is RIDICULOUS but I am kinda glad it missed out on cinematography
-They really loved Triangle of Sadness
Emi: Welllll, keep in mind that the most nominated movie last year was The Power of the Dog and it ended up winning in a whopping 1 category.
Luke, your rating predictions?
I'd say Fabelmans will make it, as a Oscar-Swansong for Spielberg.
The more interesting question is the lead categories:
For Actor, Farrell and Butler have very high chances, but Fraser has the biggest narrative
Whereas for Actress, they do love them some Blanchett, but EEAAO's nominations might be the push Yeoh needs
All Quiet on the Western Font is this years big surprise nom grabber, like Phantom Thread, Another Round, Cold War etc.
Louis, thoughts on The Batman's Cinematography and Production Design.
Well, that was crazy.
Nothing against Riseborough, and her campaign was entertaining, but her getting in over 2 Black actors is pretty unfortunate.
Guess I'll have to eat crow on de Armas, in some ways her nomination was more surprising to me than Riseborough's.
Haven't seen Fabelmans yet, but it's a pity about Dano. Guy's been doing solid work in beloved films for like 20 years. I'm sure he'll get a nom eventually.
Glad I called the Director lineup, the S. Actress lineup, BTH getting nominated, and Avatar 2 underperforming.
YES to Tar in Cinematography and Editing. But who wins Cinematography now that Top Gun was snubbed?
Speaking of which, Top Gun getting nominated in Screenplay is a bit much.
5º Judd Hirsch
4º Brian Tyree Henry
3º Ke Huy Quan
2º Barry Keoghan
1º Brendan Gleeson
Okay, let's get started:
International Film:
1. All Quiet on the Western Front
2. The Quiet Girl
3. Argentina, 1985
4. Close
From what I've seen this isn't a terrible set BUT Decision to Leave was still robbed (though I did always think that might happen).
Documentary:
1. Fire of Love
2. All The Beauty and Bloodshed
3. All That Breathes
4. A House Made of Splinters
Glad the top two made it. Didn't love "house" but it's not a terrible choice either.
Sound:
1. Top Gun: Maverick
2. The Batman
3. All Quiet on the Western Front
4. Avatar: The Way of Water
5. Elvis
A pretty strong category, though an easy #1 for me. So much of the film is its sound design that makes every flying scene so visceral. Incredible work for both its editing of all the different sounds and how the mix brings it all together.
The Batman also is great work, easy to think of some of the individual sounds like The Riddler's neck bomb and the rev of the Batmobile. Mixed together beautifully to create an extremely immersive experience.
All Quiet I think could be divisive based on how one feels about the synth notes. I loved the synth notes including how they're mixed as so overpowering and as an audio cue for the Warmachine. Otherwise beyond that potent atmospheric work for both the edits and the mix.
I won't say anything negative on this front for Avatar, the sound work is all strong as is the mix. I personnel don’t get immersed but not due to any flaws with the sound.
Elvis is the weak nominee for me. Most of the work is absolutely fine if unremarkable but when the film messes around with the mix I find it absolutely nauseating.
Makeup & Hairstyling:
1. The Batman
2. All Quiet on the Western Front
3. The Whale
4. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
5. Elvis
Easy #1, because The Penguin transformation is 100% convincing. A complete transformation that you'd never second guess. Great work.
All Quiet is all about the viscera, and impressively visceral viscera it is.
The Whale fat transformation I found more convincing than another one down below, but I would say the overall suit does look more fake than real. Not bad work by any means, however.
Hmm, not sure how it made it honestly, but it certainly isn't bad work. The tribal paints again add to the opening scene...and I guess the bit of non-CGI Atlantian stuff is decent. And....it's fine if just kind of functional.
Easily last place. One is Hanks falls into the classic balloon boy look. With Butler oddly, his makeup actually gets better as it gets more intense for the fatter Elvis which I didn't think was 100% convincing but did think was okay. The early makeup though looks just kind of bizarre, to the point I'm not sure what they were going for. I think it was to make him look like Elvis, but it makes Butler look more like he has some kind of infection on his face at times.
Costume Design:
1. Babylon
2. Everything Everywhere All At Once
3. Mrs. Harris Goes to Paris
4. Elvis
5. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Alright now, this I thought was altogether fantastic period wear, stylized yet overdone in that regard. Having a sense of character for each character, such as the aggressively suggestive, and quite successful outfits for Robbie, the old-fashioned refined look for Pitt, and the evolution of each of Calva's clothes as he gets closer to his success. Combine that with all the different looks for the period features, the random insane party clothes, and the lowest grim clothes in the Maguire sequence and you have a grand mixture of memorable clothes that emphasize the style of the film in the right way. They also just stand out in the right way, and it does what great costume designing should do.
Everything Everywhere All At Once's gives you the best of several worlds. Because it's great modern work, in that everyone has a distinct look just in their "normal" clothes which itself is notable and not something that should be shrugged off. That's just starters though as it successfully has more fashionable clothes for its "In the Mood For Love" transport, or more silly clothes like the 2001 ape costumes and many other random assortments. It then has its very specifically stylized clothing which is all rather eye-catching such as the bagel cult clothing or, slightly ironically, the Elvis impersonation clothes. The work is very all over the place in styles and works as very everything or anything.
Jenny Beavan's turn at Phantom Thread was not quite as spectacular as that work, but certainly quite striking. Properly luscious purposefully showy work.
Elvis's I'd classify as deserving. Very specific recreations, but strong recreations across the board when it comes to recreating the various looks of Elvis. Otherwise more standard period work, but fine period work in that regard.
Black Panther's work in the funeral scene is fantastic. I imagine that is how it earned the Oscar nomination. The design and the use of white everything there creates a combination of grief and celebration, with a continuation of the original film's work in a powerful way. Beyond that, though the rest of the work is pretty rudimentary I find. The Ironman suits though I found borderline atrocious. Don't know whose decisions they were, but they are costumes regardless, poor costumes that seem a better fit for the power rangers.
Production Design:
1. Babylon
2. All Quiet on the Western Front
3. Elvis
4. The Fabelmans
5. Avatar: The Way of Water
Babylon's work is much like its costumes, which is a whole lot but a whole lot that worked for me. All periods were respectful but dynamic in going to an extreme. Whether that be the various luxury suites and ballrooms, filled with different elements of debauchery to top things off, the various film sets big and small, the old studio sets as well and of course the very pit of hell that is the Maguire sequence. Every set is distinct and speaks to the period and character of the pieces. It is what great production design should be.
All Quiet on the Western Front did a lot of practical choices in terms of the work, however, there is a reason location is considered part of it. The work can exist against any other production design of World War I and top it in many regards. That is just in finding every bit of grime and dirt in the setting and showing just how bleak it all is. Combining that with other period-appropriate sets that I think effectively at times stand in contrast to the decay we see with the war sets.
Elvis I think managed to be held together by the respecting of the period, so the extravagance is befitting towards where Elvis actually performed and lived in. Largely even with those recreations of work, but strong in that sense.
The Fabelmans I'm surprised made it because it is extremely low-key period work, those extremely specified right down to the production designs of Spielberg's home movies. It is all strong work though within that specificity, and in particular the more subdued work, like the Fabelman homes, feel very lived in and filled with history.
I don't like the majority of the designs of Avatar. I'm not impressed by its generic video game aesthetic on any front. I don't think the new animals are particularly of note. Hey it's a slightly different-looking Whale kids! There were worse choices but this is nothing special to me.
Song:
1. "Naatu Naatu" - RRR
2. "Hold My Hand" - Top Gun: Maverick
3. "This Is A Life" - Everything Everywhere All At Once
4. "Lift Me Up" - Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
5. "Appaulse" - Tell It Like A Woman
"Naatu Naatu" is kind of the ideal song to win an Oscar, because it legitimately works as a song, but even more so as a sequence. That is the amount of triumphant energy and just plain fun. Love the percussion that introduces it then the duet of singing together with such potent energy. An incredible sense of fun every time he goes into its chorus which just is a genuine toe taper in the best way. What is more amazing is that it manages to only build on that to kind of a nuclear explosion of energy that so naturally realized.
Previously covered "Hold My Hand".
This is a Life is relatively simple yet beautiful in its strange meandering manner. This is with its relatively simple lyrics that work in their simplicity. Much like the instrumentation that moves from the simplest of percussion towards this build that becomes a mix between atonal and a more harmonic mix together that has a strange bending quality, that all works in its very strange way, before returning to its simple spoke truth to close it out.
Life Me Up is probably a song I won't remember in some time, which I think the three above it. I also don't like the intensity of the autotune at times. Having said that I do think overall all it still works as a ballad, I do particularly like how it builds with richer instrumentation as it goes along, to the point of creating a certain emotional catharsis in the song itself.
I'll say it again, I don't think Diane Warren is the most overdue in this category, I'd say she's the most over-nominated. I really don't care for this that sounds like the most generic thing you might find on a pop countdown. Think it has a massive overproduced sound to the point even the lyrics just blend into nothingness.
Visual Effects:
1. The Batman
2. Top Gun: Maverick
3. Avatar: The Way of Water
4. All Quiet On The Western Front
5. Black Panther Wakanda Forever
For me, The Batman better imagined its own world than other films below with its VFX and felt far more tangible to me. And also didn't have creepy faces...well ones that were meant to not be creepy. It is a created world as well as another nominee but never felt like a created world.
Maverick's work is only not largely invisible in you're guessing they didn't have the money to blow up such expensive jets, but with how much real was done, the VFX if they were off at all would've been immediately noticeable. They are absolutely never noticeable though and just refine the images.
Yes, do I have a bias against the film, absolutely. I'll admit that. And this is an example of the most money and the most time. In that endeavor is there objective success. Yes. The environments are impressive just from an objective standpoint. I will say though some of the extra techniques used by Cameron, don't look any better to me than video games without such expensive reference points. But the reason it really isn't number one, is I still find the Na'Vi faces in the uncanny valley, particularly on a lot of the less main characters, and find their movements actually too smooth at times. Although I'll admit this is a deserved nomination, I do have reservations regardless.
All Quiet on The Western Front delivers almost entirely invisible work, flamethrowers/tanks, mostly inserted pretty impeccably as is every other amplification. Not quite perfect work, but very good work.
Black Panther has a lot of seams, although maybe better than the first one as there's nothing as dreadful as the final fight there. But the less "supporting" and more focused effects are typically not great. Like the blue CGI people or the various robot suits here that look super fake. The environmental shots though are decent enough, though definitely not spectacular.
Editing:
1. Top Gun: Maverick
2. The Banshees of Inisherin
3. Everything Everywhere All At Once
4. Tar
5. Elvis
Maverick's editing is frankly a key to its success. It just moves from scene to scene without getting caught up on a particular moment but never seeming to bypass a moment. In that even the romantic scenes, which are the least of the scenes, are cut to never wear out their welcome despite having no spark, to begin with. The actual progression of the mission scenes though is just taut and tight every step of the way. The mission itself is masterful work. Maintaining the tension, creating a completely cohesive sense of what is going on, and just cutting in the most impactful ways throughout the scene. Unlike the original, which I think gets very ropey at times, this one knows exactly how to cut its sequences but also progresses through them as smoothly as possible.
The Banshees' nom definitely shows the support for the film given that it is definitely not at all showy work in any respect, the majority of the editing just being conversational editing. There I think it succeeded in that I didn't notice the cuts within scenes, maintaining proper reactions within a conversation and making the change of speaker smooth within the cuts. While also the overall film moves along nicely, partly because it is indeed compelling but also because the edit moves it along in the right way. I think a particular danger was in moments of say the animal reaction shots, which could be something that gets in the way (like the environment shots in She Said) however here were executed naturally.
I previously discussed EEAO's editing, and I'll see how it lives on re-watch for me, but on my initial watch anyways, I think the more intense editing is all very well done, and the action editing is the same. The cutting between cutaways though I occasionally thought dragged a bit, and again like the Batman, I don't think it alleviates the double climax for me entirely. Again like The Batman, definitely a script thing but the editing doesn't save for me either. Having said that, still a very deserving nomination.
Tar is an interesting choice that I think shows just HOW strong that vein of love for it in the academy is. That is because the film definitely a lot of long takes to put together, where it typically is not one focused on the cut. Of course, a lot of editing does not mean the best editing. At the same time, the work has a very gradual pace, however, I would say it is edited effectively within that pace. I wouldn't say it is a perfect example of such, but it definitely is a success.
Elvis when it calms down is pretty straightforward work and the final montage sequence is very well done. The first fifteen minutes and other crazy montages, I find absolutely nauseating in the way they are cut together.
Score:
1. The Fabelmans
2. Babylon
3. The Banshees of Inisherin
4. All Quiet on The Western Front
5. Everything Everywhere All At Once
First of all great lineup, EEAO was the only one that wasn't in my personal five from the shortlist (sorry Nope). For me, Williams's work is his very best in quite a long time, and in turn, might be one of his most minimalistic. I loved the choice to be so low key, to largely use the piano with some orchestral support that offers a sentimental but also very melancholic tone to the score. It's beautiful but there's also a real sadness to it at times, particularly with the segments involving the older Sammy. I also love the final bit that is actually quite a bit different but feels like Williams saying "here's what's to come" in being more classic Spielberg/Williams style, however in a way that I think fit just right for the film's ending.
Babylon's score is everything and the kitchen sink, but it works for me. The over-the-top jazz score is "too much" however it was one aspect that felt too much in the right way in that opening sequence. There is so much energy to it and it is memorable in itself with that repeated bass repetition. The main "love" theme also is another memorable and wonderful little ditty on Hurwitz's part. The King of Circus is insane yet again quite memorable and powerful as this larger-than-life sort of thing. The titular piece is basically a reworking of La La Land, however, I don't mind because it works as a thematic twist. The same with his riff on Bolero, which he does still make his own mark with. That isn't even mentioning all the sorts of other period riffs throughout. It is a WHOLE lot, and I think successful in that whole lot. Chazelle best never let go of Hurwitz because he may be his greatest asset.
Glad to see McDonagh get Burwell more recognition once again. Love this score, which is only limited in terms of how many really original pieces are in it, however, it is one where the repeated idea wholly works for me in that strange mixture between sort of playful and deeply sad. That with an unexpected mixture of instrumentation that again is beautiful in its sort of quiet and unusual simplicity. Wonderful work that I think is memorable in itself, yet in its memorability i think fits so well tonally with the piece in its choice of instrumentation again but also that unusual mix between something more fun and something quite haunting.
Again one's affection for this score is all about how one feels about the repeated synth, I love the repeated synth. That is of course on top of some effective ambient work that is filled with a mix of a striking sense of melancholy and more intense dread. Again less melodic than those above but effective in creating this distinct sense of emotional space with the work.
EEAO's score was a surprising inclusion to me because it is largely very ambient work and often even rather atonal. I will say that compared to the rest of the work here it is less memorable, I think the most memorable aspect of it is using Clair de Lune. It definitely works in very much this almost subconscious mood quality for much of it, occasionally mixing some more direct moments in the fight scenes, however still pretty reserved largely. The score though does definitely serve its purpose, and while it wasn't at the top of the shortlist for me, it was higher than most other potential nominees.
Cinematography:
Bardo
All Quiet on the Western Front
Empire of Light
Tar
Elvis
Genuinely surprised by the lack of Top Gun, I kind of wonder if the actors doing the camerawork in the cockpits might've detracted some votes since it is pretty surprising to go from presumed winner to snub. Anyway, Bardo makes for an easy #1 for me, and glad it was not forgotten due to its reception. It's indeed a showoff, and I don't care, I loved what it was showing off. That is the grandeur of every single frame is so very great and ambitious, and succeeding visually on that ambition every time. How much it captures per frame? How it captures such striking and downright beautiful lighting. How potent every image is and every movement of the camera is so fluid and natural. It is outstanding work on every front. I think you particularly have to give Darius Khondji special mention as he shoots beautiful films often, but in a very different way from what we see with Bardo. I thought he took up the ideas of Lubezki and actually for the most part bested a lot of them.
All Quiet's cinematography I think hits the right blend in its color grading and lighting to find the appropriate bleakness without resorting to just being ugly. It grants you an immediate sense of how harrowing of a place it all is but doesn't use it as an excuse to make the film difficult to look at. That is combined with camerawork that comprises grand images that give such a sense of place, however ones that never compromise it for any sense of visceral intensity within the war scenes. Again finding the right combination to create a particularly potent visualization of World War I.
Empire of Light is not Deakins being pushed his hardest by Sam Mendes who gives him a lot of different scenes of people talking. But man those scenes certainly have such vibrant colors and lighting. Every money shot, such as the fireworks, or the various shots of the grandeur of the movie theater, Deakins gives it all he's got in terms of the colors, the intensity of the lighting, and the magnificence of the composition. Gorgeous work, even if it is not in the service of the most interesting of ideas.
I'm genuinely surprised by Tar's recognition here, again that love is as deep well. I say that because it is decidedly straightforward work for the most part. That is the color grading and general lighting just goes for a typical kind of basic picturesque "reality", without that being an intensely unique idea in this respect. Now don't get me wrong, in terms of the film going for such an aesthetic, it is well done in a direct sense. I certainly would never complain about the cinematography, but typically the branch goes for something more inventive/expressive in a more overt way. This isn't that, but it is well done at not being that. A choice by the way I think was more important to Field's direction than what makes great cinematography, in that I think he was going with a purposeful reality to which then he subverts. More on that in a bit.
Elvis, I think mostly isn't terrible work. When again it is straightforward, or doing its "historical" recreations, I do think it is more than just fine in the former and somewhat remarkable in the latter. It is all the gimmicky nonsense that I hate. The zoom-ins feel like the most obvious and gratuitous of zoom-ins. The movement of the camera here just nauseating. Anytime the camera does something weird, it is weird.
Louis: My faith in the Oscars has been recovered thankfully, I mean, I was so disappointed by last years nominations, whew I think they are back on track, for the most part.
RatedRStar: Give it another year or two and we'll be pulling our hairs out again. They will never become infallible.
Eh, I honestly didn't love the score for All Quiet on the Western Front. Not bad by any means but I felt it was a bit too much at times, especially towards the start of the film. Think it was more effective in later parts but I wish Pinocchio were there instead. Ah well.
Louis: What do you think of seeing all first-time nominees in the Best Actor category.
Adapted Screenplay:
1. All Quiet on the Western Front
2. Top Gun: Maverick
3. Glass Onion
4. Women Talking
Still look forward to seeing Living.
All Quiet's screenplay I think makes the right choice in understanding that a great adaptation was already made out of the original novel. It accepts that, as it should, and instead seeks to find its own path. And those who criticize it solely for making the change, I'd say "why to make it at all then?". Shaking up the structure to build the overall idea of the Warmachine that exists around our protagonists I think is a brilliant idea, particularly in the execution of the opening sequence where we trade one cog for another, as realized by a coat. That is genius in not only setting up our lead in his circumstance but also showing the nature of the machine that recycles the coats of dead men like it was nothing. Also the idea of just pushing our young men right into it as a progressive machine. It still takes time to setup and realize our "Boys" and Kat within the war frame that are mixed in scenes of the horrors of war, but also the horrors of just trying to survive waiting for war. Mixed in, an essential ingredient to bleak stories is a natural sense of joy in their interactions still with what joy they do find in their lives. A lot of the key moments are changed up a bit, particularly the ending, however, the screenplay finds its own separate power done in a separate way. The overarching story of Bruhl's character, I think again shakes things up in the right way in establishing the ongoing bureaucratic nonsense, through the eyes of the goodman trying to stop things against the other men caught up in their own egos with a blithe disregard for their own young men. Showing successfully the big picture and the small picture both with appropriate detail, that eventually collide in such a cruel, yet also appropriate ending.
You may take your Knives Out (wocka wocka) against me for this placement, but a more ambitious script does not mean a superior script, also since Top Gun took The Whale's spot, I won't be here for any besmirching. Is this an amazing screenplay? Definitely not. Is it a good screenplay? Largely yes. Maverick is the only character who has that much to him, and in that, you see a proper sequel, which shows a progression of the character, while still showing his flaws that makes him who he is. His journey isn't the most complex, however each spot involving how he learns through his relationship Rooster, and a final talk with Iceman (which is the best writing in the film), isn't relatively simple but convincing. Each of the pilots are a sliding scale, they either are Rooster, or have a single character trait ego (Hangman), ill-fitting (Bob), or Woman (Phoenix). But the screenplay doesn't put pressure on these limitations. As the screenplay is about the mission, which it tells as precisely as it can and does it well. Everything else just provides *enough* weight, however almost a mathematical perfection of such, as in most cases that isn't all that much, but it is just enough. Wrapped into Maverick's arc, which also is just enough for you to care once the planes fly. I will say the dialogue is bluntly earnest, however in a way that fresh air in the time of quips, I particularly on re-watch found the natural bits of humor such as "you told me not to think" particularly enjoyable in the age of "no one takes things seriously" MCU. it's not an amazing screenplay, but it is an efficient one that gets the job done.
Glass Onion, I think I've stated my objections in terms of the mystery, which uses the glue of stupidity to keep everything together, and a couple of even weaker contrivances (Blanc's power in the press/tell-all journal). Even if a bit rickety it still holds together. Less impressed is the social satire that is better than McKay, but does come down to Billionaires are dumb, models are dumb, and dude-bros are dumb. And politicians and scientists are....underwritten? Blanc though remains a fun character written in a fun way. Although the sister twist is dumb as well, aspects of the character are fun. The billionaire's dumbness is fun, even if say the model's dumbness is less so. I don't love it as noted, but I don't hate this nomination by any means.
I actually started to read Women Talking the book, which I found far more compelling than the film, though not fundamentally different, to the point I read at least, however different in the choice of narrator. And I think that the problem was it needed more adapting. Its moments of poetic description work far better in novel form than they do onscreen. The conversation itself needed more drama, and more conflict, rather than just sort of reaching a conclusion that everyone already decided on. That can work in a book, but in a film, you need something more active than what Polley did with it. What's worse is the structure of the piece that makes every inclusion of a side description seem a bit forced, but also overdone because it feels, and in some cases, is straight out of a novel without adaptation. This also breaks up the conversation in the wrong way disrupts the flow, and even limits your ability to grasp the characters in the right way. Again I haven't finished the novel but it was largely working for me in that form, but it needed changes, not due to quality, but rather what works for a film opposed to a novel.
Original Screenplay:
1. The Banshees of Inisherin
2. Tar
3. The Fabelmans
4. Everything Everywhere All At Once
5. Triangle of Sadness
The Banshees of Inisherin's screenplay is basically everything I do love about Martin McDonagh's writing though here fashioned quite differently from In Bruges. Possibly in some ways his most comedic work, and it is indeed hilarious in its dialogue. I mean I love every interaction on that level alone and just carry itself with the comedy as far as I'm concerned. The development I love here in realizing each of these relationships, particularly the central one between two friends. What this does though is far more than some allusion towards civil war, but actually succeeds in this examination of depression, sense of mortality, and loneliness through men who have no idea how to process such things. The development of that comes from the men not being able to deal with it and we see that result in a usual breakdown between the nice man doing mean things, against his friend taking non-violence to the next level through violence. McDonagh though is also subverting really the Irish small-town tale, playing off tropes found in Ryan's Daughter, The Quiet Man, and Darby O'Gill and The Little People even. Does it in his own way, and fashions his own tale through using them however in his own way. A tale that is comedic, very successfully so, but slowly moves towards tragic in a way that McDonagh realizes so naturally through his characters. We naturally see the progression if not more accurately regression of the two men, however in a way where the bit that might not be that, breadcrumbs even, end up earning the ending which is a pitch-perfect climax. Now as a great screenplay can be, it there is plenty more to contemplate with the ideas of artistry over real pleasantry, what leads to feuds if not war, the destructive nature of community, and the nature of loneliness. McDonagh naturally explores these themes, but he also just tells a compelling tale. With some fecking good dialogue.
One best watch out for Tar, as I think this is legitimately a three-horse race between The Daniels, McDonagh, and Field considering how well each film did. Anyway on the actual screenplay, which is a truly ambitious piece befitting this ambitious character. Of course, let's mostly forget the character of Tar for a moment. I mean take alone how much there is in terms of classical music references, and other literary references, that alone is so much, and never feels like showing off, rather feels essential to mention when telling this particular story. I think something can be overlooked but what is great, is actually how much sense of appreciation and community there is in the classical music community scenes outside of Tar. It appreciates their creative process and really their sense of camaraderie without considering Linda for a moment. Now let's consider Linda. Linda that Field uses several ways. One is just an examination of a unique character sort that of the artistic "genius". It takes time to look at her method, her sort of facade, but also her truth, even before any deconstruction. He also uses her to analyze cancel culture, but never simplistically. Tar ends both being guilty and not guilty of what she is accused of. She makes legitimate points, however, while coming from a place of illegitimacy. Field allows for contradiction in his screenplay and in turn, doesn't allow for easy answers to complex questions. He rather asks you to think about them. It analyzes her successfully as the artist who fashions herself as such, as the exploitative boss, and as a potentially guilt-ridden woman (or at least haunted). Pulling these threads together and unwrapping them in unexpected ways. Field writes in weird moments even, such as the desolate wasteland home of the cellist, and while I think there is probably a truth, it also allows for the right kind of interpretation in that it can exist without it. And the ending deserves mention which is left field in a way few films are successful, and this film is successful. Both in terms of the change in venue but more so that ending, which was completely surprising, yet also so perfect in its surprising hilarity. This is anything but a simple script, it's the kind that isn't written often, and a great unique beast it is.
The Fabelmans has definitely a loose structure, though the thread that holds it together is Sammy's filmmaking as related to where it makes him fit in with his family, that being the calm logic minded dad and the flighty artistic mom. The screenplay is not traditionally structured other than general aging I guess, however, I don't view it as a flaw as this is essentially memories of childhood fashioned as such. There are moments of sudden change, such as the revelation with his mom, or the change of school. Things are not always smooth, and I think it earns by being true to the sentiment throughout. As other moments are of remembering back such as just random family moments, like clearing the table in their own way, to his filmmaking progress, to just the earliest memory of cinema. Some moments are just fun, some moving, but also some a little more. In that what works is seeing the progression of his filmmaking ambition combined with his shattering of the happy family. The latter is filled with such surprising and often painful emotions. Going in I never expected to see the scene where Spielberg's dad is on the edge of the situation being brought up directly to him, but Spielberg does explore that with Kushner, and quite powerfully. Also, the Ford/Lynch scene is just a thing of beauty that actually summarizes the take nicely. There is the nostalgia of seeing John Ford's films, then there's a blunt, in this case hilarious, truth of it all when John Ford shows up.
EEAO for me is something like Network, and I'll be interested to see how I react on re-watch because Network one is where the great is so great, I can largely ignore the excessive (the communists, Dunaway's orgasm monologue). That is EEAO for me in terms of any praise you want to throw at the film's completely unorthodox look at one examining their own life in such a completely deranged yet emotional way, that is both literally multi-universal while also being deeply personal, I'm there for it. I'm there even for the revelation of love because it is illustrated so effectively through a brilliant reference while also being honest emotionally. So many of the extremes do work for me in the fun that comes from kung fu multi-dimensional madness and there is enjoyment to be had with the sheer fun of it. Certain excesses, the bagel, the plugging of butts, the hotdog fingers, I don't like as much quite bluntly, and I do wish the Daniels were like 10% less juvenile in their writing. Personal preference of course, but that's what this is all about. The other aspect I will mention again is I don't think it balances momentum perfectly, as again I think it makes the point that loves wins out one way, and then it does it again... And the problem is the first time is more potent. Again though I think it needs both but it needed in a way that wrapped the two as one, rather than feeling separate.
Okay odd many out. I do like Triangle of Sadness though so this isn't a bashing. The screenplay is divided into three parts. The first is a relationship story told with a purposeful shallowness where gender politics are worn on the sleeve. A whole relationship that I think we get just as quickly in the midsection, and in turn I do think you could just simply cut it out. The second part is about bits. There's a bit of structure in the actions building toward the vomit/diarrhea fest and finally the shipwreck. Mostly it is about different bits. The influencer's jealousy-based relationship. The drunk Captain. The commie v. the capitalist. The genteel arms dealers. The exasperated if obliging crew. I enjoy some of these if a bit on the nose at times. The climax in it though is a joke that goes on for too long and is told too many times, however. Then there is the island where roles a reversed and it has fun with this, while also not making it simple as the servant immediately begins to become the exploiter and has fun with the previous relationships in a new light. Of course, that doesn't build toward anything other than a not ambiguous, ambiguous ending. Each part does what it does, and I think most of it is enjoyable, not truly insightful, however, I'll take it over other social commentaries not named The Menu, now that's a multi-course delight.
I'm going to hold off on director just for a little bit, mainly because I'm tired and want to give proper thoughts when I do. So for the record:
Supporting Actress:
1. Kerry Condon - The Banshees of Inisherin
2. Hong Chau - The Whale
3. Jamie Lee Curtis - EEAO
4. Angela Bassett - Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
5. Stephanie Hsu - EEAO
Shame De Leon missed (despite Triangle getting the picture nod) as I would've easily taken her over any of the bottom three.
Actress:
1. Cate Blanchett - Tar
2. Michelle Yeoh - EEAO
3. Ana De Armas - Blonde
4. Andrea Riseborough - To Leslie
5. Michelle Williams - The Fabelmans
Well Riseborough has potentially changed the game. Anyway, Deadwyler is sorely missed.
Picture:
1. The Banshees of Inisherin
2. The Fabelmans
3. All Quiet on the Western Front
4. Everything Everywhere All At Once
5. Tar
6. Top Gun: Maverick
7. Triangle of Sadness
8. Elvis
9. Women Talking
10. Avatar: The Way of Water
7 out of 10 being good films, with 6 being in my top ten, I can't complain, this is a strong lineup. It's hard not to side-eye Women Talking's nomination though, with its one other nomination, but hey I'll take it over The Whale, and I'll just be happy that Ben Whishaw wasn't nominated FOR HIS CAREER WORST PERFORMANCE, finally I can say it!
Louis: Why do you think Dano missed out?
Oliver:
He got vetted out, similar to Dench over Balfe last year, and The Fabelmans didn't quite have enough gas to get two nominations (although I think he very well might've been #6.
Late to the party for this one, guys...
I'm far less versed with this year's field as most of you, but while I was genuinely surprised by some nods, a lot of the nominated performances were in the conversation. Nonetheless, it's quite refreshing to see so many first timers in the acting nods. Also, there's a strong chance I'll be watching EEAAO pretty soon, so I'm excited to finally check it out.
Oh yeah...supporting actor predictions.
1) Quan
2) Gleeson
3) Henry
4) Keoghan
5) Hirsch
Seems like a reasonable guess, I think. I mostly placed Gleeson second because I personally like his "In Bruges" work more - though Banshees is a great turn from him still. Likewise, I'll be interested to see "Causeway" for Henry, since he's been very reliable in recent years, and his nomination wasn't a surefire thing.
1. Quan
2. Gleeson
3. Keoghan
4. Henry
5. Hirsch (42-year gap between the two nominations!)
Can anyone point me to the page where Louis posted his ratings and thoughts on To Leslie? I must have missed them.
Michael: They're under the review for Adrian Titieni in Graduation (2016 Alternate Lead Actor).
A lot of people on social media seem to be hating on de Armas but I'm not going to fault her nomination. She carried Blonde. Davis' performance isn't far off but it's not a performance that absolutely needed to be nominated. Riseborough's nomination I'm fine with because it's a game changer and she gave a pretty strong performance. Williams is the real problem. Deadwyler undoubtedly should've been there instead of her.
In which case Louis, what are your thoughts and rating on Ben Whishaw in Women Talking?
Guys
What will be Louis' ranking of director nominees?
1. Steven Spielberg
2. Todd Field
3. The Daniels
4. Martin McDonagh
5. Ruben Östlund
Anonymous:
Whishaw - 2(What a painfully mannered from him here, and unlike his other lesser performances, it isn't the script that's the problem it's him. It starts with his strange accent and delivery, where he is so labored about it I thought he was playing the part with a mental deficiency of some kind. That's not the case though it is just his strange choices. Every aspect though feels the worst tendencies as every aspect he accentuates so aggressively. His reactions are really basically twee with how out there he is in so many moments, particularly overplaying the sense of romantic attraction to Mara's character. An aspect that I thought was wholly lacking in chemistry even in one sided chemistry. I hated his "boys" monologue because it was the worst of them in terms of just making the whole thing seem as artificial as possible and not at all poetic even for a moment. Then his reactions throughout are so big and overdone, I honestly couldn't believe how little of his performance was working for me, because I usually find him so on point. This character needed something a lot more withdrawn, understated and well real, then Whishaw's theatrical and overly stagy work.)
John Smith aka Varun:
1. Gleeson
2. Quan
3. Keoghan
4. Hirsch
5. Henry
Regarding the Dano snub, it seems to me there just wasn't a lot of passion for his performance, considering he also got snubbed by the Globes. Hirsch and Williams' showier performances simply overshadowed him. Looking back he honestly should've had a more high-profile campaign that emphasized how due he is for a nomination.
Just like last year, only 5/10 BP nominees received any acting nominations.
Post a Comment