Day 3 All or Nothing: Winter’s Bone
Here we are, last day, last two movies. Let’s kick it off with our little indie surprise, Winter’s Bone. I knew nothing going into this movie, besides that it had a scrappy sort of rise to the nomination. Unlike Wayne and Garth, the title itself was not what drew me to film, but I love underdogs, so I was really interested to see it.
Winter’s Bone takes place in small, tight-knit community in the Ozarks. Our seventeen-year-old heroine, Ree Dolly (Jennifer Lawrence-nominated), seems to have a lot on her plate. She takes care of her little brother and sister, her nearly catatonic mother and has to put up with the occasional appearance of her meth-cooking father. But things get a whole lot worse when her father goes missing. He put her house and property up for collateral for bail and if he doesn’t show up in court she could lose her home. So the tough-minded Ree decides she’ll find her father, dead or alive. The problem is everyone she goes to, relatives and neighbors, just threaten her and tell her mind her own business. Her own uncle, played by the amazing John Hawkes (nominated), will only tell her that her father’s probably dead and she will be too if she doesn’t stay out of it. But Ree doesn’t have a lot of choices–she can stay out of it, get kicked out of her home and live on the street or she can keep poking around and possibly get killed.
Over the course of the film you get a fascinating picture of essentially a crime family in the rural backwaters of the Ozarks. The film was very bleak, but it was more than just winter landscapes and hard times, it gave a real character to the landscape itself which seemed as hard and tough as the people living in it. Jennifer Lawrence was great as kid who just won’t give up on her family no matter what. It’s hard to believe she got her start on The Bill Engvall Show. John Hawkes was nearly unrecognizable in role of her uncle Teardrop. I had to look it up on imdb before I would believe it. I mean just look at him as Sol Star in Deadwood and then as Teardrop. He’s like a different person.
Well, I mean, maybe not a different person . . . but still–he was very different. I’d like to see him win Best Supporting, though I’m not sure he’s a favorite. The film is also nominated for Adapted Screenplay, but I don’t expect it to take it. In some ways it’s the sort of film for which the nomination is an honor, but just because it’s a little film, doesn’t mean it can’t compete. I found it to be really compelling, if a little sad. It’s probably the saddest of the nominees and one of the shortest at 100 minutes. There a lot of short films this year, though. The majority of nominees don’t break the two hour mark, which is unusual, so maybe there’s a move towards brevity.
I took away two things in particular from the movie. First off it’s a fascinating and complicated look at life in the Ozarks, which I don’t know a lot about. It certainly captured a place, in my opinion, that felt almost like another country. Secondly, Ree Dolly’s perseverance was amazing. She’s already given up on her own future and dropped out of high school to take care of her family, and then on top of that she’s willing to risk her life to keep the house, but it doesn’t come off as a tragedy. Ree is our tough, confident, brave hero, whose ready to do whatever it takes for the people she loves. She’s not a victim and she’s not ashamed about who she is or where she comes from. I’d like to watch it a second time just for that reason. It may not win Best Picture, but it certainly a beautifully done film and deserves to be called one of the top ten of the year.
In the Line of Fire: The Social Network
Hopefully my last post didn’t put a bad taste in anybody’s mouth, but I think a lot of movie viewing has to do with expectations. I expected a lot from Toy Story 3 and I felt it didn’t live up to those expectations, on the other side of the coin was The Social Network, a film I had very low expectations of. My husband tried to get me to see this a number of times when it first came out, but I was really wary. First of all, I’m not against facebook or anything, but the movie came off like one big commercial for it in the previews. Secondly, it felt like a college movie that wanted to be taken seriously. I don’t know, it didn’t look good to me. So you can imagine how excited my husband was to rub it in my face when it got nominated. I’d have to see it now; so we saw it.
The storyline was what took me by surprise first. I had had the impression that the movie was like a how-it-all-started flick, like a biopic of facebook. Like Ray or Walk the Line, it would depict facebook as not perfect, but none-the-less genius. The story went in a different direction however, a lot more emphasis on the not perfect. Really, though the creation of facebook and the subsequent lawsuits are at the center of the tale, it’s main theme is as old Beowulf: pride and the fall of man.
Jesse Eisenberg (nominated) plays Mark Zuckerberg as a genius who both can’t seem to get over how smart he is and is completely insecure about how others see him. Eisenberg’s performance is what really did it for me in the film, because, frankly, I knew that guy in college–I knew a number of guys like that in college. In the opening scene his girlfriend breaks up with him and tells him that girls will not like him, not because he is a nerd, but because he is an asshole. Man, I wish had used that line on somebody.
Anyways, it’s a difficult line to walk and Eisenberg really impressed me, though I’d always thought of him as Michael Cera wannabe. (BTW–I totally love this and this–it’s like my favorite meme of the year). So immediately the film was really relatable for me and as it went on, I found myself kind of fascinated by the fact that not just this type of annoying guy was in my college, but this whole movie was set exactly when I was in college. I mean I remember when facebook hit campus and how we all liked the exclusivity of it, which Zuckerberg totally talks about. It wasn’t that long ago or anything, but it’s pretty incredible watching the “history” of period in your own life. When Napster creator Shawn Fanning (Justin Timberlake) comes into play I was kind of blown away. I can’t believe I didn’t know his part in the start up of facebook, but also it was like somebody said, “Let’s just name off popular internet creations of Julie’s college years and the mash them together into a movie.” I don’t know, purely on that factor alone I found the film to be fascinating.
The film is also nominated for Adapted Screenplay and, like I said, I think it did a pretty amazing job telling a story I thought I knew. The mixture of Zuckerberg slowly realizing how truly far he had fallen in the present-ish timeline, while simulataneously watching him make those mistakes in the flashback timeline was really well done and explains nominations in Directing and Film Editing. It’s nominated for Cinematography and I guess that works into all of that too, but I didn’t feel like I did with some films, that every shot was gorgeous. Then again, it’s not really that kind of a movie.
All that being said, I don’t know if someone from outside my generation would have enjoyed it nearly as much. I have a feeling if you don’t appreciate how huge facebook is now, or how much it has changed from those early days, then a lot of the power of the Zuckerberg’s actions may be lost on you. It’s also a shame that there had to be so many bimbos in the film–even if that was a realistic part of his rise to fame.
I think it’s a contender for Best Picture, but it’s probably a third or fourth horse in the race. A film should resonate with most adult age groups to win and I’m not sure that it does that, having spoken with some older people who’ve seen it. Then again, maybe it comes down to expectations. If I had gone into it expecting a masterpiece, I’m not sure I would have liked it as much as I did–so perhaps the hype is killing it too. It was an interesting movie, though and certainly worth a view.
Into the Fray: Toy Story 3
Onward in our quest, we take a look at the only animated feature nominated for Best Picture, Toy Story 3. Toy Story 3 is one of only three animated films to be nominated with Beauty and the Beast in 1991 and Up last year. In some ways I am happy to see two animated films get nominated in a row, because I was always afraid the Best Animated Feature category would kill the chances of future animated films to be taken seriously. On the other hand, however, I hope that this isn’t going to become a standard now that there are ten nominees for Best Picture, that one of the Best Picture nominees will be reserved for an animated film. I’d hate to think that some other deserving film might get bumped out by such a tradition. This sounds like an affirmative action thing doesn’t it? But live action films didn’t enslave animated films for hundreds of years so . . .
Anyways, moving on to the actual movie. I had high expectations going in. Mostly I so loved Up from last year and a number of things I had heard about Toy Story 3 reminded me of Up. First off, there was the nomination, obviously a good sign, and then there were the many facebook status updates from friends of mine who cried while watching it. Plus I heard good stuff about both on NPR. In spite of all of these signs, however, I found Toy Story 3 to be lacking.
Maybe I would feel differently if I hadn’t been watching with the Oscars in mind, but this film, in my opinion, was not all that moving or even entertaining. I’ll admit the end was touching, but it was nothing like the beautiful 3 minute sucker punch at the beginning of Up. I literally cry when I think about certain scenes from Up. I don’t even have to see it, I just have to think about it. Toy Story 3 went for the meaning laden montage–children grow up and move on. I mean, I got choked up, but it was so cookie cutter. It’s like when a commercial makes you cry–you don’t go look up who directed it and check out their other commercials.
Beyond my disappointment in the touching-ness of the movie, the narrative was all over the place. The story seemed like it couldn’t make it’s mind up about what the story was about. Are we following the story of Andy’s toys who feel obsolete or are we following the fight to overthrow the dictator of Sunnyside Daycare? And there are some threads that connect the various storylines together, but it all felt a little forced to me.
Like I said before, I might feel differently if I was just popping the movie in to watch with my nephew, but that’s the point. It’s nominated for Best Picture of the year and merely being in the list implies it’s one of the top ten movies of 2010. I just can’t get on board with that, even if it was funny and moving at times. It wasn’t satisfying as a traditional, straight-foward children’s story, nor was it particularly inventive or deep. Which is why I’m afraid it is only nominated because it is one of the best animated films of the year, which is ridiculous, because that’s why they have a category for animated films. An animated film, just like a foreign language film, can be nominated in both categories if it’s deserving, but I don’t think it should be a given.
I don’t think it will win for Adapted Screenplay or Sound Editing, but I guess it could take Best Song and it certainly has a chance for Animated Picture. Considering it is the only animated picture to be nominated for Best Picture, you would think it would have to win, which happened with Up last year. Another reason not to have this animated slot in the Best Picture nominees (not that there is, officially), is if this becomes a pattern the other pictures nominated for Best Animated will start to feel like they shouldn’t even show up. Anyways, it’s a shame, because I love animated films, but Toy Story 3 was a disappointment.
Day 2 in the Trenches: Black Swan
Let’s keep it going with Black Swan! I had heard a lot of things about this film before I saw it. One person told me it was about revenge sex and another said it was some kind of a fake snuff film. So expectations were frightening. And I’ll admit, it was a weird movie; it was freaky to say the least. I even had nightmares about it, but to be fair, I’ve been sick all week and I had nightmares about The King’s Speech too (like he’s about to give the speech, and I have to find him, but I can’t and time’s running out–horrible). Anyways, all that being said this was a really cool movie.
Basically, without giving too much away, Natalie Portman’s character Nina has just snatched up the role of the Swan Queen in Swan Lake and is slowly losing her mind. The film is shot in a way that most of the time follows Nina’s schizophrenic worldview, but occasionally breaks away to actual reality. Of course in the beginning it’s not clear at all what is real and what is in Nina’s mind. I saw it the first time with my mom and we spent a lot of time trying to hash out what was real and what wasn’t afterwords. The film does a nice job of leading you on and then revealing the horrible truth to the viewer in the same moment it is revealed to Nina. I’ve seen Black Swan called a psychological thriller, which I would normally think about like some paranoid person who has a killer following them or something, but this is the real deal, like your psyche is thrilled and you have to engage psychologically with the film to appreciate it.
Natalie Portman is superb and will probably win for her performance. First off she did all the dancing herself, and trained for six months, eight hours a day to get to a level to pull that off and she lost 20 pounds–where she found 20 pounds to lose is beyond me, but she did it, ladies and gentlemen, she did it. And as a person who took ballet for 10 years as a kid, I could never have danced like she did–I mean she must have some natural talent too or else she never could have pulled it off. Secondly, she basically plays two roles, Nina and Nina’s evil alter ego, the Black Swan. After watching it a second time, I could really see how her mannerisms, voice and facial expressions completely change in those two roles and also, that the evil alter ego comes out in a number scenes that one doesn’t catch the first time around–so she has to create two characters, but play them subtly enough, that sometimes one is not sure who is talking, Nina or the Black Swan. I have heard people say Portman shouldn’t win, because she just whined the whole movie, but these people are mistaken, because Nina whined, her alter ego confidently kicked ass, and in between there was a seriously amazing performance of a human struggle to maintain sanity.
Natalie Portman didn’t do it all on her own, however, and nominations in Directing, Film Editing and Cinematography are well deserved and frankly I’m surprised it didn’t garner a Visual Effects nomination. Putting together the slow collapse of reality and filming it in such a way that the viewer is both within and without the collapse is an achievement. I wouldn’t be surprised if Black Swan picked up one of these awards. I think it could even win Best Picture, though it would be an upset. I’m afraid the freaky factor will hurt it with some more conservative academy members. It’s kind of like the opposite of Inception in that it really goes deeper, but it may go too deep to be widely appreciated.
If it wins or loses, I recommend seeing it, at least twice. The second time around I picked up on so much more and it is just amazing how they use visual and auditory clues throughout to depict reality and hallucination. What I caught in transitional scenes alone could make a whole blog post. Plus there is a lot of beautiful dancing and Tchaikovsky was really snubbed on the Best Score nomination 
. I’ll end with my favorite scene from the film (well second favorite–my favorite is when the scary, horned guy casually says hi to Nina), when the Black Swan takes flight.
That Ain’t No Mirage, It’s a Barrage! Inception
You didn’t believe me two posts ago, but this is happening. Let’s keep on, keeping on with Inception. I know that I’m not supposed to like this film, because it was popular and I’ll admit it was a struggle finding a poster that didn’t look douchey and, as you can see above, I didn’t entirely succeed. However, I liked this movie, in spite of the hype and the hipster appeal. Let me tell you why.
Remember earlier today when I was reviewing The King’s Speech? What was my one complaint? Formulaic–right? This film, in spite of a lot of build up and hype, was anything but. It had elements that were familiar, sure, but did you know in the first scene how the rest of the film would go? No, you didn’t. And don’t say that you did, because then you’re just that guy who claims to have figured out The Sixth Sense in the opening credits. Best Original Screenplay nod–deserved. And I know people are complaining, because it was too complicated, but it wasn’t–it just didn’t follow the formula which is a good thing. And it wasn’t a twist, at least in my opinion it wasn’t a twist movie, because it wasn’t about solving a mystery, but it kept you guessing the whole time. Yes, there may be some arguments about the ending, but as a really good author once told me, you have to leave the reader something to do at the end, something to think about. That’s what this movie does, it lets you write the ending.
For those of you who have never heard of Inception (where do you live?), it’s all about dreams and dreams inside of dreams inside of dreams and so on and so on. I loved the concept–as a person who has very vivid dreams, I really enjoyed the way they engaged with certain realities about dreams–like how time moves and how you never remember how a dream starts. These little details made it feel real for me.
It didn’t garner any acting or directing nods, and I guess that makes sense to me. The acting was good, nothing amazing, and what seriously made the movie work, beyond the mind-bending script, were the mind-bending effects that made it real. Which explains the following four nominations: Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Visual Effects and Cinematography. I wouldn’t be surprised if they picked up a few of these. I mean even if you didn’t like the movie, you got to admit the effects were pretty good. It’s kind of like the Bizarro-Avatar–great effects, but with an actual, like, story, if you know what I mean.
And then there’s the score (nominated)-which was pretty haunting and could get a heart racing and was sort of scientific–see below! Anyways, I know this review reads like a rebuttal, but I’m assuming most people have heard it all by now. I definitely recommend seeing this movie, probably twice for good measure, but I do not think it is the best picture of the year. Unlike some movies (True Grit, The King’s Speech), it was not a triumph in all elements of film making and, as thrilling as it is, I just don’t think a special effects movie should win Best Picture just because of the awe factor. There has to be something deeper, and though the script was intriguing and would deserve a win, the film itself did not reach that deeper level as a whole. I’ll end with this guys analysis of the score that’s kind of fun.
Barraging: 127 Hours
And the barrage went on . . . Let’s break this wide open with 127 Hours. This film is nominated for 6 Academy Awards, most importantly Best Actor, Best Picture, and Adapted Screenplay. It’s also nominated for Best Score (meh?), Best Song (I don’t remember there being a song . . . ) and Film Editing.
I watched this film while on a Valentine’s get away with my husband. We wanted to watch an Oscar movie, and this one was available through the hotel tv’s on-demand movie system. You might not pick such a film for a romantic evening, if we had planned it better, we might not have picked it either, but it ended up being very different than expected.
I had thought this movie would be the most harrowing, most depressing, hardest to watch film going in, but in reality it was actually very uplifting and hopeful. First off, the movie starts off long before our hero Aron Ralston (James Franco) gets trapped and you get a very fun, lively introduction to this kid who seems happy and adventurous and friendly. He runs into some girls while hiking and basically tricks them into cliff diving and it’s a really fun and silly sort of scene that gives you are real picture of who this guy is.
Then comes the moment you’ve been waiting for, well the first one: he falls, he’s trapped. Amazingly, even though I knew that he didn’t get out for 127 hours, I still was right there with him, hoping for best, as he tried any number of tactics to remove the boulder from his hand. After the initial entrapment (I don’t think that’s the right word, but I like it), and subsequent efforts to get out, Ralston starts to lose it and the film gets really interesting. Now a very different picture of our begins to form. One of a man that is so independent that he doesn’t think he needs anyone and very cooly tells no one where he’s going on his hike.
The combination of flash-backs, dreams, hallucinations and Ralston’s live taping of the ordeal on his camcorder are weaved together (hey, Film Editing–I get it) to paint a picture of a man who realizes (almost) too late what is really important to him. I challenge you to not call your parents after watching it. In fact I was reminded very much of Into the Wild, if that guy hadn’t starved to death, but, you know, like lived.
Then comes the (second) scene you’ve been waiting for, the arm cutting. This scene, when it comes, is actually a relief, because Ralston has chosen to live and not despair and it’s actually kind of triumphant. From that point on the film is like an uplifting montage of survival and endurance. Then you cry, but like with a smile on your face.
As for wins, I don’t think it will pick up much. Maybe Film Editing, now that I think about it and Adapted Screenplay, but I don’t expect it it to win Best Picture and I don’t think James Franco will win, even though he gives an amazing performance. Really, he’s sort of a little survival story of his own this past year. Starting off the year with a bewildering stint on General Hospital and ending it with being the first nominee to host the Oscars in a quarter century. I think he has a chance to take it, but it’d be hard to beat Colin Firth. Regardless, he’s certainly proven that he’ll do anything and I look forward to seeing him host. I kind of love the little teaser spots that are out there right now for the big night. I’ll end with this training one here.
Barrage! The King’s Speech
Ok, so here we are, three days, well two days away from the Oscars and this is review number three. Unfortunately I was very sick all week, or you would have seen a lovely sort of countdown review thinger that I was planning. So–instead–BARRAGE! Three days left, counting Sunday itself, and I plan on posting three times a day. This is exciting right? Like when you forget about a term paper until the weekend before it’s due? Excitement! So come along with me as we pull an all-nighter of blog movie reviewing.
The King’s Speech has garnered the most of any film in nominations, 12 in fact including Best Picture, Directing, Original Screenplay, Best Score and three of the four acting awards, plus a smattering of more technical and art nominees (Sound Mixing, Film Editing, Art Direction and Costume Design). Naturally I had high hopes going into the film. It came highly recommended from a number of people and I can’t help but be excited when a feel-good movie lands that many nominations. To be both feel-good and critically acclaimed that is an achievement.
I didn’t know that much about the story and had had no idea that King George VI (Colin Firth) had a stutter (or a stammer, as they call it in the film), nor did I realize at what a crucial moment he came to power, but all of the King sort of stuff took a backseat in the film and what you get is a very human story. A man struggles to overcome a debilitating impediment and take control of his life with the help of a very special teacher. At several points they sort of go on and on about how this would be a very different problem if King George VI or Bertie, as Geoffrey Rush’s character Lowell Longue calls him, were just a common man, but then the meat of the story is really very common after all.
Colin Firth was quite frankly amazing portraying this, and I’d be surprised if he didn’t win. First off, one is completely struck by how dead on his stutter is. I’ve known people who stutter and usually actors create a caricature of the stutter, but Colin Firth really hit the nail on the head. Beyond that, though, he is playing a very complicated character of a king who’s not sure he wants to be king and on top of that, there is a sort of constant removal of layers as the film goes on, showing more and more of his personal struggles.
Helena Bonham Carter was actually kind of great, though she usually annoys me. She played a very sweet and supportive wife, which is kind of an unusual role for her. Geoffrey Rush was great too, playing a native of his home Australia, but I rather doubt either of them will pick up the win and I’d be surprised if it won Best Original Screenplay, for the same reason: the film was a little formulaic. I mean it’s a great formula–unwilling student, unconventional teacher persevering even when everyone’s against them, and it was very well done, but it has been done quite a bit. There weren’t a lot of surprises.
That being said, I wouldn’t be surprised if it won Best Picture. It’s got a lot of momentum and it’s very well done. No one ever said the Best Picture has to be different. And the score, I totally loved the score. I think it is my favorite score by far and I can see why it got the art nominations and cinematography. There were a number of shots where I thought, “Well, you could frame that and put it up on a wall.” So, it’s also a really well rounded movie, like True Grit was. It sort of hits on every aspect of film making and does it well. I highly recommend seeing it, even though it is rather British. I’m ending with Eddie Izzard’s description of British films and it’s kind of right on for The King’s Speech, but in a lovable sort of way.
,
