So I had grand plans to write either my Criterion Top 10 list or a piece about Marion Cotillard today, both of which tied into the Criterion Collection release of “Two Days, One Night” on Tuesday. (Side note: Amazon.com, you need to get me this disc now, I don’t know why you can’t just put it in my darn mailbox.)
But then, something out of this world happened. The video essay I posted yesterday popped up on IndieWire, a site that I check multiple times a day. Needless to say, the excitement kept my mind sidetracked for a while.
Click the picture to be taken to the post itself.
It wasn’t just a link, either. I hate to toot my own horn, but they gave me a truly flattering write-up as well.
“It’s hard to think that a pair of filmmakers who have won two Palme d’Or prizes at the Cannes Film Festival could be underrated, but the extent ofJean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne’s talents still feel insufficiently realized. Their latest work, ‘Two Days, One Night‘ — which is now available through the Criterion Collection— showcases an area of their acumen seldom discussed when praising their work: shot composition.” Marshall Shaffer’s 7-and-a-half-minute video essay begins with that big thesis.
What follows is extremely well edited video that deftly delivers on its premise, showcasing Shaffer’s astute eye for dissecting the latest work by the Dardenne brothers, known for movies like “L’enfant,” “The Son,” and “The Kid with a Bike.”
Watch below for Shaffer’s perspicacious analysis, including what he deems to be “the masterpiece of camera work and character blocking” in the Dardennes’ film.
So you could say I have been floating on cloud nine today. Sorry if you were craving some juicy content or analysis today. Sometimes it’s nice to just take a step back and appreciate that all the hard work pays off in some way.
But the reward is not in the recognition. It’s in the work itself. I love producing these video essays, and this certainly gives me some motivation to keep churning them out. But the thrill I got from seeing my name on IndieWire does not measure up to the immense satisfaction of exporting the final cut of the video essay itself, knowing that I have truly wrestled with a film’s meaning and produced something enlightening for the benefit of the discourse around cinema.
12:53 A.M. To put the finishing touches on the evening, “Life of Pi” was the big winner with 4 Oscars including Best Director. “Argo” took home 3 trophies to boot including Best Picture, the one that really counts. “Les Misérables” had a nice haul of 3 as well, winning Anne Hathaway her first Oscar! “Django Unchained,” “Lincoln,” and “Skyfall” each won a pair of Academy Awards too.
Thanks for tuning in, everyone! You were a wonderful audience! And you helped make this a banner night for the site as well, breaking my all-time daily traffic record.
Check back tomorrow for my Monday morning wrap-up where I attempt to break down the implications of the night, the best-dressed women, and the precise moment I went and returned from heaven during the “Les Misérables” cast reunion. Take care, readers and Oscar watchers!
11:59 P.M. Aww, Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner. And what an incredible speech of redemption, justice, and vindication!
11:58 P.M. Giving the Academy the finger with the mention of Affleck as a director.
11:56 P.M. What a wild ride for Ben Affleck. Congratulations to all involved on this fantastic movie!
11:53 P.M. Because Bill Clinton on the Golden Globes wasn’t enough, Michelle Obama had to upstage everyone at the Oscars…
11:52 P.M. Does Jack Nicholson always present Best Picture?
11:51 P.M. Biggest shocker of the night! A nice, eloquent speech as always. History has been made … and will probably be made again when he takes his next role.
11:48 P.M. BEST ACTOR: DANIEL DAY-LEWIS, “LINCOLN“
10:10 P.M. Glad Seth MacFarlane can joke about his movie’s mediocrity.
10:07 P.M. Is this what heaven is like? Oh my god!
10:05 P.M. HYPERVENTILATION!
10:03 P.M. I CAN DIE HAPPY NOW! THIS IS SO FANTASTIC!
10:02 P.M. LES MIS LES MIS LES MIS LES MIS I AM DYING
9:59 P.M. Jennifer Hudson being amazing is good enough. Why has she disappeared?!
9:57 P.M. HOW CAN THEY DO “DREAMGIRLS” WITHOUT BEYONCE!?!
9:54 P.M. I’ll never look at “Chicago” the same way. Catherine Zeta-Jones sounds awful and looks like a totally different person than the woman that won the Oscar 10 years ago.
9:53 P.M. I’m sorry, but I just can’t take John Travolta seriously…
9:44 P.M. BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE: “SEARCHING FOR SUGAR MAN”
9:41 P.M. “The actor who really got inside Abraham Lincoln’s head was John Wilkes Booth.” Yeah, maybe too soon…
9:40 P.M. By breaking up the Best Picture nominees into 3 trios, I hope this doesn’t mean they think they can get away with not doing one giant montage…
9:37 P.M. The modern American superhero who isn’t American … Liam Neeson.
9:36 P.M. Darn, there goes my streak of getting all the short films right.
9:35 P.M. BEST SHORT FILM (DOCUMENTARY): “INOCENTE”
9:33 P.M. Love that feeling of getting a short film prediction right!
9:32 P.M.BEST SHORT FILM (LIVE ACTION): “CURFEW”
9:30 P.M. This is how I knew who Shirley Bassey was…
9:27 P.M. Pretty impressive finish for Shirley Bassey there.
9:21 P.M. So glad “Les Misérables” isn’t going home empty handed!
9:11 P.M. What a terrible way to play someone off – with “Jaws!” He was trying to say something meaningful about their company that was going bankrupt and they just totally cut him off!
8:59 P.M. So great of the Academy to send out all the short films!
8:58 P.M. BEST ANIMATED SHORT FILM: “PAPERMAN”
8:57 P.M. Never mind, misread the envelope.
8:56 P.M. Screenplay already?! Not again….
8:55 P.M. Loving all this “E.T.” music!
8:52 P.M. Well, I guess lightning does strike twice. The same performance wins another Best Supporting Actor Oscar.
8:50 P.M.BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: CHRISTOPH WALTZ, “DJANGO UNCHAINED“
8:45 P.M. Sally Field, what a great sport!
8:42 P.M. So THAT’S why Daniel Radcliffe and Joseph Gordon-Levitt showed up to their first Oscars (which is a fact that surprises me).
8:40 P.M. Channing Tatum and Charlize Theron seem like an odd couple to be doing this dance … but they have some kind of grace! This reminds me of a “Family Guy” episode with all these random tangents.
8:37 P.M. This “we saw your boobs” number is true but just rubs me wrong…
8:31 P.M. Really, Tommy Lee Jones? Way to break character! Jimmy Fallon, you are in good company…
Only the second movie since 1930 to win Best Picture without a Best Director nomination – that is the feat “Argo“ looks to pull off tonight. On nomination day, I wrote “All that talk of it being a surprise come-from-behind winner all just came to a screeching halt with that Best Director snub.” That has quickly been proven dead wrong as it wins top honors from the Critics Choice, Golden Globes, PGA, DGA, SAG, and BAFTA. If it only had that pesky Best Director nomination, we wouldn’t think twice.
What looked to be a tough race to predict has been blown wide open by “Argo.” But if anything will prove us wrong, it would be “Silver Linings Playbook.” Then “Lincoln.” Then “Life of Pi.”
8:05 P.M. Ladies are looking PHENOMENAL tonight. Scroll down for Chastain, and also check out Anne Hathaway, Amy Adams, and Jennifer Lawrence!
8:00 P.M. Best Director will be more interesting tonight than it has been in quite some time … will they do it before or after the leading acting races? Hopefully it’s just right before Best Picture.
A part of me wonders if David O. Russell won’t steal this, but his nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay could lead to some vote splitting. Steven Spielberg just doesn’t feel right, not with how “Lincoln” seems to have faded at the end of the season. Ang Lee’s work on “Life of Pi” just seems director-y, so something tells me I ought to pick him.
7:50 P.M. The “breath of fresh air” category of all former winners – Best Supporting Actor. Who will win their second – or third – Oscar? Saved this category towards the end because I was still thinking about it…
He hasn’t won anything yet. But it’s a gut feeling I’ve had since the nominations. SAG winner Tommy Lee Jones or Globe/BAFTA winner Christoph Waltz seem to be more safe or likely choices. But if Riva upsets Lawrence, they run the risk of nominating “Silver Linings Playbook” for all acting awards and then giving it zero wins. I don’t think that happens, so DeNiro wins on sympathy and insurance votes.
7:40 P.M. The Best Actress race is crazy tight this year, and I will be on the edge of my seat as the envelope is opened.
Between the Golden Globe, the SAG, and “The Hunger Games,” this is Lawrence’s year. There seems to be a late surge for Riva with her BAFTA win, but I think Jennifer Lawrence should take this one.
7:32 P.M. How incredible does she look?!
7:30 P.M. I mean, do I even need to predict the next two categories?
Will win: Anne Hathaway, “Les Misérables“ Could win: Sally Field, “Lincoln“ Should win: Anne Hathaway, “Les Misérables“ Should be nominated: Shirley MacLaine, “Bernie”
Will win: Daniel Day-Lewis, “Lincoln“ Could win: Hugh Jackman, “Les Misérables“ Should win: Joaquin Phoenix, “The Master” Should be nominated: Jack Black, “Bernie”
Again, duh.
7:20 P.M. Best Adapted Screenplay is one of the night’s most unpredictable races involving five major Best Picture contenders. Who will win?
Again, since they can’t give Best Director to Ben Affleck, they’ll give “Argo” some consolation prizes so it doesn’t ONLY win Best Picture. Perhaps this is where “Silver Linings Playbook” breaks through, but I think the momentum is unstoppable for “Argo.”
7:00 P.M. Time to move into the heavy hitters … can’t believe some of these people will be holding a golden statue soon!
“Zero Dark Thirty” may be too controversial, but it did win the WGA. However, it was not competing against Quentin Tarantino’s “Django Unchained” nor Michael Haneke’s “Amour.” I’m seeing a foreign film triumph like in 2002 when “Talk to Her” unexpectedly took the trophy. Just a gut feeling I have.
6:55 P.M. Jennifer Lawrence just referenced “Father of the Bride” – MARRY ME!
6:53 P.M. The sound categories always prove to be a bit of a conundrum – do you predict a split? They haven’t done so since 2008!
Did you know they sang live on “Les Misérables?” No movie has shone more of a light on sound mixing than this one, so it should handily win. And musicals always seem to score here.
A “Life of Pi” technical sweep should get back on track and take the other sound category. 6:46 P.M. Cute Quvenzhané Wallis and her adorable puppy purse!
6:45 P.M. Best Film Editing, according to Dave Karger, is an even more necessary nomination than Best Director. So having said that…
I think it would be great if Roger Deakins, a perennial Oscar bridesmaid, won for his superb lensing of “Skyfall.” But his name isn’t on the ballot, just the movie’s name. And there seems to be a Bond bias in the Academy. So I say the technical domination of “Life of Pi” continues here.
6:20 P.M. That one time I ran into an Oscar nominee. It’s super casual.
(That’s Emmanuelle Riva of “Amour,” in case you couldn’t tell.)
6:15 P.M. Almost forgot the other two short film categories … whoops!
Best Documentary Short
“Inocente”
“Kings Point”
“Mondays at Racine”
“Open Heart”
“Redemption”
Will win: “Mondays at Racine” Could win: “Open Heart”
I’m thinking heartstrings-tugger “Mondays at Racine,” about two female cancer patients who become unlikely friends, will triumph over “Open Heart.” The latter seems to similar to “Saving Face,” last year’s winner in the category about reconfiguring women’s faces in Pakistan that have been disfigured by acid.
Best Live Action Short
“Asad”
“Buzkashi Boys”
“Curfew”
“Death of a Shadow”
“Henry”
Will win: “Curfew” Could win: “Death of a Shadow”
I did my research and “Curfew” sounded right, but now I don’t remember what it was about. I do remember that Matthias Schoenaerts of “Rust and Bone” was in “Death of a Shadow,” though.
6:05 P.M. Eddie Redmayne arrives! Why isn’t he nominated for Best Supporting Actor?!
6:00 P.M. What was once “Best Makeup” is now “Best Makeup and Hairstyling.” So that adds a whole new dimension to the category (slightly kidding, slightly serious).
Consider how much that makeup and hairstyling contributed to Anne Hathaway’s soon-to-be-Oscar winning performance. I think that’s enough to trump the showier styles of “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.”
5:45 P.M. Time for my predictions for the costume drama awards. The movies that win here are usually made solely to win these Oscars.
Some say the digital scenery of “Life of Pi” will triumph over the traditionally Oscar-y sets of “Anna Karenina,” like how “Avatar” won in 2009. And maybe it will, indicating a HUGE technical sweep for the movie. But I think given that the scenery and setting of “Anna Karenina” is a major plot device, it will walk away with the award.
4:45 P.M. 84, soon to be 85 years of Oscar, all in one picture. Awesome.
4:00 P.M. I saw all the Best Picture nominees so you don’t. Here are some of my favorite quotes from my reviews of each nominated film.
At times, it can be fairly difficult to watch … but how hunky-dory do you want movies about death to be? How can you even begin to comprehend the ennui of watching someone slowly lose their grip on life when you are treated to watch from a coolly removed distance?
However, I don’t attribute the success of “Argo” merely to coincidence and fate. The movie works because it was meticulously and intentionally crafted by director Ben Affleck, who continues to make leaps and bounds with each movie he makes.
Have no doubt about it, “Beasts” is a movie that could only by an uncorrupted visionary like Zeitlin. His ambition soars to the sky, and even in the rare occasions where it falls short, we are left in awe of the sheer gutsiness of the decision.
[R]ather than use the forward momentum to lead to further exploration of his craft, Tarantino chose to take a victory lap fueled by the high of inhaling too much of the exhaust fumes of his own success. ”Django Unchained” just feels like Tarantino on autopilot, lacking the vibrancy or surprising eccentricity of his prior films.
Even when the novelty of the close-ups wears off, we are still left to ponder just how radical and revolutionary Hooper’s “Les Misérables” is. The musical genre has favored sweeping grandiosity for years in an attempt to replicate the stage experience for cinematic audiences. Hooper, on the other hand, respects the live theatre’s conventions but throws out those that do not translate well to screen.
The core ideas of “Life of Pi” get diluted, passed over in favor of a little more cinematic grandeur. Don’t get me wrong, Lee’s grand canvas for the movie is exciting and stunning. But I can get that in any movie; few dare to delve into the psyche like he meagerly attempted to do.
Once the process wraps up, it is revealed that Kushner and Spielberg are really more interested in hagiography than biography with “Lincoln.” While it delves deeper than just mere Honest Abe iconography, their film is not one that attempts to tell his story.
Russell’s editing facilitates emotional rapport, [and] the two feel like parts of ourselves that we usually try to pretend don’t exist. But on screen and embodied by Cooper and Lawrence, we embrace them and allow them to illuminate the crazy that lives within us all.
Through the journalistic proceedings of “Zero Dark Thirty,” Boal cleverly utilizes Maya as an important through-line to keep us drawn in. And Chastain in turns creates a character so scarily resolute that we can’t help but root and cheer for her.
3:45 P.M. Remember when “Zero Dark Thirty” was the frontrunner for Best Picture? Read my piece for “LAMB Devours the Oscars” to see what happened to what was once a prized darling.
3:30 P.M. Animation is a little tougher than normal this year…
Best Animated Feature
“Brave”
“Frankenweenie”
“ParaNorman”
“The Pirates: Band of Misfits”
“Wreck-It Ralph”
A few years ago, it would be unimaginable that Pixar could lose this category. They may not cede their turf tonight, to be fair. “Brave” won the Golden Globe and BAFTA, but “Wreck-It Ralph” had better reviews and took the PGA and Annie Award. I admit to picking the movie I think is clearly better and hoping the Academy feels the same way. But they could remind us that this category belongs to the studio of Woody and Buzz.
Best Short Film – Animated
“Adam and Dog”
“Fresh Guacamole”
“Head Over Heels”
“Maggie Simpson in The Longest Daycare”
“Paperman”
Will win: “Paperman” Could win: “Adam and Dog” Should win: “Maggie Simpson in The Longest Daycare”
Disney’s short film “Paperman” should clean up here. It seems like the most substantial nominee, but I could be totally wrong. I saw it before “Wreck-It Ralph” and was very impressed with the way it rehashed silent film charm.
Best Picture nominees have dominated this category since 2008, so I give the advantage to “Life of Pi.” On the other hand, “The Lord of the Rings” did win this category three times in a row, so a sneak attack is possible.
2:45 P.M. Some more predictions for you … again, I consider these to be pretty much no-brainers.
Best Documentary Feature
“5 Broken Cameras”
“The Gatekeepers”
“How to Survive a Plague”
“The Invisible War”
“Searching for Sugar Man”
Have only seen two of the nominated films, so I can’t speak much from my own aesthetic tastes. But “Searching for Sugar Man” has been totally dominant on the precursors circuit, and I don’t expect its dominance to let up now.
Best Foreign Language Film
“Amour”
“Kon-Tiki”
“No”
“A Royal Affair”
“War Witch”
Will win: “Amour” Could win: “Kon-Tiki” Should win: “No” Should be nominated: “Rust and Bone”
Are any movies other than “Amour” in this category nominated for Best Picture? Nope, didn’t think so. Some have speculated crowd-pleasing “Kon-Tiki” could pull a “The Lives of Others”-style upset on Michael Haneke’s downer, but I think that’s doubtful at best.
And I base my should win for “No” on the trailer, which is seriously AMAZING! Shameless plug:
2:30 P.M. Honest posters for the Best Picture nominees. So incredibly accurate.
2:25 P.M. Subtext?
2:15 P.M. Might as well start some predictions. What better place to start than with the music categories? This year’s ceremony promises to be quite a celebration of music between performances by Adele, Norah Jones, Barbra Streisand, and Shirley Bassey. There’s also the celebration of “Chicago,” “Dreamgirls,” and “Les Misérables.” And the show will close with a number by host Seth MacFarlane and Kristin Chenoweth. Oy.
Really don’t have any sense of certainty, but “Life of Pi” certainly seems to be headed towards a large below-the-line haul. And it won the Golden Globe. Perhaps if the momentum for “Argo” extends beyond Best Picture, it will lift up Best Score. It would be a much-deserved win for workhorse Alexandre Desplat. Then again, we also should not count out John Williams EVER. But I don’t think that will happen with the lack of “Lincoln” love in the late phase of the season.
Best Song
Before My Time from “Chasing Ice,” music and lyrics by J. Ralph
Suddenly from “Les Misérables,” music by Claude-Michel Schönberg, lyrics by Herbert Kretzmer and Alain Boublil
Pi’s Lullaby from “Life of Pi,” music by Mychael Danna, lyrics by Bombay Jayashri
Skyfall from “Skyfall,” music and lyrics by Adele Adkins and Paul Epworth
Everybody Needs a Best Friend from “Ted,” music by Walter Murphy, lyrics by Seth MacFarlane
Will win: Skyfall from “Skyfall” Could win: Suddenly from “Les Misérables” Should win: Skyfall from “Skyfall” Should be nominated: Who Were We from “Holy Motors”
Easiest race of the night to call. It’s “Skyfall” all the way.
2:00 P.M. Kids Oscars. Let’s go!
1:50 P.M.Feel free to comment below and I will respond in the post itself!
1:45 P.M. For reference’s sake, many people will refer to tonight’s proceedings as “The 2013 Academy Awards.” In fact, probably most people will. But I, for whatever reason, choose to refer to the ceremony by the calendar year in which the nominated films were released.
1:40 P.M. Already a quick note to the E! hostesses … stick to fashion, please. Leave punditry to Dave Karger. “Argo” will not win “Best Oscar,” it will win “Best Picture.”
1:30 P.M. Who the heck is already watching Oscars red carpet coverage?! ME, of course! I can’t get enough of this stuff, who cares if no one famous shows up for 5 hours? I’m now on my fourth live Oscars blog, and it has quickly become one of my favorite parts of the night. I love sharing my thoughts with everyone – and also being able to go back and see my thoughts from past ceremonies.
(If curious, check out the live blogs from 2011, 2010, and 2009.)
So who will win Best Picture, Best Director, and other coveted trophies? In a few hours, we will know. But in the meantime, we have this list of nine…
I’m fully prepared to take a lot of heat for what I’m about to say. In fact, as I ponder making this statement in my head, I myself wonder if I’m a humongous hypocrite. What I’m about to suggest could spark some serious outrage, perhaps on the level of suggesting “Citizen Kane” isn’t all that great (which I have gone on the record as saying is false).
I’d like to see “Vertigo,” with the same script, comparable actors, and the same Hitchcock penchant for filmmaking, be remade in the present day.
There, I said it. It’s out there, I can’t take it back. But while watching “Vertigo,” I was struck by the powerful and affecting portrait of a mentally disturbed policeman played by James Stewart. I found Kim Novak’s work as the woman who claims to be possessed by the spirit of a dead woman to be frightening. I felt Hitchcock’s masterful storytelling with the camera to be totally present. I was totally engaged by the smart writing, which harkens to a mystery of almost mythical proportions.
Yet the visuals just felt so … outdated. Yes, this is obvious given that the movie is over half a century old. Obviously, it was about as good as it got back then. But this is 2011, and when the camera is stuck in the past while the story remains timeless, it can’t help but be distracting. In fact, it goes beyond that – it detracts. The movie’s style now alienates us from the movie, pulling us out to remind us, “Oh, this is a movie, and this is how they could visually represent the fear of heights back then.”
So to maintain that pervasive sense of acrophobia, why not remake “Vertigo” with modern technology that would make this classic story work so much better for the audiences of today? Isn’t that why we should be remaking movies? Not just to be lazy or to sloppily “update” it to market to younger crowds, a remake of “Vertigo” that preserved the timeless integrity of the acting and storytelling would be perfect. Because, perhaps with the exception of historic visual achievements, the look of a movie is something that should hold power no matter if it’s being shown in 1958 or 2011. I’m convinced that it would have rocked me to my core had my eyes been borrowed from that era.
Now I’m getting into Hitchcock’s most revered films, and I’m getting more and more excited to watch the movies. While I had to trudge through some of his lesser known movies to get acquainted with his style so I didn’t fly blindly into the classics, now I’m starting to see why he has become such an iconic director. “Rear Window” is definitely one that shows his unique knack for suspense. It’s a slow (and sometimes a little tedious) build towards a frightening conclusion, told with an Old Hollywood sensibility yet still a thrill.
“We’ve become a race of Peeping Toms,” says Thelma Ritter’s nurse, Stella, to James Stewart’s wheelchair-bound Jeff, a photojournalist whose daring in the field has left him immobile in his apartment. Left largely to his own devices while his socialite girlfriend, appropriately played by future princess Grace Kelly, he turns to voyeurism while looking out the titular aperture. From afar, he watches his neighbors, imagining what their actions say about their lives and making up stories based on what he sees. Hitchcock’s clever camerawork mimics Jeff’s eyeballs, jumping from place to place based on what’s interesting.
But one day, his intuitions tell him that by connecting some mental dots, his neighbor Thorwald has committed murder. With nothing else to do but observe, he sneakily begins building a case against him despite the insistence of his friends and caretakers. Hitchcock keeps the suspense held back until the very end, not giving us anything but Jeff’s hunches to be suspicious of Thorwald.
Perhaps the biggest thing I took from “Rear Window,” though, was how very seldom Hollywood makes movies like Hitchcock’s anymore. His movies were all about using the artistic capabilities of cinema to manufacture suspense, thrills, and chills; now, filmmakers just through blood and gore at the screen, play some booming tune in the background, and call it a thriller. While I loved “Disturbia,” the self-proclaimed modern take on this Hitchcock classic, it certainly lacks Hitchcock’s artistic flair. I’m certainly more primed to like the Shia LaBeouf vehicle over the James Stewart starrer because of generational differences, but I recognize why one is a classic and the other is just a wannabe trying to cash in on the wizardry of one of cinema’s greatest icons.
The perfect murder is always the perfect scenario for a Hitchcock movie. “Dial M for Murder” is then by definition a quintessential Hitchcock, and watching it would give anyone a taste of the director’s style and methods. In fact, all it’s missing is some Jimmy Stewart.
The perfect murder here is planned by former tennis player Tony Wendice (Ray Milland), who hires the perfect stranger – or old friend – to execute it for him. Through blackmail and clever thinking, Tony coerces a Cambridge acquaintance, C.A. Swann (Anthony Dawson), to murder his cheating wife Margot (Princess Grace Kelly). He has the perfect alibi to save him from any suspicion; while Swann commits the murder, he will be at the gentleman’s club. Yet things go haywire thanks to a pair of scissors, and Tony has to cover his tracks to avoid being discovered.
Hitchcock makes this single-room thriller compelling and suspensful, which shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has seen “Rope.” The only real complaint I could lodge against this one is that at times it feels a little too theatrical (the movie is based on a play) and less cinematic, almost as if he filmed it a live performance on a Broadway stage. But I have no problem with live theater, nor do I have a problem with Hitchcock, and this elaborately plotted murder mystery ranks up there with the best of them.
NOTE: The name of this 12-part series reviewing some of Alfred Hitchcock’s finest features has been changed from “Hallowed Hitchcock” to “Hitchcocked” for the sake of compactness.
Can you believe I’ve gone 18 years of living and 18 months of blogging without seeing a single movie directed by Alfred Hitchcock? Of course I’ve heard of his mastery and know of his influence over the craft of filmmaking as we know it, but as a New Year’s resolution, I decided to stop knowing about him and finally experience him.
So here we are, at the first of a monthly series running through 2011 hitting 12 high points in the filmmaking career of Alfred Hitchcock. Where to start? Before he came to America and made the films that made him an icon, I decided to start with one of his smaller British movies, “The 39 Steps,” to see if I noticed him returning to his roots.
While I didn’t watch this movie and instantly proclaim Hitchcock a men among boys and a god among men, what I did see was good, precise filmmaking that sure did entertain and engage. It’s less of a thriller, the genre most fans associate Hitchcock with, and more of a captivating mystery with none of the ridiculous bells and whistles Hollywood movies add on nowadays.
Over the course of four days, Richard Hannay (Robert Donat) runs all over England and Scotland trying to escape the police after being wrongfully accused of murder and a league of spies who believe he holds dangerous knowledge about them. The innocent Richard winds up assuming multiple identities to keep himself safe from his pursuers. It’s an well-plotted adventure that keeps the audience on its toes for the duration of the movie.
I don’t really have any context to put “The 39 Steps” into, but it sure does make me look forward to exploring some of Hitchcock’s more famous filmography. If something this good isn’t one of his most popular directorial ventures, then I’m expecting some real winners coming up.
By the time the clock runs down on 2010, I will have seen over 90 movies. Most of them were average, nothing special but nothing horrible. An alarming number were downright terrible. But, as always, there are enough gems that shine above the coal to fill out a top 10 list. It wasn’t quite as agonizing a process this year, but that’s beside the point. I want to leave 2010 smiling because, for the most part, it was a good year for the movies – provided you were willing to look off the beaten path.
What I found in common with these 10 special movies released in 2010 was a challenge. Each movie, in an entirely different way, issued a challenge to the moviegoer. These movies weren’t complacent just providing two hours of escapism; they went so far as to engage our minds, hearts, and souls in the moviegoing experience. They provided something that stuck with me, the movie watcher and reviewer, long after they ended and will continue to stick with me well into 2011.
So, here’s to the challenge, here’s to 2010, and here’s to movies!
#10
“Easy A” (A Challenge to High School)
Directed by Will Gluck
Written by Bert V. Royal
Starring Emma Stone, Penn Badgley, and Amanda Bynes
It was about time that a movie like “Easy A” came along and perfectly encapsulated what it’s like to be a high school student in the era of texting and Facebook. I was scared that my generation wasn’t going to get a Hollywood spotlight until twenty years later, and that would make us look like some kind of hokey antiques like the kids in “Grease.” What makes “Easy A” so brilliant is how it incorporates the modern with the past, be it as distant as the Puritans or as recent as the Breakfast Club, to show how fundamentally different the high school experience has changed even since 2004’s “Mean Girls.”
For me, very few moments were so beautifully authentic this year as the movie’s high-speed mapping of the rumor mill, which now moves at the speed of light (or a 3G connection). Propaganda posters after World War II suggested that loose lips cost lives, but in 2010, “Easy A” shows how it can cost reputations, something much more precious in high school. Technology may have evolved, but high school hasn’t. Society may have improved thanks to these innovations, so why haven’t we?
#9
“Rabbit Hole” (A Challenge to Coping)
Directed by John Cameron Mitchell
Written by David Lindsey-Abaire
Starring Nicole Kidman, Aaron Eckhart, and Dianne Weist
Grief is either overdone or understated. In “Rabbit Hole,” it’s presented in a manner so raw that it manages to be both at the same time, making for one of the most moving experiences of the year. A story about a husband and wife, played to brilliance by Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart, grieving their lost child, the movie shows many ways to cope. Kidman’s Becca wants to move on, Eckhart’s Howie wants to live with it, and in the middle of it all is Becca’s mother, played by Dianne Weist, offering her advice on how to get to the peaceful state in which she resides. There’s no answer to the question of who handles it best or which way is best; in fact, there’s not even an attempt to answer it. But there’s something beautiful about an unanswered question, and maybe that’s why the grace of “Rabbit Hole” has stuck with me for so long.
#8
“Get Him to the Greek” (A Challenge to Remain Silent)
Written and Directed by Nicholas Stoller
Starring Jonah Hill, Russell Brand, and Sean Combs
Okay, you can forget the challenge here. It’s not coming from “Get Him to the Greek,” it’s coming from me – I dare you not to laugh at this movie. Between the dynamite comedic pairing of Jonah Hill and Russell Brand, the scene-stealing farce that is Sean Combs’ foul-mouthed music exec Sergio, the ridiculous and totally awesome music of Infant Sorrow, and the hilarious situations that drive the movie, “Get Him to the Greek” was my favorite comedy of 2010. It’s filled with endless quotables and capable of many repeat viewings without any diminishing laughter.
#7
“Fair Game” (A Challenge to Patriotism)
Directed by Doug Liman
Written by Jez and John-Henry Butterworth
Starring Naomi Watts and Sean Penn
Rather than fall into the pile of scathing movies about America’s involvement in Iraq, “Fair Game” takes its anger in a fresh and different direction and funnels it into something constructive. The story of Valerie Plame Wilson, a scapegoat for the federal government in the wake of their exposure, is meant to rouse us, not to dismay us. We are proud that there are still people in this country who believe in the Constitution and the principles on which we were founded, and staying silent is simply not an option. While it hits you with rage, the knockout punch is of pride in Valerie and her courage to stand up for herself. “Fair Game” stands out as an exuberant flag-waving fan while all other movies of the same vein just mope in dreary cynicism.
#6
“Inside Job” (A Challenge to Care)
Written and Directed by Charles Ferguson
Narrated by Matt Damon
Who is responsible for the financial collapse of 2008? Charles Ferguson lets us know who he thinks in the activist epilogue, which you can more or less disregard if you choose to do so, but in the hour and 40 minutes prior, he points the finger at just about everyone possible. Including us. Sure, there were many factors leading to a worldwide meltdown of the economy that were out of our control, but a little bit of oversight, we could have seen it coming. By his systematic explanation of everything you need to know to understand what went down (call it “Global Meltdown for Dummies” if you must), he is challenging us to be the oversight that was lacking two years ago. And judging by how things have developed since then, we are going to need a whole lot of it.
#5
“Inception” (A Challenge to Imagination)
Written and Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and Marion Cotillard
For as much as I love the four movies I’m ranking ahead of “Inception,” none had such a monumental impact on the way movies are perceived and made quite like it. Christopher Nolan successfully redefined what imagination means for millions of moviegoers, many of whom had to see the movie multiple times to figure out what was going on in his labyrinthian dreamscape. With a massive spending allowance, he brought the spectacle to life and managed not treat the audience like children, which proved to be one of the most thrilling and psychologically satisfying experiences ever. If a movie like this can’t change the fabric of filmmaking, maybe we are headed for the dark ages like Roger Ebert cries.
#4
“The Social Network” (A Challenge to Modernity)
Directed by David Fincher
Written by Aaron Sorkin
Starring Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, and Justin Timberlake
As an old adage goes, “Every time history repeats itself, the price goes up.” David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin’s “The Social Network” may appear to be a movie planted in the digital era, but as has been said many times, it’s a movie about age-old themes like power, greed, and betrayal. In essence, we’ve seen it before. Yet retold as the story of the site we visit every day, it’s fascinating. And it’s sublime thanks to brilliantly sculpted characters who never fit traditional hero/villain roles driving the narrative. However, this is not just a rehash; it’s a brilliant cautionary tale for our times about individuality, innovation, and solitude. “The Social Network,” along with its cryptic leading man Mark Zuckerberg, is the best movie of 2010 for serious conversation that’s relevant away from the screen and out of the theater.
#3
“Toy Story 3” (A Challenge to Feel)
Directed by Lee Unkrich
Written by Michael Arndt
Voices of Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, and Joan Cusack
So maybe the whole prison escape plot wasn’t the most original thing in the world. But “Toy Story 3” has a heart so big that nothing else matters. I have no shame in admitting that I cried like the child that the movie made me feel like. For the last 20 minutes of the movie, I felt the most beautiful mix of nostalgia, sadness, and joy that may just be the most powerful potion Pixar has brewed. To be my age and watch this movie is like an ultimate realization that childhood can’t last forever. But the tears aren’t just mourning, they are happy as the torch is passed to a new generation. I pray, for their sake, that no technology can ever replace the comfort that a toy and a little bit of imagination can bring to any child.
#2
“127 Hours” (A Challenge to Live)
Directed by Danny Boyle
Written by Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy
Starring James Franco
Life-affirming isn’t a word I get to use to describe movies very often, and that’s precisely what makes “127 Hours” one of the most special experiences of 2010. The perfect combination of Danny Boyle’s superhuman directing with James Franco’s rawly human acting makes for a movie experience defying the odds. Who would have thought that a movie about a man losing his arm would be the movie that made me most glad to be alive? The movie that made me most appreciative for the relationships in my life? The movie that took me on the most gut-wrenching yet blissfully rewarding roller-coaster ride? I don’t know if I’ll be able to watch “127 Hours” again, but I’m so glad I watched at least once because it truly was a movie I’ll never forget.
#1
“Black Swan” (A Challenge to EVERYTHING)
Directed by Darren Aronofsky
Written by Mark Heyman, Andres Heinz, and John MacLaughlin
Starring Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, and Vincent Cassel
It’s such a fantastic irony that “Black Swan” is a movie about the inability of humans to achieve perfection, yet Darren Aronofsky’s movie is the closest thing to cinematic perfection in 2010. Behind Natalie Portman, who delivers one of the finest, if not the finest, performances I’ve ever seen from any actress, the movie soars to heights that I had previously thought unfathomable. It challenges just about every cinematic boundary that still exists and then proceeds to demolish them. But “Black Swan” doesn’t just destroy these boundaries for fun; it’s a purposeful and intelligent movie that gives a reason to change the boundaries of cinema for better and for good. Fearless director Darren Aronofsky choreographs a master ballet of a movie that weaves together horror, beauty, and psychological breakdown with such poise that you’ll wonder why every movie can’t be as thrilling as his. “Black Swan” is a glorious exaltation of cinema and a monumental achievement that will go down in history.
It’s impossible to celebrate a year in film without mentioning the performances that riveted us. Without further ado or fanfare, here are the 10 actors who reminded me of the power of their craft with their work in 2010.
My original review: Adams, usually the delightfully effervescent charmer, plays gritty and unapologetic in “The Fighter” and pulls it off to Oscar-worthy standards. She’s able to pull off just about any sort of character she takes, and the tenacious Charlene is different than anything we’ve ever seen her do before. It’s exciting to see an actress nowadays who isn’t content with finding one adjective to act and then carve themselves a niche, and Adams is quickly proving herself one of the most versatile actresses of our day.
Reflection: Amy Adams has wowed me in a variety of different roles, from her unassuming nun in “Doubt” to the ditzy princess in “Enchanted.” Yet as Charlene, I think she may have hit the most beautiful note in her career so far with her heartfelt conversation with Bale’s Dickie on her front porch. As she reflects on her life and her good intentions, it’s such a wonderful moment filled with every ounce of sincerity that she has to give.
My original review:
The best of the supporting bunch [in “Black Swan”] is by far and away Hershey as the pushy and demanding stage mom. Such roles often become stock characters; however, Hershey takes the role in frightening and invigorating new directions.
Reflection: There wasn’t a more frightening performance this year than Hershey as Natalie Portman’s mother. There’s a whole lot of subtext that Hershey has to act, perhaps a whole hidden backstory as director Darren Aronofsky alluded to, and that’s usually a daunting task for actors to pull off. Hershey shows no dust from her long hiatus from acting, keeping us scared and entranced at the same time.
My original review:
It’s Julianne Moore who absolutely brings down the house [in “The Kids Are All Right”]. As the more flighty, free-spirited Jules, she wins our hearts from the get-go, even if her antics only illicit groans from her other half. The character is very complex as she begins reeling from Paul’s introduction, exploring sides of herself she didn’t know even existed. It’s glorious to watch Moore dig deeper and deeper into her character as the movie goes on. She’s responsible for some of the movie’s funniest moments but also for its most effective emotional scene. Academy, take note.
Reflection: Throughout the awards season, many pundits have thrown out that Annette Bening’s role in “The Kids Are All Right” is the character the audience is meant to sympathize with and thus makes her the better candidate for Best Actress. Without dragging politics into it, I found Julianne Moore’s Jules the more sympathetic character and, by the end, the only one I actually cared about. Moore has delivered so many fantastic performances, but what makes this one stand head and shoulders over the rest is her total emotional engagement in the role. We feel her torment, her frustration, and her confusion so profoundly because of how engrossed she is in the character. And what she puts in, we get out of the performance.
My original review:
The star of the show is Portman, and “Black Swan” is made all the more fascinating by how Nina’s development mirrors her performance. Much like Nina must lose herself in the role of the Swan Princess, Portman absolutely disappears into her character. It’s a shocking and startling transformation due to Portman’s dedication to learning the craft of ballet and her impeccable acting. The movie stands as a testament to the fact that she is one of the best emerging actresses of her generation, and her flawless showing here deserves to be minted in history alongside the greatest of all time. Portman gives a once-in-a-lifetime performance, and to miss it would be to deny yourself the chance to see as close to perfection as is cinematically possible.
Reflection: Perfect. It was perfect.
Hailee Steinfeld as Mattie Ross in “True Grit”
Reflection: I have yet to review “True Grit,” but when I do, expect the highest of praise for newcomer Hailee Steinfeld. There are very few actors that can spit out period dialogue at lightning speed with confidence, and there are probably even fewer that can do the same with the dialogue of the Coen Brothers. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone do both so well, a feat that would impress me from an Academy Award-winning actress but floors me when I consider that this is a debut performer. At such a young age, she has a complete and total mastery of her character’s deepest desires and feelings, and such a strong presence out in front of “True Grit” makes it a movie and a performance I won’t soon forget.
My original review:
The knockout punch of “The Fighter” is the performance of Christian Bale, a totally authentic portrayal of a drug addict, former boxer, jealous trainer – and all simultaneously. He doesn’t act or perform as the real life Dickie Ecklund so much as he becomes him and inhabits him. Every twitch, every word is meticulously planned by Bale, who slimmed down from his Batman physique to play the gaunt Dickie.
Reflection: “The Fighter” is Micky Ward’s story, but it’s Dickie Ecklund’s movie. Bale, completely lost in the character, brings together all of his strengths to deliver what could be the quintessential performance of his career. It shows his physical commitment, his uncompromising authenticity, and a strangely pervasive sense of heart that’s often a little rough around the edges.
My original review:
Eisenberg nails all the eccentricities of the fast-talking technological wiz, and the nuances in his portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg will captivate for endless viewings.
Reflection: Who is Mark Zuckerberg? After “The Social Network” was released, millions of people were left trying to answer the question. Is he the savior of the Internet and the symbol of a new era, or is he the force that will inadvertently bring it down and destroy all the comforts of our former lives? What makes this screen version of Zuckerberg so captivating is that Jesse Eisenberg doesn’t attempt to answer this question. Eisenberg gets to the core of what he thinks is motivating Zuckerberg, going so deep that no bias or opinion can color his interpretation. Then, he lays it all out on the screen and leaves it up to the viewer to decide who Mark Zuckerberg is. With the magazine TIME naming the entrepreneur their person of the year, Eisenberg may have made Mark Zuckerberg the folk hero of the digital age.
My original review: It’s Firth’s show in the flashy role of King George, a character that must be inhabited, not just performed. Firth nails it, getting inside every thought and stammer of the king. He doesn’t just brush the surface as many actors playing historical figures do; he makes George vulnerable and sentimental. Firth’s poignant performance reminds us that what we should be looking for in movies like this is heart.
Reflections: The royal family of England always feels so distant on film, living a life filmmakers believe is so different that ours that they have to put them in an ivory tower. Yet Colin Firth, armed with a fantastically written human being by the name of King George VI, tears their mythological status down brick by brick until his royal figure is so down to earth that he feels like an old friend. The movie wouldn’t have been half as inspiring had Firth not brought such an enormously relatable pathos to the role.
My original review: There’s never a dull or wasted moment to be found in the movie thanks to Franco’s sublime and enlightened performance. While shooting on location, Boyle consistently had him act in character for 20 minutes straight and then relied on the editor to find 30 seconds to make it into the final cut. This total immersion into Ralston’s desperation makes Franco all the more raw and moving.
Reflection: The blasting score, fancy editing, and flashy cinematography of “127 Hours” can only go so far to make a static movie work. It requires a dynamic actor, both heartbreaking and heartwarming, that we can stick with until the bitter end. James Franco does just that and more as he makes pain and hope so tangible and so authentic that the movie never feels anything less than real. If anyone ever had a doubt that we need actors more than ever, Franco’s flawless work is all that’s needed to silence any critic.
My original review: Andrew Garfield as the upright Saverin is a force to be reckoned with, a true presence throughout the movie with his very likable charm. For just that reason, he makes it wrenching to watch the inevitable turn when Saverin gets cheated.
Reflection: While Zuckerberg’s prickly exterior prevents us from ever liking him too much, Andrew Garfield endows Eduardo Saverin with a sharp mind, firm beliefs, and a strong moral compass, making us fall head over heels for his character. He’s an irresistible force on the screen, the good angel resting on Zuckerberg’s right shoulder whispering in his ear to follow common wisdom. The movie’s emotional climax wouldn’t work if we weren’t rooting for Saverin the entire time, and when he explodes with anger, you’ll want to jump in the frame and punch the jerks who wronged him.
If someone classified this blog (good luck trying to do that, anyone that might attempt to) as one thing, I bet they’d be likely to say it’s a movie review site. While I do much more, and I urge you to check out all the other things I do, it’s probably true that I am most prominently a movie critic.
So how can I look back on a year of blogging without retrospectively looking at my own writing? So here are excerpts from 10 of what I believe were my best reviews this year – 5 good movies, 5 bad movies – that I believe best demonstrate my love of writing, language, and some good wordplay.
(NOTE: I’m only putting excerpts because I want you to go read the whole review! So don’t be afraid to click the links!)
There’s really no one else but Aronofsky who could pull off a big, brassy movie like this. He’s simply the best visual filmmaker out there. As if his first two movies, “Pi” and “Requiem for a Dream,” weren’t powerful enough, “Black Swan” is Aronofsky in full bloom, showing absolute command of all cinematic vocabulary. There is no boundary too sacred or stiff for him to toy with, and he doesn’t so much push them as he does eradicate them. Thus, “Black Swan” isn’t just a victory for Aronofsky and the rest of the crew; it’s a victory for the craft of filmmaking as we know it.
But overall, it’s the humanity that Danny Boyle brings to the screen that makes this a cinematic achievement unlike any other. He manages to engage our senses on frightening levels. The pain we feel as we watch the boulder crush Ralston’s arm. The disgust we feel when Ralston is left with no alternative but to drink his own urine. The fear we feel as Ralston slowly loses his mind and begins to have delusions. The gut-clenching agony we feel as Ralston amputates his own arm – and the catharsis we feel when he at last emerges from the canyon and finds refuge. Ultimately, Franco and Boyle’s commitment do more than engage our senses. They engage our souls.
Nolan pulls out all the stops to make sure that this world comes to vibrant life, beginning with his own script that never fails to captivate us. It’s heavy on the hard-hitting drama, and he always makes sure to remind us that no matter what’s going on around these people, they are still humans with emotions as complex as the world around them. These characters are fully realized, with rivalries, passions, and hatreds. Sometimes it’s hard to figure out what’s going on when a movie exists in four different layers of reality, but we manage to stay grounded through these characters and Nolan’s impeccable sense of direction.
Over the course of two well written hours, “The Town” explores and analyzes this question all the while providing fantastic drama and thrilling chases, robberies, and shoot-outs. It has Affleck written all over it, and not just because of the location. He makes Charlestown a character in itself, and we get to know it just as well as any of the people populating the set. Very few directors have the dexterity to capture a city in all of its glory and sordidness, and it’s a credit to Affleck’s prowess that he can make it feel so authentic. He also gets the best out of an extraordinary cast, and everything working together towards Affleck’s vision provides one dynamite moviewatching experience.
As the movie chugged towards an ending, I realized that I hadn’t just grown up with the toys. I’ve grown up with Andy, too. I was too young to remember seeing the first movie, but I was around Andy’s age at the release of the second installment. And as Andy prepares to move away from home and go to college in “Toy Story 3,” I am only one year behind, getting ready to make the decisions that will push me farther away from home and the innocence of my childhood. The movie is especially resonant for the generation of children that grew up with the “Toy Story” movies, allowing us to reminisce about the times where we didn’t need laptops or iPods to entertain us. Once, it only took a few toys and an unbounded imagination to make us happy, and “Toy Story 3″ gives us a window back into the simpler times of our youth. It’s a feeling both joyous and sad, but overall, it’s beautiful.
The movie is an action comedy – well, if you count Butler punching a few people as action and a few pity sneer as comedy. We’ve never quite seen a plot like this, where exes fight with stakes as high as prison, but it never feels the slightest bit original. In fact, it just feels like an old trip down Memory Lane, mimicking every sort of used gimmick with ex-lovers. But boy, Memory Lane has never looked so run-down or shabby. It’s time for some renovation.
Sound familiar? It’s not just a remake of the 1973 George A. Romero original; it’s a rehash of every horror movie since. Eventually, enough is enough, and cheap jumps and thrills only spell out boredom. The movie gets harder and harder to enjoy as it drags on … and on … and on. We know exactly what’s going to happen just from hearing the premise. Maybe the perceived lack of originality speaks to how influential the first movie was. But I missed the memo that the original was some kind of cultural watershed, so I’m just going to interpret this rendition of “The Crazies” as the latest dull entry into the woefully overflowing “been there, done that” category.
At “Dinner for Schmucks,” the real schmuck is you, the unsuspecting moviegoer who is lured in by the wattage of comedic stars Steve Carell and Paul Rudd. With your money, you’ve financed a dinner for sadists, the executives who will make a profit off of your pain. Perhaps a more fitting title is “Movie for Morons” because that’s exactly what you’ll be if you see this movie.
“Edge of Darkness” is more of an epitaph than a movie. Gather here to mourn these fallen talents, it seems to cry. Perhaps Monahan needs Scorsese’s vision to succeed; perhaps Campbell needs the stakes of a hero like James Bond to make a movie work; perhaps Mel Gibson just needs some help.
There are movies that beg you not to be taken seriously, and then there are those that beg you not to take the craft of cinema seriously. ”MacGruber” is the latter of the two, trying to fly on the flimsy premise that a sketch that can barely sustain two minutes on TV could make an entertaining movie that’s 45 times bigger. Perhaps Lorne Michaels will come up with a more clever way to make money off this movie in the future: take “MacGruber” off the case and slap on the title “The Worst of Will Forte.”
A single line can have so much power in a movie. It can make us laugh, make us think, or make us cry. It can delve profoundly into the soul, give insight into a character’s mind, provide a perfect punch of beautiful language, or be so foolish that we can’t help but repeat it endlessly.
2010 gave us many great quotes from many great movies. Here’s just a sampling of how the power of the written word was wielded this year from 10 fantastic lines that served a great deal of purposes.
“Dating you is like dating a Stairmaster.”
– Erica Albright (Rooney Mara) in “The Social Network“
“I just want to be perfect.”
– Nina Sayers (Natalie Portman) in “Black Swan“
“That Charlene … she’s one of them MTv girls!”
– Micky Ward’s sisters in “The Fighter“
“It’s so fluffy I’m gonna die!”
– Agnes in “Despicable Me“
“This rock has been waiting for me my entire life.”
– Aron Ralston (James Franco) in “127 Hours“
“It was almost as if … I had a love that was all mine.”
– Olive Penderghast (Emma Stone) referencing Natasha Bedengfield in “Easy A“
“You’re waiting for a train, a train that will take you far away. You know where you hope this train will take you, but you can’t be sure. But it doesn’t matter … because we’ll be together.”
– Mal (Marion Cotillard) in “Inception“
“When the world slips you a Jeffrey, just stroke the furry walls.”
– Aldous Snow (Russell Brand) in “Get Him to the Greek“
“Stop trying, SURRENDER!”
– Richard from Texas (Richard Jenkins) in “Eat Pray Love“
If you read this site frequently, you can’t help but notice the random factoids since I publish them every day. It’s a labor of love, summoning up some kind of opinion or awkward experience to keep the series running on a daily basis. But nonetheless, I love it and the factoids help keep me current on all my movie knowledge.
So here’s to ten of my favorite factoids that I published in 2010! (I only put little descriptions underneath in the hopes that you go and read them!)
How do you know when it’s been a bad year for the movies? Answer: when you have to narrow down a field of the year’s worst. There were WAY too many candidates for this 2010’s worst of the year; I had to whittle down from a list of 20 to get an ultimate 10. You’ll notice that “I Am Love” is absent from this list despite me giving it a flat F, and that’s because I saw it way back in 2009.
So enjoy – or cringe – this list of movies so bad, they don’t even get a snide remark under the picture. They just get linked back to my review from earlier in the year when I totally trashed them. Take the time to look at the reviews if you need convincing – I think I write my best stuff when I’m mad as #&*$ writing a bad review.
(NOTE: These are the worst movies that I saw this year. There are probably much worse out there that I simply refuse to subject myself to watching.)
Merry Christmas to all! As I wrap up on this great day, I wanted to give thanks and celebrate all the many bloggers who have made the continued success (as I perceive it) of this blog. So hopefully these ten sites that inspired me all year long like this last-minute gift under tree! And for those of you looking for an extra gift, look here at these amazing sites (presented in alphabetical order)!
…because I love reading someone with a totally different viewpoint than I have. As Nietzsche wrote, “The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently,” and I sure hold your views in high esteem.
…because you comment so much on my site that I have to go visit your site all the time. But not to sound obliged, I enjoy the variety of content and your boldness in not following any rhythm or pattern but your own.
…because you have the boldness to put down what you love to do what you have to do. I admire you so much for having your priorities in line, and if I am ever in your position, I hope I can handle myself with your grace. I’m excited that you are back and can’t wait until you get the motor running full speed ahead once more.
…because you like my posts! Thank you for adopting the new technology … perhaps others will follow your lead. Meanwhile, on your site, I get so much personality and so much variety.
We can’t be right all the time, unfortunately. I’m among the guilty people on this planet who make stupid predictions every once in a while, and I made them often with conviction. Now that the year is over, here’s a look back at some of my worst predictions in chronological order – and with 2011 up ahead, I’m laughing at these predictions.
January
“… if there is a breakout hit in [January], my bet is on [‘Leap Year’].”
Well, this didn’t turn out so well. In the first weekend of 2010, “Leap Year” opened to $9 million on its way to a total haul of only $25 million, ending up among the bottom half of January grossers. On the bright side, it did manage to recoup its production budget!
“Could Kristen Bell become a breakout romantic comedy star with ‘When in Rome?’ … I have a feeling that this could surprise people and a new start could be born.”
“When in Rome” only grossed about $32 million in its whole run, or in Leyman’s terms, what “Avatar” grossed in its 7th weekend. As for Kristen Bell, she still hasn’t hit it big; “You Again” grossed even less in September.
April
“I’m waiting for tomorrow – ‘Clash of the Titans,’ baby!”
Talk about a bust. “Clash of the Titans” was a huge disappointment as I was really eagerly anticipating it. As I wrote in my review, “My eyes might have seen in three dimensions, but my brain saw a movie that only had one. Given how deeply rooted in mythology the story is, I had very high expectations for ‘Clash of the Titans.’ Unfortunately … it fails on all levels.”
May
“[Best Supporting Actor] LOVES villians … It is also a category that likes to reward actors (usually veterans) who are overdue for a trophy … By these two characteristics, Rourke would appear to have a great shot.”
It’s funny because while I wasn’t a fan of “Iron Man 2,” I actually thought Rourke was the worst part of the movie, and there I was writing about his awards chances! As I said in my review, “It’s hard to believe from watching ‘Iron Man 2’ that Mickey Rourke was being heralded as an Oscar nominee just 18 months ago. When we aren’t waiting for him to say a word, his Whiplash seems to be nothing more than an unkind Russian stereotype.” Clearly I liked “The Wrestler” too much …
“If ‘The Dark Knight’ was part of the reason that the Oscars moved to ten nominees, then they are still looking for that popcorn flick with enough brain to atone for their horrifying omission. ‘Robin Hood‘ could be that movie.”
Despite massive love from the bloggers, “Scott Pilgrim vs. The World” became a high-profile flop over the summer, earning just $10 million in fifth place its opening weekend on its way to just over $30 million cumulatively. Ouch.
October
“I think the premise alone [of ‘The Social Network’] draws in $80 million in revenue, but the fact that it’s going to be really good will increase its total take to somewhere in the range of $120-150 million. I’m hardly a box office analyst, I know, yet I feel pretty confident making this financial prediction.”
Perhaps I overestimated the box office potential of “The Social Network” earlier this year. The Facebook movie drew in a respectable but not great $23 million in its opening weekend and displayed strong legs to power itself to $91 million (and still counting slowly). So I was a little bit off on it setting the box office on fire. But to my credit, I was dead-on about it being the Best Picture frontrunner all those months ago.
“I think [‘Hereafter’] could be a very powerful movie …”
“Hereafter” was a pretty big disappointment for me in 2010. I wrote in my review, “In hyperlink cinema, one might say there exists a formula that the final product is equal to the sum of its parts. However, Eastwood’s ‘Hereafter’ in total feels like less.” Too bad, it could have been something good.
November
“To save the weekend, there’s Rachel McAdams in ‘Morning Glory!’ As if she’s not enough, Harrison Ford and Diane Keaton are on board for this drama-comedy mix that doesn’t seem to favor any genre over the other. What a great surprise awaits us!”
Rachel McAdams may have won me over with her incredibly good looks, but she sure didn’t win me over with her 2010 movie selection. “Morning Glory” was incredibly cliched and forgettable, and it was hardly a breath of fresh air in November like I had imagined it would be. It was recycled air, like the gross kind on a plane.
December
“… ‘How Do You Know‘ is still unseen, but I’m getting good vibes. Probably stupid to put it on my list [of predicted Best Picture nominees] instead of ‘Another Year,’ but I’m going gutsy.”
How do you know when a movie won’t get a Best Picture nomination? When despite being directed by an Academy Award-winning filmmaker, it can’t even muster up a single Golden Globe nomination and movies like “Alice in Wonderland” and “The Tourist” can. If my hunch back then somehow winds up being right, I think a whole lot of people will give up Oscar guessing as a hobby.
2010 was my first full calendar year of blogging, and I sure have enjoyed every post of it. However, there were those that I enjoyed a little bit more than the rest. Here were my highlights of 2010 (in no particular order):
I find plenty of satisfaction in just the craft of writing; I don’t really need quantifiable markers of success to bring me happiness. But I will admit, it sure is nice to look at my dashboard in the morning and see an extra digit in the comments/views. These were both reached in July, and I’m happy to say that since then, this blog has logged a cumulative total of 1,740 comments and 34,500 views to date. So thanks for visiting and commenting … don’t be afraid to do it some more!
I’ve been logging a factoid every day since day (1). When I started to blog, I was in a pretty major “(500) Days of Summer” phase, so I decided then that I would have to watch the movie on my (500)th day of blogging. So, needless to say, I was very happy to have my celebration (500) days in the making.
Hard to believe I’ve been blogging so long that I’ve logged 1,000 posts. Factoids help, but I had 489 “serious” posts too. That’s a whole lot of keyboarding.
… and twice, nonetheless! Thanks to all the voters of the LAMB who think I could cut it as a casting director in Hollywood! It sure made me beam to win – and then to pick the subsequent movie to be recast.
I got a little excited for the releases of “Inception” and “The Social Network” – so much so that I spent the entire week before revisiting and reviewing all the directors, Nolan and Fincher, respectively, and their past works. The result was a renewed appreciation for their movies and an enhanced perspective when seeing their latest movies. It worked so well that now I just have to plan ahead my weeks for 2011.
The event that scared most of you all away because it looked like chapters of a book, largely because they were, was one of the most personally rewarding experiences for me this year. Looking back on a year’s worth of blogging by reading “Julie & Julia,” the book that inspired the movie that inspired this blog, led to some pretty interesting insights. If you have some time on your hands this holiday season, why not go revisit the series?
The project that brought a little corner of the movie blogosphere together may rank among my proudest achievements this year. I loved seeing the community come together to answer a few simple questions about what got us started blogging and what keeps us going. Everyone gave such interesting and unique answers, and I was always fascinated by what I posted each day for a month. It’s still worth a read – go seek out your favorite blogger in the project’s annals!
When it comes to stirring up good discussion, it’s hard to beat something that goes totally against popular opinion. Writing a review that goes along with every point that all the critics make does little to engage readers. The “Save Yourself” pieces I wrote this year got some of the best discussion on this site. People either rallied behind my hatred, saying they felt oppressed in feeling the same way, or went crazy in defense of the movie they loved. I didn’t care who thought what; I was just happy to have them comment!
I sometimes doubted my own cinematic expertise, being so poorly versed in classic cinema. So, with the establishment of the “Classics Corner” series, I renewed my commitment to being a better cinephile by requiring myself to watch at least one classic movie a month. So far, I’ve seen some very interesting ones, and they’ve illuminated fascinating things about what I watch now.
I took a big step this year and created a Facebook fan page for my blog! I’ve been experimenting with various ways to make it work, although I will admit that all these attempts have been pretty half-hearted. The building blocks are there from 2010, but in 2011, I intend to build mountains.
I’m fully prepared to take a lot of heat for what I’m about to say. In fact, as I ponder making this statement in my head, I myself wonder if I’m a humongous hypocrite. What I’m about to suggest could spark some serious outrage, perhaps on the level of suggesting “Citizen Kane” isn’t all that great (which I have gone 
NOTE: The name of this 12-part series reviewing some of Alfred Hitchcock’s finest features has been changed from “Hallowed Hitchcock” to “Hitchcocked” for the sake of compactness.
Marshall and the Movies 
Recent Comments