Oscar Moment: “Get Low”

11 05 2010

Out to top R. Kelly’s “Trapped in the Closet,” Robert Duvall stars in the film adaptation of Lil’ Jon’s hit song “Get Low.”

Just kidding.

It’s about the opposite.  “Get Low” could wind up being one of the biggest bait movies of the Oscar season, particularly for leading man Robert Duvall.  It was a hit at last year’s Toronto Film Festival and instantly thrusted Duvall into the Oscar conversation.  But when it was bought by Sony Pictures Classics following the festival, they decided to move it to the end of July 2010.  Thus, Duvall and “Get Low” are now in the 2010 awards talk.

Here’s my question: does the man need Oscar bait?  He’s already won Best Actor!  Sure, it was over 25 years ago (1983 for “Tender Mercies” to be exact), but that’s still a trophy on the mantle at Duvall Manor.

People make this argument for Meryl Streep year after year.  “She won so long ago,” they say.  “They don’t need to hide their affection; just give her another Oscar!”

The difference between the two is as follows.  Since Robert Duvall won the Oscar, he has received two other nominations (in consecutive years, as a matter of fact).  Since Meryl Streep won her last Oscar, she has been nominated eleven times!  Eleven!

Let’s take a look at some other revered actors who took home their first Oscar several decades ago and the results when they are in the game again.

  • Ellen Burstyn won Best Actress in 1974 for “Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore.”  Since then, she has been nominated three times, most recently in 2000 for “Requiem for a Dream.”  She has not won since.
  • Sissy Spacek won Best Actress in 1980 for “Coal Miner’s Daughter.”  Since then, she has been nominated four times, most recently in 2001 for “In the Bedroom.”  She has not won since.
  • Diane Keaton won Best Actress in 1976 for “Annie Hall.”  Since then, she has been nominated three times, most recently in 2003 for “Something’s Gotta Give.”  She has not won since.
  • Ben Kingsley won Best Actor in 1982 for “Gandhi.”  Since then, he has been nominated three times, most recently in 2003 for “House of Sand and Fog.”  He has not won since.
  • William Hurt won Best Actor in 1985 for “Kiss of the Spider Woman.”  Since then, he has been nominated three times, most recently in 2005 for “A History of Violence.”  He has not won since.
  • Julie Christie won Best Actor in 1965 for “Darling.”  Since then, she has been nominated three times, most recently in 2007 for “Away from Her.”  She has not won since.

See a pattern?

(NOTE: I excluded one outlier from the list: Jack Nicholson, who has received 12 nominations in his illustrious career.  His first win came on his fifth nomination in 1975 for Best Actor for “One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest.”  Two nominations later, he won again in 1983 for Best Supporting Actor for “Terms of Endearment.”  Another four nominations later, he won his third statue in 1997 for Best Actor for “As Good As It Gets.”  He was nominated for Best Actor again in 2002 for “About Schmidt” but lost to Adrien Brody.)

But if you know anything about the Oscars beyond the statistics I gave you, another trend might have popped out at you.  In case you didn’t pick up on it, this might guide you.

  • When Ellen Burstyn was last nominated, she lost to Julia Roberts for “Erin Brockovich.”  Roberts was 33, and this nomination was her third.
  • When Sissy Spacek was last nominated, she lost to Halle Berry for “Monster’s Ball.”  Berry was 35, and this nomination was her first.
  • When Jack Nicholson was last nominated, he lost to Adrien Brody for “The Pianist.”  Brody was 29, and this nomination was his first.
  • When Diane Keaton was last nominated, she lost to Charlize Theron for “Monster.”  Theron was 28, and this nomination was her first.
  • When Ben Kingsley was last nominated, he lost to Sean Penn for “Mystic River.”  Penn was 43, and this nomination was his fourth.
  • When William Hurt was last nominated, he lost to George Clooney for “Syriana.”  Clooney was 43, and this nomination was his first.
  • When Julie Christie was last nominated, she lost to Marion Cotillard for “La Vie en Rose.”  Cotillard was 32, and this nomination was her first.

As I hope you now see, these veterans usually lose to younger actors with few nominations.  So does Duvall have history against him?

The role seems like a character he can really dig into.  In “Get Low,” he plays a hermit who plans his own funeral – which he plans to attend.  Alive.  He wants to hear what people think of him, but as events unfold, he ends up divulging why he’s been away in the woods so long.

The movie also features performances by Oscar winner Sissy Spacek and nominee Bill Murray.  Both could easily be in contention, but Murray seems to have the more substantial part.  They, along with Duvall, are definitely worth keeping an eye on this season.

BEST BETS FOR NOMINATIONS: Best Actor (Robert Duvall), Best Supporting Actor (Bill Murray)

OTHER POSSIBLE NOMINATIONS: Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay, Best Score


Comments : 5 Comments »
Tags: , , ,
Categories : 2010 - Oscar Moment, Oscar Moment

Random Factoid #287

11 05 2010

Frank Mengarelli, the “Pompous Film Snob“, tagged me in one of these seemingly endless memes.  This one is about the Criterion Collection DVDs.  The point of the thread is to find out who has the most of these very special DVDs.

How many do I have?  One.

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.”

To be honest, I don’t buy many DVDs nowadays.  And the Criterion Collection focuses on older movies, which I’m more prone to rent.


Comments : 5 Comments »
Tags: , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

REVIEW: Iron Man 2

10 05 2010

“Iron Man 2” may not have all that much to offer us as a movie, but it provides significant fodder for conversation about what it means to cinema in general.  In my mind, it marks the first comic book movie of the post-“Dark Knight” era.  Filmmakers have seen what made Christopher Nolan’s film such a hit on multiple fronts, and they are trying to strike gold using the same tools: namely, character development and strong plot over explosions and action.  Jon Favreau and the other minds behind “Iron Man 2” had time to adapt their series in an attempt to replicate that success.

One thing this sequel gives us is confirmation of a theory that many have been advocating for almost two years: “The Dark Knight” really does mark a revolution in the way we watch movies and the way they are made.  As soon as we saw it, we knew that we would never watch comic book or action movies the same way.  We instantly scorned “Transformers 2” and other movies that only emphasized the visuals.  But now, similar movies are trying to shift the focus to plot.  That’s a really good thing for the average moviegoer because it means that studios are recognizing our intelligence!

But “Iron Man 2” also reminds us of an unfortunate reality: some revolutions are only revolutionary once.  Some are meant to repeated; the American Revolution, for example, inspired similar uprisings in France, Haiti, and all over Latin America.  “Iron Man 2” incorporates many elements used in “The Dark Knight,” hoping to continue the pattern of success.

But its inability to recreate what made Nolan’s film so incredible signals the dawning of an era in comic book movies not favorable to anyone.  From now on, there will be “The Dark Knight” and every other movie who wishes they were “The Dark Knight.”  These movies cannot simply try to concoct their own version as if there is some sort of a formula.  Nolan’s movie worked for so many reasons.  Now, filmmakers have to find their own way if they want to make a movie that doesn’t play like a cheap ripoff of “The Dark Knight.”  A key factor to the success of Nolan’s film was originality.  Any movie that tries to use that originality will end up creating banality.

Read the rest of this entry »


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Movie Reviews

Random Factoid #286

10 05 2010

I saw “Casablanca” for the first time (yes, I know that’s shocking) a few weeks ago and ogled at how many quotable lines there are.  I knew, “Here’s looking at you, kid,” and “at least we’ll always have Paris.”  But I had no idea it was the origin of “this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship” or “round up the usual suspects.”  Not to mention that the movie is the reason for Warner Bros. theme song on their logo and the inspiration for the title “Play It Again, Sam.”  (Fun fact: no one ever says the words “play it again, Sam” in the movie.  It’s always a variation.)

I thought about it, and movies are quoted so often that we say certain lines enough to forget that they came from a movie at all.  A more modern example is “Mean Girls” for me.  I had been rattling off “she doesn’t even go here!” and “you go, Glen Coco!” for months on end – and I had seen the movie!

I think it’s a testament to the writers if their movie has the staying power to be quoted.  I don’t know if we’ll be quoting “Mean Girls” in 70 years, but surely some phrases are going to enter our average conversational phrase book.  I wouldn’t count out “why so serious?” from “The Dark Knight” for one of them.


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

LISTFUL THINKING: Summer Movie Survival Guide

9 05 2010

Summer means a lot of things, but to the movie industry, it means extracting a whole lot of capital from unsuspecting moviegoers.  They have developed little ways to squeeze every last penny they can out of us, and they prey on the clueless among us to get it.  If you fall into that category, I have devised a list of ten ways to stay smart and stay cheap at the movies this summer.

Join your theater’s rewards program. This is the easiest way to be a smart moviegoer without drastically changing your moviegoing preferences.  All it takes is filling out a quick application (some can even be done online) to join a rewards program.  From then on, it’s just another card in your wallet to pull out at the box office when buying tickets.  It won’t take long for you to start earning free popcorn, drinks, and even tickets.

With AMC’s MovieWatcher program, it only takes buying 15 tickets to get you a free ticket, although you have to be particularly savvy to work around their policy attempting to cap your rewards at only two tickets per visit counting for points.  It’s only a slight inconvenience; simply make as many two-ticket transactions as you need.  With a membership in Regal’s Crown Club, you earn points by the number of dollars you spend; like AMC, they cap you at $15 per visit.  I assume that the same multiple transaction strategy would work there too.  Regal also offers an “extra credit” system where seeing big studio movies in their first two weeks of release earns you five or ten extra points.

When you do get free tickets, use them wisely.  First of all, do not let them expire.  Be sure to look at restrictions on the ticket because most only allow you to see movies that are more than two weeks old.  Most importantly, think about the time of day when you want to use the ticket.  It saves you a lot more money to use free ticket on the $10 evening show than on the $7.50 matinee.

Find free screenings. What’s better than saving money on movies?  Not spending any money on them at all!  There are plenty of free advanced screenings in most metropolitan areas.  To find them, just spend a little time on Google.  Usually, there are reliable sites that list these screenings.  A lot of times, stores or radio stations sponsor them and give away tickets.  They also give away some goodies before the movie starts.

Last summer, I went to 7 free screenings, which saved me about $70.  The only sacrifice these screenings require you to make is a little extra time.  It is of the utmost importance to arrive at least an hour early or you will not get in.  They deliberately overbook to have a full house, and I have been shut out of enough of these to know.

Go to early bird specials. Ten years ago, you could go to a matinee for $5.  That ticket probably costs about $8 now.  But AMC has a clever campaign offering patrons that same $5 ticket.  They offer these discounted tickets before noon any day.  I frequently take advantage of the system, and there are a lot of pluses to going to these early movies beside the price.  You don’t have to wait in lines for concessions; you can get good seats; you don’t have to deal with a crowded theater.  So if you can get up early enough, why wouldn’t you want to save at least $3 per movie?

And AMC isn’t the only chain with worms for the early bird.  At Cinemark, the first showtime of the day for every movie is cheaper than a regular matinee.

Save evenings and weekends for special movies. This seems like an odd request.  But theater owners know that these are the two peak times for moviegoers, and they exploit that by raising the prices.  Most people know the price jump from matinee to evening tickets, which usually runs about $2.  Yet many are oblivious to the fact that theaters raise their evening prices on Fridays and Saturdays, milking them an extra 50¢ or $1.

Part of the reason so many people go to the movies at these times is because they like the communal experience of sitting down and enjoying a movie with a theater full of other people.  If you think about it, though, how important is it to sit in a movie with an audience for a very serious dramatic film?  Or an action movie?  Some movies don’t gain much from being watched with a host of other people, and it might be wise to abstain from spending extra money to see it in that atmosphere.  In my opinion, comedies are the only movies for which a big crowd is vital.

Think about the necessity of 3D and IMAX. Is it really worth your extra $4 for 3D and extra $7 for IMAX?  If it’s a slipshod 3D conversion (“The Last Airbender”) or a movie not shot in IMAX (no movie actually was, but animated movies usually play better on the big screen), the overall experience may not justify the extra money.  Here’s a statistic that might make you a pinch a few pennies: if you saw every movie this summer in the most extravagant format available, it would cost you over $50 in premium ticket fees.  That’s five movies you could see at night in 2D!

Scout the cheapest priced tickets. There is a difference between theaters in their prices, even if it is ever so miniscule.  If you were to see 20 movies this summer, going to a theater with tickets fifty cents cheaper would save you an entire full-price ticket.

For example, the Edwards Marq*E in Houston is currently fifty cents cheaper than the other Edwards theater.  It’s a little difference, but as any smart spender knows, the little things add up pretty quickly.

Don’t be afraid to show your age. Seniors, don’t be afraid to show your age at the box office because it could mean the difference between a $7 ticket and a $10 ticket.  Other than children, seniors are the only age group to always be guaranteed a cheaper priced ticket.

Students, however, are a little more iffy.  The only theater in Houston that always gives a discounted student ticket is the River Oaks Theater, the oldest theater in town.  They only show smaller, independent movies though.  The bigger chains – your AMCs, your Regals – have slowly diminished the availability of the student ticket.  At Regal, the $1 cheaper student ticket used to be available every night.  Now, it is only available Sundays through Thursdays; in other words, not on Friday and Saturday when most younger people flock to the theaters.  But that’s better than AMC, which only offers one student day a week!  At my closest theater, that day is Thursday.  On that day, I can get $1 off a matinee and $3 off an evening show.

Know a theater’s matinee cut-off times. The matinee cut-off time has been slowly rolled back in my lifetime from 6 P.M. to 5 P.M. to now 4 P.M.  The theaters are doing this to sell more of the expensive evening tickets.

But say you head to a 3:45 showing and are running a little late.  You get to the box office, and that 3:45 showing is sold out.  Now, you have to wait for the 4:15.  The inconvenience is little, but the price jump is steep.  That 4:15 will cost you two or three dollars more than the 3:45.  Theaters love to put showtimes right along that cut-off time with hopes that some unforeseen circumstance will force you to buy the more expensive ticket.

Find a theater with free parking. This seems trivial, but the theater closest to my house charges $3 for parking.  If you think about it, that’s like paying for 3D.  Going to the movies 20 times at $3 per trip for parking is $60 extra – that’s six evening tickets!  It’s obscene, and I’ve started to go to other theaters where free parking is offered more often to save some money.

Eat before you go to the movies. I paid an outlandish $3.75 for a small package of Buncha Crunch on Friday at the theater.  Even if you manage to thwart them on ticket prices, they can get you at the concession stands.  When you are hungry, you are hungry, and you will buy whatever will pacify your stomach no matter what the price.

So what’s the best way to fight being ripped off by concessions?  Eat before you go to the movie!  That way, you won’t be hungry during the movie.  Even if you aren’t going after a big meal, have a tiny snack to tide you over for two hours.

I now declare you all smart moviegoers!  Go and save money!  Be sure to tell me at the end of the summer if any of this helped you be more economical.


Comments : 4 Comments »
Tags: , , , ,
Categories : Features, Listful Thinking

Random Factoid #285

9 05 2010

“Iron Man 2” missed the opening weekend record that “The Dark Knight” set by $25 million.  Phew.  Batman will “live to fight another day,” as Harvey Dent says.

But AMC MovieWatcher Network’s blog Script to Screen pointed something out about the summer opener that I really wished I knew on Friday: there was an extra scene after the credits!  And I even told the friend I went to that I suspected there might be a supplemental scene.  He hurried me out, telling me his friends had seen it at midnight and said there wasn’t anything.  But there was!

I’m the kind of person that gets up as soon as the credits roll unless there is some sort of scene going.  Unless I had heard that there would be an extra scene at the end of the credits, I would never stay through the credits.  It’s just too much time to spend if you don’t know.  And credits are getting pretty long nowadays – “The Lovely Bones” and its 15 minute credits, anyone?

Anyone out there willing to stick it out without certainty?  I applaud you if you do.


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #284

8 05 2010

Entertainment Weekly’s blog PopWatch asked an interesting question regarding trailers this week: how many is too many? Apparently, studios are paying to play more before the bigger movies.  I can tell you that six of them played before “Iron Man 2” last night.

I don’t mind a few trailers before a movie.  They give me an opportunity to go to the bathroom before the movie starts.  They give me a nice grace period to be tardy to the movie, although I don’t like to be.

But sometimes, they do go a little overboard.  Like the author of the EW post, I think four is a healthy number.  It still grants that grace period and gives you a glimpse at what’s coming up but doesn’t encroach too far past the scheduled start time.


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags: , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

F.I.L.M. of the Week (May 7, 2010)

7 05 2010

Prepare yourselves emotionally before diving into the “F.I.L.M. of the Week,” Clint Eastwood’s true-life story “Changeling.”  You might remember the movie as a blip on your radar in 2008 for one of two reasons: Angelina Jolie or the Best Actress nomination that Angelina Jolie received for this movie.  If you are one of Angelina’s detractors who argue that she’s good only for adopting babies and saving the world, you need to see this movie.  I have yet to see “A Mighty Heart,” so I’m not in a position to classify it as her best work since “Girl, Interrupted.”  However, it’s a reminder of why she has an Oscar sitting on her mantle.

Jolie takes on the persona of Christine Collins, a woman pushed to the brink in late 1920s Los Angeles. After the kidnapping of her son, the LAPD returns a boy who is supposedly her child in order to produce a positive headline for the department that had been marred by corruption.  Christine knows instantly that the boy is not her son, and she demands that the investigation into her son’s disappearance continue.  The police, not wanting to admit an error, dismisses her as crazy.  She obtains credible letters supporting her story, but the police won’t tolerate her vocal criticism.  They find a silencing method that evokes anger from people in high places, particularly a radio preacher, Gustav Briegleb (John Malkovich).

In the meantime, the police also uncover a series of horrifying acts committed by Gordon Northcott (Jason Butler Harner).  The Northcott storyline may seem like a tangent at first, but it ties into Christine’s story in unexpected and brilliant ways.  It also helps that Harner gives a startling and disturbing performance as the deranged criminal, one that has hauntingly remained with me since I have seen the movie.  It’s unforgettable the way he mixes the calm surface with a tumultuous and unstable mind.

Jolie’s forceful and commanding presence is a major part of the success of “Changeling.”  But it’s also director Clint Eastwood, who portrays these horrifying events with realism mixed with a comforting sensitivity.  A very delicate balance had to be struck to be able to really digest this movie, and Eastwood found it.  However, even with this approach, it doesn’t change the fact that this is an absolutely brutal and heavy movie.  It may not be for you if you cannot handle disturbing depiction of atrocities, including ones committed on children.

Fun fact: this movie isn’t based on a true story.  It is a true story.  Screenwriter J. Michael Straczynski took all of the movie based on evidence that can be corroborated by documents.  Thus, what we see on the screen is as close to what actually happened in “the strange case of Christine Collins” (an original title of the movie) is as close as Hollywood can ever show us.

I’ve heard from many smart movie speculators that “Changeling” is a film that was met with a mild reception but will eventually be embraced as a truly great movie.  I wholeheartedly espouse this belief, and I have been convinced that this is one of the most emotionally powerful movies that I have ever seen since I first saw it in 2008.  As for you, why wait until the rest of the world discovers it?  See it now and say you knew about it before it became so popular.


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,
Categories : F.I.L.M. of the Week, Movie Reviews

Random Factoid #283

7 05 2010

PopEater brought up an interesting point: the marketing campaign for “Iron Man 2” has been almost ubiquitous.  Really, Paramount has spent a whopping $100 million marketing a movie that every American is going to see anyways.  (And for the record, my prediction is that it will NOT beat the opening weekend record held by “The Dark Knight.”)

Nonetheless, it looks really cool to put that metallic mask on a Dr. Pepper can.  And who can resist a Whiplash Whopper?  (The answer: anyone who wants to spare a thousand calories from their daily diet.)

But it’s not designed to target the teenage blogger who rejects being bought out by Hollywood executives looking for a quick buck (see: my stance on 3D conversion).  It’s designed for the not-so-consumer-savvy among us.

Mainly, children.  I know this because I was particularly vulnerable as a child to movie promotion pushes.  Whenever a new Disney movie came out, I would go to McDonald’s several times that month just to get the Happy Meal toys.

I also bought plenty of toys and stuffed animals.  I was part of a target demographic they hit the bullseye with me.


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Random Factoid #282

6 05 2010

Don’t know what inspired this factoid, but I’m going with it.

Remember back in Random Factoid #267 when I talked about movies that I couldn’t finish?  Or Random Factoid #266 when I talked about movies I slept through?  I said I could only remember one for each.  Now, however, I think I have found another that falls into both categories.

This is going to shock you.  This is a movie that some people really like.  It was “Once,” the Sundance hit.  I love the music, and I’m really glad it won Best Song.  But the movie itself just could not grab a fraction of my interest.

I’m willing to give it another try, though.  I want to see why it is that people like it.


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags: ,
Categories : Random Factoids

What To Look Forward To in … Summer 2010

5 05 2010

Before the season actually gets kicked off in two days, I thought it was necessary to spell out my five most anticipated movies of summer 2010.  Rather than bore you with verbose observations, I will give you the rationale for my picks with only two things: the movie’s trailer and 10 words or less describing why I’m dying to see it.

Winter’s Bone (June 11)

I can’t wait because … it’s a rare summer drama and won big at Sundance.

Shrek Forever After (May 21)

I can’t wait because … it has to redeem “Shrek” after the last movie stunk!

Eat, Pray, Love (August 13)

I can’t wait because … this is that enjoyable watching chick-flick I’m always weak for.

Robin Hood (May 14)

I can’t wait because … Russell Crowe has Maximus bottled up inside for this.

Get Him to the Greek (June 4)

I can’t wait because … it’s time for Jonah Hill and Russell Brand’s breakout movies.

The Kids Are All Right (July 7)

I can’t wait because … it’s an indie and this makes comedy out of controversy.

Iron Man 2 (May 7)

I can’t wait because … action plus Robert Downey Jr. have equaled big fun before.

Toy Story 3 (June 18)

I can’t wait because … it’s going to be like revisiting my childhood!

Salt (July 23)

I can’t wait because … Angelina kicks butt!  And it’s not a franchise movie!

Inception (July 16)

I can’t wait because … it’s Christopher Nolan’s follow-up to a new classic.


Comments : 7 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : What To Look Forward To

Random Factoid #281

5 05 2010

Following a series of linked posts the other day, I wound up at this interesting USA Today article: “What happens to those 3D glasses after Avatar?”

Here’s an excerpt, featuring some pretty astounding statistics:

Laid end-to-end, the 3-D glasses worn by avid Avatar-goers since the blockbuster movie opened 46 days ago would reach from Los Angeles to Angmagssalik, Greenland — about 3,987 miles.

That’s a whole lot of plastic. With about 75% of people who see Avatar seeing it in 3-D, it works out to about 42.1 million pairs of glasses worn, or 935,834 a day.

Four companies provide 3-D systems for showing the wildly popular sci-fi epic in the USA: Dolby Laboratories, IMAX, Real-D and XpanD.

Each has a recycling program in place, for hygiene and to keep what would otherwise be a mountain of plastic out of landfill.

Real-D has the lion’s share of 3-D projection systems in the USA, accounting for at least 700,000 3-D glasses used a day. It distributes cardboard containers so movie-goers can recycle their glasses. According to Real-D’s Rick Heineman, the glasses are shipped to a cleaning facility near Los Angeles, where they’re sanitized, checked for defects, repackaged and shipped out.

Real-D provides the glasses for most of (if not all of) the 3D movies I see.  I must say, their cleaning facility is slacking.  When I went to see “How to Train Your Dragon,” there was a humongous scratch on my lens!  If you know me or have read any factoids, then you can probably guess this did not make me happy.  Eventually, I was able to get past the scratch and enjoy the movie.  But if that scratch had been on the lens during “Clash of the Titans,” I might not have been so kind.

I have a good pair of 3D glasses hanging from the karaoke machine in my room.  Maybe I ought to keep them in my car and take them to all 3D movies I see.  Can’t trust Real-D anymore.


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

For Your Consideration: The LAMMYs

4 05 2010

This post is geared more towards my fellow bloggers, but this post will be of interest to any old reader as well!

The big-a$$ movie blog conglomerate that I am a part of, the Large Association of Movie Blogs (LAMB), is hosting awards for the best movie bloggers in multiple categories.  You know me; I love Hollywood’s awards season, so I’m very into the LAMMYs, as they are calling it.

The way it works is that any member of the association gets to nominate whoever they like in the categories.  But here’s my problem with that – we each have our own little sphere in blogger world.  There are over 500 members, but I maybe visit 20 or 30 of them with any sort of frequency.  We are each going to naturally choose among our sphere, and that’s no real way to choose the BEST.  It’s a popularity contest, where the blogs with the biggest readerships will most likely win out.

But I don’t write to win awards, just as filmmakers don’t make movies to win Oscars.  I write because I love movies and love connecting with people over them.  Awards are just a nice bonus (and think how interesting they might be to bring up in a college interview or essay).

This is my FYC ad; yes, I even made one of them.  Just call me Harvey Weinstein – except don’t.  Now let me run you through the categories where I would appreciate your consideration and lay out my case.

Best Movie Reviewer

I didn’t want to become predominantly a movie reviewer, but I see so many of them that it’s hard not to review them.  I review a vast quantity of movies, including every movie I see in theaters and recent releases on DVD.  In addition to both of those, I provide a weekly column designed to promote little-known movies for great moviegoing, the “F.I.L.M. of the Week” series.  I have begun a companion series as well, movies that no one deserves to watch; the series is called “Save Yourself!”

If my sheer amount of reviews or my range of content doesn’t impress you, check out some of what I consider to be my best reviews so far.

Read my review of “Clash of the Titans.”

Read my review of “Avatar.”

Read my review of “An Education.”

Read my review of “Paranormal Activity.”

Read my first review, about the movie “Julie & Julia.”

Best Awards Coverage

Like I said, I love Oscar season.  I still religiously read awards blogs even in dry April and May.  I draw on what I hear and what I know about what has happened in the past to write the periodical “Oscar Moment.”  This year, having the benefit of blogging from the very beginning of the season, I can do more comprehensive coverage.

But last year, I took the frontrunners, analyzed them, and made predictions.  Some of them were right, but the biggest success was that they sparked discussion.  Not to mention I live blogged the 2009 Oscars.  For all those who wonder what runs through my mind on the biggest night of the year, wonder no longer.

Here’s a sampling of some of my best Oscar Moments, both this year and last.

Read my Oscar Moment on “How to Train Your Dragon.”

Read my live blog from Oscar night.

Read my Oscar Moment on “Nine.”

Read my Oscar Moment on “Up in the Air.”

Read my first Oscar Moment, about the movie “Precious.”

Braniac Award

I mean, I figure that I might as well try to thrust myself into contention here.  I try to write smart, thought-provoking pieces when I have the time.  My smartest posts probably come in the “Features” category (although I think I draw on a lot of intellect in the Oscar Moments too).

Read “Adjusted vs. Unadjusted Box Office.”

Read “Define Best Picture.”

Funniest Writer

I’m no comedian, but I let a whole lot of humor seep through into my posts.  At least I think it’s funny – you may not feel the same way.

If I had to pick the most humorous section of my blog, I would have to say the random factoids.  I’m often a very trite person, making something out of nothing.  If my life were a TV show, it might be “Seinfeld.”

But anyways, I let my funny flag fly in the random factoids.  I don’t have time to go through all 280 and find the funniest, but here are some that I remember off the top of my head as being particularly funny.

Read about what could have been a heated verbal exchanged with a theater employee in Random Factoid #255.

Read about a particular Sandra Bullock monologue that sticks with me in Random Factoid #239.

Read my rant on cramped theaters in Random Factoid #143.

Read about a caper of mistaken age in Random Factoid #135.

Read my rant on my broken DVD player in Random Factoid #85.

Best Post

Because there are some posts that I really think are THAT good.  These are the posts that I put my heart and soul into, and they get an exceptional reaction because of it.  These are the posts that stand out among the others on my blog.

You may have your own favorites, and I invite you to share them with me.  But here are the posts which I, the author, think are the most exceptional.  My top pick would have to be the first.

My review of “Up in the Air.”

My reflections on “Avatar.”

My interview with Kevin Renick.

My pondering on the importance of the acceptance speech.

My opinion piece “Mindless Moviegoing.”

Best New LAMB / Best Blog

If any or all of this has impressed you, fellow bloggers, I encourage you to remember “Marshall and the Movies” when you are filling out your LAMMY ballot in all categories including Best New LAMB and Best Blog.  But again, my greatest accomplishment would come not from winning these awards.  It comes from knowing that my voice is heard in the moviegoing community and that people accept my insights as valid.


Comments : 3 Comments »
Tags: , ,
Categories : Blogosphere, Marshall and the Movies

Random Factoid #280

4 05 2010

I like to give my mind a challenge (why else would I take AP US History and study like crazy), and I love doing riddles and puzzles to bend it.  Sudoku, KenKen, word games – you name it, I love it.

But some of that stuff is HARD.  Ever tried one of those intense difficulty Sudoku puzzles?  You can spend an hour on them and think you are finished, then realize you made a mistake way back at the beginning.  I try my hand at the New York Times crossword puzzles occasionally thanks to my nifty iPhone app.  I can toil away and exhaust all my knowledge and not solve anything more than a Monday.

So sometimes I need something that can stimulate my brain yet also build up my self-esteem.

That’s when I turn to the trusty People crossword puzzles because they are fun to do and simple for anyone with a sizable pop culture knowledge.  I’ve gained such confidence in my abilities that I have begun to do them in pen, even once in a Sharpie.

I even buy there giant, $15 books filled with crossword puzzles at airports and Target.  They are both about half completed and sitting on my bookshelf.


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Comment Contest Closure

3 05 2010

For those of you just dying to know, this was Ripley’s selection of the ten Best Picture nominees as their prize for winning the comment contest:

“A Serious Man.”  Probably my least favorite of the bunch, but to each his own.

And for those of you who want a visual on how many comments there were last month, take a look at this picture I forgot to post yesterday.

And the abbreviation for Comment Contest Closure is CCC, which is also an acronym for the Civilian Conservation Corps, which was FDR’s favorite New Deal agency because it gave jobs to young men.  Just have AP US History on the brain, and it seeps through even to here.


Comments : 5 Comments »
Tags: ,
Categories : Marshall and the Movies

« Previous Entries Next Entries »