Two years ago, one of the hottest properties at Sundance was Kevin Smith’s “Red State.” The narrative unfolded as usual: high-profile premiere, studios deliberate buying it, bidding war commences. Afterwards, however, Smith sold the movie to himself … for $20 causing a big hubbub and quite a few eye-rolls and head-shakes.
It was an attempt to make a statement on how backwards the studios’ distribution systems really are and how hard it is for filmmakers to tell the story they want. But honestly, could there have been a worse movie for anyone to make that claim with? If the studios keep all movies like “Red State” from getting made or distributed, you might not be too upset about that after actually watching the film itself.
It’s an absolutely dreadful movie that has no class or restraint. Smith critiques the Westboro Baptist Church, the notorious anti-gay protestors led by Fred Phelps, as a bunch of backwards ignoramuses – as if the rest of the world didn’t already know that. Perhaps a parody or a spoof would have been the more appropriate vehicle. Though I’ve never seen “Clerks” or any of Smith’s other films, I’ve heard he’s quite the humorist.
This is the kind of unintentional humor that usually plagues bad movies such as these. I’m sure some of it might have been planned, in which case Smith proved himself to be a poor imitator of Quentin Tarantino’s darkly comedic talents. I think he probably wishes “Red State” was something like “Inglourious Basterds” with gratuitous violence aplenty dealt out to the hated villains.
And I suppose it’s a fairly vile turn from Michael Parks as the Fred Phelps surrogate, but it’s not like I got any satisfaction out of seeing all the massive bloodshed done to him and his lunatic disciples. Mainly, I just wanted to see the conclusion of the horror story at the core of “Red State,” featuring Michael Angarano and his two buds following a sex ad but leading them to the Five Points Trinity Church. But by the time ATF shows up, all narrative and story are thrown out the window to let the bullets fly. Oh, and there’s also some criticism of the corrupt government at the end that just feels totally out of place given the rest of the film.
When the dust settles, all that’s left are a lot of corpses and a lingering disappointment in the air. Nothing to cheer about there. And for the record, I don’t think I’d buy this movie for 20¢.
I can never imagine the pain and the agony of being put through nature’s crucible, but I can gain an ever so slight taste of it from movies that can bottle up their terror. The latest of such is “
I like to fancy myself somewhat adept at interpreting the meaning of movies, but sometimes, I get stumped just like everyone else. It happened to me in “
Be careful, for “
“Amour” and “Beasts of the Southern Wild.” For all those who said 2012 was the year where studio entertainment came roaring back, think again. The Academy has a different narrative for you. These two indie darlings, sprung from the festival circuit, scored crucial nominations for their screenplays while also ratcheting a key one-two punch of Best Picture and Best Director. How much love for “Beasts of the Southern Wild” love was
“Argo.“ All that talk of it being a surprise come-from-behind winner all just came to a screeching halt with that Best Director snub. Still, seven nominations are nothing to shake a finger at.
The top five of “Lincoln,” “Les Misérables,” “Argo,” “Zero Dark Thirty,” and “Silver Linings Playbook” are locked in. There has been pretty consistent and unilateral support for these all season long (although some critics have savaged a certain musical I love).
The PGA also showed some love for “Moonrise Kingdom” and “Beasts of the Southern Wild,” two summer successes that many thought might have some hidden pockets of support. But will they choose both, one, or neither?
In case you caught on, yes, I did intentionally structure my prediction breakdown so that I would get to publish post-Directors Guild nominations. If you didn’t catch those this morning, they were Ben Affleck for “Argo,” Kathryn Bigelow for “Zero Dark Thirty,” Tom Hooper for “Les Misérables,” Ang Lee for “
While many would say Ang Lee was just below the “big three,” I would say Hooper is far more secure. I think the movie will play well with Academy voters, and I still think it could win Best Picture. It will likely win three, if not four Golden Globes. It could also win the ensemble award at SAG. And if “Les Misérables” made them feel anywhere near as much as “The King’s Speech,” they know who pulled the strings of their tear ducts. A nomination feels pretty secure to me.
However, the Academy directing branch, comprised of only about 300-400 members, is notoriously snooty, arty, high-minded, or whatever adjective you want to use. So maybe that will benefit Ang Lee. But often times, it’s a boon to someone they respect but has received little recognition leading up to the nominations With their out of the blue selections, they often provide some of the biggest surprises on nomination morning.
There were two clear paths to success for “
Phoenix’s journey will likely end the same way Fassbender’s did. Repelling the Academy, Fassbender was left on the outside looking in at the Best Actor category. Phoenix shouldn’t mind being put in the same position, however, because 
The dynamics at the top of the race have changed little over the past month. It’s still a Chastain vs. Lawrence cage match, and I think we won’t really know until the envelope is opened. They will go head-to-head at the Critics’ Choice Awards and the SAG Awards, but Viola Davis won both of those last year and lost the Oscar. The Golden Globe will do nothing to clear up the picture as they will compete in separate categories. I give Chastain the edge now.
I’m much more bullish on Watts, a prior nominee for “21 Grams” back in 2003, perhaps because I haven’t seen the movie yet and can visualize her more as a statistic (sorry for the bluntness, but that’s the name of the game). I’ve read that “The Impossible” has really played the guild circuit, ginning up admiration for Watts and the cast along the way. She got a high-profile shout-out from a mere acquaintance, Reese Witherspoon, in 
SAG’s fifth nominee was Helen Mirren for “
Perhaps that same European bloc of voters will be split among several other contenders from across the sea. The French Cotillard could steal some European love, as could the British-Australian Watts. Emmanuelle Riva could also make a play for that contingent for her work in “
Although, in the event of a “Lincoln” sweep (and me sticking my head in an oven), Sally Field could go 3-for-3 and win here for “Lincoln.” She’s certainly had her fair share of recognition along the precursor circuit, including a high-profile win from the New York Critics’ Circle.
On paper, the smart money would be on Nicole Kidman to snag a nomination. SAG is always the best indicator of actors’ sentiment, and she also has a key Globe nod.
Although don’t get me wrong, maybe they will not go with a perennial Oscar bridesmaid but rather a crowned Oscar queen.
Could it be Critics’ Choice nominee Matthew McConaughey for “Magic Mike?” He’s had quite the career turnaround in 2012, and a nomination would be a nice pat on the back. A nomination would be in the pattern of Robert Downey, Jr. in 2008 for “Tropic Thunder,” another unconventional comedic role from a resurgent actor.
Both DiCaprio and Waltz received nominations from the Golden Globes, but neither showed up on the Critics’ Choice list nor the SAG. The latter can be explained by a lack of screeners being sent to the nominating committee, but the former is troubling. I considered “Django Unchained” to be a non-factor in the season until it found some very vocal critical supporters and a large audience. So I have to think at least one actor from the movie will show up, but I don’t think there’s a consensus on who that should be.
I think this is probably the biggest no-brainer race of them all for 2012. It’s an extremely thin field, filled with several past nominees and winners. “Zero Dark Thirty” and “Django Unchained” will vie for the win; I think it’s Mark Boal’s to lose, but Tarantino could take it if they feel Boal’s win for “
As for that final slot, people (including myself) seem to have finally caught onto the fact that the writers’ branch sees foreign films and isn’t afraid to nominate them. Despite everyone declaring “
“Lincoln,” “Argo,” and “Silver Linings Playbook” are locks. Inarguable. If they don’t get nominated … well, I won’t finish that sentence since it’s a waste of time. IT’S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
In 2010, the category was 5-for-5 with Best Picture nominees “
Marshall and the Movies 
Recent Comments