Oscar Moment – First Predictions for 2011

29 11 2011

Best Picture

  1. The Artist
  2. War Horse
  3. Midnight in Paris
  4. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
  5. The Descendants
  6. The Help
  7. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
  8. Moneyball
  9. Hugo
  10. The Tree of Life

If we thought 2010 was a year that people most needed cinema to make them feel good, 2011 looks to be even more so.  That’s why it just seems right for a movie like ‘The Artist” to sweep in and take Best Picture.  It’s got the happy factor, the B&W factor, the silent film factor, and the nostalgia factor all going for it.  I have yet to see it, but even if I were somehow not to like it, I could still be content with this winning Best Picture because it would affirm the power of the prize.  When they reward risky, out-of-the-box movies, Hollywood responds by thinking even more creatively.  When they reward movies like “The King’s Speech,” studios start focus grouping the hell out of their contenders to perfectly calculate Oscar success.

There are other narratives to reckon with too, however.  Perennial Oscar favorite Steven Spielberg charges back onto the scene with “War Horse,” which coupled with box office success could wallop a hard knockout punch.  If audiences and critics decide it’s “Saving Private Ryan” good, I’ll have to seriously reevaluate.  Then there’s also Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris,” the biggest hit ever from the workhorse director.  It’s fun and funny while still making you think – the best of both Oscar worlds, if you will.  Right now, I can’t see Best Picture going to any other movie than these three.

However, don’t count out “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close.”  It has yet to screen for anyone, but that’s one heck of a book.  The delay makes pundits uneasy, but with AMPAS golden boy Stephen Daldry at the helm, Eric Roth with the pen, and a Tom Hanks-Sandra Bullock combo on screen, this would have to be a total bomb not to score with them.

I also expect “The Help” and “The Descendants” to find enough of a base of support to garner a nomination.  And I can’t help but feel that people are severely underestimating “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.”  It’s David Fincher.

On the fringe, though, are three movies that could easily break into the field – Martin Scorsese’s “Hugo,” Bennett Miller’s “Moneyball,” and Terrence Malick’s “The Tree of Life.”  Each have their weaknesses, so we’ll just have to see how they hold up through precursor season.  That’s the fun of it!

Best Director

  1. Steven Spielberg, “War Horse”
  2. Woody Allen, “Midnight in Paris”
  3. Michael Hazanavicius, “The Artist”
  4. Stephen Daldry, “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close”
  5. Alexander Payne, “The Descendants”

Here’s where ballot manipulation will start to muddle the waters.  Michael Hazanavicius, director of “The Artist,” is largely unknown, but Harvey Weinstein will have him making rounds on the circuit to cure lack of name recognition.  He got Tom Hooper a win last year at the expense of widely renowned David Fincher.  If “The Artist” appears headed for a sweep, it will have to take this category too.

But if “The Artist” and “War Horse” have the same group of fans, I see it likely that they honor the latter by voting for the iconic director to take home his third Academy Award for Best Director.  Woody Allen could also benefit from his legendary status, although I would bet they tip their hat to “Midnight in Paris” in the writing categories.  (As for the other two nominees, it’s never smart to bet against Payne or Daldry.)

Best Actor

  1. George Clooney, “The Descendants”
  2. Jean Dujardin, “The Artist”
  3. Brad Pitt, “Moneyball”
  4. Michael Fassbender, “Shame”
  5. Michael Shannon, “Take Shelter”

Can the “he’s a leading man, not a supporting actor” logic prevail to give George Clooney another Oscar?  I think that’s going to be the message from Fox Searchlight, and the starpower may be their only weapon to fend off the irresistible Jean Dujardin in “The Artist.”  I suspect it may already be down to these two, and wouldn’t it be exciting if we had another showdown like Penn-Rourke in 2008?

Meanwhile, I’m starting to think Brad Pitt is a lock for “Moneyball,” and Michael Fassbender’s daring performance in “Shame” will likely pick up some steam with release and exposure (no pun intended).  As for that final slot, I’m going daring and choosing Michael Shannon, who apparently turns in a very flashy performance in “Take Shelter” that I think might overpower Gary Oldman’s purportedly understated work in “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.”  But we’ll just have to see.

Best Actress

  1. Meryl Streep, “The Iron Lady”
  2. Rooney Mara, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”
  3. Viola Davis, “The Help”
  4. Michelle Williams, “My Week with Marilyn”
  5. Glenn Close, “Albert Nobbs”

My gut tells me that Streep will take the day here and win her first Oscar in 30 years.  The role is baity enough, the time is right, we may have never appreciated Meryl more.  But the fact that the film won’t open to audiences until next year makes it hard to gain audience support.

That’s why her biggest competitors may be two women headlining huge commercial vehicles, Rooney Mara in “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” and Viola Davis in “The Help.”  While Davis has Oprah and a sentimental vote behind her, Mara may be a huge threat because Lisbeth Salander is an intense, grueling role that demands a tremendous amount of physical commitment.  And let’s not forget that Oscar likes his leading women young.

Michelle Williams could make a big surge if “My Week with Marilyn” becomes an audience favorite with expansion.  Ditto for Charlize Theron in “Young Adult,” who has been left off the charts in favor of Glenn Close in “Albert Nobbs.”  If it weren’t for her name and her passion for the project, I would have chosen Theron or Elizabeth Olsen in “Martha Marcy May Marlene” for that final slot.  But Roadside Attractions is going to need to work overtime to revive the Streep vs. Close dialectic this month because it died rather quickly.

Best Supporting Actor

  1. Christopher Plummer, “Beginners”
  2. Patton Oswalt, “Young Adult”
  3. Max von Sydow, “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close”
  4. Jonah Hill, “Moneyball”
  5. Ben Kingsley, “Hugo”

I have absolutely no idea what to make of this field as everyone, except Plummer, could be totally out by next week.  Could the sentimental lifetime achievement faction of the Oscar voters shamelessly bare their teeth to honor the 81-year-old star?  At this point, that’s my best guess.  However, there could be another emerging storyline that will take over the Oscar narrative.

Could the lifetime achievement award be, in fact, for Max von Sydow in “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close?”  I see it as extremely likely given that the movie definitely needs one acting nomination with the talent involved, and Bullock could end up falling off the radar.  Patton Oswalt in “Young Adult” could make a case for funnymen who don’t typically do very well in the category.

My last two picks are just educated guesses, more just flinging mud at the wall than anything.  If “Moneyball” is a homerun with Academy voters, Jonah Hill could find himself on base in the category.  Same with Ben Kingsley in “Hugo,” who seems to be emerging late as a serious contender, particularly if the critical masses adoring Scorsese’s latest sound off loudly for him and the movie.

Best Supporting Actress

  1. Bérénice Bejo, “The Artist”
  2. Octavia Spencer, “The Help”
  3. Sandra Bullock, “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close”
  4. Shailene Woodley, “The Descendants”
  5. Carey Mulligan, “Shame”

I’m counting on big love for “The Artist” to make the unknown Bérénice Bejo an Academy Award winner.  Again, she has to battle unknown status, but her biggest challenger will likely be another unknown, Octavia Spencer in “The Help.”  Since “The Artist” is much more likely to take home the big prize, I think Bejo is more likely to ride on her film’s coattails to victory.  I’d hate to demean her with the term tack-on, but think Jennifer Connelly winning for “A Beautiful Mind” and Catherine Zeta-Jones winning for “Chicago.”  To justify Best Picture, maybe voters will decide it needs an acting win as well.

Two years after winning Best Actress for “The Blind Side,” Sandra Bullock looks to factor back into the Oscar scheme for “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.”  If Von Sydow isn’t showy enough, look for her to make a big rise simply due to the power associated with her name.  On the other hand, you have someone like Shailene Woodley who will likely ride in on the strength of her performance and the strength of her movie.  I don’t quite think her CV, consisting almost entirely of ABC Family’s “The Secret Life of the American Teenager,” is going to impress many voters.

For that last slot, I’ve picked Carey Mulligan in “Shame” over the much heralded performance of Vanessa Redgrave in “Coriolanus.”  I will most likely look back and call myself an idiot, but I just get the sinking sensation that people are not taking her seriously enough.  She reportedly bares it all, literally and figuratively, in a role that showcases the talents that wooed voters two years ago in “An Education.”  But just like last year, the picture is very, very unclear.

Best Original Screenplay

  1. Midnight in Paris
  2. The Artist
  3. Young Adult
  4. Win Win
  5. Martha Marcy May Marlene

It’s really a shame that even with the number of really impressive original screenplays this year, the Academy will likely settle for standard fare. I’m still counting on golden boy Woody Allen to pull through here, but if “The Artist” is poised for a sweep, I don’t see how it can not take an award for its writing.  Only three films in the past decade have taken Best Picture without a win in the Screenplay category.

As for the rest of the field, it could fall any number of ways.  I’d say the safest third slot would be for “Young Adult,” which is written by 2007 winner Diablo Cody.  But as for those last two movies, I just picked two of my favorites from this year in the prayer that they have a chance.  I can dream, can’t I?

Best Adapted Screenplay

  1. The Descendants
  2. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
  3. War Horse
  4. Moneyball
  5. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Scribe Alexander Payne is an Academy darling, winner in 2004 for his adaptation of “Sideways” as well as nominee in 1999 for his work on the script for “Election.”  I think until otherwise informed, it’s not smart to bet against him.

But there are plenty of other Oscar winners vying for glory here.  Eric Roth, winner for “Forrest Gump” and nominee for three other films, is in the race with “Extremely Loud and Incredible Close.”  Jonathan Safran Foer’s book is quite eccentric and would be a quite a challenge to adapt; even if the movie doesn’t quite hit home with the Academy, I see a nomination here as practically inevitable.  “War Horse” is written by two previous nominees, and while the writing seems to be a lesser component of the movie, a nomination seems assured.

“Moneyball” is written by last year’s winner, Aaron Sorkin, as well as Steven Zaillian, winner in 1993 for his work on “Schindler’s List.”  Zaillian could even pull double duty as a nominee as I’m predicting, on a whim, that his adaptation of “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” will also factor into the race.





(Again REALLY Belated) Weekend Update – July 31, 2011

31 07 2011

“Acting is not about being someone different. It’s finding the similarity in what is apparently different, then finding myself in there.”

– Meryl Streep

“You have to show violence the way it is. If you don’t show it realistically, then that’s immoral and harmful. If you don’t upset people, then that’s obscenity.”

– Roman Polanski

Out and About in the Community

As a sort of cop-out for not publishing this on time, I’m going to overpublicize two events I participated in recently over at the Large Association of Movie Blogs (The LAMB), a giant database of bloggers that get together and pool ideas and posts.

The first was the LAMB Acting School, a monthly series that gathers reviews and retrospectives centered around a single actor.  This month, it was the legendary Meryl Streep, the woman who may well be the greatest actress of her generation.  For those who get sick of her or claim that the Oscars are overly obsessed with her, just look at her filmography and tell me that the diversity of roles present and the dexterity with which she pulls them off isn’t flooring.  Her emphasis is obviously on the drama, but she can pull off comedy just as easily.  She is often lauded for her ability to change the accent of her voice to fit a character; however, it’s that incredible Streep pathos that she brings to every role that has made her a symbol of consistency and reliability in a volatile cinematic climate.

Not to mention I owe Meryl Streep a very special favor myself.  If it hadn’t been for her and “Julie & Julia,” this blog probably wouldn’t exist.  She has changed my life for better and for always, and I am eternally grateful.

Large Association of Movie Blogs

Click on the graphic to go see all the posts, but here are links to what I have reviewed from her illustrious career:

It’s Complicated

Fantastic Mr. Fox

Julie & Julia

Adaptation

Music of the Heart

Then, a week prior, I participated in the “LAMBs in the Director’s Chair” event, which celebrated the career of Roman Polanski.  I haven’t seen too many of his movies and have reviewed even fewer, but I admire his skill behind the camera and don’t wish to comment on his legal status.  I saw “Roman Polanski: Wanted & Desired,” which I found an interesting portrait of a haunted man, and it just made me even more torn.

Nonetheless, “The Pianist” may be one of my all-time favorite movies.  It is so powerful and moving, perhaps the only intensely personal non-documentarian account of the Holocaust we will ever get.  I’m really hoping “Carnage” is another big success – I always love a good play adaptation.

Large Association of Movie Blogs

Again, click the link to be taken to the post with reviews and commentary. Here’s what I submitted:

The Ghost Writer

Classics Corner: Rosemary’s Baby

A Week in Review

This week, I reviewed the two non-Smurf new releases, “Cowboys & Aliens” and “Crazy Stupid Love.”  My expectations were high for the former, low for the latter; the output was low for the former, high for the latter.  Click the pictures to be transported to the reviews.

I also celebrated my two year birthday/anniversary, whichever it is – without the pomp and circumstance.  And I’m totally OK with that.

Recommended Reading

Here’s some of the great work I read this week:

The Rant

This is a thought I had upon further thought on the sex friend movies of 2011, “No Strings Attached” and “Friends with Benefits.”  (Believe it or not, it is possible to think on them.)

Isn’t in hypocritical that the MPAA has begun a crusade against cigarette smoking yet have done nothing about what I think is a much bigger issue in movies nowadays: the casual attitude towards unprotected sex.  While I’m not going to dismiss smoking in movies as something that can influence kids and teenagers, I would argue that they are much more likely to imitate the sexual behavior of screen characters.  Smoking is a social behavior, so kids see it out in public all the time.  Movies just reinforce what they see in real life.

Sex, however, is a very private matter.  Their education nowadays is abstinence or a very sanitized, conservative, condoms-on-bananas approach, like Coach Carr from “Mean Girls” (see the clip below).  What they see in the movies defines how they perceive it in the real world.

While sex on film has evolved with the constantly changing societal norms, from “Carnal Knowledge” to “Brokeback Mountain” to the 2011 duo touting casual sex, I’m surprised that public awareness (and perhaps anger) of how sex is being portrayed on screen hasn’t caught up with the times.  While the conservative definition of sex as an act between man and wife was thrown out quite a while ago, that isn’t an excuse not to care.  Attitudes may have changed, but that doesn’t mean that we turn a blind eye and abandon all responsibility simply because we don’t fully agree with something.

The routine nowadays for sex is two people start passionately kissing, find a flat spot, disrobe each other, and begin thrusting.  Is it really that hard to add the simple, responsible step somewhere before the thrusting begins of adding a condom?  Would it really disrupt the scene that much to add in a shot of a Trojan wrapper on the ground?  A hand reaching in the drawer for a rubber?  We don’t actually have to see it slide on, but for kids who believe that movies reflect real life, there really needs to be some sense conveyed that these people have taken measures to be safe.  Otherwise, there should be consequences.

Only two mainstream movies (to my knowledge) have really dared to have any major results from having unprotected sex, both coming in 2007: “Knocked Up” and “Juno,” both of which featured characters who had to deal with a life-changing pregnancy either willingly not using a condom (the latter) or accidentally not using one (the former).  Both tackle the issue in a respectful manner but also serving as subtle cautionary tales.  But other than those, the only other movie I can think of that shows safe sex being practiced are, ironically, “No Strings Attached.”  (I should also credit 2005’s “Must Love Dogs,” a lame Diane Keaton rom-com that featured a scene where she and John Cusack choose not to have sex because they can’t find a condom.)

Does Hollywood really expect us to believe that 95% of the time, there are no consequences of having unprotected sex?  Wouldn’t it be so refreshing to see Katherine Heigl get chlamydia in her next romantic comedy?  Or after a drunken one-night stand, have Jessica Alba get pregnant?  These are things that happen to real people when they don’t act responsibly, and by dwelling on the small percentage of times that unprotected sex has no ramifications, they are promoting an illusion that could damage lives.

In our immediate gratification culture which demands movies on DVD sooner, data quicker, and social information faster, I find it almost unfathomable that people have chosen to fixate on eradicating smoking from cinema with all of its LONG-TERM effects.  Lung cancer takes a while to develop; you start to feel pregnancy within a month or so, a sexually transmitted disease sets in even sooner, and emotional scarring may be present the next morning.  While the wages of sex are usually not life-threatening, that doesn’t mean we should just turn a blind eye to Hollywood’s dangerous condoning of an irresponsible practice.

Check back for more “Weekend Update” on August 7 … hopefully it will be published on time!





F.I.L.M. of the Week (August 13, 2010)

13 08 2010

Much like Christopher Nolan, whose brains have been the recipient of much praise this summer, Charlie Kaufman knows how to write some intelligent movies.  His third film, “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind,” was a wildly engaging mystery and won him an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay.  I think one thing Kaufman has over Nolan is an ability to keep us spellbound while we are perplexed, not scratching our heads.

But before he was Academy Award winner Charlie Kaufman, he wrote a movie called “Adaptation,” which may just be the best movie about writing I’ve ever seen.  It’s been pushed down the calendar to run in the “F.I.L.M. of the Week” column all summer, but that doesn’t mean it is worse than any of the movies I’ve featured for the past three months.  This is easily the brainiest, most complex movie of the bunch.  And don’t think that it isn’t funny because it’s brainy; it’s brilliantly hilarious.

The movie, directed by Spike Jonze, tells the tale of Charlie Kaufman (played here by Nicolas Cage) as he struggles with writers block after “Being John Malkovich.”  His task is to adapt “The Orchid Thief,” a non-fictional book by Susan Orlean (Meryl Streep) about orchid poachers in Florida.  There’s just always some element he can’t get quite right, and it causes him anguish so painful we can feel it on the other side of the screen.

Add into the mix an equally neurotic twin brother Donald (also played by Cage) who’s obsessed with writing a script for the next blockbuster.  He has moved into Charlie’s home to mooch off him while also constantly asking advice on how to improve his screenplay.  Charlie constantly belittles his brother, refusing to acknowledge that he could actually have any talent.  Yet after seeing a screenwriting guru (Brian Cox), Charlie discovers that he needs his brother’s help to finish “The Orchid Thief.”  What results is the wildly self-referential “Adaptation,” a feast for the writer in all of us.

All three marquee names received Academy Award nominations for their performances – and deservedly so.   Chris Cooper, the so-called orchid thief of Orlean’s book, is a powerful force as a conman with uncanny intelligence.  Meryl Streep lets loose like seldom before (save perhaps her baked moment in “It’s Complicated), and it’s such fun to watch her do something a little different.  Cage doesn’t play two characters so much as he masters them, making them similar yet distinct.  He makes all the idiosyncrasies of the characters read well and milks them for some good humor.  Cage is so good, in fact, that you’ll surely scratch your head wondering why he’s strayed so far from these roles.





2009: Best Actress

4 03 2010

Best Actress – it’s considered by many to be the most unpredictable of the major races at the 82nd Academy Awards.  Five very deserving and adored candidates are vying for the industries top prize.

But before they were candidates, they were performances.  And even before that, they were characters that existed on a page.  Each of these are just stages, and to move from one to the other, a fantastic actor is crucial.

Here, I intend to celebrate the actresses for their work in turning that character into a performance, work that was so excellent that it turned them into candidates.

Sandra Bullock in “The Blind Side”

IN MY OWN WORDS: “Sandra Bullock’s spirited and spunky performance (which was good enough to overcome her dreadful accent) atones for some of the errors the film makes with her story.”

She’s here because … she is a popular actress playing a likable character in the box office surprise of the year.

Helen Mirren in “The Last Station”

She’s here because … she’s Helen Mirren and the Academy loves her; who cares if no one in America had seen her movie when the ballots were due?

Carey Mulligan in “An Education”

IN MY OWN WORDS: “The understated grace and poise that Mulligan gives to Jenny is what evoked Hepburn’s resemblance, but the real marvel of Mulligan’s acting is that the old-fashioned spirit does not make her character some kind of antique.”

She’s here because … she is a brilliant rising star who dazzles in one of the year’s most agreeable movies.

Meryl Streep in “Julie & Julia”

IN MY OWN WORDS: “[Streep] completely masters the persona of the larger-than-life personality and woman – but to anyone that has seen Streep’s work, this is hardly a surprise.”

She’s here because … this is yet another fantastic Meryl Streep performance, and the Academy can’t not nominate one of those.

Gabourey Sidibe in “Precious”

IN MY OWN WORDS: “[Sidibe] makes us feel great concern about her character from the instant we see her trudging through her school.  As Precious gains confidence, our concern develops into genuine care and affection.”

She’s here because … in her first role, she commands the screen with the presence of a veteran.

Marshall’s Oscars

I haven’t seen “The Last Station,” but three of the four nominated performances that I have seen made my Best Actress list.  The exception is Sandra Bullock, who I think has a great story this year, but not one of the best performances.

One spot goes to Zooey Deschanel for her fantastic work on “(500) Days of Summer.”  Her performance has stuck with me all year, and its beautiful subtleties are astounding.  In one of my first reviews on this blog, I raved of Deschanel:

Summer [Deschanel’s character] also has a deep need to be love, but she makes this yearning ever so subtle. Deschanel is able to play this crucial undertone quite skillfully … Deschanel, who most audiences will remember as Will Ferrell’s love interest in “Elf,” plays Summer with the right balance of warmth and bitterness. She plays hard-to-get but also projects Summer’s need to be loved at the same time.

I’ve always been hesitant about giving acting awards to foreign language performances (not that it really matters), but the more I have thought about Melanie Laurent’s performance in “Inglourious Basterds,” the more remarkable it has become for me.  I didn’t say anything other than her being “poignant” in my review, yet her virtuoso work is actually quite astounding.  Obviously Waltz reigns supreme in the film, but she’s crucial to the movie’s success in her own right.

At my prestigious ceremony, the nominees read as followed:

Zooey Deschanel, “(500) Days of Summer”
Melanie Laurent, “Inglourious Basterds”
Carey Mulligan, “An Education”
Meryl Streep, “Julie & Julia”
Gabourey Sidibe, “Precious”

Predictions

Should win: Carey Mulligan, “An Education”
Could win: Meryl Streep, “Julie & Julia”
Will win: Sandra Bullock, “The Blind Side”

The race is between Streep and Bullock, with Mulligan and Sidibe as the major dark horses.  Ultimately, I think the fact that Meryl already has two statues on her mantle coupled with the popularity of “The Blind Side” is enough to propel Bullock to the win.





FEATURE: The Importance of the Speech

1 03 2010

At the Screen Actors Guild Awards, they call it “Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role.”  At the Golden Globe Awards, they call it “Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture.”  But at the Academy Awards, the most celebrated show of them all, they call it simply “Best Actor.”

This distinction is important because at the Oscars, it is not just the performance that is rewarded.  It is the actor themselves.  The Academy elects four actors each year to become the face of quality of their industry to the world.  These actors can forever affix the title “Academy Award Winner” to their name on any poster or trailer they so desire.  Thus, they vote not only for a great body of work but also for a face and a personality that represents them well.

The performance gets a select group of actors some attention.  Their name and reputation gets them to the next step: consideration.  Then, a few big groups take a leap and select one of them.  At this point, the part of the voter is done.  It is up to the actors to let us know where they stand.  With their acceptance speech, it is their job to convince us why they deserve the highest honor that their craft has to give.  It is their job to show voters what a vote for them really means.

Let’s take a look at the five actors who have won top prizes from the Golden Globes and the Screen Actors Guild.

Read the rest of this entry »





REVIEW: It’s Complicated

24 12 2009

I equate watching Nancy Meyers’ movies to taking a leisurely Sunday saunter through a beautiful park.  Warm and delightful with plenty of laughs thrown in, her movies are always enjoyable to watch.  But just because a filmmaker does one thing very well does not mean that they should do that and only that.  With “It’s Complicated,” Meyers tries her hand at a different kind of movie.  While most of her previous projects were relatively sweet, her latest piles on the raunch.  Accompanying this vulgarity is a noticeable surge of laughter, although this comes at the cost of the charm her movies usually possess.

The title refers to the affairs of the characters and not at all to the story, which is actually quite simple.  Jane (Meryl Streep) and Jake (Alec Baldwin) were married for many years, had three kids, and are now divorced.  Jake moves on quickly, marrying the much younger Agnes.  Jane, on the other hand, tries to “learn how to be divorced,” something she cannot seem to master even after 10 years.  But after an inebriated evening leads to some ribald shenanigans with her ex-husband, she begins to wonder whether there might be some lingering feelings left for Jake.  Jane tries to fight it and chastens herself severely for even thinking of having an affair with him, but the attraction becomes undeniable.  However, this comes inopportunely as she is falling for her lovably dorky architect, Adam (Steve Martin).  He reminds her of all the joy that a lively personality can bring, and Jane begins to recall all the reasons why her marriage with Jake failed.  Sound too complicated?  It really isn’t on screen, where the story unravels quite predictably and every plot twist can be called with relative ease. Read the rest of this entry »





REVIEW: Fantastic Mr. Fox

30 11 2009

It might not seem odd at first, but soon after being immersed in the world of “Fantastic Mr. Fox,” you are bound to notice that all the characters are saying the word cuss, used as a substitute for any necessary expletives, with great frequency.  In a brilliant stroke of ingenious mischief, Wes Anderson finds a way to tone down the movie with dumbing it down.  He takes everything that audiences love about his live-action features – the dysfunctional families, the eclectic music, the geometric shots, the conscious cinematography, and all the quirks – and refuses to surrender to the family movie.  Style intact, Anderson makes a movie that audiences will realize isn’t all that different from his other pictures.

The cast of characters might seem a little bit familiar to fans of Anderson’s work.  Mr. Fox (George Clooney) is a flawed father struggling to accept his responsibilities to his family, and he yearns for his furtive days of hunting.  Trying to rediscover his true self, he embarks on a series of ultimately successful raids on the crotchety neighboring farmers with the wonderfully neurotic opossum Kylie (Wallace Wolodarsky).  This is all to the dismay of Mrs. Felicity Fox (Meryl Streep), his caring but somewhat disapproving wife.  Knowing Wes Anderson, the family drama can’t end there.  Their son, Ash (Jason Schwartzman), can’t seem to live up to his father’s legacy.  In addition, he begins to feel like second fiddle to his dad when naturally gifted cousin Kristofferson (Eric Chase Anderson) comes to stay with the family.  The classic “hunted become the hunters” story intertwines with the family turmoil as Mr. Fox angers the dim-witted farmers adjacent to their dwelling.  Using their wile, the rodents are able to outsmart and outmaneuver their foes.

Read the rest of this entry »





What To Look Forward To In … December 2009

14 11 2009

What is in my mind the finest month for the movies is almost here!  Let Marshall guide you through the best and steer you away from the worst, but most of all enjoy!  The studios have been holding back their best movies all year to dump them all here, where they can get serious awards consideration.

December 4

A major Oscars wild-card is “Brothers.”  No one really knows what to make of it.  If the movie hits big, it could completely change the game.  But it could just fly under the radar like most expect it to now.  However, the trailer makes it look as if it the movie could be absolutely mind-blowing.  Directed by Jim Sheridan, who has received six Academy Award nominations, “Brothers” follows Grace Cahill (Natalie Portman) as she and her daughters deal with the loss of her husband, Sam (Tobey Maguire), in war.  Sam’s brother, Tommy (Jake Gyllenhaal) comes to live with Grace to lend a helping hand.  But romantic sparks fly between the two at precisely the wrong time: the discovery that Sam is alive and coming home.  With the two brothers both tugging Grace’s heart for their share, a different type of sparks fly.

You have heard me say plenty about “Up in the Air.”  If you haven’t read my Oscar Moment on the movie or heard my bliss at the release of the trailer, let me give you one more chance to hope on the bandwagon.

But the movies don’t stop there.  “Armored,” an action-drama that is tooting its own moral horn, starring Matt Dillon and Laurence Fishburne.  “Everybody’s Fine” appears to be a holiday movie, so that might be worth checking out if you’re in the spirit.  The movie, a remake of a 1990 Italian film by the same name, stars Robert DeNiro as a widower who reconnects with his estrange children.  And “Transylmania” looks to cash in on the vampire craze sweeping the nation by satirizing it, but I doubt it will be financially viable because it is being released by a no-name studio and without any big names.

December 11

The highlight of the weekend for many will be “The Princess and the Frog,” Disney’s return to the traditional animation by hand musical.  The movie looks to capitalize on what we know and love Disney musicals for, adding some catchy tunes to a fairy tale we have known since childhood.  Anika Noni Rose, best known for her role as Lorrell in the film adaptation of “Dreamgirls,” lends her talented voice to the princess Tiana.  As a huge fan of “Dreamgirls” during the winter of 2006, I couldn’t think of someone better equipped to handle the sweet, soft Disney music (which isn’t designed for belters like Beyoncé or Jennifer Hudson).  That being said, the music won’t sound like anything you’ve ever heard from a Disney fairy tale.  It is being scored by Randy Newman, not Alan Menken (“Beauty and the Beast,” etc.), and will have a jazzy feel much like its setting, New Orleans.

This week also boasts the opening of three major Oscar players. Two have been featured in Oscar Moments, “Invictus” and “A Single Man.” The former opens nationwide this Friday, the latter only in limited release. I’ll repost the trailers below because they are worth watching. But read the Oscar Moment if you want to know more about the movies.

According to the people that matter, “The Lovely Bones” has all the pieces to make a great movie. But for summer reading two years ago, I read the source material, Alice Sebold’s acclaimed novel. I found it dreadfully melodramatic and very depressing without any sort of emotional payoff to reward the reader for making it through. But maybe Hollywood will mess up the novel in a good way. If any movie could, it would be this one. With a director like Peter Jackson and a cast including Saiorse Ronan (“Atonement”), Mark Wahlberg, Rachel Weisz, Stanley Tucci, and Susan Sarandon, it could very well happen.  It opens in limited release on this date and slowly expands until its nationwide release on Martin Luther King Day weekend in 2010.

Read the rest of this entry »





Random Factoid #97

2 11 2009

You might not be reading this blog if it weren’t from the surge of euphoria and a somewhat bloated ego I had on July 27, 2009.  I attended an advanced screening of “Julie & Julia,” and at promotional screenings, they usually have contests to give away free goods.  At this particular one, they were giving away prize packs to people that could do an impression of Julia Child.  I was being spurred on by family and friends to go, even though my only knowledge of Julia Child’s voice and mannerisms came from watching Meryl Streep in the trailer.

I ended up getting selected to be one of three people competing for a $30 gift card to Whole Foods Markets and a cooking class.  They gave me a whisk and a giant bowl, put a microphone up to my mouth, and told me to be Julia Child for 20 seconds.  All I could muster up with confidence was, “I’m Julia Child, don’t be afraid!”  From then on, my acting skills kicked in and I improvised for 15 seconds.  All the while, I could faintly make out my group cackling with laughter in the dim theater lighting.  I ended up getting second place in a voting system decided by applause, mainly because the other woman remembered Child’s most famous line, “Bon appetit!”  I still got an apron, a tote bag, some mini kitchen tools, and a $20 gift card though, so it was all good.  I rushed back up to my seat with the prizes and became an instant celebrity in my section, asked to reprise my impression multiple times by people I didn’t even know.  Perhaps this momentary renown was indirectly responsible for the creation of the blog, but I’ll never be able to sort out the processes of my mind to give you a black and white answer to that.





What To Look Forward To In … November 2009

7 10 2009

The holiday movie season begins to kick into high gear in the month of November, as does exciting Oscar season.  Accordingly, this post is longer than the previous monthly preview posts.  Brace yourself for movie mania coming your way in a few weeks.  Sit back, relax, and let Marshall guide you through the coming attractions.

November 6

From the mainstream movie perspective, the hot movie of this weekend will be Robert Zemeckis’ adaptation of “A Christmas Carol.”  Shot with the same motion capture technology that Zemeckis used to make “The Polar Express,” the movie will cash in on premium ticket prices from 3D and IMAX 3D screenings.  My main concern about the quality of the movie itself lies with its principal actor, Jim Carrey, who will act as Scrooge and all three ghosts.  I doubt Zemeckis will permit it, but I fear that Carrey will make a mockery of Dickens’ classic novel much in the fashion of Mike Meyers with “The Cat in the Hat.”  Regardless of what critics say, I will probably end up seeing this with the family for some good old-fashioned family fun at the movies.

“The Men Who Stare at Goats” is the first movie of the holiday season to which George Clooney lends his talents.  Here, he plays a a military man in charge of a secret unit that attempts to use psychic powers for military purpose.  One such activity is to attempt to kill goats just by staring at them.  The movie also stars Ewan MacGregor as the reporter who discovers it all; the cast also includes Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey.  The movie is directed and adapted by Grant Heslov, previously nominated for an Academy Award for his work on “Good Night, and Good Luck.”  The trailer seems to show Heslov’s approach as similar to the Coen Brothers who usually provide a fun-filled romp.  Maybe the film will be a bona-fide indie hit, and Overture Films will be able to claim their first movie to gross over $50 million.  But we’ll have to see.

I’ve already written about the Oscar favorite, “Precious,” in a previous Oscar Moment.  I’ll post the trailer here just for the sake of promoting it, but if you want to hear my thoughts, read the post.

Two thrilling movies also open this week.  First, “The Box” with Cameron Diaz and James Marsden, seems to have an intriguing premise: if you push the button on the box, you will get a million dollars, but someone you don’t know will die.  However, it looks to be more interested in cheap thrills than exploring moral issues.  The other, “The Fourth Kind,” looks downright scary.  If horror is your thing, this looks like the movie for you.  I saw the trailer at “District 9,” and even if you don’t want to see it, you have to ponder the validity of the “true story” behind the movie.

November 13

Disaster porn reaches its pinnacle this weekend.  “2012,” Roland Emmerich’s apocalyptic film, will have some of the biggest destruction and explosions the world has ever seen.  The trailer was so mind-blowing that I am willing to overlook all vices in the plot to see the world’s greatest landmarks get wiped off the earth.  My only comment is that if John Cusack somehow finds a way to stop the end of the world, I will be enraged.

The other major wide release of the week is “Pirate Radio,” a movie that Focus Features so desperately wants you to see that they changed the title from “The Boat that Rocked” just a few weeks ago to appeal to you. Are you flattered? You shouldn’t be. The movie seems like comedic Oscar Bait, but it didn’t do well Britain, the country of production. Focus scrambled to change their focus from awards movie to popular movie. So whenever this pops into a theater near you, be armed with the knowledge that “Pirate Radio” is merely a washed-up Oscars wannabe. But make the decision to see it for yourself.

New York and Los Angeles get the treat of watching Wes Anderson’s adaptation Roald Dahl’s “Fantastic Mr. Fox.”  I have the utmost respect for Anderson for not conforming to the growing trend to do all animation through computers.  Anderson’s film uses the stop motion technique, moving an object gradually to give the illusion that it is moving.  Even more exciting that Anderson’s eccentric style in an eccentric medium is the voice cast.  Clooney voices the titular character, the cunning Mr. Fox.  The cast also features Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman, Owen Wilson, and Bill Murray.  What’s not to like?  (NOTE: The movie expands on November 20 and enters wide release on November 25.)

For those who like very obscure indies, “That Evening Sun” with 87-year-old Oscar bridesmaid Hal Halbrook has his latest shot at the gold.

Read the rest of this entry »





F.I.L.M. of the Week (August 28, 2009)

28 08 2009

The F.I.L.M. (First-Rate Independent, Little-Known Movie) of this week is “Music of the Heart.” It was one of my favorites growing up, the first movie I saw at the then brand new Edwards Greenway Palace 24 Theaters in 1999. I occasionally catch it playing on Starz, and it still possesses the magic that enthralled me when I was 7.  The movie features one of the most underrated of Meryl Streep’s 15 Oscar-nominated performances, an emotionally compelling tour de force that connects with the audience on a level that very few ever have.

Roberta Guspari (Streep) is down on her luck.  After her husband runs off her with her best friend, she moves with her two young sons to the turbulent neighborhood of East Harlem in New York.  She starts a violin program in an inner city school, inspiring a love of music among youth who have never been given an opportunity to study it.  At first, it is tough to spark a work ethic among the kids and to convince their parents that the violin is a worthwhile skill to learn.  The program, over time, becomes a great success.  Unfortunately, many years later, budget cuts force the district to fire Roberta and cancel her program.  With help from teachers and parents, she fights for the right for kids to have access to arts education.

“Music of the Heart” is a movie that aims for the heart and hits it dead-on.  Immensely inspirational and uplifting, it provides wholesome entertainment with morals that don’t even fly over the little ones’ heads.  The film forges a deeply sentimental connection with the audience, and it pulls you in for a compelling experience.  It might be a hard find on the rental shelf, but it is worth the search.





REVIEW: Julie & Julia

29 07 2009

Yum.

According to Julie Powell, that word shouldn’t be used while eating.  But as America begins to devour “Julie & Julia,” I can’t help but think that audiences will use that word.  The movie is a delectable treat, serving a luxurious two-course meal: the story of Julia Child (Meryl Streep) before she became the published and televised chef that we know, and Julie Powell (Amy Adams) as she battles the boring world of bureaucracy by baking all 524 recipes in Child’s cookbook.

I do have to give the movie (and Julie Powell, more specifically) a great deal of credit – her blog, “The Julie and Julia Project,” is the inspiration for this blog.  At the beginning, Julie is struggling to find some purpose holed up inside her cubicle, forced to drone on and on about the company’s policies.  She envies her rich “friends,” who are writing cover stories for top New York newspapers and blogs because they seem to have found merit in their lives.  Much like movies are a constant source of comfort to me, Julie found solace in cooking.  And one day, she proclaims to her husband, “I can write a blog.  I have thoughts.”  As I have quickly discovered, it really only takes that little spark of inspiration to start something great (at least in Julie’s case … the verdict is still out on me).

It is really Julie’s story that captivated me the most.  As she works her way through 524 recipes in 365 days (some simple, others quite daunting), anyone who has ever stepped into the kitchen for therapeutic reasons can instantly relate to her struggles and successes.  Adams really is the heart and soul of the movie; she brings a pleasant charm to the role, but she also shows a more raw and emotional side than we are used to seeing from her. Read the rest of this entry »