Dave Eggers’ novel “The Circle” ran 491 pages. The movie adaptation of the book, co-written with director James Ponsoldt, runs a little over 100 minutes (when you exclude the credits). It appears they made the executive decision to tame that imposing length by keeping the events of the plot but dulling the nuances of the Juvenalian satire.
“The Circle” maintains so much of the reluctance of the social media era that I found so compelling upon reading two years ago (ironically before I took a job working in social media). Eggers’ eponymous technology company powerhouse combines the compulsive networking capabilities of Facebook, the Big Brother-like tracking of Google and the hardware prowess of Apple into one frightening hydra. Perhaps as a matter of budget (just $18 million), Ponsoldt can never quite translate this behemoth into visual terms. On the page, Eggers can conjure up a compound of fanciful imagination to represent The Circle’s reach. On screen … Ponsoldt shows us a Beck concert for the staffers.
As Emma Watson’s Mae Holland begins her tenure at The Circle as a low-level gopher, she comes to embody a puzzling paradox of the digital age. Even as our awareness grows of the debilitating effect of a life lived online, so does these companies’ ability to keep us trapped. Yet rather than following Eggers’ original line of thought to its logical, terrifying conclusion, the film chickens out at the end. “The Circle” betrays its literary origins, leaving behind a hollow shell of platitudes spouted by characters who act and sound like little more than the function they occupy in the narrative.
This movie could be so much more because the book its based on actually is. If the film were a straight bomb, it might be easier to write off. Yet Ponsoldt’s work arguably does the most damage by being average. It’s not a mistranslation so much as it’s just a half-hearted one. C+ / 
When the eventual biographers take stock of Tom Hanks’ career, something tells me that “
I’m young enough that I cannot remember a time when director Steven Spielberg’s name was not synonymous with cinematic excellence at the highest echelon. I am also of the age that I have never been able to experience the kind of film that earned him such a reputation in any manner other than through the lens of retrospection.
The top 3 seem pretty secure to me. There’s a slim chance of Hanks falling out simply because this isn’t his first rodeo and voters might want to give their vote to a fresher face. But aside from frontrunners McConaughey and Ejiofor, very few of the top nominees are new to the game.
Blanchett has this all but sealed up now. It would take a major blunder on-stage for her to lose Best Actress at this point, but we all know that’s not going to happen. It’s Cate Blanchett – she’s about the classiest actress around.
Amy Adams is an Academy favorite herself though, racking up an impressive four Best Supporting Actress nominations in the past nine years. She’s never been recognized as a leading lady, and a nomination here would send the message, “We’re working on getting you that Oscar win one day, Amy, we promise!” Though she did not land a SAG nomination, she’s been recognized by the BFCA and BAFTA. Moreover, she 
While I remain hopeful that Fassbender can pull an upset, this category looks to be all Jared Leto. He’s been taking everything in his path, and I don’t think that will stop until the Oscar. For Fassbender, though, he should at least take solace in getting his first nomination without campaigning a bit. (If he had to work so hard only to be denied recognition for his astounding work in “Shame,” then why bother lobbying anymore?)
Cooper was passed over by SAG in favor of a posthumous recognition for James Gandolfini in “Enough Said.” While he was certainly a beloved actor, Gandolfini was more revered for his television work than his film roles. (“
It’s down to Nyong’o vs. Lawrence for the win here. Though Lawrence prevailed at the star-powered Golden Globes, I still have my doubts as to whether she can swing back-to-back Oscar wins. I think this category could also be a way for us to gauge on Oscar night which film will win Best Picture. Both films are likely to need one acting victory, and Best Supporting Actress is the most probable place to earn it. (Ejiofor has a shot for Best Actor, and that might pan out for the film.)
My guess is that the Academy will stick to some long renowned actresses to fill out the roster. Oprah Winfrey surprisingly missed with the Golden Globes for “The Butler,” but she’s been touted by the BFCA, SAG, and BAFTA. Even though the film has lost its buzz after it scored surprisingly well with the SAG, I think the Oscars will still want to give something to one of the few screen performances given by the cultural icon.
There seems to be no clear frontrunner a la “
As I said, I’m projecting Russell to go all the way in 2013.
Big, baity performances have won out here for the past decade, essentially. So I’d say the frontrunner has to be Matthew McConaughey in “Dallas Buyers Club.” His comeback narrative is appealing, and the fact that he lost a ton of weight helps.
Please, Academy, make this Amy Adams’ year! She’s been nominated four times already in Best Supporting Actress. Now that she’s playing with the big girls in Best Actress, maybe it’s just time to give her the darned trophy already.
Go big or go home. After being snubbed for his incredible work in “Shame,” I predict the Academy will right its wrongs and reward Michael Fassbender with an Oscar for “12 Years A Slave.” I really hope I’m right.
Honestly, this category is such a toss-up at this point, so I’m forced to pick the only person with buzz at the moment: Oprah Winfrey for “
David O. Russell is a two-time writing nominee? Check for “American Hustle.”
Marshall and the Movies 
Recent Comments