March Must See Movies and Movies to Skip

As the post Academy Award drought begins March has many promising films that could be entertaining.  During the months of January and February I looked forward to catching up on smaller films, and begrudgingly suffering through films like The Woman in Black with friends.  I can honestly say there are some decent prospects this month.

March 2nd

The Lorax

Project X

Being Flynn

The most promising release for this week is The Lorax, which is from the creators of Despicable Me.  This Dr. Seuss tale will be a big hit at the box office drawing in drones of families, but will it be worth your time?  I am not excited by this film, but I do think it could be solid.  X looks like its trying to hard to a teenage rip off of The Hangover.  With poor marketing this film will do poorly and sink slowly.  Being Flynn is another DeNiro vehicle that seems to have being angry and yelling.  While the preview is not bad this looks to be a waste of everyone's time.

March 9th

John Carter

Salmon Fishing in Yemen

Friends with Kids

A Thousand Words

Silent House

John Carter always seems to have people baffled while watching the preview.  Everyone I know asks who is John Carter, and not with intrigue, more with a sense of who cares.  I predict this film to be a mess and a box office flop.  I saw Salmon Fishing and I liked the film, I did not love it.  I think this will hit a small population, the film is charming but will not draw large crowds-worth seeing.  Friends with Kids looks hilarious, more like a sitcom, but but worth watching on the big screen.  Eddie Murphy's latest film looks like a waste of time and money.  Silent House looks like the thing thrillers are meant to be made of and Elizabeth Olsen is a great find!

March 16th 

21 Jump Street

Casa de Mi Padre

If you do mind movies that are both stupid and funny go see 21 Jump Street, it was pretty hilarious.  Casa looks like another Will Ferrell movie I will try and avoid, while I do not hate him I think his schtick is getting tired the same way it has done with Adam Sandler.  Time to grow up and find a new modus operandi. 

March 23rd

The Hunger Games

No one wanted to compete with the film that outsold Twilight.  I read the first book, and liked it.  I think the film looks solid, and it has a great cast and great director.  I do not want it become the next Twilight where it was rushed to the big screen to make money.  Even though Twilight was always going to be a terrible film series.

March 30th 

Wrath of the Titans

Mirror Mirror

Bully

Was a sequel needed for Clash of the Titans?  I do not remember the first film being that successful.  The sequel looks awful.  Mirror Mirror looks campy, and not in a good way, what happened Julia?  I have to put Bully on this, this is a documentary about a young boy who was bullied, not because of his orientation, but because he was different and highlight his parents crusade to help others.  This looks fantastic.

Must See Movies: Bully, The Hunger Games, The Lorax, 21 Jump Street,  Silent House

Movies to Skip:A Thousand Words, Wrath of the Titans, Mirror Mirror, John Carter, Project X

Salmon Fishing in the Yemen Swims Upstream Against Cliche and Fights to Swim in a Commentary on Issues from Today

Salmon Fishing in the Yemen (3 out of 5)

Directed by Lasse Hallstrom (Chocolat, The Cider House Rules)

Written by Simon Beaufoy (The Full Monty, Slumdog Millionaire, 127 Hours)

Starring: Ewan McGregor, Emily Blunt, Amr Waked and Kristin Scott Thomas

Last night I caught the screening for this movie with its star Emily Blunt.  Ms. Blunt is first and foremost a beautifully charming individual; she talked about a funny story while filming this where she attempted to fish and ended up hooking Ewan's dog.  While many of the questions were about the film, her craft, and working with co-stars like Meryl Streep and Miss. Piggy.  There were also questions about her lovely husband Jon Krasinski whose parents were in the audience because they live in Newton, MA.  Blunt has a terrific presence which explains how she can help carry material that was had its moments of beauty and some big misses.

Salmon Fishing centers on a fisheries expert, Dr. Afred Jones (McGregor) who is approached by a consultant, Harriet Chetwoode-Talbot (Blunt) to help a Sheikh from Yemen (Waked) live out his dream by fishing in Yemen.  When Jones initially hears about the project he writes a e-mail to Harriet stating that because logically Salmon would not be able to adapt to the environment in Yemen this was not possible.  Enter the government.  The next morning Patricia Maxwell who is in charge of the press office for the Prime Minister, is awoken by the news of a bombing in Afghanistan.  Maxwell needs a new story to change the tone, and lands on making Dr. Jones aid in the Sheikh's journey to make it possible to fish for Salmon in the Yemen.

The directing/writing team of Hallstrom and Beaufoy combines the strength of each person.  Separately they have each contributed some great work to their perspective film category.  Hallstrom knows how to turn on the charm his films Chocolat and The Cider House Rules were both films that used charm from their books to influence their perspective films.  In a way Hallstrom knows how to work with adapted material, and make it work.  Hallstrom has also adapted the films Dear John and The Shipping News, which ultimately did not work. 


 Beaufoy's scripts have been incredibly solid, while I do not know if his talents match that of the director; he has adapted some wonderful screenplays himself.  Together this team make a film that while enjoyable does not always hit the right spots.  While this film is solid, witty, and charming it often loses the deeper messages that are meant to be conveyed as it tries to romantically connect Blunt and McGregor's character.  The real storyteller is the natural environment where the shot the film.  Cinematographer Terry Stacey does an excellent job showing the beauty of Scotland and Yemen.  Each scene was more breathtaking than the next and it was like getting lost on a magical journey.

 Blunt and McGregor have solid chemistry, and in listening to her speak to us she stated "actors work best when they build good rapport off screen."  While watching these two on screen it was apparent that they hit it it off, and got along swimmingly.  Blunt does a good job with her role, carrying the wait of emotional grief well.  While McGregor's role and evolution of character is harder to display, he does a good job, because he is a good actor.  The real highlights of the film for me are the two supporting players Kristin Scott Thomas's Maxwell brings an amazingly witty breath of fresh air to this film; she is utterly fantastic.  Waked who played the Sheikh is also brilliant.  Waked has done a lot of smaller roles, but I feel as though this film, and this role will be a major breakthrough for him.  Waked is charming, charismatic, and has tremendous acting potential.

Scott Thomas and Waked's characters represent the most intriguing parts of the film.  The film is meant to show the way politics misrepresent certain situations, and  the way logic and faith can have an impact on life decisions.  While I believe the film uses these concepts well, the film is not able to delve deep enough into the subject matter.

Scott Thomas represents the political structure.  Through her character, and looking at the fisheries office the film itself mocks today's politicos through showing their conversations via using an instant messenger, having the Prime Minister pretending to fish, and showing their need to create an agenda to gloss over the negative in today's society or create a staged photo opportunity.  While the  script is sharp enough not to shove this down the audiences throat, it does lose the sharper veracity on political structures.

The Sheikh's character is a commentary on the lack of faith in today's world.  His character has a huge impact on Dr. Jones whose reasoning is based solely on logic, but this project with the sheikh tends to shake his thinking about not only salmon, but life.  While Maked was great, and Ewen's transformation does occur, I feel like this is the weakest aspect of the film.  This is the foundation for the relationship that exists between McGregor and Blunt, and its often set on shaky ground.  Blunt and McGregor's chemistry save the day here.  I would have liked more of Maked's character because is the heart and soul of this film; he is the person who wants to do the impossible, and his journey is more fascinating than Dr. Jones.

At the end of the day this film's solid beauty and wit propel this be a decent film, that makes you believe in something more than just staying the course.  While the leads may be what we are meant to focus on, the supporting cast steal the show, and bring the film back to its core.  This is not just a love story but a commentary on life today.

Our Future Hijacked by Machines: We Love It! By Alberto Lorenzo

Today marks the first day my page has a guest writer, and that is my good friend Alberto Lorenzo who works at Georgetown University.  I like what he has to say about human dependency on technology and after watching all six Star Wars films this past weekend I just had to include his piece, so here it is.  Please contribute!


http://filmpulsations.tumblr.com/

The rise of digital media, as discussed by theorists, is in many ways, breaking away from what is considered “cinema.” However, it is very contradictory to think about it in terms of the ways it also propels “film” forward (or away?) from what we are used to. Surely, there is usually a wish to return to “reality” or “nature” in films such as Strange Days (1995), but for the most part, there is an enjoyment that comes from encountering the digitally enhanced reality that presents us with never-ending choices. At the core, getting lost in a digital world in the premise of most movies involves the pairing or joining of human and machine in some form of way. As the 20th century approached its culmination, more and more of these movies seemed to surface as the Western world grew more and more dependent on computers and machines. In fact, one way to think about this anxiety is to reflect on the Y2K problem that plagued the minds of many companies at the end of the 1990’s.

Another peculiar aspect about films that deal with the merging of human and machine, is their compulsory need to locate themselves in time, mostly, if not always, in the future. For example, Blade Runner (1982), set in 2019, deals with “replicants” or human bioengineered beings that have been designed to live for short spans of time but eventually are overcome with human-like desire to live longer; the Terminator series also deals with an imminent, Armageddon-like future where machines have successfully overpowered humans and threaten the very existence of the race; the rather famousAvatar (2009) locates itself in 2154, once again, as if giving us a timeline. While some of the representations of digital-life/computer-life in these examples differ slightly from one another, there is a double-impetus of fear and desire that haunts the ontology of these themes: do we love these ideas because they teach us about the things we fear and should thus avoid (future)? Or do we love them because we fear that, in many ways, we are already irreversibly headed in that direction (lack of future)?

An interesting way to think about these films and their futuristic timelines is to look at other films and even novels whose “future” is now our “past.” Aside from the very obvious Strange Days, Orwell’s novel 1984 (1934), and later a film the same year of its title, is a gleaming example of a novel set fifty years into its future that is now almost thirty years into our past. The presence of media and what we have come to know as computers, cameras, and screens in 1984 is what is scary about 1984. Our fascination with the possibility of a future hijacked by computer use, surveillance, and embodiment is both attractive and scary and this is a perfect recipe for films released years leading up to and away from the Millennium.

21 Jump Street is Stupidly Hilarious!

21 Jump Street (3 out of 5 Stars)

Directed by Phil Lord and Chris Miller (Cloudy withe a Chance of Meatballs)

Written by Michael Bacall (Scott Pilgrim vs. the World)

Starring Channing Tatum, Jonah Hill, Ice Cube

After a long week of writing about the Academy Awards and some pretty great films I decided I would write my review for this film which I saw last Thursday night.  I do not remember watching the television show which last for about 5 seasons and Johnny Depp, and Holly Robinson Peete.  I honestly think I was too young, and this was not a show my parents watched.

The premise of the film is similar to the premise of the show.  The film centers around two guys Jenko (Tatum) the high school jock and popular guy and Schmidt an Eminem wannabe loser in high school.  The two graduate and leave their high school labels behind as they eventually join the police academy.  While at the police academy they start to utilize each other's strengths and become best friends.  As they start their lives as cops they think things will be like television, but as they are riding bikes patrolling the park they soon realize this is not the case.  When they attempt to catch some drug dealers in the park things go wrong and they are assigned to work in an undercover squad, on you guessed it, 21 Jump Street.  The two are sent back to high school when they realize that high schoolers are different and they have to learn a whole new way of being.

The movie is pretty hilarious, and self aware of how stupid it actually is.  They make fun of the cliches that exist within television shows and films that center around the same type of shows and films.  My favorite running gag is when Hill and Tatum keep waiting for things to explode because they should, and the explosions fail.  Hill and Tatum have good chemistry, they complement each other well, and are both pretty funny.  This is not one of my favorite Hill comedic go arounds, but that is more based on the character.  While Tatum is not a good actor he has proved in this film and his latest job hosting Saturday Night Live that he does not take himself too seriously and is going to milk the work while he still has the body to do so.  

None of these things can hide the fact that the movie is not that great, but be prepared to just sit back and laugh at the stupid humor, and some great cameos by the original cast members from the television show.

Silence is Golden as the Academy Awards Pay Tribute to Why We Love the Movies

At tonight's Academy Award ceremony 9 time host Billy Crystal brought back the days of classic 
Hollywood, and made some great jokes about the Kodak Theatre.  Crystal reminded viewers that in a year that paid homage to Hollywood's past there is beauty in film.  Crystal's opening schtick remains the same, there is a video montage that included him kissing George Clooney and inserting himself into some of the most memorable films from 2011; he also did a song where he talked about all of the Best Picture nominees.  Even though his routine was the same Crystal showed his true colors and why he is one of the best Oscar hosts of all time; he is a master host.


Here are my own personal awards I would hand out for the nights show:


Best Presenter: Emma Stone-Like Ann Hathaway a few years ago, this girl showed a room full of Hollywood big wigs that she is one of the funniest people working today who deserves to work even more than she does.


Best Skit-Christopher Guest, Eugene Levy, Catherine O'Hara, Jennifer Coolidge, and Fred Willard act as a focus group for 1939's Wizard of Oz-This skit proves why these are some of the funniest working people today.  The chemistry they have just works, and it was one of my favorite moments of the evening.


Most Unnecessary Moment-Crique du Soleil-I am tired of Award shows thinking they need something hip like this to make the show "cool."  This routine did not work when the Daytime Emmys did it a few years ago and it was not needed tonight.  Hint Brian Grazer, Cirque du Soleil does appeal to the younger viewers it appeals to those old people Billy Crystal kept joking about.


Best Speech (tie) Meryl Streep and Octavia Spencer-These two women hit it out of the park.  Octavia's speech made me emotional and award shows never really do that.  I felt her surprise and genuine gratitude.  Streep finally winning her third trophy had me actually clapping, and yelling, and her speech showed that even in her surprise she is one classy broad.


The theme of the night was remembering the old, and why people love movies.  One of my other favorite moments from the night was getting past Oscar winners/nominees and a few other actors thrown in for good measure talking about the emotional heft movies bring, their first experience at the movies, what movies do to them, and saw on.  This was an incredible way to tie in the theme of the evening.  Even though the Oscars appeal to that average age of their winners 62 as Billy joked, they still put on one of the classiest shows of the year which honor some of the best films of the year.


Two films tied for the most trophies, The Artist and Hugo.  Hugo cleaned up in the technical categories winning five trophies winning best art direction, cinematography, sound mixing, sound editing, and visual effects.  The Artist won two awards in the technical genre best costume design and best original score, but it also took home three of the top prizes Best Picture, Best Director, and Jean Dujardin won for Best Lead Actor.  These two films pay tribute to the beginning of film and honor the nostalgic theme of the show.  The Artist is the first silent film to win Best Picture since the  first year of the Academy Awards.


The biggest nail biter of the night was the Best Actress category.  Going into the night many people were predicting Viola Davis because of her SAG win, but even in my predictions I had a hunch that Meryl would win.  Meryl Streep did in fact win, and took home her first Oscar trophy in exactly 30 years.  The last time Meryl won was for her role in Sophie's Choice.  While I loved Davis, I was incredibly happy Meryl finally had another Oscar to add to her mantel.


In the supporting categories the predicted winners Christopher Plummer won for Beginners and Octavia Spencer won for The Help.  These two had long been predicted from the beginning of the awards season.  In the screenplay categories Midnight in Paris won for Best Original Screenplay and The Descendants won for Best Adapted Screenplay.  


After a so-so year in film I was still mesmerized by this wonderful night, and happy to welcome Billy Crystal back into my living room, or well my friend's living room.  Listed below is the entire winner's list.

Best Picture-The Artist
Best Actor-Jean Dujardin-The Artist
Best Actress-Meryl Streep-The Iron Lady
Best Supporting Actor-Christopher Plummer-The Beginners
Best Supporting Actress- Octavia Spencer-The Help
Best Director-Michel Hazanavicious-The Artist
Best Adapted Screenplay-The Descendants
Best Original Screenplay-Midnight in Paris
Best Foreign Language Film-A Separation
Best Animated Feature-Rango
Best Documentary-Undefeated
Best Art Direction-Hugo
Best Costume Design-The Artist
Best Cinematography-Hugo
Best Editing-The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Best Make-Up-The Iron Lady
Best Original Score-The Artist
Best Original Song-Man or Muppet
Best Sound Mixing-Hugo
Best Sound Editing-Hugo
Best Visual Effects-Hugo
Best Animated Short-The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore
Best Documentary Short-Saving Face
Best Live Action Short-The Shore

Academy Awards Week (Conclusion): Predictions

Best Picture
The Artist
The Descendants
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
The Help
Hugo
Midnight in Paris
Moneyball
The Tree of Life
War Horse 

Will Win: The Artist-This film has this in a landslide, it should not, but no one seems to like any of the other films enough this year.  The problem is it seems like no one loves this film either, but it has the hip factor of being a silent film.
Spoiler: The Descendants-Ironically the most nominated film Hugo is in third place.  The Descendants has been doing well at the box office, but it will have to settle for a screenplay win.

Best Actor
Damien Bichir-A Better Life
George Clooney-The Descendants
Jean Dujardin-The Artist
Brad Pitt-Moneyball
Gary Oldman-Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Will Win-Jen Dujardin-He won at the Globes and SAG; he is a like able unknown, and like Roberto Benigni who had traction late in the game he will win this award and be part of the The Artist sweep.
Very Close Second-George Clooney-Clooney won a lot of critics awards and the Globe (drama); he is well liked, but I could see him championing for votes for Pitt and Dujardin.
Spoiler: Brad Pitt-He is the only person to star in two Best Picture nominees (in this category) and he gives his best performances in years.

Best Actress

Glen Close-Albert Nobbs
Viola Davis-The Help
Meryl Streep-The Iron Lady
Rooney Mara-The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Michelle Williams-My Week with Marilyn

Will Win: Meryl Streep-This is a very very very close race between Streep and Davis.  I would not be surprised to hear either woman's name called.  At the moment Davis has the edge, and I keep going back and forth on who will win.  Right now I will go with Streep.

Best Supporting Actor
Kenneth Branagh-My Week with Marilyn
Jonah Hill-Moneyball
Nick Nolte-Warrior
Christopher Plummer-Beginners
Max Von Sydow-Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

Will Win-Christopher Plummer; he has won everything else there is no way he will lose.

Best Supporting Actress
Berenice Bejo-The Artist
Jessica Chasstain-The Help
Melissa McCarthy-Bridesmaids
Janet McTeer-Albert Nobbs
Octavia Spencer-The Help

Will Win: Octavia Spencer-Like Plummer she has won most things leading up and will surely follow suit tonight.

Best Director
Woody Allen-Midnight in Paris
Michel Hazanavicious-The Artist
Terrence Malick-The Tree of Life
Alexander Payne-The Descendants
Martin Scorsese-Hugo

Will Win: Michel Hazanavicious-The Artist-He will join the sweep for The Artist.  I thought Scorsese had a shot at one point, but that faded.  If anyone could spoil her I could see Malick winning the way Polanski did when The Pianist slowly prevented Chicago from being a bigger winner.

Best Adapted Screenplay-The Descendants
Best Original Screenplay-Midnight in Paris
Best Foreign Language Film-A Separation
Best Animated Feature-Rango
Best Documentary-Pina
Best Art Direction-Hugo
Best Costume Design-Hugo
Best Cinematography-The Tree of Life
Best Editing-The Artist
Best Make-Up-Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
Best Original Score-The Artist
Best Original Song-Man or Muppet
Best Sound Mixing-Hugo
Best Sound Editing-Hugo
Best Visual Effects-Hugo (no film nominated for Best Picture has lost)
Best Animated Short-La Luna
Best Documentary Short-The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom
Best Live Action Short-The Shore

Academy Awards Week: My Oscar Nominations

Here are the nominees I would have put forth for tomorrow's ceremony, along with the winners bolded.

Best Picture

Drive

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Hugo

Martha Marcy May Marlene

Midnight in Paris

Moneyball

A Separation

Shame

Take Shelter

The Tree of Life

Best Actor

George Clooney-The Descendants

Jean Dujardin-The Artist

Michael Fassbender-Shame

Gary Oldman-Tinkor Tailor Soldier Spy

Michael Shannon-Take Shelter

Best Actress

Viola Davis-The Help

Elizabeth Olsen-Martha Marcy May Marlene

Meryl Streep-The Iron Lady

Tilda Swinton-We Need to Talk About Kevin

Michelle Williams-My Week with Marilyn

Best Supporting Actor

Albert Brooks-Drive

John Hawkes-Martha Marcy May Marlene

Nick Nolte-Warrior

Brad Pitt-The Tree of Life

Christopher Plummer-Beginners

Best Supporting Actress

Jessica Chastain-Taking Shelter 

Janet McTeer-Albert Nobbs

Carey Mulligan-Shame

Octavia Spencer-The Help

Shaileen Woodley-The Descendants

Best Director

Woody Allen-Midnight in Paris

Asghar Farhadi-A Separation

Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist

Terence Malick-The Tree of Life

Nicholas Winding Refn-Drive

Martin Scorsese-Hugo

Best Adapted Screenplay

The Descendants

Drive

Moneyball

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

We Need to Talk About Kevin

Best Original Screenplay

Martha Marcy May Marlene

Midnight in Paris

A Separation

Take Shelter

Win Win

Best Foreign Language Film 

A Separation

Best Animated Feature Film 

Rango

Best Art Direction

The Artist

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Hugo

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Best Cinematography

Drive

Hugo

Melancholia

Shame

The Tree of Life

Best Costume Design

The Artist

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Hugo

Jane Eyre

W.E.

Best Film Editing

Drive

Hugo

Martha Marcy May Marlene

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

The Tree of Life

Best Original Score

The Artist-Ludovic Bource

Drive-Cliff Martinez

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo-Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2–Alexander Desplat

Hugo-Howard Shore

Best Make-Up

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 

Hugo

The Iron Lady

Best Sound Editing

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Hugo

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

The Tree of Life

Best Sound Mixing

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Hugo

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

The Tree of Life

Best Visual Effects

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Hugo

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Thor

Academy Awards Week 2011: Best Actress (and the runner-up is Meryl)

This year marks Meryl Streep's 14th nominations in the Best Actress category, and 17th overall nomination.  The woman is widely regarded as the best living actress, and by some the best actress of all time.  Throughout the years this woman has given some amazing performances.  Her career as a perennial Oscar nominee began in 1978, with her nomination for Best Supporting Actress in the film The Deer Hunter.  One year later she earned her second nomination and her first win in the Supporting Actress category for her role in the 1979 film Kramer vs. Kramer.  Two years later in 1981 she received her first nomination in the Best Actress category for The French Lieutenant's Woman.  In 1982 she was honored with her second Best Actress nomination and first win in the category for Sophie's Choice.  At this point Meryl was 2 for for 4.  Since 1982 Meryl has received 13 more nominations and won no awards at the Oscars again giving her one of the biggest losing streaks in the shows history.

Meryl is the best actress working today and she does not need more Oscars to prove that fact; she is one of the most gracious losers I have ever seen.  This woman has had more great performances than most actresses could dream of.  Here is a list of her five performances.

5-Miranda Priestley in The Devil Wears Prada (2006)

While I would like to think Adaptation changed Meryl's career (and I think it still did) this performance took her level of stardom to a different level.  This performance was a supporting performance that stole the film, and as she spews venom I get lost in her performance; she captures this character so well!

4-Joanna Kramer in Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) 

Watching Joanna walk away from her son, only to come back and fight to take him away from his father is a whole different level of evil.  Yet there is a vulnerability to her character, and you can understand why the different layers.  This performance was incredible and deserved to be Meryl's first Oscar win.  Although I liked her Manhattan as well that year.

3-Karen Silkwood in Silkwood (1983)

There is something about how ballsy she was when she played this character, and yet how she was able to show this real life woman as vulnerable in the same breath.  This performance came from one of her best films, and feels real.  There is a scene where she is on the porch with Cher, and it just is beautiful.

2-Susan Orlean in Adaptation (2002)

Another great supporting turn from Meryl that made look at her in a completely different way.  As the 80s ended and the 90s began I looked at her as a great actress, but her film choices often resembled terrible lifetime movies.  Adaptation is my second favorite performance from Meryl of all time, and I would like to see more of this performance from her, where she plays it natural.

1-Meryl Streep as Sophie Zowitophski in Sophie's Choice (1982)

There is not much to say, but that bar non this is her performance of all time.  I honestly have very few words, the film and her performance speak for themself.  Meryl's method acting of staying with the child she would have to give up and not surrounding herself with the other child was brilliant, it made her grief incredibly real.

These five performances span 27 years!  Only one other actress in Hollywood can claim having a similar career experience, and that is Katherine Hepburn.  Picking just five performances is almost an impossible  task because Streep has given so many phenomenal performances that span even longer from 1978 through the present day.  This year Streep earned her 17th nomination, and has come the closest to winning her third Academy Award.

After reading this many people may ask, why has she only won twice?  I could go year by year and explain how she lost each trophy she was nominated for, so I guess I might as well.

1981-Meryl Streep in the French Lieutenant's Wife  lost to Katherine Hepburn for her last nomination in On Golden Pond, this was Hepburn's swan song and there was no way the ingenue was going to get this over Hepburn (the only time the two were nominated in the same category).

1983-Meryl Streep in Silkwood lost to Shirley MacLaine in Terms of Endearment.  Streep lost because she had won the year before and MacClaine haad never won an Oscar.

1985 Meryl Streep in Out of Africa lost to Geraldine Page in Trip to the bountiful.  Page was a 5 time nominee prior to this nomination and had never won, so the Academy honored her career performance.

1986 Meryl Streep in Ironweed lost to Cher in Moonstruck.  Cher was an unstoppable force in a Best Picture winner, while Streep's nomination came for a lesser film.

1987 Meryl Streep in Cry in the Dark lost to Jodie Foster in The Accused.  Foster had got her second nomination with this film proved that she was a talented young actress.  At this point my guess would be many academy members thought this was too soon for a third win.

1990 Meryl Streep in Postcards from the Edge lost to Kathy Bates in Misery-  Bates was a force to reckoned with and Meryl's role had no shot of giving her, her third Oscar.

1995 Meryl Streep in The Bridges of Madison County lost to Susan Sarandon in Dead Man Walking.  Sarandon had a couple of nominations with no wins.  This film also had more nominations, and Sarandon won as a career achievement.

1998 Meryl Streep in One True Thing lost to Gwyneth Paltrow in Shakespeare in Love.  Everyone was talking about Cate Blanchett and Paltrow this year.  Streep's performance was good but was not a blip on the radar.

1999 Meryl Streep in Music of the Heart lost to Hillary Swank in Boy's Don't Cry.  This was the year of Swank vs. Bening (round one-both went to Swank).  This is one of Streep's weakest nominations.

2002 Meryl Streep in Adaptation lost to Catherine Zeta Jones in Chicago.  Meryl was back in supporting (briefly) and she should have won this year, but Jones road the Chicago train.

2006 Meryl Streep in The Devil wears Prada lost to Helen Mirren in The Queen.  Mirren was unstoppable, and there was no dethroning her. 

2008 Meryl Streep in Doubt lost to Kate Winslet in The Reader.  Meryl had some strength in the front end of awards season but Winslet was on her fifth nomination had not won; she was honored for this underwhelming performance.

2009 Meryl Streep in Julie & Julia lost to Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side.  I am still baffled at the support for The Blind Side, but people were on Bullocks side after her messy divorce, and people were getting to the point where they kept saying Meryl has an Oscar or she will get nominated again.

Now we are at the current ceremony where Meryl was honored with her 17th nomination.  Here are this year's nominees:

Glen Close-Albert Nobbs

Viola Davis:The Help

Rooney Mara-The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo 

Meryl Streep-The Iron Lady

Michelle Williams-My Week with Marilyn

Will Meryl lose once again and be named the perennial runner-up?  There is a slight chance this brilliant actress will lose her 13th straight Oscar.  Mara was not a surprising nomination, but she has no shot at winning.  Close should have more of a chance because this is her sixth nomination, but no one is talking about her performance so she will join Deborah Kerr and Thelma Ritter as the queens of losing at the Academy Awards.  Each of those three women has 6 nominations with no wins.  I thought back early on Williams was going to sneak out a win, but there was enough support to get her further.  This race is between Viola Davis and Meryl Streep.

Davis and Streep each have two major precursor awards on their side.  Streep has the Globe and BAFTA, while Davis has the Broadcast Film Critics Award and the SAG.  At the moment Davis holds the trump card which is the SAG win.  SAG is voted on by the actors, and the acting branch is the largest branch of the Academy.  Many SAG voters are also Academy voters, but not all and there are differences.  At the moment many pundits are predicting Davis, and I understand why.  Davis gives a strong performance.  The Help is also a Best Picture nominee that is well liked, while Streep's film only received one other nomination in make-up.  The Help did not perform as well as thought on nomination day and only has 4 nominations (3 acting and Best Picture).  Picking the winner here is tough, logically I want to pick Davis.  Davis' win will also make history if she and Spencer win this will be the first time two Black women will win in the same year.  Yet my gut and heart keep telling me that after 13 losses this is finally Streep's year.  I love that there is still some mystery in this category.

Gutsy Prediction: Meryl Streep-The Iron Lady (Harvey will help)

Very Very Very close second: Viola Davis-The Help

Academy Awards Week 2011: Best Original Score-Time for a Change Again!

Picking my favorite technical category is a Sophie's Choice for me. I love the imagery captured by the cinematography, the way the editing cuts to capture things at the right moment or helps narrate the focus of the story, and then there is always the visual effects and how they can create a brand new world.  There is one more category I left out, and it may be my favorite, but it depends on the day, and that is the original score.

Throughout the years the music or score for a film tends to be the glue to that holds the film together, or launches memories of film experience.  There are many films scores that are infamous, and have not only left an indelible mark on my film experience, but even fans who are not fans of these films can recognize the scores from certain films.  Here are a few examples:

Gone with the Wind (1939)

The Godfather (1972)

Star Wars (1977)

Raiders of the Lost Ark

The Lion King-Hans Zimmer (1994)

Titanic-James Horner (1997)

These are just 6 scores that come to mind as incredibly memorable by the masses.  The music in them can illicit fan boy gasps (Star Wars) or bring tears (Titanic).  Music has a powerful hold on people, thus explaining why a film's score can be one of the most important elements of a film.

Throughout the years this category has looked incredibly different at the Academy Awards, the name of this category has changed, the people who were nominated has changed, the category was broken between musicals and other films, and at one point between dramas and comedies.

When this category began in 1934 the music director not the composer was honored with the award for best music scoring (from 1934-1937).  From 1937 through 1945 every film that submitted in this category was considered a nominee.  There were years during this period where there were anywhere from 14 to 11 nominees.  From 1946 through 1961 the category was broken down into two categories, score of a dramatic or comedy picture and scoring for a musical picture.  From 1962 through 1967 the two categories were original music score, and scoring of a music adaptation or treatment. These little changes went back and forth incorporating adapted scores, musical scores etc until 1984.  In 1985 the category took on the title Best Original Score.  There was only one more short period of delineation from 1995-1998 when the category was broken down into best dramatic score and best score for a musical or comedy.  This changed back to the category that started in 1985 Best Original Score.

This award has evolved as music has evolved throughout film history.  When musicals and adapted scores were in high use this category changed to honor scores that represented the best in music.  During the 1960s and 1970s when musical films and adapted music was prominently used the Academy started to change the category around as they saw fit.  Recently they have done this with the Best Picture category, their adjustments for this have not worked, and they need to go back to the drawing board.  I think this category needs a good reboot or update as well.

 In recent years many scores have been ruled ineligible, partly because many scores rely heavily on pre-existing material in their score.  One example from this year is Drive, which is the best score of 2011.  Last year four films did not make the cut: Black Swan, The Fighter, The Kids are Alright, and True Grit.  The Black Swan and True Grit were both scores and should have been considered for this category.  2009 saw another one of the best score black balled.  Where the Wild Things Are was one of the best most unique scores of the decade and the Oscars ruling seems to raise a series of red flags.  I noticed this pattern start two happen when two more great scores were ruled ineligible in 2007.  Johnny Greenwood did the breathtaking score for There will be Blood and Eddie Vedder did the haunting score for Into the Wild. These snubs are unacceptable, and the Academy needs to take note of the scores that are being left behind by these rulings.  A lot of the rulings for ineligibility seemed to be associated with non traditional music composers.

Film scores are evolving. One of the trends happening here is that former successful musicians are breaking out from their traditional form of music and creating music for films that is not only creating an evolution for scoring, but for the emotional context of films.  Last year Trent Reznor won for scoring The Social Network with Atticus Ross.  This year the duo did the score for The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and were snubbed.  I feel as though this branch is feeling a bit protective and becoming a bit snobby.

With several impressive score missing from this year, and in recent years this category has become boring.  Here are the nominees for Best Original Score this year:

The Adventures of Tinitin-John Williams

The Artist-Ludovic Bource

Hugo-Howard Shore

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy-Alberto Iglesias

War Horse-John Williams

(The clip below is a compilation of all this years scores)

Honestly there is no much debate about this years best score winner.  This is one award in the technical categories that will easily go to The Artist, the only spoiler could be Howard Shore's Hugo.  While I do not want to take anything away from these men there were numerous scores snubbed because they do not fit within the norm.  I think it's time for the Academy to make a change and adapt this category.

Prediction: The Artist
Spoiler: Hugo

Academy Awards Week: Best Visual Effects-from Star Wars to Present

Today there is one thing that bring audiences to the movies more than famous actors, and that is the visual effects.  From the creation of new lands like in Avatar to giant robots trying to save the world in the Transformers series, movie goers are drawn into films because of amazing visual effects.

A long time ago in a galaxy far far away this category had a different name at the Academy Awards.  From 1939 to 1962 the award was called Best Special Effects and was shared with the Sound Effects nominations.  This may explain why the famous burning scene did not clinch this award for Gone with the Wind in 1939, but I still am baffled as to how this film lost this award.  I digress.  In 1963 the award was called Best Special Effects, and from 1964 through 1971 the award was called Best Special Visual Effects. Ironically in 1972 the category received the name it has today Best Visual Effects.  From 1972-1997 the visual effects award was a special achievement award, but in 1977 the award also was formed to be what it we know today

What film helped launch this category to what it is today?  In 1977 George Lucas brought to life the visual masterpiece (at the time) Star Wars.  When audiences saw what Lucas had done with these visual effects creating a whole new galaxy filled with a death star, tie fighters, wookies, light sabers and so much more the world was blown away.  Audiences lined up and made this film a phenomenon.  Star Wars changed the landscape for visual effects and made audiences, and people continue to push the boundaries further and further.  Lucas took audiences to a new galaxy in a way that was never done before, and this made film makers who had an interest in working with this technology push studios to spend more money to make films that not only explosions but made the extraordinary possible.

Star Wars was the first winner of the Best Visual Effects Academy Award (award with that title), and that is fitting.  in the following years the award went to Superman (1978), Alien (1979), Empire Strikes Back (1980), Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), E.T. (1982), Terminator 2: Judgement Day (1991) Jurassic Park (1993), Titanic (1997), The Matrix (1999), The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001-2003), Avatar (2009), and Inception (2010).  

Each of these films listed above is pretty impressive.  These films are also some of the highest grossing films of all time.  Audiences love visual effects and if you look at this category today the 5 films in this category for 2012 have almost doubled the gross of the 9 Best Picture nominees.  So the big questions are, is Hollywood missing something and where is the disconnect?  Since 1977 when the category became what it is today 13 of the winners have been Best Picture nominees.  13 out of the the last 35 years.  Sure there have also been Best Picture nominees that have been in this category that did not win, but usually when a Best Picture nominee was in this category it won.

I feel as though this problem speaks to a much larger disconnect within the Academy.  Awardsdaily.com released statistics of the Academy voters and it was no surprise that most of the voters were old white men who had not been nominated or won an award themselves.  How does this effect this category?  Most of the films that fit within this category would be cited as genre films, like Rise of the Planet of the Apes or Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2.  Beyond Lord of the Rings the Academy has proven to avoid genre films like the plague.  Voters go for films centered around the Holocaust or wars rather than the earth being overrun by apes or a boy wizard because they think this means people will take them more seriously.  the problem with this logic is that people, the American public would rather see them nominate/honor films like this years Apes and Harry Potter not The Artist.  I hope the Academy takes a look at this delineation and does something about this problem.  Note: The solution is not to create genre awards like at the Broadcast Film Critics Awards, but to realize that genre films have a place in the film time capsule.

Onto this year's nominees in this category, and here they are:

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 

Hugo

Real Steel

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Transformer: Dark of the Moon

Logically the winner will be Hugo.  Since 1977 there has been no film that was nominated for Best Picture and did not win this award.  Hugo would be the first to lose.  Before I tackle who I think will win, I am going to rule out the obvious.  Real Steel is the first to get crossed off, this has no shot.  Transformers is out too, if neither of the first two films could win, the third film is out.  This leaves three. I would pick Potter, but bloggers and journalist seem to have a strong yearning for Apes.  Based on history I am going to go with Hugo and Apes as a very close second.

Prediction: Hugo

Very Close Second: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Spoiler: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Academy Awards Week: Best Cinematography

One of my favorite parts of a film is the cinematography.  Many people do not know what cinematography is, or how it is one of the most essential parts to a film.  Cinematography is the creation of film images.  The cinematographer will of use a movie camera with film or digital imagery to capture what they want to show the audience.

The American Society of Cinematographers (ASC) define cinematography as "a creative and interpretive process that culminates in the authorship of an original work of art rather than the simple recording of a physical event. Cinematography is not a subcategory of photography. Rather, photography is but one craft that the cinematographer uses in addition to other physical, organizational, managerial, interpretive and image-manipulating techniques to effect one coherent process."


At the advent of film history the cinematographer was the director, but as technology advanced these two roles became different.  The director was no longer the camera operator.  New technologies like color, and wide screen necessitated someone who was a specialist and their sole task was to capture the images and operate the camera.


As film has evolved from the silent era to present day the cinematographers continue to create visually beautiful images for the audiences to see.  During the silent era cinematographers had to work extra hard to make sure that without sound the visual created a cohesive element to the story.  As newer technologies present them self (or return) like 3D cinematographers have to work hard attain an image that captures the genuine emotional experience of the scene.


This year there were several films that did a fantastic job utilizing the brilliance of their cinematographer, here are my personal favorites.

1-The Tree of Life-Emmanual Lubezsi (director of photography)

\

2-Drive-Newton Thomas Sigel (director of photography)

3-Hugo-Robert Richardson

4-Shame-Sean Bobbitt

5-Melancholia-Manuel Alberto Claro

6-The Artist-Guillame Schiffman

7-Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2-Eduardo Serra

8-The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo-Jeffrey Cronenwerth

9-Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy-Hoyte Van Hoytema

10-Take Shelter-Adam Stone

These are just merely the top ten on my list there are many other films like Moneyball, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Martha Marcy May Marlene, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol and many more that could be included amongst this wonderful work.  The cinematographer is one of the hardest working film professionals today.  They have the responsibility to make the film's visual look and feel connect to the emotional aspects of the film.  No, they do not just have to make things look pretty, but in a sense they need to make things look as though each image tells a story.

So who made the cut for the Academy Awards:

The Artist
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Hugo
The Tree of Life 
War Horse 

This is a tough category to predict.  The ASC Guild Award went the the best cinematography of the year, The Tree of Life, but will this line-up at the Academy Awards?  I hope so, but I am not confident.  I think any of these five films could win, but I am pretty sure with little to no passion behind it War Horse is out.  I was a little surprised it made the Best Picture category.  While Dragon Tattoo has some beautiful cinematography it does not have a Best Picture nomination, do the two go hand in hand, not always, but I think the film will go home empty handed.  This leave three films open to three different scenarios come Oscar night.

1) The Artist has a clean sweep.  I do not think it will have a clean sweep, especially since the Academy is catching some flack for rubber stamping this film.  While I do agree the cinematography is one of the best parts of this film because it captures the silence so well, I do not think this film will capture this trophy on Oscar night.

2) Hugo sweeps the technical categories.  Hugo has 11 nominations and a lot of across the board support in the technical categories.  This is a beautiful film, and I would not begrudge the win.  At the moment I am torn between this and The Tree of Life.


3) Justice-The Tree of Life wins because, well it's the best cinematography of the year.  Even those people who did not love, or did not get this film still state the cinematography was amazing.

Will and Should Win: The Tree of Life
Very Close Second: Hugo
Spoiler: The Artist

Academy Awards Week: Best Adapted Screenplay

Welcome to Academy Award week!  I will be taking an in depth look at some of the categories that make the Academy Awards tick.  The first category is Best Adapted Screenplay. The Adapted Screenplay prize is one of the most coveted awards of the night.  This award honors films who have adapted source material from books, plays, television shows, short plays, and even other films. If an original film has a sequel good enough to make it in the screenplay category (I do not think it has ever happened) they would have to be nominated in the Best Adapted Screenplay category because the film would be based on the first film.

Throughout the years this award has become incredibly competitive as more and more films seem to be based on other material.  While the quality in the Best Original Screenplay category seems to peak and valley every year, the Adapted Screenplay category has seemed to stay strong picking screenplays with strong writing, which are based on some solid material.  The interesting thing about this year has been that it feels as though Hollywood did a much better job with the original work than it did with adapting screenplays.  While the five nominees as pretty strong this year, picking five original screenplays seems to have been a tough task.

Past winners in this category have been It Happened One Night (1934), Gone With the Wind (1939), Casablanca (1942), To Kill a Mockingbird  (1962), The Godfather (1972), and The Silence of Lambs (1991).  Although 5 out of the 6 of these films are Best Picture winners only about 35 films out of the 83 years went on to win Best Picture.  The Adapted Screenplay trophy tends to go to well written films like Sideways (2004), which the Academy like but to enough to win the Best Picture category.  Many times the the screenplay awards become a consolation prize, and I think history will repeat itself again this year, ironically with another Alexander Payne film.

The nominees for this years Best Adapted Screenplay category are:

The Descendants-Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon, and Jim Rash
Hugo-John Logan
The Ides of March-George Clooney, Grant Heslov, and Beau Willimon
Moneyball-Aaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian, Stan Chervin
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy-Bridget O'Connor and Peter Straughan

This past weekend The Descendants gained a lot of ground in this category winning both the Scripter and the WGA for Best Adapted Screenplay.  Winning the Scripter does not always mean you will win Oscar, mainly because its decided by USC, but winning at the Writer's Guild and Scripter is a pretty good sign.  The Descendants is nominated for 5 Oscars, and while Clooney was a favorite to win Best Actor in the beginning it looks like Jean Dujardin will be swept up in The Artist sweep.  This Best Adapted Screenplay will be a consolation prize for this film.

What about the other nominees?  Moneyball would be my personal pick, it's one of the sharpest screenplays this year.  Moneyball is also written by two of the best screenwriters today, which makes sense.  If a film is going to spoil it's going to be this one.  Tinker Tailor is an impressive screenplay because it has taken an incredibly long book that was made into mini-series at one point and makes one great film.  Ides has a decent screenplay, but it has no shot.  I am not a huge fan of Hugo's screenplay, in fact I think it is one of the weaker elements of this film.  Hugo's wins will come in some of the technical categories.

Will Win: The Descendants
Should Win: Moneyball