OVP: Director (2020)

OVP: Best Director (2020)

The Nominees Were...

Thomas Vinterberg, Another Round

David Fincher, Mank

Lee Isaac Chung, Minari

Chloe Zhao, Nomadland

Emerald Fennell, Promising Young Woman

My Thoughts: We are heading to the close of our 10-year anniversary celebration on the blog (still at least 11 articles remaining, and I might have one last trick up my sleeve to round it to a dozen), and so we are also nearly done with our 2020 Oscar Viewing Project.  Today we're going to tackle the Best Director category, which saw an historic first for the category-the first time ever that the majority of the category was not white men, and the first time ever that two women were cited for Best Director.  Since I'm always looking for a bridge into the article, let's start with one of those women, the one who ended up victorious: Chloe Zhao.

Zhao's films have an instant, singular vision.  In movies as diverse as The Rider, Nomadland, and Eternals, she starts off with her camera distinct from the picture itself, almost as if she's just observing...but you slowly realize as the movie progresses that she's guiding the audience to an eventual destination, which might be right where we started in a lot of ways (Fern is still on the road at the end of Nomadland), but it's also proving that the journey changes you even if you are where you were meant to be.  The profound beauty of Nomadland is that Fern finds what she was looking for on the road, even if she understands that absolution about her trauma (the loss of her husband & her home) will never actually be realized.  There's a beauty in that, and I love the steady way that Zhao handles this conversation.

I feel like Lee Isaac Chung tries to do that, with slightly less success.  It doesn't help that I liked Nomadland overall as a movie better, but I felt like Minari was a bit too tidy, never really finding a way to blend the sentiment of the film in a cohesive way with the introverted, quiet approach Chung takes to this autobiographical picture.  This isn't to say Minari isn't good (this is a good lineup-all of these nominees get a thumbs up from me in one of the better recent directorial lineups Oscar assembled), but it also means that I have to be picky as we're talking about the best-of-the-best.  Minari is refreshing, but it doesn't quite land some of the bigger ideas about family & the many shared experiences that result from living & loving a collective unit.

Mank is definitely the film that I have taken a more positive stance on than virtually any other film writer I read regularly, but I stand behind it, particularly when it comes to Fincher's nomination.  Fincher has a great way of having one person slowly, steadily, descending into their fate (frequently for the bad), and the way that Mank is framed is genius in that regard.  I love the way that we see all of these corollaries to the story that Mank is writing, the way that Citizen Kane echoes not just William Randolph Hearst, but also Orson Welles & Herman Mankiewicz himself, showing that all men can fall to the fate of their own hubris.  It's gorgeous, visually stunning, and Fincher doesn't go for easy payoffs (notice the way that Welles is backgrounded until the precise moment he needs to move from God to Man).  It's a towering achievement, and while it's not Fincher's best...that's an unfair metric to hold one of the best directors of our time toward.

Similar to Fincher, Emerald Fennell's Promising Young Woman feels like a distinct vision onto itself-there's no confusing this work as a "director for hire" job.  Fennell's best work is, like Mank, hiding the fact that we're seeing one character go to her fate, even as there are clear off-ramps onto easier or perhaps even healthier courses-of-action.  The way that Fennell frames what is ultimately a thriller with horror and romantic-comedy elements is deceptive; you feel gut-punched in the same way Cassie does by some of the ways certain characters disappoint.  If you want to get picky I think the film needed more perspective into who Cassie is to really get a specificity of what is lost (i.e. how she was a "promising young woman"), but that's being picky about a very good film from a director I can't wait to see more from.

Four of these films we'll get to one more time when we talk about Best Picture this weekend, but Another Round we will be bidding adieu to today.  Another Round's direction is maybe its best attribute, so kudos to the Academy in citing it here.  The scenes where we watch them get drunk feel appropriately a detachment from the rest of the movie (as any good bender feels like you're leaving reality), and the juxtaposition between the first & second halves (and what is at stake) underlines the damage of this experiment.  But Vinterberg never collects the film's ideas about alcohol with its own issues with toxic masculinity, particularly given the kind of gross "life is for the living" aspects of the final scenes.  An intriguing premise, but I don't think it's always successful.

Other Precursor Contenders: The Globes went with Zhao as their winner, and in a first picked a majority female lineup with Fennell and Regina King (One Night in Miami) joining Fincher & Aaron Sorkin (The Trial of the Chicago 7).  BAFTA also picked a majority lineup of female directors with Zhao besting Vinterberg, Chung, Shannon Murphy (Babyteeth), Jasmila Zbanic (Quo Vadis, Aida?), and Sarah Gavron (Rocks), while the DGA picked Zhao against Sorkin, Fincher, Fennell, & Chung.  I did pretty poorly in my predictions when I guessed this initially, leaving out both Vinterberg & Fennell in favor of King & Sorkin, and of the latter two I think Sorkin was closer, particularly considering that King couldn't make the Best Picture race.  I'll guess him for sixth, though there are 4-5 names you could argue were in the running for the slot that ultimately surprised for Vinterberg.

Directors I Would Have Nominated: We'll get to the My Ballot next week, so I won't telegraph more than to say I was more of a fan of subtitles than Oscar was in this category.
Oscar's Choice: Chloe Zhao stampeded throughout the season, and even if she had lost Best Picture, the Best Director trophy was inevitable for her.

My Choice: I said Fincher at the time, and while I think this is a closer race for me than it was in 2021 when I finalized my picks, I'm still going with him as I think there's slightly more style in his direction than Zhao's, which aids his movie better...it's very close though, and there are days I'd give her the trophy.  Fennell, Chung, & Vinterberg follow, in that order.

Those were my thoughts-how about yours?  I suspect I'm alone here, but does anyone want to join me on Team Mank, or is everyone sticking with Nomadland?  Fennell, Chung, & Vinterberg all had big splashes here-which one gets another shot at an Oscar nomination in the future?  And was it Sorkin, King, or perhaps Florian Zeller (The Father) in sixth place?  Share your thoughts in the comments!

Also in 2020: Actress, Actor, Supporting Actress, Supporting Actor, Adapted Screenplay, Original Screenplay, International Feature Film, Animated Feature Film, Sound, Original Score, Original Song, Production Design, Cinematography, Costume Design, Film Editing, Visual Effects, Makeup & Hairstyling, Previously in 2020

Past Best Director Contests: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019

My Top 10 Films of 2020

 Well, we have a new president now, and while we'll have to wait several more months for the Oscars, it feels like it's time for me to call it quits on 2020.  On Sunday we took a look at my Top 10 films of 2020 that weren't from 2020...today we'll do the opposite, peaking at the Top 10 films of 2020 that did come from 2020.  These are listed alphabetically, and while it was not the year I would've hoped for cinematically, every one of these was a bright spot & is well worth your time (and some tred into that coveted "masterpiece" territory):

And Then We Danced

dir. Levan Akin

A look at how love can inspire passion, desire, and occasionally even joy in the most jaded of individuals, Akin's dancing romance gains its best moments not through despair, but through bleak hope.

Emma

dir. Autumn de Wilde

A saucy minx of a take on Austen, Emma Woodhouse has never been so essential, and her suitors never sexier than in this wicked, funny look at one of the author's most-cherished tales.

The Father

dir. Florian Zeller

Anthony Hopkins & Olivia Colman are an acting duet for the ages as they encounter the cruel reality of aging, and the complicated tensions of watching your parents growing older.

Mank

dir. David Fincher

Fincher bravely steps into the long shadow of Citizen Kane, and makes his own magnum opus focusing on a similar man trying to navigate his own destiny, and the unavoidable fate that awaits him. 

Never Gonna Snow Again

dir. Malgorzata Szumowska & Michel Englert

A challenging but darkly funny look at class, mysticism, & xenophobia, Never Gonna Snow Again avoids cliche and features an unnerving performance from lead actor Alec Utgoff. 

Nomadland

dir. Chloe Zhao

Frances McDormand strips away all of the curmudgeonly ticks that have made her famous to give us a thoughtful, moving look at a woman who lives in the edges of society, and finds the person she was meant to be.

Promising Young Woman

dir. Emerald Fennell

Provocative, unpredictable, with (yet another) brilliant performance from the criminally-underrated Carey Mulligan, Promising Young Woman defies convention through clever genre-hopping.

Soul

dir. Pete Docter

Pixar totally abandons any pretense of making a movie for kids with this meditative look at a jazz musician at the crossroads of life & death, but it finds grand meaning in the ways we define our success.

Undine

dir. Christian Petzold

With glorious performances from leads Paula Beer & Franz Rogowski, Christan Petzold continues his introspective series of hits with this knowing look at love, codependence, & time.

Wolfwalkers

dir. Tomm Moore & Ross Stewart

Tomm Moore finally wins me over not just in terms of the jewel-like animation (always a winner for him, and has tan-and-green ever looked better together?) but with a story that matches the playful imagination of his imagery.

OVP: Mank (2020)

Film: Mank (2020)

Stars: Gary Oldman, Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins, Arliss Howard, Tom Pelphrey, Sam Troughton, Tom Burke, Charles Dance

Director: David Fincher

Oscar History: 10 nominations/2 wins (Best Picture, Director, Actor-Gary Oldman, Supporting Actress-Amanda Seyfried, Production Design*, Cinematography*, Costume Design, Makeup & Hairstyling, Score, Sound)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 5/5 stars

It has been said by many that Citizen Kane is the greatest film of all-time.  It is so storied in the pantheon of classic cinema that you'd be forgiven, upon viewing it for the first time, for wondering if it can live up to the hype, and for some modern film fans it doesn't.  I am not one of those fans.  While "greatest of all-time" might not be the phrase I'd name-check, Citizen Kane would rank toward, if not into, my all-time Top 10, and I think it's breathtaking, and the sort of movie that gets better with every repeat viewing.  As a result, having David Fincher, one of the best directors working, tackle the movie & its bizarre behind-the-scenes politics, felt like a wish fulfilled, but it also presented a problem.  Mank for me is what Citizen Kane is for many-a movie with such astronomical expectations (particularly after a cinematic year with more middling pictures than outright successes), that it'd be impossible to exactly live up to them.  After all, if Citizen Kane can't live up to its own hype despite being basically flawless, how could any other movie live up to Citizen Kane?

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie plays a little bit with the truth, so I'll establish what happens onscreen.  The film alternates between the "present" where Herman Mankiewicz (Oldman), a storied screenwriter (though not always credited, he was the man behind film classics like Dinner at Eight and The Wizard of Oz, and was a producer on most of the Marx Brothers' best pictures) is writing a screenplay that we understand to be Citizen Kane, while alternating back to what led him to being in a shack, writing what would be a career-killing script.  The script is an issue for the writer because it's obviously inspired by William Randolph Hearst (Dance), one of the most powerful newspaper men in the country, skewering both the publisher & his mistress actress Marion Davies (Seyfried).  As the film goes on, we learn some of the sources of Mank's hatred of Hearst, as well as studio chief Louis B. Mayer (Howard), stemming from their involvement in the 1934 California gubernatorial election, which pitted conservative Frank Merriam against socialist icon Upton Sinclair, with Sinclair losing in part because Hollywood studio bosses forced their talent to make propaganda films against him, even though they supported his campaign.  The movie ends with Mank, despite the problems it would cause him, demanding screen credit for the film, thus ending his working relationship with Orson Welles (Burke), but winning him his only Oscar.

Mank is a beautiful movie (it's criminal, and I can't even really stomach it, that this movie won't be seen by most on the big-screen as Eric Messerschmidt's cinematography is moody & glossy & glorious); in a year of less-than-inspired camerawork, this stands out so hard it's difficult to see a way that Messerschmidt doesn't get his first Oscar nomination, and probably a win.  The costumes are splendid, the sound work impeccable (creating so much atmosphere)-Mank is the sort of movie that comes about from having both money & taste.

The film pays homage repeatedly to its inspiration.  I have seen Citizen Kane more times than I can count, so I don't know what it would be like to see this movie without it as a touchpoint, but I suspect it won't read as magical.  Mank recalls certain key scenes from the original movie without always underlining it-things like the long dining room table or the cacophonous sound work, the way that everyone keeps pointing out that Marion is the inspiration for Charles Foster Kane's second wife, but that Mank's wife Sarah is hinted at in Kane's first spouse...Jack Fincher's script combs through the movie and along with Messerschmidt's work, gives us visual cues to the original film that have just a hint of malice (if you don't notice the clear parallels that Fincher also gives to our modern political climate & of course Donald Trump, you're not paying attention).

Like I said above, it's impossible to try to be Citizen Kane and not fall short-Citizen Kane is considered the greatest film of all time for a reason, and it's hard to compare it to other movies without them found lacking, and Mank is not perfect.  The ending in particular feels like you need a Film History major to understand it (which luckily for you I have).  Orson Welles is backgrounded as an almost mythic creature throughout most of the movie, and that the climax relies so heavily on him & the famed claims of Pauline Kael that Welles deserved minimal credit for the screenplay of the film (that it should have gone entirely to Mankiewicz) is where fact & Hollywood lore blend, and it makes the final payoff feel a little bit like Fincher didn't keep watching the dailies to know who had become the villain of his picture.

But up until that point Mank delivers in every conceivable way  It's a cruel noir, one with lots of gems & tiny performances.  Amanda Seyfried has been getting much of the credit for the acting in the film, and she deserves for being best on the call sheet (she knows how to make Marion the smartest person in the room even when she's pretending to be the dumbest), but the cast is uniformly good, filling out every corner of the screen with solid, brief cameos.  Oldman feels born to play this part, his boozy charm radiating even through Mank's ugliest moments.  And as a result, Mank is the rare movie this year that lives up to the hype, that feels like it'll escape 2020's grasp as a classic to be revisited, a picture confident enough in its own quality that it can stay firmly in the shadow of a greater movie without losing its luster.

OVP: Director (2008)

OVP: Best Director (2008)

The Nominees Were...

Danny Boyle, Slumdog Millionaire

Stephen Daldry, The Reader

David Fincher, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Ron Howard, Frost/Nixon

Gus van Sant, Milk

My Thoughts: Let's finish up this Slumdog-Benjamin train, shall we?  With just two more categories to go before we call a wrap on 2008, the Academy gave us an oddly duplicated year in terms of Oscar races.  It's worth noting that not only did blockbuster The Dark Knight not make this list, but that the Best Director lineup mirrored the Best Picture one-matching up completely for the first time since 2005 (it's actually pretty rare-before that it hadn't happened since 1981).  As a result a lot of the talking points we get to here may be a little bit duplicated in Best Picture, though that doesn't necessarily guarantee the same winner (see past contests for proof).

We're going to start out with Ron Howard, because his very recognizable face up-top amidst a sea of guys who are admittedly well-known but weren't on two iconic television sitcoms, is sticking out to me.  Howard's nominations for Frost/Nixon weren't exactly surprising at the time, but in hindsight considering the way that his film about the 37th president has sort of disappeared from public consciousness they seem like an easy target for eye-rolling.  The reality is that Howard, much like the film, does his best work re-creating the tapes themselves.  The interviews are riveting stuff, particularly if you aren't familiar with the famous Frost/Nixon debates, but the rest of the film falls short.  There's a moment late in the film when Frank Langella, acting to the rafters, calls Michael Sheen's Frost in something of a psychotic stupor but it feels inauthentic because it's largely out-of-nowhere and borrows more from other depictions of Nixon than the one we have encountered.  I liked the way that Howard keeps focused on Nixon in tight close-up (we all know the stories about how he lost his 1960 debate, and the paranoid president was more than aware of such things at the time), but the rest of the film seems too traditionally-structured and shot to merit an Oscar inclusion.

Danny Boyle's directorial habits have always bugged the crap out of me, to be honest.  I get that he has a vision, and occasionally it's a creative one, but it always seems so jumbled.  There's occasionally great beauty in the film Slumdog Millionaire, particularly during the first flashback when we see the streets of this impoverished nation, but the film is too traditional later in the film, frequently relying on cliches and overusing its Who Wants to Be a Millionaire motif.  I also feel like too many of the characters end up being 2-dimensional, particularly Freida Pinto's girlfriend role, and that Boyle allows his actors to just stay at a surface-level rather than expanding their understanding of what is going on in the film.  That creates a shallower experience for the audience.

I am a sucker for Stephen Daldry and his intense, dramatic flourishes onscreen.  I love the way that he creates a sense of permanence onscreen.  His best examples of this are The Hours, where every decision over a short period of time has a devastating and damning consequence and so you feel the need to hone in on every moment, but The Reader does this remarkably well also.  The short affair, briefly framed and shot in close, urgent, "is-this-the-end" shots creates a stamina to the rest of the picture-how will this end for these characters?  It helps that he has world-class actors like Kate Winslet and Ralph Fiennes driving this love story, and admittedly the first-half is better framed than the second-half, but even the second-half he pushes the actors and the story in ways unexpected.  I am still driven by the fact that Lena Olin and Ralph Fiennes play characters who have rehearsed their parts for so many years, and yet are still eager to see what will take place even though they know what they'll say-it's a wonderfully-shot film and one that I loved, critics be damned there.

The other film I latched onto was of course Milk, directed by Gus van Sant.  Here we have a director known for avant garde but also for creating a memorable but relatively traditional work (Good Will Hunting), and he finds ways to combine the two.  The film isn't neutered in terms of its sexuality and in the ways it portrays gay characters.  There's a reason I gave it Best Editing-it kept in moments that other directors would have kept out like Joseph Cross getting to third base with Emile Hirsch in a dark room or the gay campaign team drooling over the pizza delivery guy.  These sorts of touches add to the authenticity that van Sant is trying to capture, but it also lends itself well to the boldness of Harvey as a character-he's someone that doesn't back away from saying things that might make people uncomfortable, even as he stakes out a place for himself in the world of straight America.

The final nomination is for David Fincher.  Fincher, quite frankly, is my favorite director of this bunch, but David Fincher is also a director that can create mood in the way that Otto Preminger created mood in Laura, and is not someone that's great at comedy or romance, but instead at heightened tensions.  The reality is that in a movie like Se7en or Zodiac or The Social Network (undoubtedly his three finest films) you have the greatest directorial moments when we are moving into unknown territory, but Benjamin Button just slugs along, with us knowing that Benjamin and Daisy won't have a particularly happy ending, but probably a pretty sweet one (which is what occurs).  The only moments where his directorial eye is really clear and clever is late in the film, when he's finding Daisy losing her youthful upper-hand, particularly when she indulges in a much younger-looking Benjamin.  These moments betray the slightest of bitterness and as a result we get the Fincher we love, but I'll admit that those moments are few-and-far between in this a-characteristic film.

Other Precursor Contenders: Best Director is one of those rare fields where the Globes, Guilds, and BAFTA awards all have the same number of nominees (aside from the supporting actor races, this is the only OVP category where this is the case).  As a result, one generally suspects uniformity, though each group put its own little stamp on the conversation.  For starters, the Globes skipped Gus van Sant in favor of Sam Mendes, who directed Revolutionary Road (Danny Boyle won).  The DGA Awards, usually the best predictor for this category, skipped Stephen Daldry, in this case picking Christopher Nolan for one of his three DGA nominations without a corresponding Best Director nomination (a feat equaled only by Rob Reiner), while honoring Danny Boyle (didn't everyone?).  Finally the BAFTA's skipped Gus van Sant as well, and while they also honored Danny Boyle they went with Clint Eastwood for Changeling.  I know the popular sentiment in the years since is that Nolan was just south of a nomination at the time, but considering that it didn't score in either of the big categories and we don't have the usual 4/5 Best Picture split, I wonder if perhaps Revolutionary Road/Clint Eastwood may have been just as plausible for the sixth places in the top two categories, considering the one's positioned as a "woman's picture" (usually they get Best Picture without Director), while Eastwood was enjoying his last big year of success with the Oscars until his strange hiatus that would last even when he would get nominated for American Sniper (he still missed in Best Director, arguably costing the film a Best Picture or Best Actor surprise trophy).

Directors I Would Have Nominated: I surely would have included Martin McDonagh's In Bruges, which is a marvelously shot and contained black comedy, along with Andrew Stanton's epic WALL-E.  Christopher Nolan after all of these years I'm not sure on-arguably the best contained scenes in The Dark Knight are also the best of the year (the bold risk of opening the film on high-alert as we zoom into a bank robbery, as if we're still watching a trailer, is perfection), so I would pick him but subbing he or maybe one of the nominated fellas for Arnaud Desplechin's family drama A Christmas Tale wouldn't be unforgivable.

Oscar’s Choice: Like every precursor, Danny Boyle took home the Oscar over Fincher and Daldry, in roughly that order.

My Choice: I'm picking van Sant over Daldry, a more singular achievement and one that caters more to the subject at hand.  In third is Fincher, followed by Howard and then Boyle.

Those were my thoughts-how about yours?  Are you with me in favor of van Sant or were you all about that Boyle?  Does anyone else also secretly (or not so secretly after nineteen write-ups) love The Reader?  And Eastwood, Nolan, or Mendes-who was the sixth place finisher?

Also in 2008: Actress, Actor, Supporting Actress, Supporting Actor, Original Screenplay, Adapted Screenplay, Foreign Film, Animated Feature Film, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, Original Score, Original Song, Art Direction, Cinematography, Costume, Film Editing, Visual Effects, Makeup, Previously in 2008

Past Best Director Contests: 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013

Ten Thoughts on the Golden Globes

So, yesterday we recounted the morning's SAG Award nominations, and today we have the Golden Globes, so we're going to dive in and do the same.  Like yesterday these will be film-focused with one exception that is very cinematic but technically geared toward television.  Without further adieu, here are my ten thoughts about the Golden Globe nominations.

1. Selma is In, Unbroken and American Sniper are Out

In awards season, either you're in or you're out, and after yesterday's shut-outs at the SAG Awards, I have a feeling all three of these films were feeling a bit nervous.  Today, though, the Ava DuVernay biopic can breath a sigh of relief, racking up four nominations including a citation for Best Picture.  Meanwhile, Angelina Jolie and Clint Eastwood's films did embarrassingly bad, not getting a citation between them despite both actors being incredible favorites of the HFPA.  While Oscar occasionally has a mind of his own, it's doubtful these films do well outside of technical awards at this point.

2. Pride gets a Best Picture nod!

Pride, a truly wonderful film that you need to add to your Netflix queue immediately (I'm not kidding-do it right now...I'll wait), managed to get one of the bigger surprises of the morning with a Best Comedy nomination.  Though it will certainly lose to Birdman, this is a big win for such a small film and may help it a bit when the BAFTA nominations come out (and hopefully it gets you to see the movie, which as I said is an absolute treat).

3. Six Came In, Five Came Out...

While we're certain to still hear names like Bill Murray and Ralph Fiennes later in the season, at this point it seems like six men are duking it out for five slots in the Best Actor field.  While long-established frontrunners Eddie Redmayne, Benedict Cumberbatch, and Michael Keaton all got their expected nominations, Jake Gyllenhaal and Steve Carell scored both today with the Globes and yesterday with the SAG Awards.  Joining them in the Drama field was David Oyelowo with Selma, which missed yesterday due to screening concerns.  I have to believe that Oyelowo is going to make it this year, which means that Gyllenhaal and Carell are in a battle royale for the next few weeks to see which one of them actually ends up on top.

4. Are the Best Actress and Supporting Actor Fields Locked Down?

Despite announcing back-to-back (thus avoiding the "you're copying me" argument), the Best Actress fields and the Best Supporting Actor fields were identical between the Globes and the SAG Awards, causing a lot of press to believe that this might be the same lineup for Oscar.  While there are still names floating around the awards season (Amy Adams is very formidable, particularly if she's going to win for Big Eyes at the Globes, and Tom Wilkinson could score with the right sort of push for Selma), these ten actors have to be feeling very strongly about their eventual chances at the Dolby.

5. Speaking of Amy Adams...

Which of the five women nominated for Best Actress in a Comedy/Musical is actually going to win?  None of them get off scott-free here.  You have Adams (who just won last year), Emily Blunt (who is overshadowed by Meryl Streep and is more of a "default" nominee than anything else here), Julianne Moore (almost certain to win over in Drama-spread the wealth!), Helen Mirren (who is nominated for a film no one remembers, and mostly just because she's Helen Mirren), and Quvenzhane Wallis (whose film Annie got two surprise nominations despite no one knowing much about it and, in Wallis's case, her costar Cameron Diaz being more Globe-beloved).  A victory for either Adams or Blunt could mean big things for their chances with AMPAS, though I honestly don't have a clue who wins this at the end of the day.  Like the 2010 Best Actor in a Comedy lineup, this looks like a lot of nominees but no winner.

6. The Best Director Lineup is Really Distinctive

Say what you will about the films they made, but Ava DuVernay, Richard Linklater, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Wes Anderson, and David Fincher are a very vision-oriented group of filmmakers.  The Globes resisted the celebrity baubles (Eastwood, Jolie) or the default newcomers (Tyldum, Marsh) and came up with what may be the strongest Best Director lineup we see this season.

7. The Hunger Games has a Strange Streak Going

The Hunger Games series officially went 3 for 3 in the Best Original Song race, getting nominated for Lorde's song in the film.  This follows nominations for Taylor Swift and Coldplay in the past installments.  The weird thing about this isn't that pop stars keep receiving nominations at the Globes (they always go for the big names), it's that none of them have been nominated by AMPAS (and neither has the astronomically profitable series in any other category).  While the Globes and the Oscars jive least in the music categories, this still feels a bit odd that at least one of these nominations hasn't turned into a citation.

8. Gone Girl has a Mixed Bag Sort of Day

By most accounts Gone Girl had a superb morning-four nominations, including for Director and leading lady Rosamund Pike definitely keeps the film in the game.  However, considering those four nominations and the massive Box Office surrounding the film, you have to wonder what it was that kept the David Fincher film from ousting Foxcatcher (which had another great day, and is now a much stronger contender for one of the 6-10 slot Best Picture nominations) in the Best Drama field.  It was clearly well-liked, so why not make the plunge and give it a shot at the big one?

9. What is the Globes' Problem with Melissa McCarthy?

Seriously!  McCarthy was Oscar-nominated for her work in a Globes Best Picture nominee (Bridesmaids), has amassed three Emmy nods and a win for a hit TV series (Mike & Molly), was in a major comedy hit with a Globe winner (The Heat), and now is starring in yet another Best Picture nominee (St. Vincent) but lost her nomination to Julianne Moore for a film that literally only critics and French film festival audiences have seen.  Does Maps to the Stars even exist, or is it like Frankie and Alice a few years back with Halle Berry and come 2017 it'll play in art houses for like a week?  Either way, McCarthy clearly is not the HFPA's cup of tea.

10. Whither Julia Roberts?

One of the weirdest snubs of the morning happened in television with one of the country's biggest movie stars.  Julia Roberts, who basically just made The Normal Heart so that she could get the Emmy in her EGOT, lost that to Kathy Bates, and now has to suffer the sting of not even getting a Globe nomination for the work.  $20 says she randomly wins at the SAG Awards and doesn't even show up to pick it up because she doesn't want to risk losing in public again.

And those are my thoughts on the Globes this afternoon-what about you?  What are you jumping for joy for or reaching for the bottle?  And who do you think will win?  Share your thoughts in the comments!

October Oscar Predictions: Best Picture

Once again we arrive at the Best Picture race, and what a strange trip it is this year.  There seems to be only two things that everyone can agree upon: A) this year has been fairly weak in terms of overall Best Picture contenders and B) as of this writing, no film has emerged as an obvious candidate to win Best Picture.

There are several films, though, that seem like they are in a position where they will surely be nominated, and at the top of that list would be the two major British biopics: The Imitation Game and The Theory of Everything.  Both films look to be in the camp of movies that get nominated, but don’t win (instead scoring acting or writing prizes), but we aren’t predicting winners right now, just nominees, and I cannot fathom a Best Picture race without either of them.

I also feel like, in a year that’s looking pretty weak, Oscar will rest on his favorites, and that means that Angelina Jolie’s Unbroken, a World War II epic in a year begging for one, will be a third nominee.  Jolie’s film is probably the closest you have to a frontrunner for the win (though the Academy clearly jumped the gun on giving her the Hersholt, as this would be her third Oscar before she hits forty), and even if it underwhelms a bit, in a year like this it surely will land in the Top 8-10, which should be enough.

Passion is occasionally a major factor in getting a nomination in the 5+-wide field, and while I was a bit skeptical over its inclusion, I am starting to feel like Boyhood may be impossible to ignore.  Richard Linklater is in a very strong position in Best Director (and after the Jesse-and-Celine trilogy, is sort of in that moment where you feel like the Academy has to honor him with a Best Director citation at some point), and it will surely get a lot of first-place ballot slots.  I suspect that it also makes the cut.

There will at least be five nominees, and I’ll finish out with what I’m assuming is the surest bet for the final slot, Birdman.  While the movie may be a little autre for Oscar, I think that its near universal praise will make it a contender for a nomination thanks to the lackluster fare that has come out (and the rather slim winter lineup only helps matters).  Gonzalez Inarritu hasn’t been in the Best Picture game for eight years and it seems well-timed for him to return.

The rest of the lineup is something of a question mark.  The biggest one, and the one I'm betting hardest on, is Selma.  The film finally proved its existence with a recent trailer, and while it struck slightly more comedic tones than I expected, it seems like the sort of heavy, Oscar BAIT-y drama that manages to make it onto the larger Best Picture lineup.  I'm still not quite sold because this is a film that few people have seen, but on paper it seems like a strong bet.

The same can no longer be said for Interstellar, where, despite a decent Rotten Tomatoes score, the naysayers seem to be out-performing the yaysayers, and the fact that it couldn't land Number One at the Box Office may be a problem (Hollywood doesn't need another disappointment this year).  I'm actually dropping this from my predictions for now, but considering that the Best Picture lineup is horribly blockbuster averse this year (there's no real chance for any other blockbusters to make the cut), AMPAS may want to throw Christopher Nolan a bone if only for the ratings.

A few other films seem to be in contention, but it's hard to read where they go.  The site In Contention is really high on Whiplash, and it is the sort of film that sneaks in in a Top 10 situation, but will enough people see it?  Mike Leigh's Mr. Turner could be a contender, but he hasn't been to the Best Picture lineup in almost twenty years, and this seems like a pretty small picture with no big stars, so there's a genuine question over whether it could actually make the cut.  Bennett Miller's Foxcatcher has somewhat faded from existence (that movie clearly needs to open, and soon), but he's done very well with this category in the past (both Capote and Moneyball made the shortlist).  Reese Witherspoon could pull a 127 Hours and land Wild a nomination with nothing but her sheer moxie.  If A Most Violent Year is deemed important enough, it could possibly make the cut.  And of course late-in-the-year box office or major critical prestige could boost Into the Woods into the running.

That being said, I'm going to say that the best shots right now are with two major Academy favorites: Clint Eastwood and David Fincher.  Eastwood's American Sniper is, like Selma, one of the big question marks of the year-will it be any good?  Will it hit a chord with AMPAS?  Just how big did Bradley Cooper's biceps get for it?  All of these questions will be answered in a few weeks when it opens, however, and I think that Clint will be able to make it to the Best Picture rodeo once again with this edgy-looking character piece.  David Fincher's Gone Girl may be a bit populist and pulp-y, but in a year where Box Office receipts were down across-the-board, don't you think AMPAS will want to reward a favorite director who manages to make a massive hit that's both critically-lauded and commercially successful?

September Oscar Predictions: Birdman, Boyhood, Foxcatcher, Fury, The Imitation Game, Interstellar, Selma, The Theory of Everything, and Unbroken
October Oscar Predictions: I kind of already spelled it out, but I'm feeling The Theory of Everything, Unbroken, The Imitation Game, Boyhood, Birdman, Selma, Gone Girl, and American Sniper.  I'm not going to push for a ninth film even though that's Oscar's sweet spot lately, though if I did I'd probably keep Interstellar on the docket, and I'm not completely sold on Gone Girl and American Sniper, but this is the time to take risks in predicting before the precursors steal away the mystery.

How about you?  What are your Best Picture predictions?  Share in the comments!

OVP: Gone Girl (2014)

Film: Gone Girl
Stars: Ben Affleck, Rosamund Pike, Neil Patrick Harris, Tyler Perry, Carrie Coon, Kim Dickens, Casey Wilson, Missi Pyle
Director: David Fincher
Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Actress-Rosamund Pike)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

And now it officially begins-Oscar season.  That time of year when I seem to always have something to see at the movies and as a result my bank account depletes and I start to wonder if popcorn is a food group.  It's also the time of year I write reviews that I know that I'll be revisiting, and try not to make a fool out of myself, and the snappishness of some of those rankings become all the more apparent when time gives me a new perspective on films and performances.

(Spoilers Ahead) Because Gone Girl is not the sort of movie that you just sit back and say "that was great" or "that was terrible."  It is the sort of movie where, after discussing it a bit, the fabric tends to unravel even if you still maintain the admiration.  The movie, about a hapless man named Nick Dunne (Affleck) who is drawn into a world well over his head when his wife Amy (Pike) is found missing, starts out as a straight drama.  There's very little suspense in the beginning of the movie.  Nick, left with Rosamund Pike in just flashbacks and Affleck in the present recalling his wife, first perfect, then slightly less so, is both A) clearly innocent and B) clearly headed for the gallows.  This is a man who has been set up either by fate or by someone else and every single finger points in his direction.  The movie is a bit slow during this time, save for when it points out the faultiness of the American criminal system, showing clips of The Ellen Abbott Show (hosted by Kim Dickens doing a ruthless Nancy Grace impression) where Nick is pronounced guilty from the beginning, a media desperate to find a villain to go with the seemingly dead beautiful blonde.

The film gets a different energy, of course, when we find that his wife Amy isn't in fact dead, but planned the entire affair (this is about halfway through the movie, and at this point you've clearly realized that she's probably still alive, as otherwise there'd be no reason for the Oscar buzz for Rosamund Pike, who seems more like a plastic Barbie doll in her memories than anything of interest, and this movie wouldn't have needed to be made, since clearly it's the Scott Peterson Story and they already did that on Lifetime, though obviously not at this creative level).  The movie then follows how she planned the entire faked death to try and punish her husband for his affair and for not being the perfect man she hoped he would be.

At this point, the film gets some electricity and not just occasional moments of brilliance.  You find in Pike a compelling character, someone you both hate and secretly want to get away with it for bringing so much life into the film (without her, the film may trend into that horrible place of "bland but handsome"...which, admittedly is usually how I describe Ben Affleck's cinematic career).  The plot takes quite a few detours during this part, and some convenient changes-of-heart (I don't believe for a second that Pike would have actually killed herself based on five minutes with the character, or that she would have carried around her money in such a discreet way, trusting the two backwoods-style characters who eventually steal her entire cash reserve).  Eventually she has to improvise and involve her controlling ex-boyfriend Desi (Harris) in order to find some way to finance her endeavors and eventually murders him to find a new "kidnapper" for her that isn't her husband, since otherwise she'll become a different' man's "prisoner."

The film, like most, has its good and bad.  The film's not-so-secret jewel is Pike, a 35-year-old British actress who has been at the sides of films like Die Another Day and An Education, but has never had a showcase role the equivalent of this, certain to make her a household name by the end of awards season.  Pike finds vile places to take her character, frequently trading on her beauty and intelligence to seduce and manipulate everyone around her.  It'd be sort of unbelievable if she didn't come across as so methodical and planned; she's a Stepford Wife crossed with a bloodhound.  The rest of the cast is solid. Ben Affleck isn't great in his work, but he is physically and personality-wise perfect for the role (having that muscular beefiness that defines sexually-attractive in the Midwest, he is both smart and hot enough to have attracted Amy in the first place and continue her obsession, but dumb enough to continue falling for her games).  The supporting parts are a bit of a mixed bag.  For every Carrie Coon (terrificly understated as the twin sister who gets dragged along with her brother through the mud) and Casey Wilson (the only towns-person who legitimately has enough crazy and confidence to have been a true threat to be the kidnapper in the first half's narrative), there's a Tyler Perry (who is fine, admittedly, but too big of a star to not be a distraction in a straight supporting part) and Neil Patrick Harris (who is certainly the film's weakest acting link-never finding a place for his character to be either a similarly-minded sociopath or just a rube constantly foiled by his lust for Amy).

The film's direction is of course wonderfully sedated, as is Fincher's raison d'etre.  He moves the camera through the world as if we're watching a stylish documentary, and the lighting is always dead-on (though a bit predictable, especially with the constant grey) from Jeff Cronenweth.  Probably my biggest problem with the film would be the writing.  I've never read Gillian Flynn's best-selling novel, and perhaps some of these plot holes would have been solved if I had, but that's not really how a movie is supposed to function (it's a separate entity, and if there's plot holes in the book they should be patched up when you get to the movie).  The film never quite finds its identity.  The first half it feels like a cultural study of our justice system and an unfolding crime drama, the second half occasionally a treatise on how marriage may be a destructive institution to our individuality and a paced-thriller over whether Amy will get away with the crimes (you know about thirty minutes before the end that she clearly will, otherwise there'd be no fun in the dark comedy of the movie, so this in particular peters out).  There's also too many story missteps (the entire Desi plot seems wildly underwritten and an extremely convenient scapegoat without much work to be done by Amy to solve the problem, the first half gives us no reason to believe that Nick could be guilty, which would add to the film's intrigue) to really forgive the writers.

Still, though, this is a film worth seeing (which, admittedly, I hope you did before you read this review-it says spoiler alert for a reason), as the strong attributes (Pike, the direction, Coon, Affleck's perfect casting, in that order) outweigh the weak.  It's also a film clearly made for adults in an increasingly teenage-oriented world, and as someone who is continually hoping for more grown-up fare at the cinema, that's worth celebrating.

What were your thoughts on Gone Girl (considering the Box Office I'm sure most of you have seen it)?  Did you also find the plot to be weighted down with too many directions and not enough consistency?  Were you also in love with Rosamund Pike's star role?  And what sort of future does this film have at the Oscars?  Share in the comments!