OVP: Best Makeup & Hairstyling (2016)
The Nominees Were...
Eva von Bahr & Love Larson, A Man Called Ove
Jole Harlow & Richard Alonzo, Star Trek Beyond
Alessandro Bertolazzi, Giorgio Gregorini, & Christopher Nelson, Suicide Squad
My Thoughts: Thankfully, this is going to be one of the last, recent years where we will have to create a different photo montage for Makeup, as the 2019 Oscars will be the first year to have five nominations in this category to match the rest of the other fields. However, the Oscars didn't have such an option in 2016, but perhaps that was for the best, as in terms of sheer quality of the actual picture (not their makeup merits), I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a worse lineup of actual films this decade. It only gets better from here, folks.
We'll start with Star Trek Beyond, the movie I saw the furthest away from the present (the other two were the final two movies of 2016's nominees that I saw). The film's makeup work is extraordinary, particularly the creations of Sofia Boutella's Jaylah and Ashley Edner's Natalia. These are creations that almost any other film would have gone CGI for, but the work here is remarkable, looking effortlessly real while also alien. There are moments in the script where the makeup feels almost like its own character rather than aiding the story, but I'm putting that more on the screenwriters for not coming up with a better picture. All-in-all, this is very worthy in a film that's just okay.
Star Trek Beyond is a considerably better movie, though, than the other two contenders. A Man Called Ove is nominated in another category we'll profile at this project's halfway point, so I'll save some of my thoughts for the film itself then, but suffice it to say I wasn't a fan. I also thought the makeup work here was good but unnecessary. Star Rolf Lassgard is quite well-known in Sweden, so this is surely the same impact you'd get seeing someone like Tom Cruise or Johnny Depp go from iconic movie star to unrecognizable, but there's never really a reason why this is happening in the context of the film other than they just wanted to cast Lassgard & he wasn't old enough for the role. The work is fine, but perhaps we should pick films for this category where the makeup is actually necessary, and not just there because the filmmakers didn't want to hire an age-appropriate actor (it's not like he ages dramatically throughout the film-he's played by a different actor in flashbacks).
And then finally there's Suicide Squad, truly one of the worst movies I've ever seen win an Academy Award. The film is a pantheon of bad acting, perhaps covered up slightly by the rather strong makeup work on-display. It's not always clear why we are plastering actors in mountains of prosthetics, as motion-capture might have worked better and made certain scenes look less cheap, but when it's on (like Margot Robbie's iconic Harley Quinn), it's a hit, adding to the world of DC while also blending in, never feeling like they're trying to achieve a different picture...even though they really, really should have tried to achieve a different picture.
We'll start with Star Trek Beyond, the movie I saw the furthest away from the present (the other two were the final two movies of 2016's nominees that I saw). The film's makeup work is extraordinary, particularly the creations of Sofia Boutella's Jaylah and Ashley Edner's Natalia. These are creations that almost any other film would have gone CGI for, but the work here is remarkable, looking effortlessly real while also alien. There are moments in the script where the makeup feels almost like its own character rather than aiding the story, but I'm putting that more on the screenwriters for not coming up with a better picture. All-in-all, this is very worthy in a film that's just okay.
Star Trek Beyond is a considerably better movie, though, than the other two contenders. A Man Called Ove is nominated in another category we'll profile at this project's halfway point, so I'll save some of my thoughts for the film itself then, but suffice it to say I wasn't a fan. I also thought the makeup work here was good but unnecessary. Star Rolf Lassgard is quite well-known in Sweden, so this is surely the same impact you'd get seeing someone like Tom Cruise or Johnny Depp go from iconic movie star to unrecognizable, but there's never really a reason why this is happening in the context of the film other than they just wanted to cast Lassgard & he wasn't old enough for the role. The work is fine, but perhaps we should pick films for this category where the makeup is actually necessary, and not just there because the filmmakers didn't want to hire an age-appropriate actor (it's not like he ages dramatically throughout the film-he's played by a different actor in flashbacks).
And then finally there's Suicide Squad, truly one of the worst movies I've ever seen win an Academy Award. The film is a pantheon of bad acting, perhaps covered up slightly by the rather strong makeup work on-display. It's not always clear why we are plastering actors in mountains of prosthetics, as motion-capture might have worked better and made certain scenes look less cheap, but when it's on (like Margot Robbie's iconic Harley Quinn), it's a hit, adding to the world of DC while also blending in, never feeling like they're trying to achieve a different picture...even though they really, really should have tried to achieve a different picture.
Other Precursor Contenders: The BAFTA Awards have been going five-wide for years, and in a weird conundrum, picked an entirely different lineup from Oscar, with Florence Foster Jenkins besting Doctor Strange, Hacksaw Ridge, Nocturnal Animals, and Rogue One (the latter being a pretty large question mark considering the amount of CGI in the picture). The Saturn Awards picked six nominations (it's always a question mark how many they'll shortlist), with Star Trek Beyond beating Doctor Strange, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Suicide Squad, X-Men: Apocalypse, and Rogue One (as a reminder-the Saturn Awards only honor SciFi, Fantasy, and Horror so something like Ove or Florence wouldn't be eligible here). The Oscars do have a shortlist for best Makeup, so we know that the fourth place finisher was either Deadpool, The Dressmaker, Hail Caesar, or Florence Foster Jenkins. I know at the time I predicted it'd be Deadpool, but with some distance I wonder if Florence Foster Jenkins (which did comparatively well with Oscar and precursors) might have just missed here, getting J. Roy Helland a shot at a second trophy.
Films I Would Have Nominated: 2016 is the first ever year we profiled where I picked all of my choices at the time for what I'd have gone with for nominees here, so I actually have some things to say about this lineup. I'm going to be real here-while I actually don't think this lineup (based solely on its makeup) is terrible, I think I'd restart the whole shebang if limited to only three nominations, with Jackie (the picture-perfect recreations), Silence (the use of dirt and blood is so authentic), and Hail Caesar (beautiful reinventions of old Hollywood glamour) making the cut.
Oscar’s Choice: I think if it hadn't have been a sequel this would have gone to Star Trek Beyond as it's the easiest to swallow film from a reviews standpoint, but since it was a sequel they added "Oscar-winning" to Suicide Squad DVD's for the rest of time.
My Choice: Easy call for Star Trek Beyond. I might not have liked the movie, but it's impressive makeup work is undeniable. I'd follow that with Suicide Squad and A Man Called Ove.
And those are my thoughts-what are yours? Who's with me that it should be Star Trek Beyond rather than Suicide Squad picking up that trophy? Who do you think was in fourth place (note you can only pick from the bakeoff)? And is this truly the worst set of movies Oscar ever put into one category? Share your theories below!
No comments:
Post a Comment