It was with caution that I entered the theater for the remake of the 1981 cult horror/comedy classic "The Evil Dead". So many great horror franchises like "Friday the 13th", "Nightmare on Elm Street" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" have recently been ruined by Hollywood by not caring about the script and hiring a young music video director making his feature debut and throwing the casting net over any random show currently on the CW or ABC family. it is with great satisfaction and somewhat surprise that I can report that the new "Evil Dead" is both a fine addition to the franchise but also easily the best horror movie I've seen in years.
First a brief history: The Evil Dead first came about as a low budget movie directed and co-wrote by a then unknown director, Sam Raimi (the original spider man trilogy, Drag Me to Hell) and starring future B movie king Bruce Campbell (Bubba Ho Tep). The Evil Dead got enough of a following that two sequels came out, each more successful than the last (Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness). Army of Darkness was released in the early 90's so Dead fans and Brucefiles alike have been clamoring for something-anything, at one point there was even talk of a "Freddy VS. Jason VS. Ash" franchise launcher which unfortunately never came to fruition. So now more than 30 years after the original we have a "reboot" of "The Evil Dead". The story is the same as it was originally, 5 friends are in a remote cabin in the woods when the stumble up a book of the dead. Soon after reading from said book bad shit starts to go down.
"Evil Dead" is bloody, dirty, disgusting and hilarious in parts. Limbs are lost and blood spurts out at a rate that makes "Kill Bill" look PG-13 in comparison, obviously if you are squeamish about those sort of things you may want to cover your eyes. With the train wrecks that have been other rebooted horror remakes its comforting to know that both original director Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell are both on board as producers. The cast is surprisingly strong, the most recognizable is Jane Levy from TV's underrated sitcom "Suburgatory". Levy has a great screen scream and without ruining the end it will be interesting if there is a sequel to see if her and Ash team up in anyway. There are a lot of nods to the original "Evil Dead" which will make my fellow dead heads squeal with delight (tip: stay til the end credits for an even bigger surprise). First time Hollywood director Fede Alvarez does a great job as well, there are signature "so evil dead" camera zoom in's but also the director puts his own spin and I cant wait to see what he can do with an original property.
Saying the new "Evil Dead" is the best horror movie to come out in some time unfortunately isn't a hard statement to make. Hollywood has deemed cheap, PG 13 "scary" movies as the future. Gone are the days when big name, respected directors such as Stanley Kubrick or William Freidkin would take on what would become horror classics (The Shining and The Exorcist). Though "Evil Dead" is a remake with Raimi now a big Hollywood franchise director this should hopefully show that even a hard, hard R rated film can stand out and entertain both the masses and the cult diehards. For lack of any other term "Evil Dead is "groovy", now go see it you primitive screwheads!
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Sunday, April 7, 2013
Die Hard: With a President
*Spoilers throughout
"Olympus Has Fallen", the first of two "White House under attack movies" scheduled for release this year has about every single action movie cliché that you can fill in a two hour movie yet still remains surprisingly effective. OHF features a cast entirely too good for the material which probably benefits the film the most as it plays more as a campy guilty pleasure B movie rather than a "sign of our times" movie.
Gerard Butler takes a break from making dreadful "romantic" "comedies" in horrible American accents to come back to his action roots, with a horrible American accent... He plays secret service agent Mike Banning, the President's right hand man, even the first lady and POTUS's son are sweet on Mike until of course a car crash involving the Presidents motorcade leads to the death of the first lady (Ashley Judd). Mike blames himself as he had to choose between saving POTUS or the first lady and leaves the White House and becomes lead security for the department of treasury. 18 months goes by and during a visit from the South Korean prime minister the White House is overtaken by an army of North Korean militia. Thankfully our hero is only a few blocks away during this invasion and since he knows all the in's and out's of the property he is able to sneak inside while kick ass and taking a few names along the way.
Its not a huge spoiler to indicate that by the end of the movie the President and America's freedom are all still well in tact."OHF" is not about breaking new cinematic ground, sure there are hokey moments like a tattered American flag being taken down as you hear saddening orchestra music. The cast is top notch overall, Dylan McDermott plays a secret service agent turned bad (you know this because he smokes in the movie) Morgan Freeman is very "Morgan Freemanish" here as well as the speaker of the house who becomes acting President during the crisis and maybe most unrecognizable is recent Academy Award winner Melissa Leo (The Fighter) as the Secretary of Defense-the fact that they cast actual "actors" in this really helps the overall tone and pace of the film, its a ridiculous concept but it works nonetheless
"Olympus Has Fallen", the first of two "White House under attack movies" scheduled for release this year has about every single action movie cliché that you can fill in a two hour movie yet still remains surprisingly effective. OHF features a cast entirely too good for the material which probably benefits the film the most as it plays more as a campy guilty pleasure B movie rather than a "sign of our times" movie.
Gerard Butler takes a break from making dreadful "romantic" "comedies" in horrible American accents to come back to his action roots, with a horrible American accent... He plays secret service agent Mike Banning, the President's right hand man, even the first lady and POTUS's son are sweet on Mike until of course a car crash involving the Presidents motorcade leads to the death of the first lady (Ashley Judd). Mike blames himself as he had to choose between saving POTUS or the first lady and leaves the White House and becomes lead security for the department of treasury. 18 months goes by and during a visit from the South Korean prime minister the White House is overtaken by an army of North Korean militia. Thankfully our hero is only a few blocks away during this invasion and since he knows all the in's and out's of the property he is able to sneak inside while kick ass and taking a few names along the way.
Its not a huge spoiler to indicate that by the end of the movie the President and America's freedom are all still well in tact."OHF" is not about breaking new cinematic ground, sure there are hokey moments like a tattered American flag being taken down as you hear saddening orchestra music. The cast is top notch overall, Dylan McDermott plays a secret service agent turned bad (you know this because he smokes in the movie) Morgan Freeman is very "Morgan Freemanish" here as well as the speaker of the house who becomes acting President during the crisis and maybe most unrecognizable is recent Academy Award winner Melissa Leo (The Fighter) as the Secretary of Defense-the fact that they cast actual "actors" in this really helps the overall tone and pace of the film, its a ridiculous concept but it works nonetheless
Sunday, March 24, 2013
"Spring Breakers" breaks all the rules of mainstream fare
If you've heard anything about "Spring Breakers" prior to reading this its for one of two reasons: 1) you've heard it features former Disney stars Vanessa Hudgens and Selena Gomez in their first "adult" roles or 2) you've seen pictures of co-star James Franco in full southern crunk style attire (corn rows and a grill). What you should know is that it features a genius performance by the afore mentioned Franco and is an art pop mix of a David Lynch film and Will Smith's music video for "Miami". In short this translates to "Spring Breakers" being a sometimes brilliant, sometimes too art housey for its own good trip of a movie-going experience. In even shorter it means that you will either love this movie or think it signals the end of western civilization.
The "story" centers around 4 BFF's in college and their obsessive desire to go to St. Petersburg Florida to experience spring break, to these girls spring break is not just a week vacation its a movement-its their Mecca. So determined are the girls to make it to spring break that once their year long savings of a combined 350 dollars comes up short they resort to robbing a local restaurant to fund their trip. Once there the customary partying, drinking, drugs and bikinis ensue until while at a house party the girls get thrown in jail until rapper turned drug/arms dealer Alien (James Franco) bails them out and recruits the girls to join his crew. This is about how in depth the story goes, the overall plotline is not the selling point. Director Harmony Korine until now had only made small quasi art/independent movies which "spring breakers" is if not for the fact that the cast has name recognition. There are segments in this film where it is just dubstep music and images of spring break partying which add nothing to the story but make the overall experience of the movie work.
Its obviously early in the year still but I would give serious consideration for James Franco to at least get a Best Supporting Actor nomination for his role as "Alien" here. Both flat out hilarious and terrifying Franco's turn here is one of his best and the first where he just isn't James Franco playing a character, he is Alien. Vanessa Hudgens doesn't do a whole lot here but again in this film acting isn't top priority, she looks good in a bikini and that's what's important. Selena Gomez and rapper turned actor Gucci Mane are the two other than Franco who make the most out of their dialogue, Gomez especially now that she is out from the shadow of ex Justin Bieber shows a lot of vulnerability as the Christian girl tuned bad.
Korine, who also is married to co-star Rachel Korine borrows some camera moves from Scorsese and Fincher and maybe spends a little too much time glamorizing drugs and "thug life" and needless to say tweens should not be seeing this movie. I understand the two ex Disney stars wanting to pull an "Hathaway" and branch out to more serious material and not run the risk of being typecast or pull a complete "Lohan". "Spring Breakers" is definitely a branched out situation but well worth the trip.
The "story" centers around 4 BFF's in college and their obsessive desire to go to St. Petersburg Florida to experience spring break, to these girls spring break is not just a week vacation its a movement-its their Mecca. So determined are the girls to make it to spring break that once their year long savings of a combined 350 dollars comes up short they resort to robbing a local restaurant to fund their trip. Once there the customary partying, drinking, drugs and bikinis ensue until while at a house party the girls get thrown in jail until rapper turned drug/arms dealer Alien (James Franco) bails them out and recruits the girls to join his crew. This is about how in depth the story goes, the overall plotline is not the selling point. Director Harmony Korine until now had only made small quasi art/independent movies which "spring breakers" is if not for the fact that the cast has name recognition. There are segments in this film where it is just dubstep music and images of spring break partying which add nothing to the story but make the overall experience of the movie work.
Its obviously early in the year still but I would give serious consideration for James Franco to at least get a Best Supporting Actor nomination for his role as "Alien" here. Both flat out hilarious and terrifying Franco's turn here is one of his best and the first where he just isn't James Franco playing a character, he is Alien. Vanessa Hudgens doesn't do a whole lot here but again in this film acting isn't top priority, she looks good in a bikini and that's what's important. Selena Gomez and rapper turned actor Gucci Mane are the two other than Franco who make the most out of their dialogue, Gomez especially now that she is out from the shadow of ex Justin Bieber shows a lot of vulnerability as the Christian girl tuned bad.
Korine, who also is married to co-star Rachel Korine borrows some camera moves from Scorsese and Fincher and maybe spends a little too much time glamorizing drugs and "thug life" and needless to say tweens should not be seeing this movie. I understand the two ex Disney stars wanting to pull an "Hathaway" and branch out to more serious material and not run the risk of being typecast or pull a complete "Lohan". "Spring Breakers" is definitely a branched out situation but well worth the trip.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Zero Dark Thirty
The last time I remember clapping at the end of a movie was during the climax of "Independence Day" when Randy Quaid bravely flies his biplane straight into the alien mothership saving us all from annihilation. The act of clapping at the end of the movie is now what I like to call a "douche move", once people started clapping at the end of Tyler Perry movies that's when it "jumped the shark". Upon viewing "Zero Dark Thirty" I almost got the urge to clap in approval and while I withstood the urge I can easily say that "Zero Dark Thirty" is my #2 favorite movie of the year.
Unless you've been under a rock you at the very least know that "Zero Dark Thirty" is about the 10 year hunt for Osama bin Laden in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11th 2001. The main character is a young CIA operative named Maya played by the excellent Jessica Chastain. Maya takes on the task of helping find UBL (bin Laden's code name) along the way there are misleads, deaths and politics all getting in the way of the lone ultimate goal. The movie is an epic journey, made more fascinating by the fact that this has all gone on during our lifetime. This movie has no political agenda, it takes no sides. Controversy surrounding torture scenes in the beginning of the movie should not shadow what is accomplished here. The scenes in question are disturbing as they should be but anyone should be able to figure out that this method does not directly lead to UBL's capture/death, I can understand politicians being upset as this may shed a bad light on the country but its not overwrought or overdone.
I've often written about running time in movies and how 99% of the time movies are at best 20-25 minutes longer than they need to be. "ZDT" runs in at almost 3 hours in length and a common complaint is that nothing happens until the raid on the Bin Laden compound. If you are looking for a typical action movie then this is not the film for you, if it was we'd have Sylvester Stallone in a turban running around shouting out tag lines just before blowing up UBL with a bazooka. "ZDT" makes you think about what is happening during this 10 year period, the path the characters take is not always easy and may not always be the right one, the film lets you decide.
Sacramento's own Jessica Chastain gives her best performance here, the character is based on an actual CIA operative that was the frontrunner in finding/killing Bin Laden, due to security reasons not much else is known about her but Chastain commands the screen and the character really has structure and depth thanks to screenwriter Mark Boal "The Hurt Locker" the rest of the cast is mostly unknown or character actors sans for James Gandolfini as C.I.A. director Leon Panetta and Chris Pratt from "Parks and Recreation" as one of the Navy Seals sent in to the compound.
"ZDT" ultimately lost out to "Argo" for best picture at the Oscars, I cant say I'm ultimately surprised, "Argo" is like "ZDT" for red states-much more accessible and easier to follow. They are actually two great companion pieces of film but ultimately "ZDT" is a more important film, especially for those of us who have lived and experienced the time it represents.
Unless you've been under a rock you at the very least know that "Zero Dark Thirty" is about the 10 year hunt for Osama bin Laden in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11th 2001. The main character is a young CIA operative named Maya played by the excellent Jessica Chastain. Maya takes on the task of helping find UBL (bin Laden's code name) along the way there are misleads, deaths and politics all getting in the way of the lone ultimate goal. The movie is an epic journey, made more fascinating by the fact that this has all gone on during our lifetime. This movie has no political agenda, it takes no sides. Controversy surrounding torture scenes in the beginning of the movie should not shadow what is accomplished here. The scenes in question are disturbing as they should be but anyone should be able to figure out that this method does not directly lead to UBL's capture/death, I can understand politicians being upset as this may shed a bad light on the country but its not overwrought or overdone.
I've often written about running time in movies and how 99% of the time movies are at best 20-25 minutes longer than they need to be. "ZDT" runs in at almost 3 hours in length and a common complaint is that nothing happens until the raid on the Bin Laden compound. If you are looking for a typical action movie then this is not the film for you, if it was we'd have Sylvester Stallone in a turban running around shouting out tag lines just before blowing up UBL with a bazooka. "ZDT" makes you think about what is happening during this 10 year period, the path the characters take is not always easy and may not always be the right one, the film lets you decide.
Sacramento's own Jessica Chastain gives her best performance here, the character is based on an actual CIA operative that was the frontrunner in finding/killing Bin Laden, due to security reasons not much else is known about her but Chastain commands the screen and the character really has structure and depth thanks to screenwriter Mark Boal "The Hurt Locker" the rest of the cast is mostly unknown or character actors sans for James Gandolfini as C.I.A. director Leon Panetta and Chris Pratt from "Parks and Recreation" as one of the Navy Seals sent in to the compound.
"ZDT" ultimately lost out to "Argo" for best picture at the Oscars, I cant say I'm ultimately surprised, "Argo" is like "ZDT" for red states-much more accessible and easier to follow. They are actually two great companion pieces of film but ultimately "ZDT" is a more important film, especially for those of us who have lived and experienced the time it represents.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
2012 Oscar Analysis
Welcome to the first annual "Aisle of Mann Academy Award Analysis" we will be going over each major category and who will win and who I think should actually win, whether they were actually nominated or not!
BEST ACTOR
Nominees: Daniel Day Lewis "Lincoln", Bradley Cooper "Silver Linings Playbook", Hugh Jackman "Les Miserables", Joaquin Phoenix "The Master", Denzel Washington "Flight"
Who will win: Daniel Day Lewis, Daniel Day Lewis and oh yeah, Daniel Day Lewis
Who should win: Daniel Day Lewis (Easiest bet of the night)
Analysis: The best actor category is loaded this year, I could make easy arguments as to why each actor is deserving of the statue unfortunately the four others have to go up against Daniel Day Lewis. Lewis and Washington are the two front runners as they have both won Oscars multiple times, Lewis gets the edge because he is the only one here playing a real person and if you 've seen the movie you know, the dude IS Abraham Lincoln! Bradley Cooper could be the dark horse here, especially if "Silver Linings Playbook" pulls upsets in other categories (more on that later). Joaquin Phoenix might have actually given the best performance out of anyone this year but unfortunately his movie is in the "love it or loathe it" category and after all the bashing against the Academy during the press tour for "The Master" he should really be happy he even got an invite. Hugh Jackman can definitely sing but his victory should just be the fact that he can now have "Academy Award Nominee" placed in front of his name when he makes another "Wolverine" movie, or until they make a musical out of "Crocodile Dundee"
BEST ACTRESS
Nominees: Jessica Chastain "Zero Dark Thirty", Jennifer Lawrence "Silver Linings Playbook", Emmanuelle Riva "Amour", Naomi Watts "The Impossible", Quvenzhané Wallis "Beasts of the Southern Wild"
Who will win: Jennifer Lawrence
Who should win: Jennifer Lawrence
Analysis: Full disclosure: at time of writing this I have actually only seen one of these performances (Jennifer Lawrence). Another two horse race here and its between Chastain and Lawrence. Since Julia Roberts is just old and Reese Witherspoon forgot how to make movies people actually went to Hollywood has been looking for the next "America's Sweetheart" Lawrence is poised to take this title as someone who can actually act and make blockbuster movies. She's young, She's gorgeous, she wins the Oscar. I get a strong Meryl Streepian vibe from Jessica Chastain, I think she will be around for quite awhile and have a chance to win soon and as great as it is to see a female nominated in a somewhat "action" film she isn't winning. Its nice to see Naomi Watts still around, she really should have won for "21 Grams" a few years back. As for the last two what can I say, one is 85 and the oldest nominee ever in the lead actress category, and its an unwritten rule that if I can't pronounce your first name you cant win an Oscar, sorry Quvenzhané Wallis.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Nominees: Alan Arkin "Argo", Robert De Niro "Silver Linings Playbook", Tommy Lee Jones "Lincoln", Phillip Seymour Hoffman "The Master", Christoph Waltz "Django Unchained"
Who will win: Tommy Lee Jones
Who should win: Robert De Niro (Since Leonardo DiCaprio got snubbed)
Analysis: This is easily my favorite category this year, and the hardest to predict. My personal choice would have been Leo in "Django", Christoph Waltz is great though and I'm glad that at least someone from the cast got recognized. He has won previously and it was for a Quentin Tarantino movie, no deja vu here. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is going to have the same problem that Joaquin Phoenix is having, great performance but there are a lot of people who absolutely despise "The Master" (fools). The race is between veterans Robert De Niro, Alan Arkin and Tommy Lee Jones. Arkin is a scene stealer in "Argo" but it was a limited role. Jones and De Niro are essential in their respected roles though I actually would have liked to have seen Jones nominated in "Hope Springs" over "Lincoln" as in that role he really plays against type to fantastic results. De Niro is just De Niro and after making some horrible film choices (basically EVERYTHING after Meet the Parents) he shows in "Silver Linings" why he is in fact the true "Master".
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Nominees: Sally Field "Lincoln", Anne Hathaway "Les Miserables", Jacki Weaver, Silver Linings Playbook", Amy Adams "The Master", Helen Hunt "The Sessions"
Who will win: Anne Hathaway (ugh)
Who should win: Amy Adams "The Master"
Analysis: Get ready for the most annoying acceptance speech of the night thanks to Anne Hathaway who like Daniel Day Lewis in "Lincoln" is almost a stone cold lock to get her first Oscar. I didn't dislike Hathaway's performance it just thought it was overhyped, her performance of "I Dreamed a Dream" is really the only reason she is even nominated (The Dark Knight Rises is the much meatier, more deserving role of her this year that should have gotten recognized). Sally Field is the next closest for "Lincoln" but the old vote can only get you so far, Field maybe liked, just not that much this year. Amy Adams would get my vote, her turn in "The Master" is quiet and nuanced and she is just as impressive as her juggernaut male co stars. I absolutely loved Jacki Weaver in "Silver Linings" her role was limited though so not much chance here. I didn't see Helen Hunt in "The Sessions" but I understand that it was very "brave" of her to get naked in the multiple sex scenes that are in this movie and also I understand that Helen Hunt is very excited that people still know she is still around, maybe Twister 2: The Twistering can finally get the greenlight!
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Nominees: Argo, Lincoln, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Life of Pi, Silver Linings Playbook
Who will win: David Magee for "Life of Pi"
Who should win: Chris Terrio for "Argo"
Analysis: I haven't read or seen "Life of Pi" but I do know that its about a kid on a lifeboat with a tiger, if you can make a two hour movie out of that and end up with 11 total Oscar nomination you have to get at least one major award out of it and this is Pi's best chance outside of the technical categories. "Argo" was both nerve rackingly tense and hilarious and harkened back to the heyday of 1970's thrillers, "Lincoln" is very topical and sturdy but is a little too much like a history lesson in parts which is directly the fault of the script. Comedy very rarely wins in the adapted category so that cancels "Silver Linings" out and just forget about "Beasts" the nomination is truly the award for this Sundance favorite.
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Nominees: Moonrise Kingdom, Zero Dark Thirty, Django Unchained, Flight, Amour
Who will win: Mark Boal for "Zero Dark Thirty"
Who should win: Quentin Tarantino for "Django Unchained"
Analysis: As I stated in my review of "Django Unchained" review they should just rename the best original screenplay award the "Tarantino" so with him being nominated here you know who I'm pulling for, Django is easily the most original film of the year. I do however think "Zero Dark Thirty" takes this award. Epic in its scope the ten year hunt for Bin Laden cant be anything if ambitious and even with all the criticism as to how "true" some true event are here I think this is where it will get recognized. If "Django" was easily the most original film of the year than "Moonrise Kingdom" is easily my least favorite Wes Anderson movie-shouldn't be here. "Flight" is an overall "good" movie with a GREAT lead performance, if Denzel should be able to pull off some monumental upset in the lead actor race he should buy his screenwriter a house or something. "Amour" is a foreign language film and while I'd place my bet on it to win best foreign language film its the longest of long shots here.
BEST DIRECTOR
Nominees: Steven Spielberg "Lincoln, Michael Haneke "Amour", Ang Lee "Life of Pi", David O. Russel "Silver Linings Playbook", Benh Zeitlin "Beasts of the Southern Wild"
Who will win: Steven Spielberg "Lincoln"
Who should win: Ben Affleck "Argo" or Kathryn Bigelow "Zero Dark Thirty" (both not nominated)
Analysis: You love Steven Spielberg, I love Steven Spielberg, we all love Steven Spielberg because of this fact and the fact that with "Lincoln" he reminded us all that he can still make a good movie that doesn't involve aliens he takes home his third directing statue, I'm not going to waste your time with going into why the others actually nominated wont win against the might Spielberg, lets talk about who wasn't nominated. Had Ben Affleck been nominated I'd put him as the front runner, "Argo" is a game changer both for himself and as to what types of movies are greenlit in Hollywood and with nominations for the film in writing and best picture the fact that Affleck was not at the very least nominated is a spit in the fact....Almost like how Kathryn Bigelow must be feeling now. Its well known that Bigelow became the first woman to win best director for "The Hurt Locker"(it will always be a strange and wonderful irony that the director of "Point Break" has a best director statue) she has followed up that with the story of the hunt and subsequent killing of arguably the greatest real life villain in our modern era and without even seeing it yet I can assure you she was overlooked.
BEST PICTURE
Nominees: Zero Dark Thirty, Life of Pi, Argo, Lincoln, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Silver Linings Playbook, Amour, Les Miserables, Django Unchained
Who will win: Lincoln
Who should win: Silver Linings Playbook
I almost put "Silver Linings" in the "will win" category as well. This movie, along with being my favorite of the year has serious dark horse potential-especially if it picks up more than one acting award along the course of the evening. "Argo" and Zero Dark Thirty" basically cancel themselves out of the race as they are similar in subject matter. The battle is really between "Lincoln" and "Life of Pi" I'm giving the edge to "Lincoln" as it is the safe pick and though its no groundbreaking piece of film everything about it is excellent in its execution. I wish "Django" could have been my pick but the last half hour really disappointed me and while I think its the most original film of the year, its not the best. The casual moviegoer will probably be hoping that "Les Miserables" wins, while I didn't hate the movie its not one of the years best and if it were able to steal a victory it would be a black eye in an otherwise great year for moviemaking. I do really look forward to seeing "Amour" eventually when it finally opens somewhere other than New York or Los Angeles, it could actually be the best of them all but I like most others can't say because its not available. "Beasts of Southern Wild" what can I say, I've typed your name more than I ever thought I would. That alone should be a notch in your belt.
BEST ACTOR
Nominees: Daniel Day Lewis "Lincoln", Bradley Cooper "Silver Linings Playbook", Hugh Jackman "Les Miserables", Joaquin Phoenix "The Master", Denzel Washington "Flight"
Who will win: Daniel Day Lewis, Daniel Day Lewis and oh yeah, Daniel Day Lewis
Who should win: Daniel Day Lewis (Easiest bet of the night)
Analysis: The best actor category is loaded this year, I could make easy arguments as to why each actor is deserving of the statue unfortunately the four others have to go up against Daniel Day Lewis. Lewis and Washington are the two front runners as they have both won Oscars multiple times, Lewis gets the edge because he is the only one here playing a real person and if you 've seen the movie you know, the dude IS Abraham Lincoln! Bradley Cooper could be the dark horse here, especially if "Silver Linings Playbook" pulls upsets in other categories (more on that later). Joaquin Phoenix might have actually given the best performance out of anyone this year but unfortunately his movie is in the "love it or loathe it" category and after all the bashing against the Academy during the press tour for "The Master" he should really be happy he even got an invite. Hugh Jackman can definitely sing but his victory should just be the fact that he can now have "Academy Award Nominee" placed in front of his name when he makes another "Wolverine" movie, or until they make a musical out of "Crocodile Dundee"
BEST ACTRESS
Nominees: Jessica Chastain "Zero Dark Thirty", Jennifer Lawrence "Silver Linings Playbook", Emmanuelle Riva "Amour", Naomi Watts "The Impossible", Quvenzhané Wallis "Beasts of the Southern Wild"
Who will win: Jennifer Lawrence
Who should win: Jennifer Lawrence
Analysis: Full disclosure: at time of writing this I have actually only seen one of these performances (Jennifer Lawrence). Another two horse race here and its between Chastain and Lawrence. Since Julia Roberts is just old and Reese Witherspoon forgot how to make movies people actually went to Hollywood has been looking for the next "America's Sweetheart" Lawrence is poised to take this title as someone who can actually act and make blockbuster movies. She's young, She's gorgeous, she wins the Oscar. I get a strong Meryl Streepian vibe from Jessica Chastain, I think she will be around for quite awhile and have a chance to win soon and as great as it is to see a female nominated in a somewhat "action" film she isn't winning. Its nice to see Naomi Watts still around, she really should have won for "21 Grams" a few years back. As for the last two what can I say, one is 85 and the oldest nominee ever in the lead actress category, and its an unwritten rule that if I can't pronounce your first name you cant win an Oscar, sorry Quvenzhané Wallis.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Nominees: Alan Arkin "Argo", Robert De Niro "Silver Linings Playbook", Tommy Lee Jones "Lincoln", Phillip Seymour Hoffman "The Master", Christoph Waltz "Django Unchained"
Who will win: Tommy Lee Jones
Who should win: Robert De Niro (Since Leonardo DiCaprio got snubbed)
Analysis: This is easily my favorite category this year, and the hardest to predict. My personal choice would have been Leo in "Django", Christoph Waltz is great though and I'm glad that at least someone from the cast got recognized. He has won previously and it was for a Quentin Tarantino movie, no deja vu here. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is going to have the same problem that Joaquin Phoenix is having, great performance but there are a lot of people who absolutely despise "The Master" (fools). The race is between veterans Robert De Niro, Alan Arkin and Tommy Lee Jones. Arkin is a scene stealer in "Argo" but it was a limited role. Jones and De Niro are essential in their respected roles though I actually would have liked to have seen Jones nominated in "Hope Springs" over "Lincoln" as in that role he really plays against type to fantastic results. De Niro is just De Niro and after making some horrible film choices (basically EVERYTHING after Meet the Parents) he shows in "Silver Linings" why he is in fact the true "Master".
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Nominees: Sally Field "Lincoln", Anne Hathaway "Les Miserables", Jacki Weaver, Silver Linings Playbook", Amy Adams "The Master", Helen Hunt "The Sessions"
Who will win: Anne Hathaway (ugh)
Who should win: Amy Adams "The Master"
Analysis: Get ready for the most annoying acceptance speech of the night thanks to Anne Hathaway who like Daniel Day Lewis in "Lincoln" is almost a stone cold lock to get her first Oscar. I didn't dislike Hathaway's performance it just thought it was overhyped, her performance of "I Dreamed a Dream" is really the only reason she is even nominated (The Dark Knight Rises is the much meatier, more deserving role of her this year that should have gotten recognized). Sally Field is the next closest for "Lincoln" but the old vote can only get you so far, Field maybe liked, just not that much this year. Amy Adams would get my vote, her turn in "The Master" is quiet and nuanced and she is just as impressive as her juggernaut male co stars. I absolutely loved Jacki Weaver in "Silver Linings" her role was limited though so not much chance here. I didn't see Helen Hunt in "The Sessions" but I understand that it was very "brave" of her to get naked in the multiple sex scenes that are in this movie and also I understand that Helen Hunt is very excited that people still know she is still around, maybe Twister 2: The Twistering can finally get the greenlight!
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Nominees: Argo, Lincoln, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Life of Pi, Silver Linings Playbook
Who will win: David Magee for "Life of Pi"
Who should win: Chris Terrio for "Argo"
Analysis: I haven't read or seen "Life of Pi" but I do know that its about a kid on a lifeboat with a tiger, if you can make a two hour movie out of that and end up with 11 total Oscar nomination you have to get at least one major award out of it and this is Pi's best chance outside of the technical categories. "Argo" was both nerve rackingly tense and hilarious and harkened back to the heyday of 1970's thrillers, "Lincoln" is very topical and sturdy but is a little too much like a history lesson in parts which is directly the fault of the script. Comedy very rarely wins in the adapted category so that cancels "Silver Linings" out and just forget about "Beasts" the nomination is truly the award for this Sundance favorite.
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Nominees: Moonrise Kingdom, Zero Dark Thirty, Django Unchained, Flight, Amour
Who will win: Mark Boal for "Zero Dark Thirty"
Who should win: Quentin Tarantino for "Django Unchained"
Analysis: As I stated in my review of "Django Unchained" review they should just rename the best original screenplay award the "Tarantino" so with him being nominated here you know who I'm pulling for, Django is easily the most original film of the year. I do however think "Zero Dark Thirty" takes this award. Epic in its scope the ten year hunt for Bin Laden cant be anything if ambitious and even with all the criticism as to how "true" some true event are here I think this is where it will get recognized. If "Django" was easily the most original film of the year than "Moonrise Kingdom" is easily my least favorite Wes Anderson movie-shouldn't be here. "Flight" is an overall "good" movie with a GREAT lead performance, if Denzel should be able to pull off some monumental upset in the lead actor race he should buy his screenwriter a house or something. "Amour" is a foreign language film and while I'd place my bet on it to win best foreign language film its the longest of long shots here.
BEST DIRECTOR
Nominees: Steven Spielberg "Lincoln, Michael Haneke "Amour", Ang Lee "Life of Pi", David O. Russel "Silver Linings Playbook", Benh Zeitlin "Beasts of the Southern Wild"
Who will win: Steven Spielberg "Lincoln"
Who should win: Ben Affleck "Argo" or Kathryn Bigelow "Zero Dark Thirty" (both not nominated)
Analysis: You love Steven Spielberg, I love Steven Spielberg, we all love Steven Spielberg because of this fact and the fact that with "Lincoln" he reminded us all that he can still make a good movie that doesn't involve aliens he takes home his third directing statue, I'm not going to waste your time with going into why the others actually nominated wont win against the might Spielberg, lets talk about who wasn't nominated. Had Ben Affleck been nominated I'd put him as the front runner, "Argo" is a game changer both for himself and as to what types of movies are greenlit in Hollywood and with nominations for the film in writing and best picture the fact that Affleck was not at the very least nominated is a spit in the fact....Almost like how Kathryn Bigelow must be feeling now. Its well known that Bigelow became the first woman to win best director for "The Hurt Locker"(it will always be a strange and wonderful irony that the director of "Point Break" has a best director statue) she has followed up that with the story of the hunt and subsequent killing of arguably the greatest real life villain in our modern era and without even seeing it yet I can assure you she was overlooked.
BEST PICTURE
Nominees: Zero Dark Thirty, Life of Pi, Argo, Lincoln, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Silver Linings Playbook, Amour, Les Miserables, Django Unchained
Who will win: Lincoln
Who should win: Silver Linings Playbook
I almost put "Silver Linings" in the "will win" category as well. This movie, along with being my favorite of the year has serious dark horse potential-especially if it picks up more than one acting award along the course of the evening. "Argo" and Zero Dark Thirty" basically cancel themselves out of the race as they are similar in subject matter. The battle is really between "Lincoln" and "Life of Pi" I'm giving the edge to "Lincoln" as it is the safe pick and though its no groundbreaking piece of film everything about it is excellent in its execution. I wish "Django" could have been my pick but the last half hour really disappointed me and while I think its the most original film of the year, its not the best. The casual moviegoer will probably be hoping that "Les Miserables" wins, while I didn't hate the movie its not one of the years best and if it were able to steal a victory it would be a black eye in an otherwise great year for moviemaking. I do really look forward to seeing "Amour" eventually when it finally opens somewhere other than New York or Los Angeles, it could actually be the best of them all but I like most others can't say because its not available. "Beasts of Southern Wild" what can I say, I've typed your name more than I ever thought I would. That alone should be a notch in your belt.
Sunday, January 6, 2013
I wasn't exactly miserable during "Les Miserables"
Hearing of the prospects of Maximus, Wolverine and Catwoman in one movie understandably got me and my fellow cinenerds quite excited. Then when it was clarified that it would be Russell Crowe, Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway coming together for an adaptation of the novel, turned movie, turned musical and finally turned into movie musical known as "Les Miserables". Needless to say my excitement dimmed just a little bit...
The source material to which "Les Miserables" is based upon is probably, in my mind one of the greatest novels ever written. To this point that is my only point of reference as I have never seen any other film or stage version, until now. I was actually dreading seeing this movie, I really have nothing against musicals "West Side Story" and "Rocky Horror Picture Show" are two of my favorites but with "Les Miz" it seems like the promotion and advertising started in September and went into overdrive in the weeks leading up to the Christmas day release. The fact that this is apparently the first time that actors have been able to sing live on set and not pre record their songs was something the producers wanted you to know, wanted your grandmother to know and wanted your dog to know because it was everywhere. Add in annoying Anne Hathaway's press tour and sharing of how difficult it was to shave her head on camera and how much she apparently has in common with a 19th century poor French line worker turned prostitute and this was turning into another overhyped Hollywood product.
So bottom line, how is it? Maybe it was the lowered expectations but it is actually a very ok movie, the first hour is absolutely fantastic, the middle drags and the end improves on that. The story is of prisoner Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) who is released but closely watched by Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe), a series of events leads to Valjean changing his identity, becoming an outstanding member of the community and caring for a child whose mother Fantine (Anne Hathaway) has died. All while under the constant pursuit of Javert and all underneath the backdrop of the French Revolution. The story itself is epic and the production design and costumes promote this in all its glory. All the actors are game for their roles, Hugh Jackman is able to command the screen even without an adamantium skeleton. Much has been made, or hyped about Anne Hathaway's performance probably because she gets the signature song of "I Dreamed a Dream". I found the performance overall overrated, she has a very good voice but you shouldn't get an Oscar for shaving your head, wearing bad teeth prosthetics and having your breasts fondled by dirty French soldiers. If Hathaway does get nominated for Best Supporting Actress it should be for "The Dark Knight Rises" as Selina Kyle/Catwoman, a role that actually was something I didn't expect her to be able to pull off but she did. The real surprise for me is Russell Crowe, I was expecting more of a Pierce Brosnan in "Mama Mia" type of performance from him here but he actually goes all in and even without the best singing voice he steals every scene that he is in-he gives a performance.
As talked about in other posts here a big problem is the running time, "Les Miz" clocks in at 2 hours and 38 minutes, I'm not one of these proponents against long running times, if its warranted its completely acceptable. The middle portion here though drags almost to a complete stop, I'm sure diehard fans of the musical would call blasphemy if any musical numbers were cut out but I think it would of been for the films benefit had they done so. Most notably the storyline of Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bohham Carter as the innkeepers could have easily been removed from the final cut. The other big issue for me was the accents in the film, accents range from American to cockney British, the one that's missing: French. I think "bonjour" and "monsieur" are the only bits of French said in the whole production.
I was expecting "Les Miserables" to be an utter train wreck and for better or worse it wasn't, aspects of it are outstanding as well as pointless and overdone. Its a film that screams "nominate me!" which it probably will, deserving in some categories (production design) and unconscionable in others (best picture). For the meantime I'll be waiting for the inevitable "Book of Mormon" adaptation.
The source material to which "Les Miserables" is based upon is probably, in my mind one of the greatest novels ever written. To this point that is my only point of reference as I have never seen any other film or stage version, until now. I was actually dreading seeing this movie, I really have nothing against musicals "West Side Story" and "Rocky Horror Picture Show" are two of my favorites but with "Les Miz" it seems like the promotion and advertising started in September and went into overdrive in the weeks leading up to the Christmas day release. The fact that this is apparently the first time that actors have been able to sing live on set and not pre record their songs was something the producers wanted you to know, wanted your grandmother to know and wanted your dog to know because it was everywhere. Add in annoying Anne Hathaway's press tour and sharing of how difficult it was to shave her head on camera and how much she apparently has in common with a 19th century poor French line worker turned prostitute and this was turning into another overhyped Hollywood product.
So bottom line, how is it? Maybe it was the lowered expectations but it is actually a very ok movie, the first hour is absolutely fantastic, the middle drags and the end improves on that. The story is of prisoner Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) who is released but closely watched by Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe), a series of events leads to Valjean changing his identity, becoming an outstanding member of the community and caring for a child whose mother Fantine (Anne Hathaway) has died. All while under the constant pursuit of Javert and all underneath the backdrop of the French Revolution. The story itself is epic and the production design and costumes promote this in all its glory. All the actors are game for their roles, Hugh Jackman is able to command the screen even without an adamantium skeleton. Much has been made, or hyped about Anne Hathaway's performance probably because she gets the signature song of "I Dreamed a Dream". I found the performance overall overrated, she has a very good voice but you shouldn't get an Oscar for shaving your head, wearing bad teeth prosthetics and having your breasts fondled by dirty French soldiers. If Hathaway does get nominated for Best Supporting Actress it should be for "The Dark Knight Rises" as Selina Kyle/Catwoman, a role that actually was something I didn't expect her to be able to pull off but she did. The real surprise for me is Russell Crowe, I was expecting more of a Pierce Brosnan in "Mama Mia" type of performance from him here but he actually goes all in and even without the best singing voice he steals every scene that he is in-he gives a performance.
As talked about in other posts here a big problem is the running time, "Les Miz" clocks in at 2 hours and 38 minutes, I'm not one of these proponents against long running times, if its warranted its completely acceptable. The middle portion here though drags almost to a complete stop, I'm sure diehard fans of the musical would call blasphemy if any musical numbers were cut out but I think it would of been for the films benefit had they done so. Most notably the storyline of Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bohham Carter as the innkeepers could have easily been removed from the final cut. The other big issue for me was the accents in the film, accents range from American to cockney British, the one that's missing: French. I think "bonjour" and "monsieur" are the only bits of French said in the whole production.
I was expecting "Les Miserables" to be an utter train wreck and for better or worse it wasn't, aspects of it are outstanding as well as pointless and overdone. Its a film that screams "nominate me!" which it probably will, deserving in some categories (production design) and unconscionable in others (best picture). For the meantime I'll be waiting for the inevitable "Book of Mormon" adaptation.
Friday, January 4, 2013
If "This is 40" do you make it to 41?
*I'll start off this with the disclaimer that I am not 40, nor do I pretend to be
"This is 40" the newest film from director Judd Apatow is an improvement on his last movie "Funny People" but has the common flaw of the later as it doesn't quite know if it wants to be an all out comedy or a dramedy. The movie follows the story of Debbie and Pete from Apatow's second film "Knocked Up". Debbie and Pete are played masterfully by the always dependable Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann (no relation sadly). The title of the movie says it all as the movie is basically about how the couple deals with becoming 40, Pete is more or less ok with this fact but Debbie struggles with this idea of getting old and even goes so far as to convince herself and everyone around her that she is actually 38, or maybe 37...
There are some truly funny scenes here, one in particular involves an intimate act between Debbie and Pete behind a locked door while their two kids yell and scream for their attention from the other side. The cast is almost an Apatow dream team, Chris O'Dowd and Melissa McCarthy from "Bridesmaids" pop up for extended cameos as well as Jason Segal reprises his role from "Knocked Up" in a part that could have been much funnier than it is. Lena Dunham from Apatow's crushingly funny HBO show "Girls" is also here in a limited role, I feel that the movie would have benefited from O'Dowd and Dunham having larger roles as Petes co-workers at his record label, again missed opportunities.
A big problem in the last two Apatow films has been the running time. Both "40" and "Funny People" clock in at well over two hours when they could have easily been edited down to a more standard run time. Blame this on either the fact that most of the dialogue is improvised or that there are too many ideas going around and the director feels it necessary to include all his ideas, and friends in the movie. "40" is probably most relatable to those who are over or closing in on that magical(?) age of 40. Mann is in fact Apatow's real life wife and his two kids are again playing their same roles from "Knocked Up" both kids can act but there are long scenes where it just looks like home movies, I'd like to see Apatow's next project be something not semi autobiographical. Megan Fox also appears as one of Debbie's employees at her clothing store but Fox has the same problem as Jessica Biel, she looks great but brings nothing to the table acting wise, I felt she would have been better suited as one of the mannequins in Debbie's store.
"This is 40" will ring true to a lot of people of that age and even those of us still in our 20's. There is no question that you will laugh a lot during this movie. Apatow started off his directing career with such a bang with "The 40 Year Old Virgin" and "Knocked Up", with "Funny People" and "40" he seems to be almost teetering into Schmaltzy territory lately and while "40" is not a bad movie it isn't great either, maybe he should give Steve Carell a call...
"This is 40" the newest film from director Judd Apatow is an improvement on his last movie "Funny People" but has the common flaw of the later as it doesn't quite know if it wants to be an all out comedy or a dramedy. The movie follows the story of Debbie and Pete from Apatow's second film "Knocked Up". Debbie and Pete are played masterfully by the always dependable Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann (no relation sadly). The title of the movie says it all as the movie is basically about how the couple deals with becoming 40, Pete is more or less ok with this fact but Debbie struggles with this idea of getting old and even goes so far as to convince herself and everyone around her that she is actually 38, or maybe 37...
There are some truly funny scenes here, one in particular involves an intimate act between Debbie and Pete behind a locked door while their two kids yell and scream for their attention from the other side. The cast is almost an Apatow dream team, Chris O'Dowd and Melissa McCarthy from "Bridesmaids" pop up for extended cameos as well as Jason Segal reprises his role from "Knocked Up" in a part that could have been much funnier than it is. Lena Dunham from Apatow's crushingly funny HBO show "Girls" is also here in a limited role, I feel that the movie would have benefited from O'Dowd and Dunham having larger roles as Petes co-workers at his record label, again missed opportunities.
A big problem in the last two Apatow films has been the running time. Both "40" and "Funny People" clock in at well over two hours when they could have easily been edited down to a more standard run time. Blame this on either the fact that most of the dialogue is improvised or that there are too many ideas going around and the director feels it necessary to include all his ideas, and friends in the movie. "40" is probably most relatable to those who are over or closing in on that magical(?) age of 40. Mann is in fact Apatow's real life wife and his two kids are again playing their same roles from "Knocked Up" both kids can act but there are long scenes where it just looks like home movies, I'd like to see Apatow's next project be something not semi autobiographical. Megan Fox also appears as one of Debbie's employees at her clothing store but Fox has the same problem as Jessica Biel, she looks great but brings nothing to the table acting wise, I felt she would have been better suited as one of the mannequins in Debbie's store.
"This is 40" will ring true to a lot of people of that age and even those of us still in our 20's. There is no question that you will laugh a lot during this movie. Apatow started off his directing career with such a bang with "The 40 Year Old Virgin" and "Knocked Up", with "Funny People" and "40" he seems to be almost teetering into Schmaltzy territory lately and while "40" is not a bad movie it isn't great either, maybe he should give Steve Carell a call...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)