Oscar Watch: Best Picture Thoughts

Now that I've seen all the best picture nominees, it's time to post my thoughts about them! This was an excellent year for best picture nominees. We have a wide range of film genres, from westerns ("True Grit") to animation ("Toy Story 3") to sports ("The Fighter) to psychological thrillers ("Black Swan") to historical drama ("The King's Speech") to sci-fi ("Inception") to dramatic comedy ("The Kids Are All Right") to soporific ("Winter's Bone"). That's a wide range. And while most of them likely have no chance of winning, I still think it's an honor to be nominated.

I want "Toy Story 3" to win. It's a likely long, long shot, but I hope the day will come when animation can win an oscar. Heck, fantasy won an oscar a few years ago, so maybe it's a matter of time. Now why "Toy Story 3"? I felt that it captured the feeling of being a child, and simultaneously infused in us the burning desire to return to the simplicity and joys of being a child. The joy of playtime with your toys, when your imagination was the only limit to your enjoyment. It forced us to deal with growing up, and in its final scenes, showed us the sadness in giving up the things you love as you become an adult. Maybe this movie came at a time when I feel like I'm dealing with these things, but to me, it's the best movie of the year.

Now, to be fair, I think only five films warrant serious consideration for best picture. Just a few years ago, there were only five nominees. If you want to know what this year's top five nominees were, I'd say look at the best director category. This leaves us with "The King's Speech," "Black Swan," "The Fighter," "The Social Network," and "True Grit." Each of which is deserving of a nomination. I don't think "The Kids Are All Right," "Inception," and "Winter's Bone" deserved a nomination. "Inception" was a fun and inventive movie, but there is better sci-fi out there that deserves nomination (like "District 9" was last year). "Winter's Bone" was just boring. And "The Kids Are All Right" was funny and enjoyable, but just not best pic worthy. "Toy Story 3" fully deserved its nomination, and "127 Hours" I feel deserved it just because it made a 1.5 hour movie about a man trapped by a rock interesting to watch.

So, as for the top five, I think it really comes down to two: "The King's Speech" and "The Social Network." The other movies are good, but just not good enough to win best picture to me. They excel within their genres, and deserve some other awards, but as an overall film, I'd really have to give it to "The King's Speech." The acting, editing, costumes, and script all came together to make a solid, multifaceted movie that we can look back on and rank as a quality oscar winner. But I think "The Social Network" has it's strengths as well. It's telling a very modern story, and fits well with the times. When we look back, we will see "The Social Network" as a movie that helped define the days we live in, when some people broadcast their whole life on the internet. People have said that the facts in the movie aren't accurate. I think that furthers its credibility as a picture of the modern day. We may judge people by their facebook posts and pictures, by their status updates; this creates an unfair and fractured image of a person. Should a movie about facebook's creation be any less fractured? "The King's Speech" is the better film, but "The Social Network" is the tale of our times. If I were to choose, I'd give it to "The Social Network" for its snapshot of our current society, but I'll be just as pleased if "The King's Speech" nabs the top prize.

Oscar Watch: The King's Speech

"The King's Speech"
Starring: Colin Firth, Geoffery Rush, Helena Bonham Carter
Directed by: Tom Hooper
Nominated for: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Firth), Best Supporting Actor (Rush), Best Supporting Actress (Carter), Best Film Editing, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, Best Sound Mixing, Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Cinematography

The leader of the pack at this year's oscars is also the film that arguably deserves to win the top prize. "The King's Speech" is both a historical chronicle of pre-WWII England, and a drama about the relationship between two men. Two men who, while not equal in society's eyes, are equal when in each other's company. These two men are, of course, King George VI (Firth) and his speech therapist, Lionel Logue (Rush). The film start with King George V in power (Michael Gambon), with George VI as the Duke of York. At an event at Wembley Stadium, he is unable to deliver a proper speech, secondary to his lifelong stammer. Enough is enough, his wife decides, and she finds Logue. The rest of the movie follows Logue and George VI's training, as events both personal and political shake both of their lives. The movie culminates as World War II begins, and King George VI is looked on by his nation as a figure of strength.

Speaking of strength, this movie has a lot of it. The acting is superb. As with Helen Mirren in "The Queen," Firth makes you feel as if you are having an inside eye into British royalty. It's easy to have someone put on a stammer and the claim it's good acting, but I feel Firth also showed the frustation and anger that King George VI felt by his impaired speech. Rush is equally good as Logue, who shows such confidence and courage, yet a softer, gentler side. The relationship between the two is the foundation of the movie, yet it doesn't delve into being overdramatic.

The script is well written, but I feel the movie's main strength after acting is the way it set the scene for pre-WWII Britain. I'm no history enthusiast so I can't comment on how accurate it was, but I felt as if I was there. It was filmed in a way where you feel it's taking place in an older time. Art direction and costume design were essential here, and sometimes I'm glad I'm not in the academy, because I'd have difficulty choosing winners for those categories. Because while this movie had art direction and costumes that really enhanced the entire film, "Alice in Wonderland" was a subpar movie with beautiful art direction and outlandish costumes. I wonder at what point these categories are awarded solely on their own merit, versus their contribution to the overall film.

The film was edited well. It was slow, but not boring, and as a friend of mine said, it moved at the pace of life. Unlike "Winter's Bone," which was downright dull.

The music was subtle, but complemented the film well. And the use of Beethoven's Symphony No. 7 Mvt. 2 in the final scenes is excellent. I would say it's the best use of Beethoven in a movie, but that honor simply has to go to "A Clockwork Orange," wouldn't you say?

The cast also has an assortment of British actors, including Gambon (HP's Dumbledore), Timothy Spall (HP's Wormtail), and Derek Jacobi (DW's old master). Guy Pierce ("Memento") also appears as King Edward VIII. This film made me attracted even more to England!

Overall, an excellently filmed, paced, and acted film that you should check out.

Oscar Watch: True Grit

"True Grit"
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Hailee Steinfeld, Matt Damon, Josh Brolin
Directed by: Joel and Ethan Coen
Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Actor (Bridges), Best Supporting Actress (Steinfeld), Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Sound Mixing, and Best Sound Editing.

"True Grit" was a retelling of a book, which as also a 1960s John Wayne movie. It's actually the film where Wayne won his one and only oscar. You know when the Coen brothers make a movie, it's probably going to be oscar bait. Most of the time, though, their movies are very good, and this one is no exception. "True Grit" has stellar acting, good direction, and is the suspense story that "Winter's Bone" tried hard to be but really wasn't. "True Grit" does move slow at times, and the old western dialogue does get to be a bit much in some extended scenes. However, the story and strength of the acting ultimately win out.

Bridges playes Rooster Cogburn, hired by a young girl (Steinfeld) to track her father's murderer. A texas ranger (Damon) is simulatanously tracking the same guy, Tom Chaney (Brolin), for a seperate murder in Texas. The story follows their quest to find him. While it's an interesting journey, the real story is how this young girl changes Cogburn from a bitter, angry man to someone who learned to actually care for someone. It's a good mix of suspense, action, and drama, and it is filmed as such. I don't know how authentic the costume design is to back in the days, but they do look real.

I really think Stienfeld did a commendable job, and should be considered higher on the list to win. Why she was only supporting actress and not in the main category is a bit odd to me, as she probably has the most screen time of anyone, and was the focus of the movie. She was better than both Leo and Adams in "The Fighter," and I have yet to see Carter in "The King's Speech," or Weaver in "Animal Kingdom."

Bridges was also very good, as I figured he would be. Given that he won last year, I'd say the award should go to someone else. But he did an oscar-worthy performance. My pick to win so far is Franco ("127 Hours"), but that may change after I see "The King's Speech."

I liked this movie more than some of the other Coen brothers' stuff (especially best pic winner "No Country For Old Men," and "A Serious Man"). My favorite of their films is probably "Intolerable Cruelty," just because it's fun to watch. Anyway, I'm hoping for a few wins for this film, particualrly best supporting actress and perhaps best costume design, although "Alice in Wonderland" had some pretty fancy costumes too (one of the few things it did well).

“The Fighter”
Directed by: David O. Russell
Starring: Christian Bale, Mark Wahlberg, Melissa Leo, and Amy Adams
Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Bale), Best Supporting Actress (Leo, Adams), Best Originl Screenplay

Oscar is a fan of fighting movies. “Rocky,” “Raging Bull,” “The Wrestler,” “Million Dollar Baby,” and now “The Fighter.” It’s probably because so much emotion and good drama is involved in sports and preparing for big fights. Such challenges can wear a person down, but build them back up, as we’ve seen. It’s no different in “The Fighter,” which follows the story of Mickey Ward (Wahlberg) and his brother, Dicky (Bale). It has its share of family turmoil, but also family loyalty and unity.

I really want to see more of the raw, angry Christian Bale. We saw it in “American Psycho,” and we see it again in “The Fighter.” Bale is the best Bruce Wayne on film, but the full diversity of his acting range isn’t shown in the “Batman” films. In “The Fighter,” we see the little bit of insanity, and a whole lot of the rage. But we also see the devotion and a big change in character. Bale is one of the best actors working today, I feel, and I hope he wins this oscar.

This is definitely a fun movie, and worth the best picture nod, as well as Bale’s nod for acting. Amy Adams was good, but whether she deserved a nod is debatable. Melissa Leo, however, was very good, as Ward’s mom. I hope Bale gets the oscar. I was surprised to learn this story was so recent; the big fight at the end only took place in 2000. It’s a good story, definitely worth a watch if you like boxing movies, and hopefully a strong oscar contender this year.

Oscar Watch: The Kids Are All Right

"The Kids Are All Right"
Directed by: Lisa Cholodenko
Starring: Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo
Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actress (Bening), Best Supporting Actor (Ruffalo), Best Original Screenplay


One of the advantages of this expanded best pic category is that films that won’t normally get nominated make the cut. While this includes sci-fi (“Inception”) and animation (“Toy Story 3”), it also includes funny, quality comedy like “The Kids Are All Right.” A comedy that then turns into a drama, but doesn’t quite lose its charm. The movie focuses around a homosexual couple (Bening and Moore) and their kids who are living a nice life, when everything changes when their sperm donor is sought out. It features deserved acting nods from Ruffalo (soon to hulk it out in “The Avengers”) and Bening, the plot moves along at a good pace, and it’s well directed and filmed. The editing and cinematography aren't exceptional, but I think this movie scores in its writing and acting. The acting is real, as any good drama should be, and you feel that the pain the characters are going through. The writing gives the the actors good material to work with, as well as a good deal of comedy earlier on in the movie.

Best picture worthy? Debatable, but far more than “Winter’s Bone,” to me. Worth watching? Sure. One day, though, I’d still like to see a straight up comedy like “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” make it to the best pic category.

Oscar Watch: Winter's Bone

"Winter's Bone"
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, John Hawkes
Directed by: Debra Granik
Nominated in: best picture, best actress, best supporting actor, best adapted screenplay

I don't know why this film was nominated for some of oscar's top prizes. It's basically a story of a girl who's father makes crystal meth. When a sheriff comes and says their house is gonna go if her father doesn't show up at his court trial, she starts roaming around this rural community poking her nose in unwanted business. I just thought the movie was downright boring. This is the type of oscar movie I hate; not only boring, but with no real highlights. The acting was fine, but nothing to write home about. The story was slow, dull paced, and lacked any suspense, at least for me. Another movie, like "Never Let Me Go," could have been a much better best pic nominee.