Showing posts with label Marriage Story. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marriage Story. Show all posts

Saturday, February 8, 2020

Countdown to the Oscars: Best Picture


Welcome to the Last Cinema Standing Countdown to the Oscars for the 2019 movie season! Throughout this series, we will break down all 24 categories with predictions and hopes for the big night. The series concludes with the nine nominees for Best Picture.


This is the big one, the reason we are all here. This is Best Picture at the Academy Awards. There was much furor over the perfectly fine if bland choice of Green Book last year over Alfonso Cuaron’s masterwork, Roma. Keep in mind, however, there is that kind of upset every year. Every film nominated for Best Picture has passionate supporters – that is how you end up with a Best Picture nomination in the first place – and no matter what wins, someone is upset. You have to go back to 2007 and No Country for Old Men to find a winner that was nearly universally agreed upon, and even then, There Will Be Blood fans wondered where the Paul Thomas Anderson love was.

Some great films are nominated in the Academy’s top category this year. One of them will win Best Picture. Eight others will not. The announcement of a winner does not magically erase the others from existence. All of this is to say: Try not to get too worked up about it. I love this stuff. I genuinely jump for joy win films and people I respect win Academy Awards. When they do not win, it is upsetting, but then I go back and watch films I love and remember why I love them in the first place. It is not because they may win Oscars but because they are great works of art.

These are the nine films nominated for Best Picture of 2019 at the Academy Awards this year, in order of likelihood to win (from least likely to most):


Ford V. Ferrari, directed by James Mangold

I hate using the term “muscular” because it has become so gendered when talking about filmmaking. But we are talking about big, beefy engines, fast cars, and loud noises. I don’t care what gender you are. This is muscular filmmaking. Ford V. Ferrari is the kind of movie the Academy usually eats up. It is a classic tale of American exceptionalism that finds within that structure a critique of the capitalist system. It is about a couple Davids working for Goliath, trying to take down another Goliath. In the end, only the Goliaths win.

Mangold’s direction is tight, precise, and propulsive, Christian Bale and Matt Damon are excellent in the leading roles, and the film is a visual splendor. That said, with no directing nomination, no acting nominations, and no writing nomination, the love for this film appears to stop at its considerable crafts. It will not get many No. 1 votes among these nominees, and the prize will have to be the nomination.


Marriage Story, directed by Noah Baumbach

Despite what you may have heard, Marriage Story is much more than Kramer vs. Kramer 2.0. Baumbach’s film a fairer, more considered work than that earlier film to which it is so often compared. For those who cannot see both sides of this story, it says more about them than it does the film. Baumbach balances his audience’s loyalties and sympathies in a way you rarely see on screen. Marriage Story is evidence of a filmmaker working at the height of his considerable powers as both a writer and director.

It helps that at the center of film are two remarkable leading performances. Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver. They battle and rage and scratch and claw and never given an inch, either as performers or characters. The beauty of the film lies in the way both characters come to realize they have entered a war that cannot be won. It may ultimately be too raw and too close to the bone for voters. It is a hard film to love, but it is worth the effort if you have the patience to meet the film on its level.


The Irishman, directed by Martin Scorsese

It feels impossible that Scorsese could return with another masterpiece and the world could simply shrug at it. As of now, I am predicting The Irishman to win precisely zero of its 10 nominations. That is a feat matched or exceeded by only five other films in history, including Scorsese’s own Gangs of New York in 2002, which similarly went 0-for-10. The list also features American Hustle (10), True Grit (10), The Turning Point (11), and The Color Purple (11). I do not think it is controversial to suggest The Irishman is the blue ribbon of that group.

I wonder how much of this is the Netflix effect. Not simply the Academy’s and the industry’s at large aversion to the growing power of the streaming platform. If anybody could move voters beyond that prejudice, surely Scorsese could. Rather, Netflix’s model, for both its film and television originals, seems to be a major release with much press and hullabaloo. The new piece, say The Irishman or Marriage Story, dominates the cultural conversation for a week or two, then disappears, lost in the sea of content. I cannot imagine a world in which a master director releases a perfect film and it simply disappears into the ether, but here we stand.


Little Women, directed by Greta Gerwig

There is little that irk me more than sight-unseen prejudice. The conversation around the release of Little Women was that men would not see it, that men, in fact, were refusing to see it based on some misguided and phony masculine code. Yet, it is here. It is among the nominees for Best Picture in a male dominated Academy. So, clearly, some men crossed the picket line and saw it. For doing so, they were rewarded with a masterful piece of storytelling in which everything old is new again. Little Women is a rebuke to the very men who would refuse to see it.

Little Women is also a major work from one of the best new directors on the scene. With Lady Bird and now this, Gerwig has proven that she is in this game to play, and not only is she playing – she is winning. Her post-modern take on the March girls saga is the perfect movie of the moment, striking at the very core of what drives conversations around art and the artist. It is a film in conversation with itself and the world at large, daring viewers to judge it, to misinterpret it, and to miss the point. It is challenging, daring, and brilliant, so of course, it will not win. But just wait until Gerwig gets back here again.


Joker, directed by Todd Phillips

The preferential ballot used to determine Best Picture rewards consensus. A controversial, love-it-or-hate-it work is unlikely to win under this kind of system. It does not come much more controversial than Joker when it comes to the Academy’s top award. Many voters will put it down as the No. 1 film of the year. Many others will place it last on their ballots or leave it off entirely. This is not a film that can build consensus, yet its ceremony-high 11 nominations suggest it has strong support across the board.

The critical and industry divide on Joker has been fascinating to watch ever since it won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival. Somehow, winning a major award put a target on Joker’s back. Its worst sin is that it is derivative of early Martin Scorsese, though the homage fits the tone of the piece. From what I can tell, people want to find nothing in the film. People who want to hate will find it empty, though admittedly, some who love are seeing too much. The truth is the film’s existence is something of a miracle, a billion-dollar-grossing comic book film that takes an infamous character and puts a new spin on it. Kudos to Phillips for trying something and succeeding.


Jojo Rabbit, directed by Taika Waititi

This is my least favorite among the nominees. I just want to be upfront about that before I discuss the film’s chances to win Best Picture. Part of me wonders if Waititi just is not my bag. Though I loved Hunt for the Wilderpeople, I could not get on board for any of What We Do in The Shadows, Thor: Ragnarok, Flight of the Conchords, or Jojo Rabbit. While some of the humor works for me, what I found most distressing about Jojo Rabbit were its attempts at sincerity.

Jojo Rabbit wants to be about something important – it is even billed as an “Anit-Hate Satire,” just in case you didn’t get the joke – but it also wants to make you laugh at the antics of an imaginary Hitler. The tonal shifts do not work. The film works for others, and I am happy for them. I will not be happy if this film wins Best Picture, which is a viable outcome for a middlebrow crowd-pleaser that has Life Is Beautiful DNA. Few would call it their favorite film, but few will say they outright dislike, which could be important on a preferential ballot.


Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood, directed by Quentin Tarantino

Tarantino shot his shot with this film. I think it is his second-best work after Inglourious Basterds. He says he will retire after his 10th film – this is No. 9 – and it is hard to imagine him producing another work of such profound beauty and introspection. As ever, this Tarantino movie loves movies, and it loves people who make movies, which would be Academy members. If there were ever going to be a fastball down the middle of the plate for Oscar voters, this would be it. And yet, it has gained little traction.

Brad Pitt will win Supporting Actor, Tarantino could win his third Original Screenplay award, and the film is in the mix in a couple below-the-line categories, but the momentum does not seem to exist for the top prize. Like Inglourious Basterds, which came in the year of Avatar vs. The Hurt Locker, Once Upon a Time seems to be running third behind the two Best Picture favorites. Maybe it ends up second on enough ballots and surprises everyone, but it does not seem to be in the cards. Maybe Tarantino will never get there. Hitchcock never did. Nor did Kubrick. Welles couldn’t even get back to the show. If Tarantino does retire and join this group, hey, there is worse company in which to find yourself.


Parasite, directed by Bong Joon-ho

The best film of the year does not always get this close to the top prize. In the 16 or 17 years I have been following the Oscars closely, my favorite film of the year has won the top award three times, and I freely admit that many people disagree with me about those selections. There is not much disagreement that Parasite is the best film of the year. It won the Palme d’Or at Cannes, becoming the first Korean film to do so. It won numerous critical accolades and has broken down barriers across the board for Korean films specifically and foreign language films in general.

There is no one in the industry who does not like this director, this cast, or this film. At industry function after industry function, the enthusiasm and applause for this film and these filmmakers has been off the charts. Bong has been one of the most popular individuals in the room at every party he attends. Parasite is universal. The love is out there. The question is: Will that love translate into votes? The short answer is yes, but will there be enough? We will find out.


1917, directed by Sam Mendes

It is no longer cool to admit you still like American Beauty. There is the Kevin Spacey aspect, the general whiteness of the film, its handling of gay characters, and its generally icky plot about a middle-aged man lusting after a teenage girl. The film has not changed. The culture has. In many ways, I understand. But the fractured take on suburban malaise had not become a cliché at this point. American Beauty is primarily responsible for the wave of imitators that followed. That was 20 years ago when Mendes’ first feature film won Best Picture. Now, he is on the verge of another triumph.

1917 has won all the right awards that would suggest a Best Picture win. It won the Golden Globes, it won the Producers Guild, it won the Directors Guild, and it won all those BAFTAs. There is only one empty spot in the trophy case. 1917 is a strange goliath because it is such a well-made film. It truly is an impressive piece of filmmaking and storytelling. I do not want to root against this film. I really enjoyed it. The crafts are impeccable, the performances are lovely, and the climax is among the most stirring I have seen in a cinema in recent years.

The problem is that Parasite is an unimpeachable masterwork. Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood is stunning. Little Women and The Irishman are brilliant. You want something transcendent to beat that group. 1917 is tremendous, but transcendence is elusive. All signs point to 1917, but it is hard to be excited about that outcome. Of course, the last time I felt this certain about a Best Picture winner was La La Land. Then, Moonlight happened. So, you never know.

Will win: 1917
Should win: Parasite
Should have been here: Midsommar

Countdown to the Oscars: Actors



Welcome to the Last Cinema Standing Countdown to the Oscars for the 2019 movie season! Throughout this series, we will break down all 24 categories with predictions and hopes for the big night. The series continues with the acting categories.

Best Actor in a Leading Role

Nominees
Antonio Banderas for Pain and Glory
Leonardo DiCaprio for Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood
Adam Driver for Marriage Story
Joaquin Phoenix for Joker
Jonathan Pryce for The Two Popes

Even by the standards of a usually competitive category, this was a historic year for the Best Actor race. You could fill out this list of nominees with a wholly different group of five actors, and it would be just as valid. Off the top of my head, try Robert De Niro (The Irishman), Eddie Murphy (Dolemite Is My Name), Adam Sandler (Uncut Gems), Song Kang-ho (Parasite), and Kelvin Harrison Jr. (Waves). At the same time, my feeling is the group we got is historically great as well.

The nomination for Banderas makes me particularly happy as nominees from foreign films are rare (though Pedro Almodovar has a way with pulling off this trick; see Penelope Cruz for Volver in 2006) and I thought Banderas gave the best male performance of the year. Right after that, you have DiCaprio doing career-best work that is bound to be remembered as an also-ran for the Oscar season, if not in the actor’s career. Pryce’s performance is lovely and technically skilled, and the XX-year-old thespian is well deserving of his first career nomination.

When the season started, it appeared this would be a two-horse race between Phoenix and Driver. It has not worked out that way. For the most part, the performances exist on wildly opposite ends of the spectrum. Driver delivers a subdued, nuanced exploration of character, while Phoenix offers a bold, bombastic interpretation of an iconic villain. Both are great, but Phoenix’s work is showier and of the kind the Academy loves to reward. 

Actors, in particular, have been drawn to Phoenix’s performance since Joker debuted. From the improvised bathroom dance to the vocal inflections to the precise facial expressions, it is the kind of work that screams out for a reward without detracting from the film. Phoenix knows the movie he is in and perfectly pitches his performance to the key of the film. For all of that, he will walk away with his first Academy Award.

Will win: Joaquin Phoenix for Joker
Should win: Antonio Banderas for Pain and Glory
Should have been here: Eddie Murphy for Dolemite Is My Name

Best Actress in a Leading Role

Nominees
Cynthia Erivo for Harriet
Scarlett Johansson for Marriage Story
Saoirse Ronan for Little Women
Charlize Theron for Bombshell
Renee Zelwegger for Judy

Consider me baffled by the way this category shook out this year. Zelwegger is going to win her second Oscar for her imitation of Judy Garland in Judy. That much has seem preordained since the film debuted, and that is what I find so baffling. Zelwegger is good in the film, and she is an extremely likable person. But the film was not a hit, nor is it particularly well liked. Somehow, though, Zelwegger has run roughshod over the competition all season, and no contender has seemed able to challenge her lock on this award.

It is a shame because as delightful as Zelwegger is and accomplished though her work may be, it feels like the least adventurous choice possible. The celebrity biopic is a tried and true formula for winning an Oscar, and a win for Judy feels monumentally uninspired. In truth, however, this list of nominees feels a bit uninspired. More exciting choices such as Lupita Nyong’o for Us or Florence Pugh for Midsommar would have livened up this category. But, as a previous Best Actress winner said in her winning role, this is the story you get.

Johansson is doing career-best work in Marriage Story, and if there were going to be a spoiler, the smart money would be on Johansson, particularly with the history of double-nominated performers in mind. Theron is quite good in Bombshell, but as far as voters go, it is possible the quality of the performance is hidden partially by the stellar makeup work that transforms Theron into Megyn Kelly. Cynthia Erivo is the lone actor of color nominated this year, and similarly to Zelwegger, she is working in straight biopic territory. One wishes she had been recognized for her wonderful supporting turn in Widows last year.

Finally, you have Ronan, who at 25 years old is already a four-time Oscar nominee. She appears to be sliding comfortably into the Kate Winslet group of talented young actresses who rack up nominations but have to wait until later in their careers to be honored. She is the beating heart and artistic soul of Greta Gerwig’s amazing Little Women adaptation, but for the third time in five years, the nomination will have to be her reward.

Will win: Renee Zelwegger for Judy
Should win: Scarlett Johansson for Marriage Story
Should have been here: Florence Pugh for Midsommar

Best Actor in a Supporting Role

Nominees
Tom Hanks for A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
Anthony Hopkins for The Two Popes
Al Pacino for The Irishman
Joe Pesci for The Irishman
Brad Pitt for Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood

What a group! Here we have five previous Academy Award wins represented (Hanks 2, Hopkins 1, Pacino 1, and Pesci 1), and the lone non-acting winner, Pitt, previously won an Oscar as the producer of the best film of the decade (12 Years a Slave). As with all of the acting categories this year, this has seemed like a lock for months, and Pitt will soon join his fellow nominees as an Oscar-winning actor for his role as a past-his-prime stunt double in Quentin Tarantino’s Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood.

Hanks perfectly captures the spirit of Mr. Rogers in Marielle Heller’s non-traditional “based on a true story” film, and he is back in the Oscar game after 19 years without a nomination, including a shocking snub for Captain Phillips in 2013. On just his sixth nomination, Hanks is less an Academy favorite than his reputation as the prestige actor of his time would suggest. His back-to-back wins for Philadelphia (1993) and Forrest Gump (1994) remain among the more delightful anomalies in Academy history, and perhaps this nomination portends a new era for Hanks with this voting body. Not that it will hurt the ever-popular Hanks either way.

Pacino and Pesci are here representing Martin Scorsese’s mob epic The Irishman. While Pacino has the flashier role as outsized union president Jimmy Hoffa, Pesci has been the one earning all the hosannas for his quietly menacing portrayal of an aging mob boss. Hopkins is a bit of a surprise nominee here, and his performance for me was somewhat overshadowed by Jonathan Pryce’s leading performance in The Two Popes, but it seems the Academy was just excited to see Hopkins back doing good work on the big screen (as long as you didn’t just see the film on Netflix).

The winner, however, is Pitt. He has picked up all the precursor awards, and he has the backing of basically an entire industry excited to see the former Sexiest Man Alive recognized for his acting prowess. The role is a variation on certain notes contained within the Pitt persona, which makes this smart casting on Tarantino’s part, but Pitt is making enough distinct choices with the character that the performances is allowed to bloom fully. So, while this is something of a lifetime achievement award for Pitt, the Academy at least is picking the right film for such an honor.

Will win: Brad Pitt for Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood
Should win: Al Pacino for The Irishman
Should have been here: Wesley Snipes for Dolemite Is My Name

Best Actress in a Supporting Role

Nominees
Kathy Bates for Richard Jewell
Laura Dern for Marriage Story
Scarlett Johansson for Jojo Rabbit
Florence Pugh for Little Women
Margot Robbie for Bombshell

Stop me if you have heard this before, but this race has been over for months. Dern locked up this award early in the season and just kept delivering funny, heartfelt speeches. She has been nominated twice before this, but this is the first time she has been within shouting distance of the win, and it does not appear to be getting away from her. Her empowered, feminist divorce lawyer is one of the most refreshing parts of Noah Baumbach’s Marriage Story, and Dern makes strong choice after strong choice to bring fully to life a character who could seem one note on the page.

Speaking of characters who could be one note on the page, a popular hashtag around Little Women this year has been #JusticeForAmy, referring to the bratty middle sister in Louisa May Alcott’s classic tale. Portrayed almost always as immature, whiny, and downright unlikable, Pugh finds the wounded heart at the core of the character and infuses her with reason and understanding like we have rarely seen. Beyond the story elements, though, Pugh is transformative in the role, and it completes a trifecta of stunning turns this year from the young performer. This will not be her last nomination.

The Bates nomination may seem out of left field for a movie that received mixed to negative critical notices and utterly bombed at the box office, but never underestimate the Academy’s love for one of its own. Bates is a true actor’s actor, and she has ridden that love to her fourth nomination. Robbie, meanwhile, is good in Bombshell and has a couple of standout scenes, but I cannot help but think she is here for the wrong film. I would much rather have seen her recognized for her role as Sharon Tate in Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood, but a lack of dialogue probably doomed her chances for that.

Then, there is Johansson, who becomes just the 12th actor in Academy history to be nominated for two performances in the same year. Of the previous 11, seven of those performers ended up with an Oscar at the end of the night. Johansson seems destined, however, to join the other group, those who lost two awards on the same night. It is a good group, consisting of Cate Blanchett, Julianne Moore, Emma Thompson, and Sigourney Weaver. Perhaps there is some solace in that, though of course, there is no shame in losing to Dern here.

Will win: Laura Dern for Marriage Story
Should win: Florence Pugh for Little Women
Should have been here: Shuzhen Zhao for The Farewell