Oscars 2020

I didn’t make an Oscar post last year, mostly because I was appalled at what was being trotted out as “best” of anything.  Mom always says, “if you can’t say anything nice,” right?  But this year has been an enormous improvement over last year, so I’m pretty giddy for this year’s Oscars to get here.  It should be fun.  My analysis here is only going to be what I think should win (because of course, I’m right) and not what I think will win (though I may make mention of what the New Academy may do).  Unless I note otherwise, I’ve seen all the films in the category.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role:  I haven’t seen Pain and Glory and probably won’t before the Oscars come and go, so my choice here is not completely informed.  The four performances I did see were all quite good but so, so different from each other:  an actor past his prime, a director blindsided by a divorce, a mentally unstable misfit, and the current pope.  It is difficult to compare these performances, since the actors are working with a completely different range.  I would have no problem with Phoenix, Driver, or Pryce winning (I don’t think that DiCaprio’s performance was that nuanced).  Pryce’s performance seemed similar to the one Hanks was playing in A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood in that they are playing two saintly men who have to deal with significant hardships and not crack, so there’s a lot of control there.  Phoenix is the opposite of this – a hurt rage machine.  Driver sort of balances both.  The climax of Marriage Story with Johansson is one of the best scenes from a film this year, and it’s mostly due to Driver.  I’m not going to pick one – all three are effective.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role:  I’ll go into this more in detail later in this post, but I was NOT impressed with The Irishman … except for Pacino.  Every time he showed up on screen, I was like “ok, here we go!”  I know it’s his normal schtick of chewing the room up.  I don’t care.  I love that.  Pesci and Hopkins seem to be playing their archetypical selves in their roles, and you may be saying to yourself, “But Mary, isn’t what you are saying the same as Pacino?”  And, you’re right.  But, I don’t enjoy Pesci or Hopkins as much as Pacino.  There are a few times in Neighborhood where we get to see why Hanks is given the regard that he is owed.  The story and most of the acting (outside of Hanks and Cooper) is very boilerplate.  But there are times where Hanks takes Rogers and, just through looks or facial expression, shows the cracks.  That was interesting to watch.  However, Pitt was the reason why I enjoyed Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood as much as I did.  There used to be a time where I would swear up and down that Tarantino was the most brilliant American director of his time.  His last few films have made me walk back on that.  I maintain that ever since Sally Menke (his editor) passed away in 2010, his films haven’t been as good.  But Pitt is so much fun to watch in Hollywood, and he makes it look almost effortless.  Pitt should get it, but if Pacino gets it, I won’t be upset.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role:  Ok, so this one you shouldn’t listen to me, because I haven’t seen two of the five performances (Erivo and Zellweger).  Judy was initially panned so severely (though now, curiously, the ratings on RT are much higher) that I was surprised to see Zellweger nominated and even more shocked to see her win the Golden Globe.  So, while I know I should see it, I don’t really want to.  Just put it at the top of my Netflix cue, so maybe before Oscars, I’ll get it in.  I feel bad for Johansson, as she gave two of the best performances in her career this year, but being nominated in two different categories means your votes get split (this will come up again when I talk about Parasite).  I didn’t see Theron anywhere in her performance as Megyn Kelly in Bombshell.  Ronan was good in LW, but I don’t see her performance as stellar.  I would be happy with Johansson or Theron winning here.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role:  I did not see Richard Jewell, nor do I want to.  However, Bates is an outstanding actress, and the other four performances in this category were fantastic.  I really wouldn’t mind any one of these women winning.  I have a soft spot for Dern, I must admit, so I’m probably pulling more for her than anyone.

Best Animated Feature:  I haven’t seen any of these, but I Lost My Body looks cool.

Best Cinematography:  As much as I would deeply love to see The Lighthouse win for this, as it is its ONLY nomination this year and was my favorite film of last year, it has to go to Deakins’ work on 1917.  I did have a shade of doubt cast on it by a guy I watch on YouTube not liking it and pointing out faults, but given the light continuity they went for (and I think achieved) without digital processing, this is a feat too great to not acknowledge.  I didn’t see anything particularly innovative or beautiful in the other three films.

Best Costume Design:  None of these films are contemporary.  We’ve got a movie that spans 50 years, WWII, early 1980s, late 1860s-early 1870s, and the late 1960s.  No real alternate or futuristic universes here.  Just how well did you represent the time?  I would lean towards Rubeo’s work in Jojo Rabbit (as a particular part of a costume has a searing effect in the film) or Durran in Little Women.

Best Director:  Hands down:  Bong Joon Ho.  He’s had a career of excellently executed films, and I’m so happy to see him getting some recognition.  Runner-up would be Sam Mendes, as 1917 is not just a film but an orchestration.

Best Documentary:  I have only seen American Factory, but it is good enough for me to use in my comp classes.  I know Honeyland is supposed to be really good (interesting that a documentary is also up for best international film).  Two of the other films deal with Syria, and the other is about democracy in Brazil.

Best Short-Subject Documentary:  No clue on this.  Sorry.

Best Film Editing:  The racing sequences in FvF are tight and effective, but the rest of the movie is meh.  Do you give it the award for just that?  I’m not sure why Jojo is here, and I love that film.  I don’t recall going “wow, that editing” after seeing it.  Joker’s a little more complicated.  It should go to Parasite, because of the carefully calculated tension that is built through editing.

When Did They Change the Name From Best Foreign Language Film to Best International Feature Film?  WTF?:  I think that THIS is the biggest thing that needs to be changed about the awards.  I don’t think the same picture should be up for this (stupidly named) category and best picture, because the votes will be split, or this will be considered a consolation prize.  Of course, Parasite will win this when it should win best picture.  People may go with the safer bet to make sure Ho wins his award.  But think of how many people may actually get past the subtitle barrier if it won best picture?  In my world, Honeyland would win this, and Parasite wins best picture.  But, that’s not how it is going to go down.  And, honestly, 1917 is an international film, because Great Britain.  Why isn’t it in this category?  Stupid.

Best Makeup and Hairstyling:  It was interesting to see more than three films nominated this year – normally, they only do three.  My soft spot is for Bombshell because of the work they did on Theron and Lithgow.  Joker is mostly about the character’s performance and what he did to/with himself, physically.  I didn’t see Judy, but I don’t think everyday Zellweger looks much different (outside of the hair) than real life Garland.  Didn’t see Maleficent.  I don’t recall there being much makeup and hair in 1917, outside of showing body wounds, and the shots were so fast, most of the time, it didn’t register.

Best Original Score:  Lots of good stuff here this year.  Again, didn’t see SW, and Williams has enough awards at home.  I really like Desplat – his work is consistently exceptional.  I do lean more towards T. Newman than Gudnadóttir, but it should come down to those two. 

Best Original Song:  Normally, I don’t give a flying fig about this.  This year, I do.  Rocketman really impressed me, as I went into that film thinking I was going to be bored.  Far from it.  I’m sad to see that Egerton wasn’t nominated (but glad to see he at least got a Golden Globe).  I’m not a huge Elton John fan, but there’s no denying his influence on pop music.  So, “(I’m Gonna) Love Me Again” should win.  If any of the other songs win, I will be legitimately sore.

Best Production Design:  This one is hard.  Even I’d admit that The Irish/Italianman looked good.  Ok, yeah, Parasite had a pretty house.  But, there was that scene during the flood.  Things got real technical real quick there.  Grr.  Anyone can have this one.  Little Women should be on this list.  And The Lighthouse.  Plenty of pretty movies this year.

Best Animated Short:  I haven’t seen any of these and am running out of time.  Based on their posters and plot descriptions, they all sound fascinating.  I hope I get a chance to see them.

Best Live Action Short:  I’ve seen none of these, and I’m too out of time to try to catch them.  These all sound depressing except for Nefta Football Club.

Best Sound Editing:  Did not see Star Wars.  For those who forgot, sound editing in this context doesn’t mean splicing sounds together – it means sound capture.  For that reason, I don’t think SW has a chance.  The other four, though, did a good job of this – the throaty roar of the engines in FvF, crowd calamity and insane laughing in J, the explosions and gunfire of 1917, and the dialog of OUaTi…H.  I wouldn’t mind any of those four films winning.  I would, though, give the edge to FvF and 1917, as those were more technically difficult films to get sound for.

Best Sound Mixing:  This is post-production sound.  I didn’t see Ad Astra.  Rather surprised to not see SW in this one instead of Sound Editing.  Again, all four of the films I saw in this category were solid.  I think, like with sound editing, FvF and 1917 probably needed more work in post, so they would be my choices.

Best Visual Effects:  I haven’t seen The Lion King or the last Star Wars film.  While Endgame was sort of impressive, the screen was far too busy trying to be epic, and colors were washed out.  I’ve seen clips from TLK, and it looks awful.  I wish Disney would stop rebooting these films.  But, they are raking in so much money that they don’t care about art.  All the de-aging in TI was not convincing to me (nor were the constant times they were calling the 40-ish version of DeNiro “kid”).  I’m sure SW looked great.  I’d give it to 1917 just because of the dead bodies Schofield had to crawl over to get out of the water.  The goal of visual effects is to make something that isn’t real appear real or plausible.

Best Adapted Screenplay:  I’m afraid I haven’t read any of the books the films were nominated on, so I do not know who truly did the best job.  My three picks are Jojo Rabbit, Little Women, and The Two Popes, with the edge to LW.  A lot of people got bent out of shape about Joker not really following that character’s true mythology (while others said it was perfect – the backstory of that character is deliberately ambiguous).  As can be told by all my other posts, I give nothing to Irish/Italianman.

Best Original Screenplay:  I’m not sure why 1917 is nominated for this – there wasn’t very much dialog in the film.  The screenplay must have looked like a schematic diagram for what they were going to do with the cameras, actors, explosions, etc.  Those are awards for other departments.  Knives Out was cute, but when compared to these heavy hitters, it looks light.  The best is Parasite, but it’s in another language, so people won’t care.  As Marriage Story rests solely on the performances and script, this is a respectable choice.  Tarantino still has a cult of personality, and people did like to see Sharon Tate not get horribly murdered.  Any one of those three is fine with me.

Best Picture (from least deserving to most): 

The Irish/Italianman:  This movie was so indulgent of itself that it was somewhat sickening.  Changing someone’s eye color from brown to blue digitally does not make them Irish, especially when that someone has had a 55-year long career being his Italian self.  I saw in an interview that Scorsese wanted to make this film for years but couldn’t for an assortment of reasons and was so grateful to Netflix to get a chance before someone dies.  I’m creeped out by the de-aging in films, and I don’t see this getting any better.  Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.  If you’ve seen a Scorsese mobster film, you’ve seen this.  Everyone is so thunderstruck that in this one, you see those gangsters grow old and deal with the consequences of their wily ways.  Oh, how Scorsese has matured.  Silly.  Embarrassing.  And THREE HOURS AND TWENTY-NINE MINUTES LONG.  And the joke is, it’s up for best editing.  Oh.  My.  God.  The only worthwhile thing in the film is Al Pacino.  The rest is forgettable.

Ford v Ferrari:  I’m puzzled why this is nominated.  It’s a decent film, but the world’s full of them.  I’m guessing that they were able to raise the pedigree of this film by its actors.

Joker:  I’ve mentioned this before, but Parasite does what this film is trying to do much better.  It is sort of crazy to see such a critical film of current America (yes, it is set in an alternate 1980s, but it’s impossible to miss seeing today in it), the class struggle, and the failure of social programs make this much money (and a rated R film, at that).  Joaquin Phoenix kills it (but he does in every movie – watch You Were Never Really Here instead of this film).  The score really contributed.  The controversy was ridiculous.  In five years, what will people remember about this film?

Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood:  There was a time when Tarantino was razor-sharp.  This is a good film and a lot of fun to watch (especially when Brad Pitt is on screen).  I buy more into the whole “our innocence died the day the Manson family murdered,” but as a country, we’d already had Civil Rights leaders assassinated.  This certainly hit closer to home for people in the film industry, as it was some of their own.  I like that Tate gets to live here, just as I liked the theater full of burning Nazis in Inglorious Basterds.  The film is beautiful, and I love that there are some directors that won’t let analog film die and make a stink about it.  It just wasn’t as good as the others that come after this.

Marriage Story:  This is at the same level as Little Women, but because you leave LW feeling good and this feeling awful, this was a bit lower.  The performances and the script in this are what made it.  The story itself isn’t all that new.  Kramer vs. Kramer was 1979.

Little Women:  This was fun to watch, even when it wasn’t (like the dying sister).  Honestly, Chris Cooper should be up for an Academy Award for best supporting actor, because every time he was on screen (and it’s precious little), he totally broke my heart.  Everyone was great in this.  Timothée Chalamet is actually starting to grow on me.  It was feminist without harping on it.  It was delicately made, and everyone looked like they were invested.  I’m thinking that Gerwig is quite a director.  It also kind of tickled to see Streep and Cooper in a film together again.

1917:  It was a technical achievement, and I’m interested in WWI.  Roger Deakins.  It’s not a heavy story – it's a race against time.  It’s exciting.  It’s tragic.  For me, it worked.  Loved it.

Jojo Rabbit(s):  The (s) is because at my house, that’s how we say the title.  Really loved this film.  Child actors can be really hit-or-miss.  Roman Davis and Archie Yates were awesome.  I didn’t know Sam Rockwell or Scarlett Johannson were in it, and they were both awesome.  Taika Waititi as Imaginary Friend Hitler was awesome.  The story was engaging.  I think some people can’t take Nazis being humanized, but there is so much fun poked at them in this film.  It’s really well-made, and it has a good heart (like LW).

Parasite:  This is such an intricate film, so beautifully crafted in every aspect of the categories above.  Again, it will probably only get best international film (ugh), but it is way out there past these other films.

I’ll be sure to get caught up on the films I missed (maybe not the shorts or the documentaries).  It will be wild to see what actually wins – if it’s politics or merit that triumphs.  Good luck!