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!