Politically, racially, and gendered-charged
year. 2016. After the #OscarsSoWhite scandal last year,
and the push for more diversity within the membership of the Academy of Motion
Pictures, Arts and Sciences (as well as new guidelines meant to exclude
previous members who weren’t considered “active” in the industry anymore), what
we are seeing in this year’s nominees is a distinctive divide between the more
conservative (and possibly older) members of the Academy and the more liberal
(as well as younger and more diverse) members.
So, while initially I was scratching my head at some of these nominees,
I eventually came to the sad realization that there’s a lot going on this year
that doesn’t really have anything to do with (or at least the focus isn’t) the
artistic merit of a film. What you have
is people voting with their politics. When
one couples the fact that it’s the industry voting on its own as well as money
as well as feeling the need for art to represent / reflect the times it was
created in, I’m coming closer and closer to treating the Oscars as being mostly
superfluous. I still had a lot of fun
watching these films, and I have seen almost all of the films up for
nominations (I will note after the category which films I didn’t see, so assume
all others I did see). Your immediate
counterargument to this, as my lovely wife noted, is “no one said you have to
watch them all.” However, I’m also
noticing (and maybe this runs parallel with the whole politicizing of art) that
a lot of commentary associated with talking about Oscar nominations this year
includes the phrase “well, I haven’t seen the movie, but …” People are firing off a lot of opinions on
films that they haven’t seen, which is unfair and ignorant. So, I’m not going to be one of those
people. Already, in more than one
instance, I’ve had my mind changed on what I expected to see and what I
actually saw (and it was extremely pleasant and affirming). I’ve also had those moments in prior
years. So, I have an overall personal
feeling of responsibility and respect. I’m
not going to sell these films short.
Onward!
Actor in
a Leading Role: The
SAG Award went to Washington. I
don’t understand that. There seems to be
a lot of love for Washington out there. There
is also a lot of backlash with sexual harassment scandals involving Affleck. For the
American Society of Cinematographers, Washington won their Board of Governers
Award. Holy shit. He’s never even done cinematography for a
film. I know it’s about a lifetime of
contribution, but really? He’s 62. He has plenty more years of film work in
front of him. There’s something about
his performances that always have a kernel of similarity to all his other
performances. I realize I’m biased
because I hate the character he plays (Troy Maxson), but when you put his
performance up next to Casey Affleck’s outstanding job in Manchester by the Sea, it should literally be a no-brainer. As much as I like Ryan Gosling, I’m not sure
why he’s nominated. He did a solid job,
and his dancing was great (singing was ok).
But, best actor? It is interesting
that Viggo Mortensen is nominated. His
work in Captain Fantastic is very
good – a different kind of contained that what Affleck does. It’s a great film. However, the ending was really stupid (You
think Frank Langella isn’t going to try to track down those kids? Fat chance.).
Of course, the ending has nothing to do with Mortensen’s competent work
in the film. That leaves Andrew
Garfield, who had two physically and mentally brutal performances last
year: Silence and Hacksaw Ridge. Both are outstanding, courageous pieces of
work. Based on merit, the order should
be: Casey Affleck, Andrew Garfield,
Viggo Mortensen, Denzel Washington, Ryan Gosling.
Actress
in a Leading Role (I didn’t see Elle): I find this category odd. I don’t know why Viola Davis isn’t up for
it. I don’t see her role as supporting. If she were in this category, she would still
win. I’m at a marked deficit because
from what I’ve seen of trailers, Isabelle Huppert did a wonderful job. As for the others in this category, I have
issues with 3 of 4. The first is Meryl
Streep. I didn’t like Florence Foster Jenkins. In fact, it made me a little angry. I get that you love someone so much you want
to shield them from negativity, but the amount of effort put into keeping the
fact that Jenkins, who was already suffering from dementia brought on by syphilis,
was a horrible singer yet still wanted to perform, was really ridiculous and
wasteful. That may sound callous on my
part, and I know this was based on a true story, but not only was the original
situation ludicrous, but making a movie about it was further indulgent. My guess is her performance is spot-on to the
actual Jenkins, but ultimately, I didn’t care.
Natalie Portman’s portrayal of Jackie Kennedy was, as Streep’s,
well-studied. From archival footage, she
sounded and acted just like Jackie. I
don’t know much about the historical JKO, so I was hoping that this film would
help me understand her a little bit better.
It didn’t. I walked out feeling
mostly uninformed. And, I think, that
might have been part of the film’s point.
I don’t think it was trying to answer questions. It was a film I was thinking about days after
I saw it. So, yeah, Portman did a great
job. The third issue has to do with Ruth
Negga’s nomination for Loving. Like Washington and Davis in Fences, I don’t think you could have had
a successful movie in Loving without
both Negga’s and Edgerton’s portrayals of Richard and Mildred Loving. Both of them did outstanding work which was
the opposite of what happens in Fences. It’s a very quiet film. Very respectful of its subject. So, why isn’t Edgerton nominated, yet Negga
is? It isn’t right. I don’t have a problem with Stone’s
nomination, and she did practically sparkle in every scene she was in. She did win the SAG award for best
actress. So, not only is it a safe bet,
but it’s pretty accurate. Merit: Stone, Portman, Negga, Streep (cannot place
Huppert).
Best Supporting Actor: This one is tough. This may actually be more challenging than
Best Actor. My clear and very easy
choice is Michael Shannon, because his work in Nocturnal Animals is so ridiculously good (as well as the, no
kidding, 9 other films he was in in 2016).
I don’t think Jeff Bridges should win.
He’s essentially doing a more hard-core version of Tommy Lee Jones’ Ed
Bell character from No Country for Old
Men (2007). Not a big deal,
especially for Bridges. I’m not really
sure why Hedges is nominated, other than trying to get someone nominated that’s
under the age of 30. Yeah, he does fine
in Manchester, but I don’t see a lot
of acting (maybe in one or two scenes).
It doesn’t help that he’s working next to Affleck and how great Affleck
is in the film. Mahershala Ali won the
SAG award, and his performance was good.
But really who it should go to is Dev Patel. His work in Lion is raw and emotional.
He should share the nomination with Sunny Pawar, the little boy who
plays the young Saroo in the first part of the film. Merit:
Dev Patel, Michael Shannon, Mahershala Ali, Lucas Hedges, Jeff Bridges.
Actress
in a Supporting Role: The work done in
this category was very strong. Viola
Davis’ Rose tore at my heart. As I
argued previously, she should be up for Best Actress. This was not a supporting role. Naomie Harris’ work in Moonlight, while clichéd, was solid. When you find out she did all of her scenes
in three days, it makes her work shine even more. She’s the only actor that is in all three
parts of Moonlight. She’s the through-line. Octavia Spencer is stalworth, but to me, she
sort of has only two modes in this film:
steadfast friend and chin-up-in-the-face-of-discrimination. I don’t see a lot of range in what she does
in the film. The one that did have the
most range, even though she’s not in the movie all that much, is Nicole
Kidman. You see so many sides to that
character and understand so much of what she has been through. That’s talent to convey all those states of
mind. While Michelle Williams was good,
she’s in so very little of Manchester by
the Sea that I don’t think this is a fair nomination. Some have likened her nomination to that of
Judi Dench’s Shakespeare in Love or
Viola Davis’ Doubt nominations for 8
minutes of screen time. I’m not trying
to say the work wasn’t good. But there’s
a reason why the word “supporting” is in this category. I think there should be more significant
contribution to the film overall.
Order: Viola Davis, Naomie
Harris, Nicole Kidman, Octavia Spencer, Michelle Williams (hey! alphabetical order!).
Animated
Feature Film (My Life as a Zucchini won’t
be released near me until after the awards):
I really enjoyed the films in this category, some of which surprised
me. Kubo
and the Two Strings was masterful.
That’s the first one I saw in the category. When I saw that, I felt that none of the
others would be able to hold a candle.
Next, I saw Moana. As much as I’d like to poo-poo the juggernaut
that is Disney, I couldn’t help but find the film adorable. Princess Moana has come a long way from the
princesses of Disney past. When I’d see
posters for Zootopia, it just looked
too goofy to be good. When it won the
Golden Globe for best animated feature, I was shocked. So, I watched it. It was so relevant to what is going on now
with Trump’s all-out policies on immigrants and Muslims, yet also folded in gender
politics and perseverance. The film has
so much heart to it. It was wonderful storytelling. I was disappointed in The Red Turtle, which I fully expected to be at my top, because it
is produced by Studio Ghibli (even though it was made by a Dutch animator Michael
Dudok de Wit) and executive produced by my all-time favorite, Isao
Takahata. The film was beautiful (looked
like a modern Japanese wood-block print), but it was also pretty slow and
overly metaphorical while not always maintaining the metaphors. The trailer for My Life as a Zucchini looks amazing and deals with children living
in a foster home. Pretty serious
stuff. But, nothing’s going to beat Zootopia. Merit:
Zootopia, Kubo and the Two
Strings, Moana, The Red Turtle (cannot place My Life as a Zucchini).
Cinematography
(Did not see Silence – sorry, Marty): This got more interesting when
the ASC gave their award to Lion. But when you couple that with the fact that Greig
Fraser was also DP on Rogue One: A Star Wars Story in the same year,
that’s pretty impressive. The dream-ish
sequences in Lion are striking. The camera work in Arrival and Moonlight is
also appropriate and effective, each evoking a tonal sense for the films. From what I’ve heard about the production of Silence, it was a Bataan Death March in
Taiwan. It sounded horrible. Mud.
Typhoons. Constant rain. Short shooting schedule. Poor Marty.
But I don’t see how anyone can fail to acknowledge how drop-dead
beautiful La La Land was. Linus Sandgren did an amazing job. He’s also DPed David O. Russell’s last two
films. Loved his work on American Hustle. This should be his award to lose. Order:
Sandgren (La La Land), geez this
is hard … um … Fraser (Lion), Young (Arrival), Laxton (Moonlight) (cannot place Prieto).
Costume
Design (didn’t see Fantastic Beasts and
Where to Find Them): When you think
of costume design, you usually think of period pieces or fantasy. In fact, they actually
break down their awards into different categories based on genre. Clever.
Their ceremony is a week before the Oscars. Their nominees are really interesting. I don’t know if I’d consider La La Land fantasy, so it’s an odd duck
in this category. But the CDG has a
category for contemporary, so there you go.
Marion Cotillard’s gowns in Allied
were indeed beautiful, and I know a lot of work went into the costumes for
that film. So, I have to divorce my
apathy to that film when I consider this.
Yeah, the costumes in Beasts were
interesting. As were the costumes in FFJ.
And Jackie. Merit:
Jackie, Allied, La La Land, FFJ (cannot place Beasts).
Directing: DAMIEN
CHAZELLE!!! You can practically see the love in each frame of that
film. The other films are well-directed,
without a doubt. Learning
about Lonegan’s coming off of the nightmare litigations with Margaret (2011) and him taking over this
film and how hard this film is bears true testimony to his adherence to his
craft. Barry Jenkins’
personal attachment to the story of Chiron also shows the depth of
responsibility and reverence for the materials he worked with. The full commitment of Mel Gibson to tell the
story of Desmond Doss in Hacksaw Ridge
was inspiring. The body of work Denis
Villeneuve is amassing displays significant talent. All of these films are good. But, when I think about what I will buy and
rewatch, this is easy. Order: Chazelle (La
La Land), Lonegan (Manchester by the
Sea), Villeneuve (Arrival), Gibson
(Hacksaw Ridge), Jenkins (Moonlight).
Documentary
– Feature (Fuck you, Academy. I am not
watching 7 hours and 47 minutes of what is essentially an ESPN
documentary mini-series.
Just because it was shown in theaters a few times does not make it a
movie.): I think this is where you will
see politics in total play here, and it will give liberals an anxiety attack to
judge whether they should give the award to a film about Lampedusa, a city in
Sicily that processes refugees fleeing Africa and the Middle East on boats
across the Mediterranean Sea, mostly with disastrous results, or one of three
documentaries on the African-American experience. The darkest horse in the group is Life, Animated, which tells the story of
an autistic boy who uses Disney films to communicate. In light of the other four films nominated,
this one comes off as kind of a joke. I
honestly did not get Fire at Sea beyond
the obvious juxtaposition of everyday life in Lampedusa to the horrors of the
refugees. The long passages following
the boy around were so slow and wasteful.
What should win, and what everyone should see is I Am Not Your Negro. James Baldwin’s eloquence is so beautiful and
painful. Expertly edited archival
footage, coupled with Samuel L. Jackson’s almost-whispered readings of Baldwin’s
text is, in my estimation, one of the best films of the entire year. It really makes 13th look pale in comparison. Order:
I Am Not Your Negro, and
forget the rest, really.
Documentary
– Short Subject: I won’t be seeing these
until Mom gets here next weekend, so, my apologies.
Film
Editing: Films are made and broken in
post-production. One thing I am learning
from listening to interviews with producers, directors, and editors is that the
films they want to make are not the films we end up seeing. So much gets compromised. This is essentially the same list as best
director, only with Manchester by the Sea
swapped out with Hell or High Water. Why is that?
Is it because there were bank robberies and car chases? That seems a bit lame. The non-linear storytelling in Manchester was quite compelling and, by
extension, well-edited. Anyways. Normally when I think of something as being
“well-edited,” I’m looking at action sequences or dance numbers. Not sure why Moonlight is here. It really
should come down to Hacksaw Ridge and
La La Land. And since there’s a lot of long takes in La La Land, the really tight editing in
that film comes in the sequences at the end (the “what-could-have-been,” which
was highly effective). What the
American Cinema Editors’ Eddie Awards did was give Arrival best edited dramatic feature and La La Land best comedy feature. (My) Order:
John Gilbert (Hacksaw Ridge),
Tom Cross (La La Land), Joe Walker (Arrival), Nat Sanders and Joi McMillon (Moonlight), Jake Roberts (Hell or High Water).
Foreign
Language Film (Land of Mine will not
be released in my area until after the awards.
Was going to see Toni Erdmann,
but was always put off by the fact that it is 2 hours and 42 minutes
long): I realize only seeing 3 of 5
nominees puts me at a disadvantage here.
I’m still rather puzzled why, after all the attention it got, The Handmaiden was not nominated for
this category (edit 2/21/17: Apparently, South Korea didn't submit it. Why? Beats me.). For me, watching A Man Called Ove was a very similar
experience to watching The 100-Year Old
Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared, which was a Swedish film up
for best makeup in 2014. Both films are
very similar: an actor is aged through
makeup to look at various parts of his life.
While 100 got really goofy
after a while, this other Swedish film (oddly enough, not made by the same
people but being really tonally similar), was a better film of the two. Tanna was
Romeo and Juliet in the jungle. It was beautiful (the shots that included the
lava flying from the volcano were amazing), and the Nauvhal language is so
alien, like most of the world we see in the film. The
Salesman, directed by Asghar Farhadi, whose 2011 film A Separation won in this same category, was really built-up, so
when I watched it, I couldn’t figure out what the big deal was. Yes, it was a good story (sort of, maybe),
but I don’t see anything particularly innovative here. So … I’m assuming that film will win, simply
due to the fact that it was made in Iran.
None of the films I saw really impressed me. From what I’ve seen of Land of Mine, it tells an amazing story. I don’t think I’ll vote on this category
here.
Make-up
and Hairstyling: Um … I only saw A Man Called Ove. I wasn’t going to watch Suicide Squad or Star Trek
Beyond just for this category. So, a
superhero movie, a science fiction movie, and a quirky Swedish film. It’d be great to see the Swedish film win,
just for giggles.
Original
Music Score (did not see Passengers): The score for Lion really stands out to me here.
I realize this is Thomas Newman’s (Passengers)
13th nomination, but that film got little attention. Since I’m fairly sure Justin Hurwitz is going
to win in the Best Original Song category, he may get a pass on his score
(splitting the vote could be an issue for him, too). I’d say another strong contender is
Britell. The music in Moonlight really heightened individual
scene moods. But, I could say the same
thing for Lion. This is another really tough one. Merit:
Moonlight, Lion, La La Land,
Jackie. (cannot place Passengers)
Best Song: Normally, I don’t care at all about this
category. I think it’s a waste of
time. NOT THIS YEAR! The Academy should go to “You’re
Welcome” from Moana, but it’s not up. If you ever see Kim, please let her how sorry
you are for her that she has to listen to me sing this all the time. I didn’t see Trolls, but I listened to “Can’t
Stop the Feeling,” which
is a fun song. And everyone loves Justin
Timberlake. That’s not winning, but it
will make it fun for Timberlake to perform at the ceremonies. Also, I didn’t see Jim: The James Foley Story,
but I listened to “The Empty Chair” by Sting, and … Sting’s getting
old. Initially, I didn’t know if it was
him singing or whoever J. Ralph was.
Also, why wasn’t that film nominated for best documentary? Sounds like it was pretty good. I could venture a guess. The song is very sad, and in the face of all
these other fun songs, there’s no way it has a chance. So, that leaves the two songs from La La Land and “How Far I’ll Go” from Moana.
I’d go: “City of Stars,” “Audition,”
“How Far I’ll Go,” “Can’t Stop the Feeling,” and “The Empty Chair.”
Production
Design (did not see Beasts or Passengers): Yeesh, another tough one. There are some specific worlds created
here. I’d say La La Land is the least worthy,
since most of its locations were real. Hail, Caesar! is another movie about
movies, and it was a period piece, and the movie within a movie was a Roman
epic, so they had harder work to tackle.
That leaves you with the fantasy world of Beasts, the completely outer space Passengers and the interior spaceship of Arrival. Like costumes, the Art Directors
Guild also breaks down their awards into contemporary, period and fantasy. They recognized
(read: nominated) Nocturnal Animals. They get
it. As far as what to pick that’s
actually up: Arrival, Hail, Caesar!, La La Land.
(cannot place the other two)
Short
Animated Film: I won’t be seeing these
until Mom gets here next weekend, so, my apologies.
Short
Live Action Film: I won’t be seeing
these until Mom gets here next weekend, so, my apologies.
Sound
Editing (This is the only award Sully is
up for, and I’m not going to watch that movie just for this.): I thought Hacksaw
Ridge had this in the bag. Then I saw Deepwater Horizon. Ho-ly
shit. Wow. Damn.
Merit: Deepwater Horizon, Hacksaw
Ridge, Arrival, La La Land. (cannot
place Sully)
Sound
Mixing: I thought Hacksaw Ridge had this in the bag.
Then I saw 13 Hours:
The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi.
Wow. Damn. That was pretty similar. However, whereas HR has part of the film that is not in combat, almost all of 13 Hours is either waiting to get
attacked or getting crazy attacked. And
that film is 2 hours and 24 minutes long.
Merit: 13 Hours, Hacksaw Ridge, Arrival, Rogue One, La La Land.
Visual
Effects: I thought Dr. Strange had this in the bag.
Then I saw Deepwater Horizon. I still think Dr. Strange was amazing. But
it was amazing fantasy. Watching Horizon,
I feel like I know what those men and women went through during that
disaster. The realism was
incredible. I am quite tickled / pleased
that Kubo and the Two Strings was
given a nod here. That’s extremely rare
to see for an animated film. However,
the stop motion work they did on Kubo was
astounding. While The Jungle Book won most of the Visual
Effects Society awards (for photoreal categories), Kubo won for best animated visual effects. It’s nice to see someone other than Disney
win something. That’s respect. I love VFX.
These awards are cool. Merit: everyone.
Even though I didn’t like The
Jungle Book, I have no problem saying the VFX were impressive.
Best Adapted Screenplay: So, THIS IS MY CATEGORY. However, out of the 5, I’ve only read
one. The weirdness is, I’ve taught that one. I’m of course talking about Fences.
And I would be an idiot to hate on August Wilson. I’ve loved this play since I first
encountered it. However, there are
better stories being told here. Not
going to lie – Luke Davies adaptation of the real story of Lion is what should win.
Sorry, but this is too compelling and blows away the other four. After that, this gets complicated. Technically, Hidden Figures should come second, given how amazing that true
story is. That leaves you with Arrival and Moonlight. Order: Lion,
Fences, Moonlight, Hidden Figures,
Arrival.
Best Original Screenplay (did not see 20th Century Women): There are two real contenders here: La La
Land and Manchester by the Sea. Hell or
High Water was good, but the acting in it made the writing shine more than it
did (though you could say the same for Manchester). The
Lobster is one of the worst movies I’ve seen in years (not from an
execution point of view but a “Do I Give A Fuck About The Human Species?” point
of view). I will seriously come in
conflict with you if you say you liked this film to my face, or at least lose
some respect. Merit: Manchester
by the Sea, La La Land, Hell or High Water.
(cannot place 20th
Century and will not dignify Lobster
by doing so)
Best Picture:
There’s so many different ways to
define what a movie is. Is it
artistic? Emotional? Important for its time / place? Gut reaction?
Aesthetic? So many different
things to consider. Here’s mine, with my
honest opinions. I’d like to think I
focus on craft, but maybe I’m fooling myself.
9.
Hidden Figures – This is my no
means a bad movie. In fact, all the
movies nominated this year are good films.
But I would say there is a marked difference between a “good” film and a
“great” film. For example, when I look
at the films I own on DVD from last year, they are: The Big
Short, Mad Max: Fury Road, and Spotlight. Guess what I have
reserved for purchase this year? Nocturnal Animals and La La Land. So, what does that say? Quite a lot. This film is a story that needs
to be told. My position: this would have made an amazing
documentary. However, they went the
dramatic route. The performances were
solid, but this writing was aw-ful. “We
all pee the same color.” Maybe that line
was actually spoken in the real world during this incident, but that shouldn’t
have been in final cut, instead of a rousing point. This is a paint-by-numbers film. A TV film.
Not best pic material.
8.
Hell or High Water – This
should be a testament as to how good the movies are this year. This is my #8. If someone wanted to ask me why Trump was
president right now, I’d tell them to go watch this movie. I don’t know how many of the “coastal elite”
understand what it is like for people to be out of work for a long period of
time. This film stretches back long
before current times, to the housing collapse of 2008 and even before, but it
relates directly to what we are seeing today as the aftermath. The most telling scene of this film is when
Hamilton comes to Howard’s porch at the end of the film, and Howard explains
that he’s been poor all his life, and here was an opportunity to reverse that
for his own children. I know a lot has
been made of this being a modern-day western, but it really isn’t. It is about what is happening now. It is about a rural America desperate for
America being great again. And, they
don’t know (or want to know) how much they’ve been lied to in order to make
that happen. This movie is incredibly
well-executed. This is film is thoughtful. But, it may be too subtle. Do you realize that as of 2/3/17, this film
has made $27 million against a $12 million budget? Do you understand how sad that is?
7.
Fences – August Wilson is an
undisputed genius. And this play is
perhaps within the top 10 plays of the 20th Century (and if you know
me, that’s a big claim). The characters
are what make this. As stated
previously, I think Troy is a horrible person.
Just like I think Willy Loman is a horrible person. I see a bit of my father in both men. Very depressing. Kim made an astute and important point about
the Madonna / Whore complex and how it relates to Rose (and also Linda Loman). Why do we have to make these women such
martyrs? She’s got a point. Up until now, my affinity for Rose has been
very solid. However, why does she have
to be so “good”? So
“long-suffering?” Men = bad, women =
good (or necessary to be good in order to stay with these dirtbags). Why? I
used to think Wilson was a visionary for how he depicted women. Now, I think it may be a cop-out.
6.
Arrival – This a great
film. However, I found it lacking. I just felt it got away with things too
easily. And, that’s a problem with
time-travel, sci-fi movies. It takes
something that is meant to save the world, and looks at how it can save an
individual. I wanted to love it, for its
humanity. But, it got too
ridiculous. So, I don’t begrudge this
film a minute, but it needed to be tighter.
5.
Hacksaw Ridge – This is
outstanding, and if you didn’t see it in a theater, you missed it. This needed to be seen in a theater. However, this film is not for everyone. It is a very gory, violent film. But the story it tells is so uplifting and
honorable, it is worth watching. Also,
it is technically well-made. As much as
people want to throw shit at Mel Gibson, he did a masterful job with this
film. So did all the actors. Out of all the films nominated for best
picture, this is by far the most intense.
4.
Moonlight – What I appreciate
about this film is its subtlety and its confidence that you will do with the
characters what you will. No one “wins”
in this film. If you are human, it
should hurt you. It’s a very beautiful
film. However, it is also heavily
clichéd and formulaic. So, it turns me
off. This is not a limit of the
filmmakers. Well, perhaps. Actually,
yeah, that’s what I’m saying.
3.
Manchester by the Sea – This
movie is physically debilitating. I came
out of it feeling I had been beaten up. So many scenes that were so powerful
and real. It is a very deliberate
film. I respect what everyone was trying
to do. Yes, it is depressing. But, it is
so human, you can’t but help to watch and identify. If you haven’t seen it, GO NOW. Pay respect to amazing filmmaking.
2.
Lion – When you think about
movies, you think about the stories they tell. This one, Arrival, and my #1 have the best stories. A man, who has grown up in affluence when he
could have been discarded like so many others, is so tormented by the pain he
has most certainly left behind that he is compelled to go back. While I love La La Land, this story is much better. And, the filmmaking is so careful and
respectful of the real people it depicts (much like Loving).
1.
La La Land – You don’t like
this film? Think it was overhyped? Fine.
Go ahead. Sorry about your
cynicism. I’m a cynic. And a pessimist. And I loved this film. Why?
Because I’m also an idealist at heart.
I really do want to believe in the good of everyone. And yet, in the
face of its flights of fancy, there is some realism. From all the audition rejections to the
shattering of dreams (a great jazz bar now a tapas place?), the alternate
“Hollywood” ending and what Chazelle does with it. This is beautiful and life-affirming. NONE of the other films makes you feel good
once you leave (well, maybe Lion, a
little bit). This one does. Does it matter? TAKE A LOOK AROUND YOU RIGHT NOW. Yes, it matters.
No comments:
Post a Comment