Verdict: Oscar Nominations 2013

I'm annoyed for many reasons right now. The first, most obvious, is to do with my disgust at a lot of the nominations this year, which I'll come onto. But secondly, and most personally, because my first post of 2013 has to be a bitter, angry one about why the Academy has let me down this year, so much so that I'm not even going to watch the ceremony because I just don't care about any of them.

The Academy has in recent years descended into somewhat of a farce, becoming predictable and sterile and celebrating only a certain selection of films rather than diversifying a bit more. In other words, they're playing it safe, and it's boring.

So many films and performances have been overlooked this year it's unbelievable. Major unexpected snubs were Ben Affleck's work on Argo, who was omitted from both Acting and Directing awards despite the film itself being up for the big one.

On the other hand, people were unnecessarily surprised about some of the categories, expecting films to be included that weren't. Mostly I'm talking about Skyfall, which I never even entertained as to get a nomination in any of the major categories. For one thing, the Academy are probably too scared to do something as "out there" as put a Bond film up for major Oscars. But also, the BAFTA nominations were announced the day before, and if Skyfall was not up for Best Film at the BRITISH film awards then why would the American film awards include it? The same goes for Sam Mendes and Daniel Craig for Best Director and Actor respectively.

Two of my favourite films starring two of my favourite people should have been up. I can't believe that On The Road isn't up for any acting nominations. I know that the film in general divided critics so I wasn't hopeful that it would get any major nods, but whatever you thought about the film, the performances were brilliant. The main trio of Sam Riley, Garrett Hedlund and Kristen Stewart deserve recognition, as well as Viggo Mortensen and Kirsten Dunst. It's ridiculous that it was overlooked. Also the cinematography was stunning and that should have been up for something too.

And also Cosmopolis should have been up for, in my opinion, Best Actor for Robert Pattinson, Best Director for David Cronenberg, Best Supporting Actor for Paul Giamatti, Best Supporting Actress fr Sarah Gadon, Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Original Score. The fact that this film was so overlooked not just in awards season but throughout the whole year makes me unspeakably sad, because it was genuinely incredible, one of the most intelligent, complex films of this year. I should actually do my own awards this year just to honour it, because I can't actually give it enough praise.

I was also quite surprised at the lack of recognition for Hitchcock, which I thought would be mingling up there with the rest of them. This isn't just the Academy, I admit - there's nothing at the BAFTAs either and hardly anything at the Golden Globes - but from what I've heard it's meant to be very good. I thought Helen Mirren would get a Best Actress nod, and maybe the film itself. The same goes for The Sessions, which did in fact get Helen Hunt a nomination but I thought would have got more, but that's probably because it wasn't prolific enough. And also The Hunt, which got rave reception at Cannes this year and I thought was a real contender for nods at the Oscars, but apparently they're ignoring most films that aren't major Hollywood blockbusters. I would have liked real recognition for Mads Mikkelsen who I think is brilliant, and also I think it would have done The Academy a favour to acknowledge a film with such sensitive material. The Master wasn't up for nearly as much as I thought it would be, with exclusions on the Best Director (Paul Thomas Anderson) and Best Film lists, which was again surprising from the amount of buzz around it and the rave reviews it got from critics.

Anyway, I'll crack on with discussing the major awards and pointing out why they're wrong and spoiling the ceremony by revealing the the obvious winners for you all.

Best Film

It will go to either Les Miserables or Zero Dark Thirty because they are the obvious choice. Les Mis is the sort of stylish tragic story the Academy love, though admittedly they haven't held favour with musicals for quite some time. Zero Dark Thirty is the gritty, real-life drama they also appreciate, and you can't overlook the similarities the film has to The Hurt Locker, which of course was also directed by Kathryn Bigelow and about recent wars. However, recent controversy surrounding the film may put it out of favour with the voters, so we'll have to see. I have yet to see any of the nominees (but I plan on seeing Les Mis, Django and Lincoln in the next couple of weeks so look out for reviews of them!) but at the moment I'm just really disappointed at the shortlist.

 

Best Actor

Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln) seems to be the best bet at the moment, with the closest contender probably Joaquin Phoenix for The Master based on the rave reviews he got (but again, the Academy may be a bit peeved with him after his recent comments about them - he basically told them to shove their egotistic ceremony). The curveball here was probably including Denzel Washington (Flight) where one might have expected Jamie Foxx (Django), Mads Mikkelsen (The Hunt) or Ben Affleck (Argo).

Best Actress

Jennifer. Bloody. Lawrence. People need to stop going crazy about her. The inclusion of her on this list made me so angry the other day I had a massive rant on Twitter for about 8 hours. I like The Hunger Games, okay? I just don't like her, and I think she's a massively overrated actress. If she wins, I'll never watch the Oscars again and the Academy will have lost all respect from me. I would like to see Jessica Chastain get it for Zero Dark Thirty, but we'll have to see. It's pretty much between those two, though. Well done too to Emmanuelle Riva (Amour) and Quvenzhane Wallis (Beasts of the Southern Wild) for being the oldest and youngest nominees respectively in this category, that's quite an achievement. Wallis especially makes me question what I've done with my life if she's nine and has been nominated for an Oscar.

Best Director

Affleck. Bigelow. Tarantino. Hooper. Where are they on this list? I understand that with five to ten Best Film nominees and only five Director slots, some people are going to miss out, but really, the wrong ones did. I don't understand this at all. David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook), really? I can't even say anything else because I'm so surprised and annoyed about the inclusions and exclusions on this list. Affleck has just won a Golden Globe! I would have put money on Bigelow and Tarantino being up. And Tom Hooper has famously been revolutionary with Les Mis by making his cast sing live, apparently with good results. The outcome of this strange list is harder to call than some other categories this year, but I'll go for Spielberg (Lincoln) or Michael Haneke (Amour).

Best Supporting Actor

I do like the line-up in this category (I know, I'm giving praise!) and I also like the fact that every nominee has already won this award. I don't know why, since maybe some newcomers should have been included, but anyway. The smart money is on Phillip Seymour Hoffman (The Master) but I wouldn't rule any of the contenders out this year. I was expecting Leo DiCaprio to be nominated over Christoph Waltz if one of them was going to be up from Django, but I'll have to reserve judgement on that until I see it. I also personally think Garrett Hedlund should be up for On The Road, or Paul Giamatti for Cosmopolis, but hey, apparently the Academy and I are not on the same wavelength here.

Best Supporting Actress

It will go to Anne Hathaway. It's the most obvious result in recent Oscar memory, I don't even know why they bothered to nominate anyone else when they're all going to get overlooked anyway. It's another classic Academy view that actresses should suffer for their work (if losing weight and cutting off your hair is "suffering") and that they like tragic stories more than anything else. At least now maybe Hathaway will stop being so unbelievably desperate for recognition. And hey, maybe it will make her more interesting, because right now I find her to be the human equivalent of beige, i.e. so incredibly dull it makes me want to hurt myself to not look at or listen to her. Apparently, it should go to Amy Adams for The Master (but I'm just parroting what other people are saying, I haven't actually seen for myself), but really it's irrelevant, because it's not going to happen.

Best Adapted Screenplay

Not too sure about this one, because it depends what the Academy members are thinking when they're voting. It could go to Lincoln if they're feeling patriotic, or Life of Pi, which was the supposedly "unfilmable film", or Silver Linings Playbook because apparently they're in love with that. I don't think Argo is in with a chance because they seem to be ignoring this, sadly. Personally I think Perks of Being a Wallflower should be there, because I did not see a better page-to-screen adaptation this year. I think the problem with both screenplay awards is that they forget it's about the script and focus on the finished movie, which really kind of rejects a lot of films which may actually have better scripts than those nominated.

Best Original Screenplay

I thought for sure this was going to Zero Dark Thirty, but now based on all the incoming reviews and the fact that it won the Golden Globe last Sunday, I'd have to say now it's going to Django Unchained. Which I'm happy about, because any nod for Tarantino is a bonus in my eyes. He is the best writer/director of his generation and I'm glad he's still getting credit where it's due. Again though, a lot of these I can't comment on because I haven't actually seen them, but since the Academy seem to be celebrating the prolific films this year, I think Django's got this.

Danny Leigh of  BBC Film 2013 basically summed up the main points here, give him a watch. His hatred of Silver Linings Playbook is particularly apparent and he makes an interesting point about Kathryn Bigelow too. Also what he says about the inclusion of foreign and indie films is completely true. Ranting starts around the 13:25 mark (he's just wrapping up talking about The Sessions):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01pz82d/Film_2013_Episode_2/

So the question is, will you be tuning in? I know I certainly won't be staying up to watch something I really don't care that much about. If there's a highlight show I might flick over to that but honestly, this "hooray for Hollywood" attitude they have going on right now is getting on my nerves too much to tolerate.

My First Review is a Special One

In advance, I would just like to say that these reviews are going to be my personal opinions. You may not agree with them, you may not like what I say, but this is what I think, so suck it up and deal. It's not going to stop me from posting.

Anyway, since this is my first proper review, I thought I would make it a special one.

Water for Elephants.

Yes, the movie I have been looking forward to for over a year. I first read the book (amazing, read it if you haven't, it's my all-time favourite) about a year and a half ago, and I remember when they first announced they were making it as a film. I cannot even describe my joy when I found out the cast. Three of my favourite actors in a film based on my favourite book? It couldn't have sounded any better to me.

And then the pictures from filming came out, and it was everything I imagined it to be.

So months later, I find out I have to wait until the following spring before I can see it, and I'm a little bit pissed. But Fox are forgiven, because I'm still so damn intrigued.

Anyway, so two weeks ago I got my notification saying I could buy tickets for it, so I did straight away, for the first night of course. I had already got my mother interested and she read the book and loved it too, so she was coming along with me.

And then the call came on Tuesday morning. I won't go into the whole premiere thing right now, I may do a separate blog post later. But it was amazing. I cried, I laughed, I smiled so much my cheeks hurt by the end of the film. But I don't think I could have made a sound judgement on it, because I was too emotional. So I just accepted it as amazing the first time round, and reserved proper judgement until the next time. Which is where this review finally begins.

The film was pretty much everything I thought it would be.

I love the story, and I always held a little reservation about how they could put it into a film and have it still be as amazing as it was in the book. I had seen Francis Lawrence's directing before in I Am Legend, good film (let's not focus on that ending). Rodrigo Prieto's cinematography was bound to be amazing, since he worked on Brokeback Mountain. And the stars. Well, like I said, three brilliant actors involved, and the often overlooked Hal Holbrook, who made me cry as Old Jacob.

The acting was very good, in my opinion. Robert Pattinson showed he could hold his own in a cast which included three Oscar winners, and still stand out. His facial expressions were amazing, so brilliant at channeling his emotions. In my opinion, he has never acted better. And I've seen pretty much every film he's ever done. It didn't hurt that he was also pretty nice to look at as well. It showed in the film that he can also laugh at himself. I won't ruin the particular scene for anyone who hasn't seen it yet; all I will say is, remember the Storage Trunk ;) But he made me laugh, and cry a lot, so I think he did a pretty damn good job in it.

I also liked Reese Witherspoon. Was it her best performance? No (though she is an Academy Award winner, and her performance in Walk the Line was just about brilliant), but it wasn't her worst, and she was believable. I admit when I first heard she was cast as Marlena, I was a bit dubious. I never really imagined her to be that much older than Jacob, but now I really can't imagine anyone else. At times it seemed like she was just reveling in the fact that she got to wear pretty costumes and ride an elephant, but she looked stunning and graceful, and there are points where my heart just breaks for her.

I agree with what is being said about the chemistry between the two. It doesn't have that magic spark, and there's never really that much intensity. He is smitten with her from the moment he lays eyes on her, and she just seems as if she is being distracted by a shiny new toy. It doesn't seem genuine, and feels a little forced, but the two actors make it passable. I've definitely seen worse on-screen relationships.

Christoph Waltz was pretty much perfect for me. He's just like I imagined the paranoid schizophrenic August to be, and he plays villains so incredibly well. I think someone called him a "watered-down Hans Landa", which it pretty much is; no, it doesn't reach the brillance of Inglorious Basterds, but like Reese, I don't think anything ever will. That being said, I don't like the way Christoph is being typecast as the villain now (see: Green Hornet and the upcoming Three Muskateers) but he does do a spectacular job at it. He is genuinely terrifying at some points, and he is so horrific as a person that you can't help but hate him. But you love to do it. There were points when I was gritting my teeth at him and wanted to hit him so hard, but that's what's meant to happen, and he acted the part so damn well.

I have said before many times that I don't like the way they have toned it down to a 12 just to appeal to Rob's extensive fan-base of teenage girls. I much prefer the graphic, darker and grittier scenes in the book, but I have to praise Richard LaGravenese for staying true to the novel. In some ways it actually improved, as in the book I found myself wanting to skip ahead to the 1930s chapters, as nice as the present-day ones are, so I like the way LaGravenese has instead chosen to nicely book-end the film with the "Old Jacob" parts instead of constant interjections that break up the action. Which is something else I want to add. I absolutely loved the ending. I thought it was beautifully done, so emotional and just perfectly fitting. It's made me cry both times. It's cathartic.

I think Francis Lawrence did an amazing job in bringing this book to life. The cinematography was beautiful, the sets and costumes were stunning, and the acting was brilliant. Not to mention the elephant, Tai, who plays Rosie. She was wonderful, and I really did find myself so emotionally attached to her. She acted so brilliantly, and it was easy to see why the stars loved working with her so much. Which is another point: you could see that they were all so proud of what they had done, and how much they enjoyed working on the production, and that for me made it all the more worthwhile.

Another thing I have to add is that I am listening to the soundtrack as I write this. James Newton Howard (who I share a birthday with!) has done a fantastic job, adding in touches of 30s music with gorgeous piano pieces which really make the film more emotional. Just listening to the last track can bring tears to my eyes. Definitely in my top 5 of all time. Give it a listen if you're into that kind of thing.

So, basically, this has been, personally, my favourite film of the year so far. I had such an emotional attachment to it from the beginning of the production, and it lived up to my expectations. I really want people to see how good Rob is as an actor outside Twilight, and I really think this film shows that he has a long career ahead of him. What I was struck by was how wonderfully different it was to anything I have seen in a long time, though it may have followed the same basic structure (a struggle for love faced by obstacles with an ultimate triumph). I sincerely urge everyone to go and see it.

Verdict: A valient effort, a beautifully made film that may not win any awards for its acting or screenplay, but is very deserving of a wide audience and respect.

****