Oscars

Note to Self: If you ever want to feel like you’re getting nowhere in writing something, fill the full 27 inches of your computer screen with “Text Edit” and start typing. For instance, this note to this point is not even halfway across the screen yet. Ok, now it is: by a centimeter.

Here is a question I know all of you are thinking, but you’ve never bothered to ask me: “Ben, what is your opinion of the ten films the Academy of Motion Pictures selected for Best Picture?”

Well that is a fantastic question and I’m glad you asked, because I don’t know what else to write about.*

*A couple friends of mine have either asked me point blank or hinted for wanting a reason why I haven’t been blogging lately. Here is two terrible excuses: One, I’ve been working on my book, which is going better than I thought it would, but that doesn’t mean anything, and, two, I don’t like filling space with something I would never actually say to anyone – but I should get past that and just aim for wasting your time. You are all very kind. In addition, I’ve been thinking about doing a little twitter update deal like my good friend Charlotte did when she was writing her novel. You can follow me @bdn723 if you want. Or you could just not, I’m okay with that, too.

Because I have little to account for as a “life” I have seen all ten movies nominated for Best Picture and I will now rank them starting with the worst and moving to the best. This list is so fascinating and original you just may… eh, it’s none of those things. Let’s move on.

Before we move on, however, I should probably reference you to a post earlier in which I explained why I liked “Inglourious Basterds,” and have you read it.

Go on…

…

…

…

…

Did you read it or just skim through it? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Go back and truly read it, I’ll wait.

…

…

…

…

…

…

If you’re planning of just scrolling past all of this and getting to the point, you’re going to be lost. I know how you people think.

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

Read it? Need more time? Okay, okay, I’ll shut up and let you read.

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

Done? Okay, good.

Now, take everything you’ve just read and forget it all, because that is not how I rate Oscar movies.

There are six criteria in which I rate movies for awards: Writing, Acting, Directing, Story, Visuals and Sound and the “Damn Factor.”

The first three in that list are pretty self explanatory, so I’ll leave those three alone.

The story element is a bit more complicated, and is truly separate from “writing” when one really spends too much time thinking about it. There are three things to consider when thinking about a good Oscar story: First, is there a story being told; Second, does the story make sense; Three, does the story communicate the message effectively.

I’ll make this short.

IS THERE A STORY: Think “Where the Wild Things Are.” The book and the movie are essentially a diary entry of a small boy’s imaginative mind. If you think about it, in the book the boy never actually leaves his bedroom, and in the movie never leaves the forest he runs into. His thoughts may leave, but, physically, he never leaves the those two locations. You may need LSD to understand that, but I promise it is true. It is my philosophy that a good movie tells a story. A movie without a story is art. Art displays a message without the use of a story, in my world at least. And when you get into the realm of art, things become so subjective and “taste based” that it is almost impossible to subject it to things like awards.

Think about it: Someone can make a outline of a cow using human poop and call it art. You look at something like that and go *brain explosion.* There is no way to objectively critique that other than say, “That’s a piece of crap – ZING!” Now, you can like or dislike that cow, but you really can’t give a true reason for liking or disliking said art – you just can’t. You have to go with your gut instinct, your interpretation of things, your world view… all those factors that make you who you are – and none of those things are objective.*

*And this sentence is crap.

This isn’t to say there isn’t a place for art in film – as there are artistic elements in every film – but a true art film, by my definition, could never fit into the current structure of the Oscars.

Okay, I lied when I said I’d make this short.

DOES THE STORY MAKE SENSE: Most of this is logic based. Example: Okay, so if Tom Hanks was “casted away” on an island for three years and he comes back to his fiance only to see she is married and has a two-year-old daughter, did Helen Hunt really love Hanks? That would have given her three months between Hanks’ “death” and the conception of her daughter. Too many questions, too big of a hole.

Another Example: In “Back to the Future,” Mart McFly goes back in time, helps his parents get together, invents rock and roll… and then everyone forgets he was ever there from the moment he leaves. Nobody notices that a clothing brand is named after him, nobody notices Chuck Berry releases a song that sounds similar to the one McFly played and nobody notices when several years later his mom has a kid that looks EXACTLY LIKE HIM.

Now, this isn’t to say major plot holes means the movie sucks. It just means the story is damaged by it. A flaw in the story can be overcome by acting, writing, directing or cool visuals. Just ask “Avatar.”

DOES THE STORY COMMUNICATE THE MESSAGE EFFECTIVELY: There should never be an excuse for a movie watcher to not know the message being communicated in a film. Sometimes, like in the movie “Momento” it may take you a few minutes after the movie to put all the pieces together to figure out what happened, but once the pieces are put together the message should be clear. The word “effective” is important here. You’ll notice is some of my critiques of the movies below that some movies may have communicated their messages, but may not have left the intended impression or steered the viewer down the indented path. For instance, one should not be leaving the movie “Schindler’s List” thinking, “I wish I was a Jew during the holocaust.”

Visuals and sound are both the technical things that are key in selling a story. This does not necessarily mean “crazy awesome effects” as it means the visuals and sounds enhanced the movie and did not keep it from being an effective movie. Think “Juno.” There is nothing special graphically or sound wise in that movie. But the editing, transitions and cinematography helped set the intended tone for the movie. Examples of crap visuals and sound: “Twilight.”

The “Damn Factor” is something I clearly just made-up five minutes ago, but there is a point to it. There is a difference between exiting a movie and saying, “That was a good movie” and “That was a good movie.” Good movies have that extra something that leave you at a heightened state of emotion. Good movies make you stay in your seat during the end credits longer than you usually do. Good movies are hard to verbalize when being explained to other people. Good movies cause you to think and feel things you rarely or never think or feel.

Good movies, at the end, make you say, “Damn.” Or at least that’s what I say.

10. Avatar

Writing: 3 of 10

Acting: 1 of 10

Directing: 5 of 10

Story: 2 of 10

V&S: 10 of 10

“Damn”: 5 of 10

As a complete movie, Avatar sucked. The acting was comical; the writing reminds one of an above average 1980 bad action film; and the directing, outside of the technical aspect, was lazy (i.e. The ridiculousness of the Sigourney Weaver’s performance of being a tight-ass who doesn’t trust any non-scientist, to hippie, to mellow yellow. Consistency, James, consistency.)

Now, I would recommend everyone see this movie on IMAX 3D and enjoy the visual spectacle that is “Avatar.” The fight scene at the end of the movie will go down in movie history purely from a technological standpoint. And it is because of these visual effects that “Avatar” does deserve a nomination. But that is it, a nomination. If it wins anything other that a tech award I’m going to be level five pissed.

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: “Avatar” is a lot like a fireworks display. At the beginning, you’re excited by the big boom and pretty explosions. Then you kind of fall asleep as some of the cheap fireworks go off… cheer when a cool one goes off… fall into a coma as the lame fireworks continue… and then go ballistic because of the spectacular visual of the grand finale (and because it means the display is over). And then, when it is all over, you think to yourself, “Man, I wish the hole thing was the grand finale only a couple minutes shorter.”

9. District 9

Writing: 3 of 10

Acting: 5 of 10

Directing; 6 of 10 (Peter Jackson at least appeared like he was giving guidance to his actors.)

Story: 6 of 10

V&S: 8 of 10

“Damn”: 6.3 of 10

I love the change of pace in terms of how alien movies usually go. The political elements were a little over-done and some of the various plot things like “Why didn’t the Nigerian assemble the aliens together and create an army he controlled?” or “Why didn’t the Nigerian guy not force one of the aliens to build him a gun?” left you wondering a bit.

The movie was solid as a whole, but it wasn’t great. i don’t know if it deserved a nomination, but if “Avatar” is getting one then “District 9” deserves one two, by those standards.

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: “District 9” is like a tree that has been damaged by a truck slamming into it: It’s still alive and does what one needs it to do, but it is not as effective as it could potentially have been.

8. The Blind Side

Writing: 4 of 10

Acting: 7.1 of 10

Directing: 3 of 10

Story: 7.3 of 10

V&S: 5.3 of 10

“Damn”: 7.8 of 10

This movie is nominated for two reasons: Sandra Bullock and the insanity of Michael  Oher’s story.

I have strong feelings i have to fight through to be objective about “The Blind Side.” The book, written by one of my favorite authors Michael Lewis, was significantly better than the movie. I cannot stress this enough. So with this in mind, take the following worth a grain of salt – but note that everything I’m about to write is 100% true.

The story is excellent just on the merit of what Oher went through to get where he is today. The problem is the movie focus too much on Sandra Bullock’s character and got away from Oher and the story and did not emphasis the craziness of the racial issues surrounding this him or the NCAA’s investigation into Oher’s recruitment. There are other things too, but those two in particular astound me as to why they were such a little part of the movie.

Also, let’s be honest about something: Sandra Bullock wasn’t that good in this movie. Sure, I’m good for giving her a nomination, but she was nowhere near as good as Carey Mulligan (“An Education”) or Gabourey Sidibe (“Precious”). It’s not even close, really.

Bullock is getting the Julia Roberts treatment this award season. Bullock was finally in a movie worthy of the Oscars and stole the screen well enough to deserve a nomination. And because of Bullock’s fame with women, the box office successes of the movie and her contributions to film with some of her other popular movies and “much loved” personality, she’ll likely end up winning the Oscar. But note that she really wasn’t that great in the movie, over-hyped if you will. Kinda like Julia Roberts.

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: “The Blind Side”

7. Up in the Air

Writing: 7 of 10

Acting: 9 of 10

Directing: 6.7 of 10

Story: 7 of 10

V&S: 5 of 10 ( I wouldn’t take this as a negative rating, but as to say the element of Visuals and Sound did not get in the way of the movie for me.)

“Damn”: 6.3 of 10

Meh… I guess I’m depressed.

Those were my feelings on the movie. The acting was fantastic, fantastic in the “Doubt” kind of way from last year. George Clooney was between good and great, and was still the third best actor in the movie. Well played by all parties.

I think my problem with this movie is that it did not have a uniqueness to it that made the movie it’s own. At least “Avatar” and “District 9” can point to elements in their films that separate it from other movies. I didn’t see that in “Up in the Air.” I think it was an above average story, aided by above average writing and directing and wonderful acting.

Too be honest, I should probably watch the movie again to see if I missed something.

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: incomplete

6. The Hurt Locker

Writing: 6.3 of 10

Acting: 7.3 of 10

Directing: 9.1 of 10

Story: 6.2 of 10

V&S: 8 of 10

“Damn”: 8 of 10

This movie is intense and in most years would be ranked higher on this list. There is a big jump in quality of movie between movies 10 thru 8 and “Up in the Air” and an exponential jump between “Up in the Air” and the top six movies. “The Hurt Locker” could win Best Picture and I would not be upset and that could be said of all the movies listed from here down. But when you get nit-picky, “The Hurt Locker” comes in sixth.

There is a fine line between a character being human and a character being a superhero and Jeremy Renner goes about one and a half steps too far into superhero land. The point of the movie is to display the intensity of the actions going on in Iraq and the human element involve. It becomes difficult to accurately reflect that element when there is a part of you doesn’t believe the main character can die. I think the writing is to blame for this problem. Had the issues Renner’s character run into, his personal daemons, been more human – or at least more developed – maybe I would think of Renner as less of a superhero.

Another issues I had was the quality of the supporting cast. I had a hard time connecting with the other two characters in Renner’s team. They could have casted those two parts better.

But, again, the movie was amazing, and Renner was amazing in it.

5. An Education

Writing: 9.1 of 10

Acting: 7.9 of 10

Directing: 7.9 of 10

Story: 7.1 of 10

V&S: 5 of 10

“Damn”: 8.3 of 10

As I stated before, Carey Mulligan was excellent in this, and I hope she or Sidibe come away with the Osacar for Best Actress.

My problem with this movie is also the reason why I like the movie, which causes my brain to explode and to safely place it at number five. I like this movie because some of the thing the character goes through – life purpose and expectation – are things that everyone goes through, and it connected enough with me to make an impact. At the same time, you’ve got a crazy awkward love relationship and the reelection of a culture and time period that I simply cannot identify with.  Add those two things to the sluggish pace at the beginning of the movie and you’re left kinda down on it overall. But at the same time it’s a freakishly great movie.

I dislike my brain.

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: “An Education” is like Jello: It never tastes bad, but never tastes good either. Yet, when offered to you, one almost always accepts Jello.

4. A Serious Man

Writing: 9.5 of 10

Acting: 8.7

Directing: 7.1

Story: 7.3

V&S: 5 of 10

“Damn”: 7.9 of 10

If the Bible was a collection of movies, “A Serious Man” would be the Book of Job.

The strength of writing and acting in this movie is what separates it from the two previous movies. I have not seen “Crazy Heart” yet, so I cannot comment on Jeff Bridges performance. But of the other four nominees – Morgan Freeman, Jeremy Renner, George Clooney and Colin Firth – Firth was the best.

The small problem with this movie is it sometimes runs into being an art and fashion film and loses track of where it is in the story. The writing – the Coen brothers – is stupid good and helps make up for this problem a little bit.* I also believe the director was a first-time guy who is a world renown fashion designer or something, so there were bound to be some flaws. But it’s one hell of a first effort.

*The Coen brothers, in my mind, are cheaters. I think every good writer needs an equally good writer for support and assistance. The problem is finding that other writer and developing that relationship. The Coen’s cheated by being brothers  who happen to be ridiculous screenplay writers and thus did not have to run around and find that writing partner. This makes me mad. Bastards.

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: It’s taking me too long to come up with, so…. I’ll move on.

3. Up

Writing: 7.3

Acting: er… i dunno

Directing: 9 of 10

Story: 9 of 10

V&S: 9 of 10

“Damn”: 9 of 10

“Up” is the greatest animated film of all-time in my book. You’ve done a ridiculous job of animation if you can make four of every five people cry in the theater (including grown men) without any character saying a single word. Think about that for a minute. When you’re crying in the first five minutes of “Up,” you’re essentially crying for you’re PC. Unlike “Avatar” or “District 9”, zero humans are involved in this movie. You’re literally crying for a bad-ass Paint drawing. The idea of this is insane to me, the connection that is built so early in a movie to characters that don’t exist. Just… wow.;lkajsdfoiawoghaskjd;

The problem with up is third quarter of the movie, where things seem to lull a bit. That, and the first five minutes making me feel like a little girl for tearing up in public.

*This is a good write up on “Up.”

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: “Up” is like a surprise party for you that you see in movies and tv shows. You’re arriving home thinking, “Ah, I’m going to relax, have a beer and forget about reality for a while.” But when you walk through the door a crazy series of events are immediately thrown at you. First, you’re stunned that there are people in your house attacking you with kindness. Second, your thrust into the kitchen where food and cake and a bounty of beer awaits. People give speeches about you, talking of things you never realized they thought. This makes you cry, and you’re immediately embarrassed by it. Then settle down a little, you enjoy the evening and the calmness of it all. Then everyone exits saying parting nice words. Everyone leaves and your spouse uncharacteristically has sex with you. You’re pleased. (This really is nothing like “Up” is it… And does this kind of thing even happen? I don’t know…)

1. Tie between “Precious” / “Inglourious Basterds”

Writing: 9.3 of 10 / 9.7 of 10

Acting: 9.6 of 10 / 9.2 of 10

Directing: 9.7 of 10 / 10 of 10

Story: 10 of 10 / 9.1 of 10

V&S: 7 of 10/ 8.5 of 10

“Damn”: 10 of 10 / 8.5 of 10

This is a copout: I simply don’t know which movie to pick.

INGOURIOUS BASTERDS: A blind person could watch this a love it; A deaf person could watch this and love it; A shallow person could watch this and love it; An intellectual could watch this and love it; Jesus could watch this movie and love it; Satan could watch this movie and love it; A Jew could watch this movie and kinda feel sorry for Nazis; A modern film critique could watch this movie and give it five stars and a mid-century film critique could watch it and give it five stars. This movie is the purist version of the “onion” metaphor.

The ease in which this movie switches between thick dialogue to grotesque violence to a discourse of the 1930’s German cinema to drunken party games to scalping to brilliant old school camera angles to goofy yet kinda appropriate background music to wherever the hell Quentin’s brain is genius. Genius, genius, genius.

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: Onions.

PRECIOUS: Precious rips your soul out, defiles it and then hands it back to you with a smile.

I’ve never felt so angry and sick in a movie my whole life and a lot of it is due to the acting by Monique, Sidibe and, yes, Mariah Carey. The directing was great, brilliant even. The flashbacks were well done, the tone was great… and I’ve never heard of the guy either. I hope he does more movies.

Just go see the movie. Intense.

Sad Attempt at a Metaphor that’s Really More of a Simile: Precious rips your soul out, defiles it and then hands it back to you with a smile.

*This post is dedicated to Mandy Custard – who should be planning her trip to somewhere not in America. Feel free to leave a comment, Mandy. :)*