The Oscars...and well movies
Mar. 10th, 2024 08:02 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatI'm watching the Oscars. I'm a flim buff, always have been. Worked on the film committee in college, took cinema studies courses in undergrad, and discussed movies in depth with family, friends, and co-workers. Watching the Oscars was more of an event in our house than the Superbowl. (Although we all pretty much agree it's an impossible contest, comparing apples and oranges.)
I've seen almost all the films nominated for Best Movie - in regards to the Oscars, now. Just not seen four of them: Zone of Interest, Anatomy of a Fall, Past Lives, and Maestro. But I have seen: Oppenheimer, Barbie, Killers of the Flower Moon, The Holdovers, Poor Things, and American Fiction. And damn, we now have ten films nominated? I remember when it was just five.
Of the ones I've seen? I'd rank them as follows:
1. Oppenheimer
2. Poor Things
3. American Fiction (which are in a three way tie for first)
4. Barbie
5. Killers of the Flower Moon
6. Holdovers
I wouldn't have nominated The Holdovers - it's basically a run of the mill 1970s flick or Alexander Payne/Paul Giametti film that I feel I've seen before. Nice performances, a good character arc, but nothing stellar. I told the plot of it to mother, and she said - "I feel like I've already seen this?" Exactly.
Barbie and Killers are deeply flawed films that run too long, and are a wee bit too gimmicky for their own good - and kind of fail in their attempt at satire - falling a touch too much towards self-parody for their own good. Also both are incredibly preachy and get on their soap boxes at the end. A bit more subtly would have a gone a long way. The audience isn't stupid.
However, points for being innovative and providing interesting and new film techniques, and taking chances.
Oppenheimer, Poor Things and American Fiction all blew me away. Two are deft and at times biting satires, without getting overtly preachy (hard to do). And the third is a thought-provoking bio-pic and socio-political commentary on the arms race. All three use interesting film techniques, while at the same time never losing sight of their characters or their arcs. And the performances are riveting and among the best of the actors involved.
Oppenheimer and Poor Things deserve all the nominations they've gotten - they blew me away and still haunt. And dealt with controversial and difficult topics at the same time.
Predictions? This is an impossible contest.
But so far it's going as expected. No surprises. And for the most part I agree with the awards.
Poor Things - is a visual feast for the eyes. He does things with film I've not seen since maybe David Lynch. And the director reminds me a great deal of Lynch.
However, it is not an easy subject matter. Lots of sex, but the sex is from a "female perspective" and more female gaze than male gaze (which I found interesting considering the film is written and directed by a man).
The set-up? Bella Baxter is created by Godwin Frankenstein ( a monster himself created from dead bodies but also a brilliant surgeon). As an experiment, he takes the body of a recent suicide victim - a pregnant woman, and inserts the brain of her unborn child into her head. So she has the body of a woman but the brain of a child, and no memory of either. Then she goes on this amazing journey of existential discovery - that is mind and body. And manages to outcad a cad, and outsmart a misogynistic general. It's a brilliant horror tour de force, ending with the general who attempts to take her clitoris...getting well the tables turned on him.
It's an existential visual tour de force with graphic sex. And the satire is rather biting in places.
Don't read reviews - see it for yourself. It's kind of like watching Sartre by way of Mary Shelly and David Lynch and Virginia Woolf.
American Fiction - this is also a brilliantly scripted satire - this time tackling the American Publishing Industry. Kind of reminds of Yellowface in places.
The setup? Theolonius Monk, Black literary writer, who has published numerous books, but no best sellers and works as an American Literature Teacher in California. He gets in trouble trying to teach Flannery O'Connor's "The Artificial Nigger" in class. A white girl with green hair gets upset, and takes exception to it. And he loses it. And apparently it wasn't the first time. So he's sent back to Boston for a sabbatical, and stays at his sister's beach house...except things don't quite go the way he expects, and he ends up in fit of rage after seeing a young black woman get a best-seller writing a book about a world she knows zip about and furthers the very stereotypes he fights against - a book similar to hers. And well we go from there.
There's some clever bits, and the satire is sharp in places. It also does a good job of underlining the unintentional and unself-aware racism in our society.
The Holdovers - I was kind of disappointed in it. Felt it was overly long, and drug in places. It's mainly a character piece that follows a trite and true 1970s or 20th Century film trope. If you've seen films with Paul Giametti - you've seen it before. Enjoyable in places, stale in others.
Stand out performance by Devine Randolph - who plays Mary, a grieving mother of a boy killed in Vietnam.
The set up? Professor Human, who teaches Ancient History at the Preparatory Academy Barton draws the short straw and has to play babysitter to a bunch of students held over during the holidays. Their parents failed to pick them up or send them home. The year is 1970. The Vietnam War is dragging on. Mary the school's cook has recently lost her son to the War and is grieving him in silence. And Tully is stuck there, even after the four other students stuck get rescued and sent on a ski trip with one kid, who's father has a change of heart and airlifts them by helicopter to a ski resort. Tully is stuck because his mother is on an excursion (aka honeymoon) with her new hubby. Tully desperately wants to visit his Dad in Boston - we don't know why...and it goes from there.
It is considered subversive, but I didn't find it that subversive? And kind of long. It does however have a good character arc for Human's character or Paul Giametti. Not sure about anyone else though?
I wouldn't have nominated this film. It's enjoyable but not all that?
I've reviewed the others separately.
ETA: I'm happy with the outcome. Killers of the Flower Moon and Maestro were shut out. And in a big upset, Emma Stone won Best Actress (Poor Things) over Lily Gladstone (Killers).
If you wanted Gladstone - you need to read the book and get back to me. I really didn't like Killers, and was underwhelmed by Gladstone's performance. While Emma Stone's blew me away. (Both are problematic films, but Killers bugged me more - since the point of view is the bad guys, not Gladstone's. She's more of a supporting role in Scorsese's film. In the book, she isn't.)
It is of course unimportant in the scheme of things. And I'll most likely forget in a year or so. Also the performances aren't comparable. But alas, we do.
Happy about Oppenheimer - means Cillian will be in more films at least.
I've seen almost all the films nominated for Best Movie - in regards to the Oscars, now. Just not seen four of them: Zone of Interest, Anatomy of a Fall, Past Lives, and Maestro. But I have seen: Oppenheimer, Barbie, Killers of the Flower Moon, The Holdovers, Poor Things, and American Fiction. And damn, we now have ten films nominated? I remember when it was just five.
Of the ones I've seen? I'd rank them as follows:
1. Oppenheimer
2. Poor Things
3. American Fiction (which are in a three way tie for first)
4. Barbie
5. Killers of the Flower Moon
6. Holdovers
I wouldn't have nominated The Holdovers - it's basically a run of the mill 1970s flick or Alexander Payne/Paul Giametti film that I feel I've seen before. Nice performances, a good character arc, but nothing stellar. I told the plot of it to mother, and she said - "I feel like I've already seen this?" Exactly.
Barbie and Killers are deeply flawed films that run too long, and are a wee bit too gimmicky for their own good - and kind of fail in their attempt at satire - falling a touch too much towards self-parody for their own good. Also both are incredibly preachy and get on their soap boxes at the end. A bit more subtly would have a gone a long way. The audience isn't stupid.
However, points for being innovative and providing interesting and new film techniques, and taking chances.
Oppenheimer, Poor Things and American Fiction all blew me away. Two are deft and at times biting satires, without getting overtly preachy (hard to do). And the third is a thought-provoking bio-pic and socio-political commentary on the arms race. All three use interesting film techniques, while at the same time never losing sight of their characters or their arcs. And the performances are riveting and among the best of the actors involved.
Oppenheimer and Poor Things deserve all the nominations they've gotten - they blew me away and still haunt. And dealt with controversial and difficult topics at the same time.
Predictions? This is an impossible contest.
But so far it's going as expected. No surprises. And for the most part I agree with the awards.
Poor Things - is a visual feast for the eyes. He does things with film I've not seen since maybe David Lynch. And the director reminds me a great deal of Lynch.
However, it is not an easy subject matter. Lots of sex, but the sex is from a "female perspective" and more female gaze than male gaze (which I found interesting considering the film is written and directed by a man).
The set-up? Bella Baxter is created by Godwin Frankenstein ( a monster himself created from dead bodies but also a brilliant surgeon). As an experiment, he takes the body of a recent suicide victim - a pregnant woman, and inserts the brain of her unborn child into her head. So she has the body of a woman but the brain of a child, and no memory of either. Then she goes on this amazing journey of existential discovery - that is mind and body. And manages to outcad a cad, and outsmart a misogynistic general. It's a brilliant horror tour de force, ending with the general who attempts to take her clitoris...getting well the tables turned on him.
It's an existential visual tour de force with graphic sex. And the satire is rather biting in places.
Don't read reviews - see it for yourself. It's kind of like watching Sartre by way of Mary Shelly and David Lynch and Virginia Woolf.
American Fiction - this is also a brilliantly scripted satire - this time tackling the American Publishing Industry. Kind of reminds of Yellowface in places.
The setup? Theolonius Monk, Black literary writer, who has published numerous books, but no best sellers and works as an American Literature Teacher in California. He gets in trouble trying to teach Flannery O'Connor's "The Artificial Nigger" in class. A white girl with green hair gets upset, and takes exception to it. And he loses it. And apparently it wasn't the first time. So he's sent back to Boston for a sabbatical, and stays at his sister's beach house...except things don't quite go the way he expects, and he ends up in fit of rage after seeing a young black woman get a best-seller writing a book about a world she knows zip about and furthers the very stereotypes he fights against - a book similar to hers. And well we go from there.
There's some clever bits, and the satire is sharp in places. It also does a good job of underlining the unintentional and unself-aware racism in our society.
The Holdovers - I was kind of disappointed in it. Felt it was overly long, and drug in places. It's mainly a character piece that follows a trite and true 1970s or 20th Century film trope. If you've seen films with Paul Giametti - you've seen it before. Enjoyable in places, stale in others.
Stand out performance by Devine Randolph - who plays Mary, a grieving mother of a boy killed in Vietnam.
The set up? Professor Human, who teaches Ancient History at the Preparatory Academy Barton draws the short straw and has to play babysitter to a bunch of students held over during the holidays. Their parents failed to pick them up or send them home. The year is 1970. The Vietnam War is dragging on. Mary the school's cook has recently lost her son to the War and is grieving him in silence. And Tully is stuck there, even after the four other students stuck get rescued and sent on a ski trip with one kid, who's father has a change of heart and airlifts them by helicopter to a ski resort. Tully is stuck because his mother is on an excursion (aka honeymoon) with her new hubby. Tully desperately wants to visit his Dad in Boston - we don't know why...and it goes from there.
It is considered subversive, but I didn't find it that subversive? And kind of long. It does however have a good character arc for Human's character or Paul Giametti. Not sure about anyone else though?
I wouldn't have nominated this film. It's enjoyable but not all that?
I've reviewed the others separately.
ETA: I'm happy with the outcome. Killers of the Flower Moon and Maestro were shut out. And in a big upset, Emma Stone won Best Actress (Poor Things) over Lily Gladstone (Killers).
If you wanted Gladstone - you need to read the book and get back to me. I really didn't like Killers, and was underwhelmed by Gladstone's performance. While Emma Stone's blew me away. (Both are problematic films, but Killers bugged me more - since the point of view is the bad guys, not Gladstone's. She's more of a supporting role in Scorsese's film. In the book, she isn't.)
It is of course unimportant in the scheme of things. And I'll most likely forget in a year or so. Also the performances aren't comparable. But alas, we do.
Happy about Oppenheimer - means Cillian will be in more films at least.
no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 03:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 12:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 05:19 am (UTC)Here in Germany of course there is much excitement over The Zone of Interest winning best foreign film and Sandra Hüller having been nominated for best actress - apparently the first German actress to be nominated for that since 1938.
We didn’t actually watch the show but I am hearing that the memorials section wasn’t very good because apparently it was difficult to read the names due to dancers ?
no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 12:58 pm (UTC)Zone of Interest did very well as did Anatomy of a Fall. Although I'm not sure I can watch Zone of Interest...
no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 04:48 pm (UTC)I don’t know whether I will watch Zone of Interest yet or not.
no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 07:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 04:17 pm (UTC)I haven't seen any of the nominated films so I had no preferences. But I also hated what they've done to the In Memoriam section, which is to spotlight the singers (and this year dancers) instead of the people being remembered. Leave the performers for the people in the theater, and let the TV audience see the video compilation.
no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 06:59 pm (UTC)Also the In Memoriam - we really shouldn't have been focused on the dancers (who weren't all that good - my mother liked them, I was bored). They should just have one or two songs playing over the loud-speakers and show clips of each of the people who died, and what they did. The Grammy's did a better job, and they did a better job in previous years.
If you get a chance - do see Oppenheimer - it's a brilliant piece of film making. Also American Fiction, Nydia, Rustin and Poor Things are worth a look, although Poor Things is controversial for a reason.
I'd skip Barbie, Killers, and Holdovers.
no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 08:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-11 10:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-13 11:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-14 10:39 pm (UTC)Like a lot of Lynch films - it is kind of in your face offensive in places? I can see why some people were turned off by it. And it's also a bit over-the-top in places.
The visuals kind of jump from insanely beautiful to grotesque - it's like looking at things through a fun house mirror.
I've never seen anything quite like it - and not sure what to make of it. But it was definitely an artistic film.
no subject
Date: 2024-03-15 12:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-15 01:56 am (UTC)There's things in that movie I don't want to focus on or think too much about. It's a disturbing film. Particularly the ending - where she's removed the General's brain and inserted a goat's? Which is foreshadowed, but still I'm amazed they went there and kind of wish they hadn't, it's a bit too much on the nose in terms of satire.
My brother - from the bits he's seen of it, said it looked like something AI would put together to be quirky? I'm not sure I'd say that, exactly?
no subject
Date: 2024-03-15 02:14 am (UTC)