Thursday, February 23, 2012
Oscar-nomics: Best Actor Predictions
Demián Bichir A Better Life
No offense to Mr. Bichir, this is a well earned nomination, but its his nomination I am most upset about. While I am sure his performance is strong, it had a very little release. This, to me is one of those "hmm, maybe I will finally go check out this film," kind of nominees that happen every once in a while (such as Jacki Weaver last year for Animal Kingdom). That being said, he hasn't the momentum or the mentioned release time to truly mount an upset, so the nomination is the reward.
George Clooney The Descendants
This is arguably one of my favorite George Clooney performances. Not only do we see him be the George Clooney we all know and love, we also see his emotional side as a father trying to handle family and business all during a tragic accident. He was long since to be considered your winner, but I am not so convinced now. Lately, there has been a shift in momentum towards a new sheriff in town. I think Mr. Clooney will fall just short of...
Jean Dujardin The Artist
I knew this nomination was coming from a mile away, but I never considered him the frontiersmen. Then I started thinking about it and it actually makes the most sense. Being in a silent film, he must be able to act out each and every scene with only his body movements not his voice, which is hard to do. Granted, it throws subtlety out the window, but after seeing Mr. Dujardin on the awards circuit, there isn't a single bit of subtlety in his bones, and that's actually a compliment. He is a very charismatic man, he is in a Best Picture front-runner, and in a way he does the most acting than all the others combined (and they have the luxury of verbal conversations). I think Dujardin will squeak out a win here, and deservedly so (I mean since Fassbender is out).
Brad Pitt Moneyball
Now, I am really happy for this nomination, and I was hoping he would get more love than he did. Many were playing this category (and to a lesser extent the Adapted Screenplay category) as a Pitt vs Clooney battle. I was pulling for Mr. Pitt because while his is the most subtle of the two but also the most impactful, in my opinion, on the scene at had (Clooney was already surrounded by the emotional context of the scene). Pitt worked the dialogue with intelligence and humor, allowing us to better understand the logic of the game as well as Mr. Billy Beane. I only wish he had gained more momentum to win, because the man deserves to very much. That being said, I think he has been stuck in the #3 spot right now, but hey I'm pulling for you man (and this is coming from a devout Cardinals fan).
Gary Oldman Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
Now, if you want to talk about subtle performances, look no further than Mr. Oldman's performance. I personally felt his performance, as well as the film, was too subtle for their own good and the plot kind of got a little muddled because of it. Also, this being his first nomination, you can't help but wonder if the nomination is to say, "See, we have nominated the guy," because he has often been snubbed of an Oscar nomination. That being said, he has no chance of winning, he's not carrying a Best Picture nominee, he's had little award's season love and his performance isn't really much of a standout. The nomination is the reward.
And this was about as restrained as I can be in terms of holding back my hatred of the Academy for snubbing Mr. Fassbender, now if you'll excuse me, I am going to go and blow off some.... steam....
Winner: Jean Dujardin The Artist
Runner-Up: George Clooney The Descendants
Should Win: Brad Pitt Moneyball (but Jean Dujardin would be runner-up in this category)
Should've been Nominated: Michael Fassbender Shame
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Oscar-nomics: NYFCC Awards Recipients 2011

Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Half-time Report





Thursday, June 16, 2011
Review: Tree of Life

How do you suppose life began? Was it thanks to the Big Bang? Did an almighty being have something to do with it? Could it be both? We ask these questions a lot, and are never closer to the answer, but we come to a level of acceptance of such ideas. In “Tree of Life,” that is simply what is happening. The legendary Terrence Malick (Thin Red Line) weaves a story about the creation of life itself, but does not take a side. Rather, he shows a balance of such ideas, accepting both as they are, and further represents said ideas in the form of a singular family, a bold move if you ask me.
The story begins with a family mourning the death of their child; the only detail we are truly given of this son is his age. We see one of the brothers, Jack (Sean Penn), still grieving years after his brother’s death, as well as his parent’s reaction. We are then thrown into visuals of the creation of time, with voices throughout discussing faith, evolution, love, life, what have you. We are shown the Big Bang, dinosaurs, and everything in between in a set of visuals that harkens back to A Space Odyssey and even reminded me of Planet Earth, the BBC series.
We are then taken back to the childhood of Jack, as he is raised in two separate ideals, which is the film’s main motif: nature and grace (an allusion to the conflicting ideas of evolution and creation). The father (Brad Pitt) represents nature and the mother (Jessica Chastain), represents grace. We see most of the film in the viewpoint of the children, as they are taught about life’s greatest values through the two conflicting influences that are their parents. Which side will they choose? Do they have to choose a side? Is accepting either side a wrong choice?
This is, quite possibly, the most beautiful film I have ever seen. It’s a cheaply made film, well for the visuals anyway, around 32 million. It is an artistic masterpiece, everything happens for a reason. The music adds a certain angelic tone to the film, which is further aided by the equally angelic Jessica Chastain. Brad Pitt has come a long way from 12 monkeys and other such films, this is his strongest performance I have seen. Emanuel Lubezki, the cinematographer who often works with Alfonso Cuaron (one of my favorite directors) and was robbed of a win for Children of Men in particular, is the true champion of the film (aside Malick himself). I am not only putting him on my list for an Oscar nomination, I am giving him the win right now. I have never seen a film crafted so magnificently as this, it’s the closest to a masterpiece I have ever seen.
Mr. Lubezki isn’t the only champion here, however. Terrence Malick, a perfectionist known for creating what many critics consider “masterpieces,” wrote and directed a truly magnificent work of art. He takes his time with his shots, which some may consider being a weakness of the film, but I think it truly works. There isn’t an actual plot/goal to the film, its simply the showing, in an almost documentary feel, of creation as seen in a single household. It’s truly an exceptional piece of work.
The film won the Palm d’or (Cannes version of Best Picture), but it has received its share of applause and boos. I see this film as being considered a controversial film, which is understandable. I see this as a film accepting of both ideas, not discrediting either. It tells us that life is beautiful and it should be treasured. “The less you love, the more life will pass you by.” I doubt I will see a film that will be better than this, it is truly an excellent, near-perfect piece of filmmaking.
Jack’s Grade: A+