Category: Commentary

Oscar Nominations 2014 Analysis: Full of Surprises and None

All the Oscar surprises that really weren’t surprises after all

The Oscar nominees rarely satisfy, only surprise and enrage, although never in the way people expect, which I guess is its own surprise.

It was expected that Amy Adams could “surprise” by breaking into the field of Best Actress nominees, but did anyone suspect that it would be at Emma Thompson’s expense? There were predictions that Christian Bale or Leonardo DiCaprio could get into an even tighter race, but both of them? Sally Hawkins was less expected behind perhaps Octavia Spencer and others, but was Oprah really the weak link?

These are the kinds of revelations that both delight and frustrate Oscar pundits. In a way, they were right that the Academy after all did not love “Inside Llewyn Davis” or “Saving Mr. Banks,” but then those prediction tallies never seem to match up.

The fact that there are surprises each year really shouldn’t be a surprise at all. If the Oscar nominations were as easy to predict as picking all the top ranked favorites, then what would be the fun of waking up at 7:38 in the morning to watch them? For instance, why was there doubt that David O. Russell couldn’t lead yet another cast to a sweep of the acting categories like he did with “Silver Linings Playbook” and nearly did with “The Fighter”? That’s one of those “surprises” that people should’ve seen coming a mile away, but no one did.

I guess it’s less of a surprise that Oscar pundits will now all turn around and rationalize the nominations in the way I’ve just done, as though it made sense or was expected all along, but no one “knew” that Thompson would be out, or no one “knew” that “Philomena” was a sure thing thanks to Harvey Weinstein after all. (I did however bet Hanks would get nothing) Continue reading “Oscar Nominations 2014 Analysis: Full of Surprises and None”

2013: The Year the Movies Weren’t Cool

The movies are no longer the pinnacle of pop culture. How do we make them matter again?

When “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire” came out in November, it accomplished something no other movie in 2013 has: it made an impact.

Prior to its release, I saw genuine excitement in my friends and in my social media feeds. Jennifer Lawrence began appearing on just about every late night talk show and proceeded to be generally awesome and meme worthy.

When it finally did come out, lo and behold, it was really good – better than the original by far and fully matching the hype. It even made more money than the original and set records for the November box office. Critics discussed it like it was important, and people talked about and saw it multiple times like it mattered. And it does matter.

Each year a few moments in popular culture seem to define the entire year. They set the world on fire for moments at a time and anyone who’s anyone knows about it and is talking about it.

Pinning down just how they define the year is a bit more intangible, and it’s up to the media to write year-end lists, columns and mashups that weave our culture together when box office receipts and viewership numbers don’t paint the whole picture.

2013 has been an exciting year, as are most years when we look back each December. This year gave us the finale to “Breaking Bad,” one that garnered as many parodies as it did live viewers. It gave us the hilarious and even groundbreaking antics of Kanye West and Miley Cyrus. “Homeland,” “The Walking Dead” and “Dexter” made waves with polarizing new seasons. Arcade Fire and Daft Punk turned heads with critically acclaimed smash hits and tour and marketing choices that were talked about as much as the music. “Grand Theft Auto V” and “Call of Duty: Ghosts” were blockbuster video games that made “Thor” look like an independent film. Jimmy Kimmel pranked the Internet. We learned what the Fox says.

And a few movies came out too.

In terms of quality alone, 2013 turned out to be a pretty great year for movies. You can read my Top 15 list here. Many were moving, original and game changers, and some felt like they could be all time classics.

And for the most part, these movies made money, they got good reviews, and they’ll be here to stay through Oscar season and beyond. People continue to see them, buy them, stream them, steal them, whatever.

But increasingly, they matter less.

No longer is film the pinnacle of pop culture. TV offers more opportunities for experimentation and narrative complexity, music continues to pose discussions about race, femininity and more beyond the music itself, video games demonstrate the greatest chance for growth as a blossoming art form, and all three continue to be infinitely accessible and open to critical discourse.

Film on the other hand can seem to be more selective, more homogenized and harder to access. Filmmakers like Steven Soderbergh and others are jumping ship to TV, the mass marketed movies are losing their zest, the important and groundbreaking films are not available nationwide or in the Netflix canon, and film’s innovations to the medium, namely digital and 3D cinematography, look gimmicky and defensive at worst.

No one is dismissing the work of great artists because there is other entertainment to be found elsewhere, but when everything is to some degree competing for attention, the ability to discuss films and share them widely is waning.

Movies aren’t worse; they just aren’t cool. Continue reading “2013: The Year the Movies Weren’t Cool”

The Summer of Too Much Hype

We’re currently operating in a culture where there’s a lot of excitement for movies frankly no one cares about.

When Ben Affleck was cast as Batman in Zack Snyder’s “Man of Steel” sequel this past week, the Internet’s subsequent explosion of jokes and boos and hatred and memes over absolutely nothing summed up the odd state of mainstream movies in 2013.

You’ll recall that the crazed reaction to the announcement of this year’s lineup sounded no different a year ago than it does now. And yet the resounding verdict about Summer 2013 was that it was “The Year of the Flop.”

On sheer numbers alone, this is perhaps misleading. “White House Down,” “Elysium,” “The Lone Ranger” and “Pacific Rim” did in fact flop… big time. The studios responsible for these films will take significant losses financially, despite the fact that they rank amongst the highest grossing films of the year.

Most of the others however have done quite fine. The worldwide box office will salvage poor domestic receipts and Hollywood will continue making movies that speak the universal language of PG-13 explosions. “Pacific Rim” alone made nearly 75 percent of its overall gross overseas.

So for the present, Hollywood may not change a damn thing. The movie industry is doing well enough.

But if you ask me why the summer was such a letdown, and ask anyone, it’s because the biggest movies this summer were all so meh.

None attained the level of pop culture phenomenon even if the dollars said otherwise. “Iron Man 3” was not “The Avengers.” “Man of Steel” was not “The Dark Knight.” “Elysium” was not “District 9.” “The Heat” was not “Bridesmaids.” “Star Trek Into Darkness” was not the original “Star Trek.” “The Hangover Part 3” was not the first or second. “The Wolverine” was not any of the X-Men incarnations.  “Monsters University” was not “Up.” Perhaps only “Despicable Me 2” was as huge as “Despicable Me.”

We’re currently operating in a culture where there’s a lot of excitement for movies frankly no one cares about. Continue reading “The Summer of Too Much Hype”

No one really cares about the Superman/Batman movie

The ensuing hype for the Superman and Batman movie will be far greater than the quality or lasting legacy of the movie itself, and it’s ruining cinema.

The announcement of a Superman/Batman movie yesterday morning and confirmed at Comic-Con is exactly the reason why cinema is hemorrhaging viewers, quality and general interest to television: no one honestly cares.

No, please do tell me how excited you are for the follow-up to “Man of Steel,” how long you’ve waited to see this mash-up finally happen, how Zack Snyder is by far the greatest choice to helm this sure to be new franchise and how whomever they eventually pick to play both Superman (will it still be Henry Cavill?) or Batman (will it be Christian Bale? Probably not. Maybe Joseph Gordon Levitt? Who knows?!) will somehow eventually be wrong.

I know you’re foaming at the mouth. I know you’re stoked. It’s great that you have something you’re passionate about. It’ll probably be good. It could even be great!

But the fact is, this movie is a hype and dollar machine. As has been true of nearly every Hollywood tent pole comic book franchise, the hype and speculation is greater than the movie is actually interesting, and it will evaporate as soon as the next one is announced, which will be post-credits.

I haven’t counted to be sure, but I have probably seen fewer major Hollywood releases this summer than in any year since I started seriously writing as a movie critic. Chalk that up to me being an adult and not a college student with all the free time, but at the end of the day, I simply no longer care.

I do not care about “Man of Steel.” I do not care about “Pacific Rim.” I do not care about “The Lone Ranger” or “White House Down” or “The Hangover Part 3” or “Fast & Furious 6,” and I will not care about “The Wolverine,” “Thor: The Dark World,” “Kick-Ass 2” or “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug,” even if I end up seeing them.

Why? These have talented directors and stars attached. They could be above average. They could be fun enough to be worth my 10 bucks or yours.

But like a chocolate bar you quickly scarf down, they are immediately thrown away and forgotten such that you’ll grab for another. They have no sustaining value or reason to exist other than because they fill a void and enough people will buy them. Continue reading “No one really cares about the Superman/Batman movie”

Don't take aim at Jim Carrey

People shouldn’t be attacking Jim Carrey based on his political stance on “Kick-Ass 2.” We should be asking questions we can reasonably influence.

 

It’s amazing how much ire just two tweets can cause. Jim Carrey yesterday created a “controversy” by posting on Twitter that after the events of the Sandy Hook massacre, he could no longer help promote the upcoming film he stars in, “Kick-Ass 2.”

Carrey, who has recently been a vocal gun control advocate, effectively caused a political fervor over his public comments. Some fans, critics and anti-gun supporters have come to his side in taking this bold stance against a potential summer blockbuster and a hot topic, but most have called out his supposed hypocrisy, claiming that the timing of Sandy Hook and the impending release of “Kick-Ass 2” seem off, and that Carrey has appeared in numerous films in which he has wielded guns but has never expressed disdain over this or similarly over other massacres in recent memory.

 

 

This is a faulty argument, firstly because it’s unfair to criticize Carrey for trying to change his opinion and have a “change of heart,” secondly because several of the aforementioned films in which he holds guns are from the ‘90s and are referenced without context. What’s more, if you can find me a modern, major male actor who has not held at least one gun in a film, then you win bragging rights for the day.

Although Carrey’s comments have turned into a political pissing match in which conflicting statements and ad-hominem attacks about Carrey’s choices as a comedian are being thrown around willfully, this debate does raise interesting questions about the state of violence in the movies.

Carrey has put critics and movie supporters in a difficult place; defense of his statement arguably implies by association that “Kick-Ass 2” is too violent, and that he has all the reason to abstain based on his political beliefs. And although I can’t speak for all critics, the general opinion is that works of art, movies or otherwise, do not cause real world violence. That would be ridiculous. But Carrey’s minimal comment (which really shouldn’t be overanalyzed) sways closer to Fox News’ assertion (despite what Fox has said about Carrey in this aftermath) that it is popular culture, not guns, that cause violence.

What cannot be argued is that there is a lot of violence in mainstream Hollywood films, regardless of the context in which they are presented. How much is too much, what crosses the line, and what massacre has to make major studios rethink the images that are fit for frivolous, summer release? Continue reading “Don't take aim at Jim Carrey”

Cinema Isn't Dying; The Business Is

Big Data could be poised to help the movie industry stay afloat, and it can do so without damaging the integrity of the art.

“Ack! You can’t make movies out of statistics! That’s not art! AARRGGHHH!”

That’s my impression of a filmmaker or critic reading an article about Big Data, a currently buzzy, business-y tech term that every industry is currently figuring out what to do with, including Hollywood.

Now, I understand that most of the people who got into making movies or writing about them did so because they never wanted to have to learn about something like Big Data. But as a struggling movie blogger, I’ve had no such luck, and Big Data makes up a big chunk of the articles I’ve been reading for the past few months.

So it came as a shock to me to hear about this panel called “Big Data and the Movies” at the Tribeca Film Festival and see my worlds colliding. It happened to coincide with Netflix’s release of “House of Cards,” this New York Times article about a man using analytics to give notes on screenplays, and then of course two wonderfully insider and apocalyptic discussions about the state of cinema, one by A.O. Scott and David Denby at Tribeca, the other by allegedly retiring filmmaker Steven Soderbergh at the San Francisco International Film Festival.

With all those things together, I began to wonder: How does the movie industry innovate? Continue reading “Cinema Isn't Dying; The Business Is”

RIP Roger Ebert (1942 – 2013): Another Critic in the Room

RIP Roger Ebert. As a critic and a personal mentor, he tapped into the universal idea that the movies are for everyone.

I met Roger Ebert just once. I was invited beyond all good reason to Ebertfest in 2009 by his Chicago Sun Times print editor Laura Emerick. In between films, she asked, “Would you like to meet Roger?” Somehow I didn’t think it was an option. He had been battling cancer for several years at that point, but his appearance at the festival, to sit through 10 films in less than five days, was an enormous act of strength for someone who had just so recently attained stability with his health.

Those who have attended Ebertfest know where he sits. It’s the furthest back seat in Champaign’s Virginia Theater, right on the aisle and by the door on a slightly elevated platform. Chaz sits directly to his left.

Ms. Emerick walked me into the aisle as a flock of people gathered by the exit and by Ebert to say hello. He wore a bright white sweater that only seemed to amplify his then dangling chin, a newly defining feature that was impossible to forget, but somehow most everyone managed to ignore. Even for being a television star, Ebert was about his words, not his mug shot.

I was introduced and muttered something about how much I admired him and enjoyed reading his work, but because I was not about to have a stimulating conversation with him given his condition, the part I remember more vividly and painfully is walking away.

I said my piece, he smiled, or seemed to, and that was all. The more fulfilling memories of that weekend were talking with Michael Phillips, Richard Roeper and a handful of other critics and filmmakers. Ebert was just another critic in the room.

Some years later, I got the chance to attend a press screening of the movie “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” with RedEye film critic Matt Pais. Those who have been in that room, albeit a much smaller number, know where Ebert sits: the furthest back seat, right by the aisle and the door. Chaz was there that day too.

I didn’t make a scene or even try to say hello, because I definitely had no right being there this time. I don’t recall seeing him at the end either. He gave it three and a half stars. I gave it two, and I wondered which movie he had seen. I had more fun hashing out my thoughts with Pais. But regardless, I was content in knowing that I got to share this movie moment with Ebert, even if again he was just another critic in the darkened room. Continue reading “RIP Roger Ebert (1942 – 2013): Another Critic in the Room”

'Argo' absolutely deserved to win Best Picture

“Argo” may not try anything completely new or daring, but it’s an ambitious achievement and a new classic. “Argo” is the most deserving of all the Best Picture nominees.

Argo Affleck Best Picture
Image courtesy of CNN

As it became increasingly certain that “Argo” would walk away with a Best Picture Oscar Sunday night, the articles claiming why “Argo” was not worthy of the movie industry’s top prize were a dime a dozen. Heaven forbid that in this Internet age we have something other than a contrarian opinion, or that we commit the even worse sin of agreeing with the Oscars.

Because a funny thing happens when something or someone becomes the assumed front-runner: people get begrudgingly accepting of whatever it will be. Everyone knew “Argo” and Anne Hathaway and Daniel Day-Lewis would win, but was anyone really happy about it until they finally did and gave the touching (or in Day-Lewis’s case hilarious) speech they were always meant to?

The Academy’s stamp of approval suggests to most that something is good and for the most part deserving, but the real gem is something else entirely.  Yet somehow I doubt that every critic who writes about the Oscars for a living would be infinitely happier if “Holy Motors” was the indisputable winner, because a win for a movie like that wouldn’t say as much about this year in movies as “Argo” will.

No, my movie of the year didn’t even get nominated for Best Picture, but I’m prepared to say that no movie deserved to win the Oscar this year more than “Argo.” Continue reading “'Argo' absolutely deserved to win Best Picture”

2013 Oscars: Final Predictions

I just finished watching a Katie Couric special edition of “20/20” in which they talked about everything that makes the Oscars iconic, but none of the reasons why I actually care about the awards. Hearing about Bjork’s swan dress is cute, but I’m in this for the movies.

Every year I come up with elaborate reasons why this year’s winner will mean something. For “The Artist” it was that even a silent, foreign, black and white comedy could win Best Picture and make people interested in a great form of movie history for just a little while. For “The King’s Speech” it was that the love for Old Hollywood was alive and well, even if I was pulling for the generational landmark that would’ve been a victory for “The Social Network.” And for “The Hurt Locker,” it signified a turning point in our view of the campaign in the Middle East, as well as a long denied achievement for women everywhere, which really is something to cheer about.

And yet just as I study every nominee and understand every nuance of the race, all of that is forgotten as quickly as the next year, and the only things that are left are the great movies themselves.

I think this year’s Oscars matter because above all, they will honor a lot of great movies, more than in most years. I may not think “Argo” is the best movie of the year, nor is my pick even nominated, but I think that whatever wins, it will be a victory for quality (except for “Les Miz” obviously).

Here then are my final predictions for what will take home gold on Oscar night. This year has been so exciting, so tumultuous, so long and so controversial that if I have to make one correct prediction, it’s that I will be wrong… possibly a lot.

Argo Ben Affleck

Best Picture

  • Argo
  • Lincoln
  • Silver Linings Playbook
  • Life of Pi
  • Django Unchained
  • Zero Dark Thirty
  • Amour
  • Les Miserables
  • Beasts of the Southern Wild

I don’t think I ever wanted to admit that there was going to be a sure fire winner for Best Picture, and I don’t think I ever could. The “Argo” freight train of success is still relatively fresh news. A lot has happened since it premiered at Telluride back in September, and there was a time just six weeks ago when nominations were announced that it looked to be a dead and gone afterthought. Now it has swept every major guild prize and award in sight, and it is poised to make history no matter what happens. All the comparisons that have been made to explain its victory in the context of past winners will be erased because its victory (or loss) will be completely unprecedented. Pundits will now point to it as the example.

If it wins, it will be because it is a great film, but also because it is an agreeable film that was able to weather the storm of controversy and barrier to entry better than any other.

“Lincoln” hardly seems formidable, and in fact “Life of Pi” or “Silver Linings Playbook” look even stronger with more recent wins in the bag, but it remains an even greater film in my view and is still, on paper, the predictable Oscar winner.

Brian’s Pick: Argo

Dark Horse: Lincoln, followed by Silver Linings Playbook, then Life of Pi

Should Win: Life of Pi Continue reading “2013 Oscars: Final Predictions”

'Argo' and the pretzel logic of Oscar pundits

"Or you could just give all the pundits bicycles and meet them at the Oscars with Gatorade."
“Or you could just give all the pundits bicycles and meet them at the Oscars with Gatorade.”

Now that “Argo” has won the Directors Guild prize, it’s time again to ask the question that every Oscar pundit has been asking for the last two weeks: Is “Argo” more like “Apollo 13” or “Driving Miss Daisy?”

Wait, what?

Oscar pundits have one job, and that’s to make sense of the Oscar race, how the Academy thinks and use statistics combined with unscientific intuition to predict who will actually win.

But this year a curious thing happened in that we actually have a race on our hands. The factors that have led up to where we are now, still three weeks away from the Oscars themselves and even days away from the ballots even being mailed out, have been so numerous and unprecedented that no real front runner has ever really been established.

And because of this, analysts have been wrapping themselves into pretzels desperate to find one. Within minutes of the nominations being announced, I could find you tweets of Sasha Stone claiming this was all sewn up for “Lincoln,” no question. Now just two weeks later, the Oscar race is over yet again with a new contender up front, “Argo.” Continue reading “'Argo' and the pretzel logic of Oscar pundits”