Oscar Predictions 2015 Part II

Now that I've discussed the major awards in Part I, it's time to discuss what many view as the sort of second tier awards. Which really isn't fair--these are all pretty incredible achievements and are just as fascinating to consider and be aware of as the major awards. Although, admittedly, I guess I contribute to their second tier status because I have much less to say about all of these. This time, I'm just going to say who I think WILL win, rather than also always choosing who should win and who should be nominated. Or, in the case of sound mixing, who should not have been nominated.

I'm talking about Interstellar. Interstellar shouldn't have been nominated.

Best Animated Feature Film:
Everyone is still reeling from The Lego Movie not being nominated here, and its exclusion here has certainly left the category wide open. The frontrunner by a hair is currently How to Train Your Dragon 2, but this is hardly secure, and either of the two beautifully crafted indie projects Song of the Sea or The Tale of Princess Kaguya might just gather enough votes to pull an upset win. I personally am keeping my fingers crossed for one of my favorite movies of the year, Big Hero 6 to take the crown. And then there is The Boxtrolls which...is the fifth nominee. It's probably good.

"An...film...I...appreciate...nice"--A.O. Scott, from his review of The Boxtrolls

Will Win: How to Train Your Dragon 2

 Best Foreign Language Film:
This race has two definite frontrunners. At one point, it looked like Ida, from Poland, was the runaway favorite, but in recent months, Russia's entry Leviathan has steadily gained popularity and is now the more likely of the two. Either has a chance, but I'm predicting Leviathan on instinct.
Will Win: Leviathan (Russia)

Best Documentary Feature Film:
The Edward Snowden documentary Citizenfour has been making waves ever since it first premiered and has not lost momentum since. At one point, it faced some competition from the Roger Ebert documentary Life Itself, but with that failing to grab a nomination in a surprise snub, Citizenfour is the far and away favorite.
Will Win: Citizenfour

Best Original Song:
Many months ago, the song "Lost Stars" from the underrated gem Begin Again was once the frontrunner in this category, and it's a really great song. But it has faded from the spotlight and another great song has taken its place as the frontrunner: "Glory" from Selma. Selma's only nomination other than Best Picture, it seems inconceivable that "Glory" will not take home this prize, and it's definitely deserved. "Glory" manages to perfectly tie in the film to present day events--it's a powerful and vibrant song which works both as a song in the context of the film, and as a song in its own right. I can't wait to see it performed during the ceremony. And, it'll be nice for Selma to go home with at least one award given how little attention the Academy paid to it.

But...while I love "Glory" very much, it's actually not my favorite song of this group. That would belong to "I'm Not Gonna Miss You" by Glen Campbell, which comes from a documentary about Campbell, which followed him on his final tour as he battles with the starting effects of Alzheimer's. The song is the last song he'll ever write, and is about his own struggle with this disease. It is heartbreaking, bittersweet, poignant. It's a song that makes you well up when you listen to it. "Glory" is a call to action, but "I'm Not Gonna Miss You" is just as effective as a sweet and emotional heavy ballad. It'll probably be "Glory," but if "I'm Not Gonna Miss You" pulls off a surprise win (which it definitely could) it will certainly be deserved.
Will Win: "Glory" from Selma
Could/Should Win: "I'm Not Gonna Miss You" from Glen Campbell: I'll Be Me

Best Original Score:
Everyone (including me) talks about how the Academy likes to honor those who are overdue. And few are as overdue as the composer Alexandre Desplat, who has been nominated for this award six times before this year. And this year, he is nominated twice, for both The Imitation Game and The Grand Budapest Hotel. Desplat is very likely to win this award, the only question is for which film. And it really is a toss up. I'd give a slight edge to The Grand Budapest Hotel, but we'll see. Of course, the true best score of the year actually belongs to Birdman. Composer Antonio Sanchez's almost entirely percussive score was deemed ineligible for a nomination due to a technicality (read: bullshit) which is a shame because rarely has a score ever so perfectly fit a film. That score is brilliant, and there's really nothing like it. It leaves an impression on you in a way none of the nominated scores do.
Will Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel
Should Have Been Nominated: Birdman 

At Wes Anderson's insistence, the entire score to Grand Budapest was performed by this up-and-coming Portland band.

Best Production Design:
What does "Production Design" mean? It means, basically, the entire look of the film. Production designer oversee the entirety of the art department, and coordinate all of the design aspects. And, of the nominees, the bright and vibrant The Grand Budapest Hotel certainly stands out. Considering how distinct a look Wes Anderson's films always have, the fact that no film of his has ever won this award is pretty shocking--he's overdue. The Grand Budapest Hotel has been his most Oscar-friendly film and, if my predictions are right, it will certainly pay off for Anderson in multiple categories on Sunday.
Will Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Best Cinematography:
Birdman is in the running for a lot of awards, but this is the only one it's actually guaranteed to win. Birdman's cinematographer Emanuel Lubezki won last year for his groundbreaking work on Gravity, and is the clear frontrunner to win again this year. Now, everyone knows I love Birdman and I hope it is showered with awards, but...even with as great as the cinematography was...I am kind of rooting for an upset here. My favorite cinematography this year actually came from Mr. Turner. And not just because I want to hear someone (hopefully John Travolta) say cinematographer Dick Pope's name again. The cinematography is beautiful. Some shots of the film look like they were taken right out of a Turner painting. Birdman will win and its cinematography is certainly worthy, I just wish that it was in a different year so that Mr. Turner could be recognized too.

One of the many spectacular shots from the gorgeous Mr. Turner

Will Win: Birdman
Should Win: Mr. Turner

Best Film Editing:
Those who take these awards show prediction things seriously will often talk about the Best Editing category. Because many claim that winning Best Picture and winning Best Editing go hand in hand. I think the connection is much more tenuous. In this article which talks about the connection it says that "of the 61 films that have won Best Picture Oscars since 1952, 32 have won the editing statuette as well." It says this as if that's a high percentage...but it's actually less than 53%. And in the last ten Oscars, only for of the Best Film Editing winners have also won Best Picture. And some editing winners, like The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Bourne Ultimatum weren't even nominated for Best Picture. so, the connection is not as important to me as it is to some. And I think we're going to see a break in the categories this year too. Of the two films in contention to win Best Picture, Birdman is surprisingly not nominated. And while Boyhood is nominated, this award tends to go to films with a much faster pace which Boyhood definitely lacks. Some are calling this award for Boyhood solely on the basis of its Best Picture frontrunner status, but I just don't see it. I think this award will go to American Sniper or Whiplash. Between the two, I hope it goes to Whiplash. Not just because it's a much better film, but because the editing itself is more impressive. The last scene alone should win this film the Oscar--an impressive ten minute drum solo was edited down from, I believe, 23 hours of footage to make what still looked like a single cohesive performance. And what an exciting performance at that! But, throughout the film, the fact that we believe Miles Teller is a professional drummer is pretty extraordinary, and accomplished almost solidly through editing. Boyhood seems like the odds-on favorite to win, but I just simply don't see it winning over Whiplash in terms of editing.
Will Win: Whiplash

Best Sound Editing:
The frontrunner here is American Sniper. Military films tend to do very well here, so American Sniper definitely seems like the frontrunner. But, there's a chance that Birdman might actually win, especially if the controversy surrounding American Sniper catches up to it and Birdman can ride a goodwill wave to the win. Who really knows, this is kind of an unpredictable category, but for now, the safer bet is American Sniper.
Will Win: American Sniper

Best Sound Mixing:
So, when I posted my reaction to the nominees, I spent a lot of time talking about the sound mixing for Interstellar. And how terrible it is. And...I don't want to go into that right now but let's just say HOLY CRAP THE SOUND MIXING IN INTERSTELLAR SUCKS HOW THE HELL IS IT NOMINATED FOR AN ACADEMY AWARD I'M SO ANGRY!??!?!

So, Interstellar won't win. American Sniper has a chance of winning, but the frontrunner, and the film that SHOULD win is Whiplash. This is a film where sound is front and center. And not just any sound, LOUD sound. Loud sound which is used to actually tell the story. So, sound mixing is crucial--it has to be just present enough. If the drumming is too soft, we won't feel its effect and the stakes won't feel as high. If the drumming is too loud, it gets annoying rather than exciting. Whiplash's sound is balanced perfectly. As much as Interstellar's sound mixing is bad, Whiplash shows how sound mixing should be done.
Will Win: Whiplash
Should Win: Interste...HAHA JUST KIDDING THAT WOULD BE THE FUCKING WORST THING IN THE WORLD

Best Visual Effects:
This is another category that's kind of up in the air. Interstellar is certainly the frontrunner, but Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and Guardians of the Galaxy definitely have a shot here. X-Men: Days of Future Past could make a grab at the win based on that now famous Quicksilver scene alone. The only one I don't see winning is Captain America: The Winter Soldier (although that is a fantastic film overall). Interstellar is the frontrunner, but this category could definitely have an upset. And I'm not just saying that because I hate Interstellar and its shitty sound mixing. I am in the middle of writing a giant blog post outlining why I don't like this movie, so definitely look for that to be posted soon. But, in the meantime, I do grudgingly give it the edge here.

Although, a quick note, while I don't think it would have or should have won this category, I was really hoping that Birdman would get a nomination in this category. Granted, there aren't a lot of visual effects, but there are a few (the giant bird, the fireball, the flying, the moving objects) and all of them are done exceedingly well, and fit seamlessly into the more realism-based world of the film. I was impressed by them, and thought it should have at least gotten some recognition.

Does Interstellar have a giant cyborg bird? That's what I thought.

Will Win: Interstellar
Will Also Win the Miles Purinton for Worst Sound Mixing Ever: Interstellar
Should Have Been Nominated (for Best Visual Effects, not the worst sound mixing thing): Birdman

Costume Design:
The fancy period dress of Mr. Turner is what my gut is telling me here, but so far, the awards seem to be going for The Grand Budapest Hotel. Which would be great. They're bright, colorful, really distinct, and work so perfectly in the world of the film. As beautiful as the costumes in Mr. Turner are, I'd love to see a non-period piece film win this year. So, if everyone's predicting that The Grand Budapest Hotel will win this, I'm more than happy to go along with that.
Will Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Tilda Swinton shows off both the costume design AND the makeup and hairstyling for The Grand Budapest Hotel

Best Makeup and Hairstyling:
This one should really be a no-brainer. Steve Carell has a prosthetic nose, and Tilda Swinton has old-age makeup, but...Guardians of the Galaxy is a movie that, by its design, features much more complete and innovative makeups which are used more prominently throughout the entire film. Consider Drax the Destroyer.

For your consideration

Looking at him, you probably think that his skin is created through some computer effect. Nope. Makeup. It's all makeup. That's impressive. And Oscar-worthy.
Will Win: Guardians of the Galaxy

Best Live Action Short Film:
As always, I highly recommend people seek out the nominated short films if they ever get a chance. It's always a really good selection, and these categories can offer some of the absolute best films the year has to offer. This year, of the Live Action shorts, most things I've read online have given the win to a Northern Irish film called Boogaloo and Graham about two brothers and their pet chickens. It's a cute film, but...I can't see it winning. It just doesn't have the same staying power as some of the other films. Last year, everyone seemed to predicting this win for a film called The Voorman Project and I went against the grain and chose a film called Helium based on instinct, and I'm going to do the same thing again this year. It won't be Boogaloo and Graham. It will, and certainly should, be a film called The Phone Call, a really touching and well-executed film starring Sally Hawkins, and co-starring Jim Broadbent in a voice-over performance. Hawkins is simply incredible--her work in this one film is better than most of the acting nominees in the regular categories. And the film itself is great too. I simply can't imagine it not winning.
Will Win: The Phone Call

Sally Hawkins gives a masterful performance in The Phone Call

Best Animated Short Film:

This category is a lot tougher. The five selections are all very strong, and all for different reasons. Frankly, I could see any one of these films winning. Disney's selection, Feast, has the brand recognition, and is a cute sentimental story, but to me is certainly the most lightweight of the offerings and doesn't really stand up in the lineup of nominees. A Dutch short called A Simple Life, is by far the shortest offering, at only two minutes long, but it's really great, and tells all the story it needs to in those two minutes. You want to watch it over and over again, and it definitely has my favorite premise of the five films. But, its length might work against it. Then there's a film called The Dam Keeper which is beautiful and engaging and tells the most complete and conventional story of the five...but is kind of off-kilter and bizarre (as most films with anthropomorphic animals tend to be) and that might work against it with the generally stuffy Academy. Although it's probably my favorite of the five. If I had to guess which way the Academy will go, I'd guess it will either be Me and My Moulton--a film by animator and director Torill Kove, who adopts a documentary feel not unlike in the movie Persepolis to talk about her time growing up in Norway. It's cute, whimsical, and very well-written. But in terms of animation alone, it pales in comparison to The Bigger Picture, whose animation is actually painted full-size on walls. It's fascinating to watch, and its discussion of grand themes like death and family are certainly relatable. If I had to choose one film, my guess is that The Bigger Picture will win, but really, any of the five have a chance.
Will Win: The Bigger Picture

Animator Daisy Jacobs paints one of the stills that make up The Bigger Picture

Best Documentary Short Subject: 
I did not see these. I was going to, but then I read about them. They all sound very good. But they also all sound very, very depressing. Crisis Hotline: Veterans Press 1 is about the workers at a suicide call center for veterans. White Earth is a movie about how, essentially, the American dream does not exist and how people endanger themselves and their families by taking on dangerous jobs in the oil industry in an attempt to stay above the poverty line. Then there's a film called Joanna about a woman who is diagnosed with cancer and is given three months to live but promises her 5 year-old son she will stay alive as long as she can. If you think that's probably the worst one, then you haven't heard of Our Curse, which is about the parents of an infant who suffers from a rare condition where if the baby falls asleep he dies, so the parents have to be on constant watch in order to ensure their infant does not decide to take a nap and is killed. Lastly, there's a film called The Reaper (La Parka) about a man who works in an animal slaughterhouse which doesn't exactly sound happy but I thought sounded the least immediately depressing...but have since read through reviews that it is the MOST depressing of the lot.

This shot from Our Curse pretty much sums up all of my feelings right now.

I could not see these films in one sitting, I just couldn't do it. I already saw the film Unbroken and don't want to go through another depressing film-viewing experience like that again. So, what will win? I don't know. How about Joanna. That's the one about cancer. That sounds the most Oscary. I guess that's my prediction but really I just don't want to think about this category too much.
Will Win: A really sad movie.
Should Have Been Nominated: A movie about bunnies hopping through a field and eating delicious strawberries and nothing bad happens ever.

And that's every category! What are your thoughts on the nominees and/or on my predictions? Share your own predictions in the comments section, and be sure to watch the Oscars on Sunday, February 22nd!

Oscars 2015: Reaction to the Nominations

The Oscar nominations were announced this morning and, like every year, there were some snubs and surprises. But, I must say, this year felt especially surprising. Considering what a great year it was for film, a lot of the nominees struck me as being generally unimpressive, while far more deserving work was passed over. Not only were the notable omissions surprising, they felt very unjust. When one makes predictions about awards ceremonies, it's important to keep personal opinions out of it or you will always be disappointed. But, nonetheless, a lot of these nominations just feel wrong. So, today, I really feel like a bit of an Oscar grouch.

Pictured: me right now

As the Oscars draw closer (they air on February 22^nd) I will offer a more in-depth analysis and make predictions in all of the categories, but for now, here are my first thoughts on today’s nominations. You can find the whole list of nominees here.

BEST PICTURE:

Every year the Oscars has a couple of wildcard films that might break their way into the field. This year, it was American Sniper, which had a slow start in terms of building awards buzz due to a very late release, but started doing well at the later guild awards. It proved to be the major surprise this year. I had not predicted it to be a best picture nominee but after it started picking up a bunch of technical awards, it became clear it was going to be on the list. And it beat out deserving contenders like Foxcatcher, Gone Girl, and Nightcrawler. Nightcrawler had only an outside chance of making it so I’m not too surprised by this, but Gone Girl was seen as a definite contender and got snubbed not just here, but in multiple categories. The worst snub for me, though, was the absence of Foxcatcher because is actually did perform well with the nominations. It picked up two acting nominations, a directing nomination, and a screenplay nomination (and, with the exception of Mark Ruffalo’s nomination, none of those were guaranteed). So, when all of these elements are so strong, how is the film not recognized as a best picture of the year? On the plus side, Selma got a nomination, which I was starting to think would not happen seeing as how it got snubbed in every other category other than Best Song. I’m also glad to see Whiplash, once seen as a long shot in this category, get recognized. That’s the type of film that makes a case for having the extended field of Best Picture nominees—a really great movie that otherwise might not have gotten recognition. Also, we can pretty much just agree now that Boyhood is going to win Best Picture, right? It's pretty much guaranteed at this point, and it is certainly worthy of the trophy.

DIRECTOR:

I’m glad to see Wes Anderson get his first ever director nomination for The Grand Budapest Hotel. And Richard Linklater and Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu are, deservedly, the frontrunners to take home this award. But the other two nominations were surprising. I for one am really glad that Bennett Miller got recognized for Foxcatcher—he does such amazing work, especially with his ensemble. But the other award leaves me scratching my head. Morten Tyldum for The Imitation Game? Really? What about that directing was extraordinary? Like everything about that movie, it was decidedly good to average, and his inclusion here over the more deserving contenders like Ava DuVernay and David Fincher is frustrating.

ACTOR:

My shock at the warm reception for American Sniper continues here. With such a competitive category, Bradley Cooper is a definite upset, beating out much more deserving candidates such as David Oyelowo, Ralph Fiennes, Timothy Spall, and Jake Gyllenhaal. Especially Jake Gyllenhaal. After being nominated for pretty much every other award out there, how does Gyllenhaal, who gave by far one of the best performances of the year, not get the Oscar nomination he so richly deserved?

ACTRESS:

The big surprise here is the always deserving Marion Cotillard, who delivers what is supposed to be an incredible performance in Two Days, One Night, but who has been mostly out of the running at most major Oscar ceremonies. Who did she beat out? Jennifer Aniston for Cake. Was Aniston ever a real contender to win? No. Everyone’s going to lose to Julianne Moore. But Aniston really did deserve it with a career-defining performance. I’d hoped to see her work recognized, and after all of her accolades up until now, it’s surprising that it is not.

SUPPORTING ACTOR:

No huge surprises here, but…Robert Duvall for The Judge? Really? I mean, he has gotten a bunch of nominations for this, including a SAG and Golden Globe nomination, but…really? The Judge is so generic and his performance so solid but ordinary that a nomination for Duvall honestly seemed unlikely to me. I thought he’d be bested by Josh Brolin for Inherent Vice, but no. Duvall is probably the most surprising not surprising nomination this year.

SUPPORTING ACTRESS:

Patricia Arquette, Keira Knightley, Emma Stone, and Meryl Streep were all locks. But with a fifth nomination up in the air, everyone wondered who would sneak in! Would it be Jessica Chastain for A Most Violent Year? How about Naomi Watts for St. Vincent? It even looked like longshot Tilda Swinton, who gave what I thought was the best performance of the year in Snowpiercer would actually make it into the running. But, no. The fifth nomination went to Laura Dern for Wild. Dern is undeniably a talented actress, but her role in Wild is…I don’t know. Her nomination feels mostly settled on rather than earned. Like when Mitt Romney got the Republican presidential nomination in 2012.

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY:

These are good nominees. I like these nominees. Good job, Oscars. You did a good. I am still mad at you, but, for this category at least, you did a very good. Nightcrawler gets its only nomination here and, while it deserved more, at least its something.

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:

The huge upset here is Gone Girl, which I thought had a shot at outright winning this category. The screenplay was masterful and, in what was widely considered a fairly weak field to choose from, its snub here is especially shameful. Especially over a group of fairly unimpressive nominees, seemingly chosen for the film’s overall prestige as opposed to actual writing talent. I wasn’t nuts about Inherent Vice or its screenplay, but can certainly understand why it was nominated based on ambition alone. I’m hoping Whiplash pulls off a win—after a strange decision by the academy to classify it as an adapted screenplay instead of an original one, it stands out as by far the most deserving of these candidates.

ANIMATED FEATURE FILM:

Oh wow. Oh wow wow wow. This is probably the biggest upset of the day with The Lego Movie failing to get a nomination. I’m pretty sure everyone is scratching their heads over this one. But it does blow the field wide open. Instead of The Lego Movie, the academy honored three films from smaller, independent studios—The Boxtrolls, Song of the Sea and Studio Ghibli’s The Tale of Princess Kaguya. The award will probably go to one of the higher-profile competitors. How to Train Your Dragon 2 and Big Hero 6 are worthy frontrunners.

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE FILM:

Often one of the most difficult categories to predict, it’s hard to be too surprised by anything…but it is nonetheless surprising that the film about Roger Ebert, Life Itself, which was very well-received and beloved by the film community, failed to make it. Look for Edward Snowden doc CitizenFour to take home the title.

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM:

Not much to say about these—the biggest snub in this category is the Belgian film Two Days, One Night for which Marion Cotillard got an acting nomination, BUT that film was snubbed a while ago when it failed to even make the shortlist for the nominations. The winner will be either Poland’s Ida or Russia’s Leviathan.

CINEMATOGRAPHY:

Not much to say here. Some great choices, really. I’m glad Mr. Turner got nominated. That was some gorgeous cinematography, to be sure.

COSTUME DESIGN:

This is a neat category for me as it features some really creative costumes, in a category that typically goes to those who simply make the best period piece costumes. Even the two period pieces had some really interesting things going on—Inherent Vice’s biggest success was that it really captured an era and the costumes were a big part of that. And while Mr. Turner had the standard “gorgeous period piece costumes” there was a lot more quirkiness going on than in most. It’ll be interesting to see which route the academy goes down in terms of actual voting—will the showboaty pieces of Into the Woods and Maleficent  win out over the more realistic—but still pretty wacky—costumes of the other nominees? Time will tell.

SCORE:

The biggest surprise here is that the spooky underscoring from Gone Girl’s Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross—who previously won in this category for The Social Network—fails to score a nomination. Once again, Gone Girl gets snubbed. But the snub that hurts me most is Antonio Sanchez not getting recognized for his percussive score for Birdman, which was very distinct, unique, and which served the film beautifully. Compare that to the very nice, but pretty typical scores you find in Mr. Turner and The Theory of Everything and it’s clear to me which score is more truly original.

SONG:

While the songs “Grateful” and “I’m Not Going to Miss You” were not expected, the other three nominees were the big ones that everyone was ready to see announced. So, there are no huge surprises in this category. I love Begin Again, and the tune “Lost Stars” is lovely, but look for Selma’s powerful closing anthem “Glory” to be the frontrunner on Oscar night.

FILM EDITING:

I’m at a loss as to how Birdman was not nominated here, considering that the editing work convincingly made the film seem like a single take. How does that not get recognition? In a just world, this award will go to Whiplash for its final scene alone—an epic, nine minute drum solo that was cut together from, I believe, 23 hours of footage.

SOUND EDITING:

I don’t really know much about sound editing. So I default to wanting Birdman to win because I want Birdman to win most awards. I’m sure that the producers of Unbroken—once seen as a legitimate Oscar contender and potential Best Picture nominee, are glad that their film walks away with a sound editing nomination.

SOUND MIXING:

THIS CATEGORY ENRAGES ME. HOW. THE. FUCK. DID. INTERSTELLAR. GET. A NOMINATION. FOR SOUND MIXING. A LOT OF PEOPLE DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT SOUND MIXING IS. WELL, YOU KNOW HOW IN MOST FILMS, YOU CAN HEAR THE ACTORS TALK OVER THE BACKGROUND NOISE? THAT’S DUE TO SOUND MIXING. THAT IS, IN FACT, SOUND MIXING 101. AND INTERSTELLAR FAILED MISERABLY. And I’m not the only one who thinks so. The film has been widely criticized for its atrocious sound mixing (enough so that Christopher Nolan had to actually make a statement to clarify that the sound mixing job was not a mistake). Its nomination here is appalling—for me, of all the disappointing surprises at this morning’s nomination, this one is by far the worst. While Gyllenhaal, for example, deserved a nomination, I wouldn’t say those that were nominated instead of him are undeserving. Here, with Interstellar’s sound mixing nomination, actively bad work is being rewarded. And that is horrifying to me. Fuck you, Academy. Seriously. I hated the movie. But even if I had liked it, the sound mixing would have been terrible. That is, simply, a fact.

I’m really angry about this.

MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING:

The shortest list of nominees on this list, there weren’t any super big makeup jobs this year apparently. Steve Carell’s prosthetic nose and Tilda Swinton’s old age makeup will probably ultimately lose out to The Guardians of the Galaxy. You know Drax the Destroyer? No CGI. That look was all makeup. You know Groot? Not animation, that was all makeup. Okay, that one was a lie.

VISUAL EFFECTS:

The award for which film makes the biggest explosions is thankfully free of Michael Bay this year and showcases the above-average offering of big blockbuster films. Which is why I’m sad that Interstellar will probably beat out the other, good films which are nominated here. I know the effects were good, but…I just really hated the movie. And you know what else I hated? THE SOUND MIXING IN THAT MOVIE?! HOW THE FUCK WAS THAT NOMINATED?! I’M STILL NOT OVER IT!

PRODUCTION DESIGN:

The sophisticated sounding award for “which film looks the best” offers us an interesting array of nominees this year. The pretty period piece look for The Imitation Game versus the much darker and surreal period piece look for Mr. Turner. The whimsical signaturely Wes Anderson look of The Grand Budapest Hotel versus the grand, dark, fairy tale world of Into the Woods. And then there’s the poorly mixed sound look of Interstellar.

BEST ANIMATED SHORT, BEST LIVE ACTION SHORT, AND BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT:

I love the short films. These are highly competitive awards and, every year, offer some pretty outstanding nominees. Now that the nominees have been announced, see if you can find a chance to view these films (for my fellow New York residents, the IFC Center offers screenings of all the Oscar-nominated shorts every year). The only well-known nominee this year is the animated short film Feast, which preceded Big Hero 6. It was good—very sweet, but I will admit I wasn’t blown away by it as many were. I’m excited to see what the other nominees have to offer and I hope that you are too.

And those are all of the categories! One last thing, I was very pleased with how the nominees were announced. Most years, they only announce a few major categories (best picture, best director, the acting categories, etc.) and then release the rest of the nominations online. But for the first time, they actually announced all 24 categories this year. And I think it’s about time. Every category is important, and every category is there to honor outstanding work in the field of film. And I’m glad that sound editing, for example, was given the same revered treatment as best picture.

Share your thoughts on the nominations below! Which nomination pleased you? Which nomination/snub pissed you off the most?

The correct answer is Interstellar's nomination for sound mixing. And before you ask, yes, I am already doing a writeup on why I hate Interstellar so much. Stay tuned, and get pumped.

On a personal note, it's exciting to announce that I started this blog pretty much one year ago-- the first post here was my reaction to LAST year's Oscar nominees. Thanks to those who have read and enjoyed the blog! There are many more cinematic and other cultural endeavors to come!

BEST FILMS OF 2014--#5: "The Grand Budapest Hotel" Brings the Evolution of Wes Anderson's Filmography Into Darker Territory

This is the seventh in a series of eleven posts counting down my favorite films of the year. Be sure to read about my #6 pick, #7 pick, #8 pick, #9 pick, #10 pick,  #11 pick, and about the honorable mentions too.

Is...is that Owen Wilson? In a Wes Anderson film? Who would have guessed?!

There is nobody in film doing quite what Wes Anderson is doing. Not even considering his smart and quirky scripts, Anderson’s inimitable visual style makes him one of the most daring filmmakers out there. While his work is certainly divisive, and some projects succeed better than others (I know most consider it among his best work, but The Royal Tenenbaums really falls flat for me), you can always count on Anderson to do something interesting and charming. He’s a visionary in every sense of the word. And if you’re not a fan of Anderson, I’d ask that you consider how few times you could see a still shot from a film and identify exactly who the director is. Wes Anderson certainly would fall into that category.

But despite my love of Wes Anderson, I must admit I felt some trepidation when I first saw the trailer for The Grand Budapest Hotel. It just looked...so aggressively like Wes Anderson: The Movie. The bright, symmetrical shots, and wide array of cameos made the film look like it would be a rather annoying form of self-flattery. I was still curious to see it, but I worried. What if Anderson got complacent? No matter how unusual his visual style, seeing it over and over again would cause some major diminishing returns. So, I went into The Grand Budapest Hotel thinking I would enjoy it but that it would be exactly what I’ve seen from Wes Anderson before.

One of the trademark quirky and composed shots that Anderson is known for.

And I bet that’s exactly what he wanted his audience to think. Because it made it all the more surprising and satisfying to see Anderson delve into darker territory. This film feels very different from what we've seen of Wes Anderson before, but in a way that still feels true to its creator. It feels like the film Anderson has always been trying to create--perhaps the film of his that best represents him so far. Seeing Anderson try new things is exciting to me, and shows that innovation does not have a limit--and the darker territories Wes Anderson brings The Grand Budapest Hotel into serve only to enhance what we already know he does so well.

This summer, Wes Anderson brings you: Pastels Are the New Black

This is not to say that Anderson's work has not always been dark. As quirky as Anderson makes his characters, they tend to be sad and angry, or at the very least confused about their place in the world at large. But, that's what makes his characters realistic. The colorful world in which these characters live ends up elevating their more real flaws into charming territory. The common level of thinking is that his films are cutesy, as evidenced by this brilliant SNL parody of what it would look like if Wes Anderson directed a horror film (which, I would totally watch). And The Grand Budapest Hotel certainly fits this description. And yet, it has moments which are decidedly un-cutesy. At one point a cat is thrown out a window and shown splattered on the ground. At one point, a characters fingers are chopped off and shown falling to the ground. At one point we see a character's severed head. At one point a prisoner goes on a rampage and murders about five people with a knife. These are moments one would expect more from Saw than from Wes Anderson, and the effect is striking. After all, they're still shot in the beautiful and colorful world of Wes Anderson. They're moments you can't believe are happening in front of you, which makes them stand out. These moments of the grotesque are absolutely mesmerizing--they feel like they should be so out of place and yet work so perfectly. If anything, the over-the-top violence adds to the cartoony aesthetic.

I didn't feel like including a picture of a severed head, so here are Gustave and Zero carrying some cakes!

Wes Anderson's style is, in some ways, personified by The Grand Budapest Hotel's main subject: Monsieur Gustave H., played by Ralph Fiennes. Gustave, the concierge of the titular hotel, and is fascinating to watch. We only ever see Gustave as he was perceived by his protege, a lobby boy named Zero (newcomer Tony Revolori) and, as such, we only ever see him at work. And he takes his work very seriously--putting on various charming airs in an impression to please. He subsists on a series of manufactured eccentricities--he often recites long passages of poetry, he wears copious amounts of one specific brand of perfume, and always speaks with a certain practiced flair. It is never clear why he acts in such an ostentatious way--we learn very little about his background, and it is generally unclear how much of his behavior is real and how much is a facade. Either way, Fiennes makes all of Monsieur Gustave's eccentricities feel incredibly natural, as if this is how all people act. It's a simply wonderful performance--full of charm, but hinting at a more meaningful core.

Ralph Fiennes in his wonderful performance as Monsieur Gustave H.

He is a man of values, and a person who follows his own slate of ethics as he defines them. Gustave is incredibly vain, arrogant, and selfish, yes, but we see he does have a good heart and cares deeply about those around him. Gustave sleeps with old wealthy women, in what seems to be partly for monetary gain, but he is still shown to care about these women all the same. He draws attention to himself shamelessly, and yet he takes every opportunity to thank those around him. Despite all of his  strange behavioral quirks, his defining characteristic is that of kindness. A police officer (Edward Norton) recalls staying at the Grand Budapest as a child and can still remember Gustave's kindness. During the most adorable prison break scene in movie history (this is, after all, Wes Anderson) Gustave takes time out of his escape to thank a prisoner who assists them. And, of course, there's Zero. The relationship between them is lovely, and it is immediately apparent that both will do anything for one another. They share a kindred spirit. When we find out that Zero lost his entire family early in life, one gets a sense that Gustave must have suffered a similar tragedy (which would explain his mysterious past). Much like Wes Anderson's filmography as a whole, Gustave covers his entire being with bells and whistles and other odd things, but those do not define him. What defines him is his tremendous heart and sense of goodness.

Zero and Agatha, OTP

Gustave is, of course, not the only memorable character in the film. There's Agatha, a young baker played by Saoirse Ronan, pictured above, who is Zero's fiancee, who serves as the voice of reason and clearest moral compass in the film. There's a series of fellow hotel concierges who, with Gustave, form a secret order called The Society of Crossed Keys, who only appear briefly and yet feel like they come pre-packaged with rich backstories. There's Deputy Vilmos Kovacs, an attorney played by Jeff Goldblum who admirably serves as one of the least wacky characters in the film.

Jeff Goldblum: inexplicably he most normal actor in this movie.

But the film is perhaps most intriguing in its use of villains, who employ absolutely no subtletly whatsoever. There's Dmitri Desgoffe und Taxis, played by Adrien Brody, as a villainous man who accuses Gustave for the murder of his wealthy aunt. And then there's J.G. Jopling, an assassin and cohort of Dmitri's played with chilling menace by Willem Dafoe. While there are protagonists and antagonists in Wes Anderson films, Dmitri and Jopling are the first examples of pure evil that he has ever put to screen, and it is not a coincidence that Jopling is to blame for most of the film's most grotesque moments. They are villains of the Dick Dastardly variety--evil just because it is their nature (the only exception I can think of would be the villains in The Fantastic Mr. Fox, which is also his only adapted work). Antagonists in Wes Anderson films tend to just generally asshole-ish, but these villains are legitimately unsettling. And they are unnerving because they feel so out of place. They are like a disease spreading throughout the colorful world of Anderson and bring a necessary danger to the movie that has been missing in his previous works.

Dmitri, front and center. You can see Jopling lurking most evilly in the back.

Anderson's films tend to focus primarily on simpler stories--while complex thematic ideas are often discussed, the stakes themselves are usually small-scale and personal to the individual protagonists. But, again, Anderson departs from his usual comfort zone with The Grand Budapest Hotel. This time, it feels like an epic, and it takes us on a series of, fittingly, grand adventures in a variety of colorful locations. The stakes, too, are higher. Set against the backdrop of a war that is coming to a head, Zero and Gustave must think of people other than themselves-- a first for Wes Anderson main characters. Zero, for example, thinks of his darling Agatha, who he puts in terrible danger, often inadvertently. Gustave has to think about Zero, but also has to think about the hotel, which constitutes a character in and of itself. With higher stakes, The Grand Budapest Hotel is not only Anderson's most exciting film, but the one that is most focused on story. Anderson's films tend to act as remarkable character studies and, as seen by Fiennes' portrayal of Gustave, this one is as well. But for the first time, Anderson puts the actual act of storytelling first and foremost. The film is, in fact, a love letter to the very idea of storytelling. 

Jude Law as the young author, staying at the Grand Budapest Hotel.

If he had wanted to, Anderson could have simply made a film about Gustave and Zero. But he doesn't. He makes it a story within a book within a film. The film actually takes place in present day, as a young woman reads from a book called "The Grand Budapest Hotel" in front of the grave of its author (Tom Wilkinson). The author, meanwhile, also does not simply tell the story of Gustave, but instead tells the story of how he went to the hotel as a young man (played by Jude Law) and heard Gustave's story from a Mister Moustafa (F. Murray Abraham) who is, himself, Zero grown up. So, the film is the story of the woman reading the story of the author who heard the story from Zero who tells him the story of Gustave. If this sounds convoluted, that's because it is. But it makes a little more sense seeing these levels of storytelling play out on film, and is integral to the film's success. Why else would Anderson have included this convention at all, or drawn attention to it by casting someone like Tom Wilkinson to have only a few seconds of screentime? But the idea, to me, was clear. After the events of the film, Zero grows old and only passes this story onto the author much later in his life. The author does not write the book until later in his life either. And the young woman does not read the story until after the author is already dead. So, what's the point? that the story lives on. Wes Anderson's style is not without substance--he makes his film look like a storybook because that's what he wants them to be. That his filmmaking breaks the fourth wall, or that uses obviously composed shots that are arranged more for artistic merit or realism, or that he uses lighting shifts more reminiscent of live theatre than film is meant to draw our attention to the filmmaking, because Anderson never wants us to forget that he is telling us a story. Gustave and the colorful cast that supports him are forever immortalized, both in the film and by the film. 

F. Murray Abraham as a grown-up Zero, sitting in the now rundown Grand Budapest Hotel.

The Grand Budapest Hotel is speaking to the power that stories can have-- that they travel from person to person and can touch so many lives simply in their telling. When the author makes his trip to the Grand Budapest Hotel and speaks with Mister Moustafa, the hotel is falling apart. The new concierge (Jason Schwartzman) lacks all of the special care that Gustave gave to it. The splendor has worn off. But because of the stories Zero tells, the glory the hotel once held can live on. And because of the stories Wes Anderson tells, the wonderful world that exists in his mind can be shared by audiences forever. The Grand Budapest Hotel--both the hotel and the film--will never go out of style.

I really liked this image but didn't have anywhere to put it in the write-up. So...you get it here. Deal with it.