Jason writes and obligatory Oscar post

I remember back when I had more time to do this. Anyway, here it is Oscar morning and I haven't announced my picks. To start out with, here are the Oscar nominated movies I have not seen, not even on DVD or illegal download:

August Rush--nominated for best song. I missed it in the theaters, and it's not out on DVD yet. I suppose I could find a download, but a) I don't like doing that, and b) it's too late anyway. Besides, it's just best song, so I could hear it during the ceremony and make my call then.

Norbit--nominated for best makeup. No way! No fucking way!

The Contenders, Beaufort, Mongol, Katyn, and 12--all the foreign nominees. The industry has been particularly bad about making these unavailable for the general public this year. This are the only misses that really bother me. Beaufort will play at Cinequest in a week. The Contenders is out in limited release now. The other three, I have no idea. I especially want to see Mongol. Whatever

War/Dance--I could've seen this at the Kabuki during the free slate of Oscar docs. But I missed it. Oops.

Funny thing is, by Monday morning I won't give a crap about any of these movies. Is it insanity if I do the same thing every year and already know it won't mean a thing?

So that means I saw quite a lot of nominees. In my last three posts I quickly did all the shorts (docs, animated, and live-action). So here's my quick take at the rest:

Best Actor: I'm very happy Johnny Depp got nominated, but he hasn't a chance (and he doesn't care). When Tommy Lee Jones was nominated for In the Valley of Elah, I was confused as to why he wasn't nominated for No Country for Old Men. Then I watched Elah, and he's awesome in it. George Clooney hasn't a chance. It's gonna be Daniel Day-Lewis, for screaming his way through There Will Be Blood, but I'd be happier with it going to either Tommy Lee Jones or Viggo Mortensen.

Best Actress: Cate Blanchett gets one of her two nominations for reprising her role as Queen Elizabeth. Whatever. There are a lot of great performances in this category. If enough people saw it, Marion Cotillard will probably win for La Vie En Rose, but my heart is going with Ellen Page as Juno.

Supporting Actor: It's appropriate that Casey Affleck was nominated as a supporting actor. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, is more about Robert Ford (Affleck), then Jesse James (Brad Pitt), but just like in real life Robert Ford gets second billing. I loved Philip Seymour Hoffman in Charlie Wilson's War. But really it's a waste of time to debate this. Javier Bardem has this locked up for No Country for Old Men.

Supporting Actress: Cate Blanchett gets nominated in a male role, while notoriously androgynous Tilda Swinton also picks up a nomination. This means nothing, except they're both great actresses and almost interchangeable in my mind. Cate Blanchett wins.

Original Screenplay: This might be the one Oscar Michael Clayton will win. I liked the movie, and am happy it got nominated, but I don't see it competing much. In fact, I don't even see it winning this category. I'm pulling for Juno. Should I be disturbed that I'm such a fan of a movie about a pregnant teenager?

Adapted Screenplay: This is a very, very strong category. Hard to make a call here. With that said, why wasn't Into the Wild nominated? I'm pulling for There Will Be Blood, but I think No Country for Old Men will win. This will be a theme of the night, I think.

Cinematography: Again, why no Into the Wild? Jesse James and No Country have cinematography by god. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly use the cinematography to great effect to put you in the eyes of a man who's body no longer works, but it's also painful and frustrating to watch. I'm going for There Will Be Blood.

Editing: What the heck is the uber-shaky Bourne Ultimatum doing here? That's f'ed up, man! I'm going for No Country for Old Men here.

Art Direction: Okay, now we're getting into the categories I don't really know much about. But why isn't Across the Universe in here? For all it's flaws, it looked beautiful. Maybe people aren't going for over the top this year? But then, I'm casting my vote (not that I have one) for Sweeney Todd.

Costume Design: And Across the Universe is in here...okay. Again, I don't care so I'll just vote for the movie I preferred--Sweeney Todd.

Makeup: This category should be abolished, retroactively. Not that I don't appreciate the hard work of makeup artists, but I don't want to live in a world where Norbit is an Oscar nominee. There should be a global veto rule, where the Academy president can eliminate a category for one year if utter crap is nominated. I'm not making a call here.

Best Score: If you notice the score, it failed. Atonement is the only one I noticed. So it'll probably win (yay typewriters as musical instruments!)

Best Song: Way to split the vote, Enchanted. As I said, I haven't seen August Rush so I can't actually make a call. Still, I'm calling Once, because Enchanted annoyed me so much.

Sound: No clue, how about No Country For Old Men.

Sound Editing: What, exactly, is the difference? I'll go with There Will Be Blood.

Visual Effects: You can thank the best makeup award for keeping this category from being the biggest crap-fest of the Oscars. Still, it's close. Of the three, I'll go for Pirates.

Animated Film: I have a love/hate relationship with this category. I love that animation is recognized, but I hate that it's ghetto-ized. Persepolis can stand with any of the best picture nominees, and it's obviously my choice. Ratatouille is also good, but Surf's Up? I mean, it wasn't awful, but one of the best three animated films of the year? What about The Simpsons Movie? Or Paprika? Whatever.

Foreign Language Film: Fuck that Academy and the rules that incentivize distributors to not release these films to the general public. You see, unlike other categories you can only vote for this if you've seen them all. They hold special Academy screenings, but if you have a film that might only appeal to the people who make it to those screenings, you're better off not letting everyone else see it.

Documentary Feature: I haven't seen War/Dance, but I'm voting for Taxi to the Dark Side. But Sicko will probably win.

Best Director/Best Picture: I don't know why there's ever a split here. I wouldn't know how to justify splitting my vote. In any case, both of these come down to No Country For Old Men or There Will Be Blood for me. I think No Country will win, but Blood should win.

And that's my obligatory Oscar post. In about 4.5 hours, I'll see how well I did. Cheers!

Jason watches all the Oscar Nominated Live-Action Shorts

Here we go:

"Om Natten (At Night)"--A Danish film about chicks with cancer. It went on forever. I don't know the cutoff for "short" films, but this clocked in at just under 40 minutes, and by the end I couldn't wait for them to die. This is just the sort of thing the Academy is likely to pick.

"Il Supplente (The Substitute)"--My choice for the Oscar. A crazy substitute teacher really shakes up the class. Just my sense of humor, and a nice message about keeping a child-like sense of fun.

"Tanghi Argentini"--A nerdy guy strikes up an internet romance around tango. Problem is, he can't really dance, so he gets his lonely co-worker to teach him. A very good movie.

"Le Mozart des Pickpockets (The Mozart of Pickpockets)"--Two not-too-bright pickpockets happen upon some great luck in the form of a little mute orphan who's truly gifted at thievery. Wacky hijinx ensue.

"The Tonto Woman"--This is my second choice for the Oscar. Based on a story by Elmore Leonard, it's about a cattle-rustling drifter, a rich rancher, and the rancher's wife. She was kidnapped by Indians, and rescued only after being tattooed in her face. The rancher keeps her hidden in a house out in the prairie. But the rustler finds her beautiful, cleans up, and tries to woo her. A showdown ensues. Very nicely done.

Jason watches all the Oscar Nominated Animated Shorts

Thanks to the Landmark Theaters and Magnolia pictures for putting on this program. Here we go:

"Même les Pigeons vont au Paradis (Even Pigeons Go To Heaven)"--this is my choice, a funny French computer-animated flick about an old man and a huckster who sells a machine that will fly him to heaven.

Here are the other ones, quickly:

"My Love (Moya Lyubov)"--A Russian boy in the 19th century, he's looking for love and finds himself pulled into a class-system love triangle.

"Madame Tutli-Putli"--From Canada, the computer-animated story of a timid woman on a big scary train.

"Peter and the Wolf"--A classic, well-known story. Classic, well-known music. Rendered with a great sense of humor.

"I Met the Walrus"--My other favorite of the set. When he was 14, Jerry Levitan interviewed John Lennon with his old reel-to-reel tape recorder. Now that interview, with all the humor and insight, is set to animation, in funny and surprising ways.

Jason watches all the Oscar Nominated Documentary Shorts

Thanks to the SF Documentary Film Institute and the Kabuki Theaters for showing all the Oscar nominated short and feature-length documentaries over three days (ensuring everything shows both as a matinée and an evening screening), and for free! You just have to reserve your seats early, and you can only do that in person at the box office, not online.

Anyway, I only had time for the shorts program, but it was pretty cool, and there was one filmmaker there; Amanda Micheli, director of "La Corona". Her film was first, and followed the competition behind a beauty pageant in Columbia. Specifically, a beauty pageant in a women's prison in Columbia. It's an interesting story, but the inmates put it together themselves and it's a break in the dreary routine of prison. A fascinating character driven documentary, with no real agenda other than introducing us to some interesting people (for example, there's no judgment on why they're in prison or whether the beauty pageant is a good or bad thing). Here's a pic of Amanda Micheli:

At the Q&A, she revealed she also made the feature "Double Dare" about stuntwomen (especially Zoe Bell), which is one of my favorite documentaries. So I'm now declaring her a great documentarian, definitely someone to watch, and I'm rooting for her at the Oscars.

There were also three competing films. Here they are:

"Salim Baba"--a film very much about film. Salim Muhammad owns an ancient (1897) hand-cranked film projector, and lets his neighbors in the slums of Kolkata, India view little scraps of film in it. He could be rich if he sold the thing to a collector, but it's his prized possession and the only way most of his neighbors could ever see any film. So he holds on to it.

"Sari's Mother"--Sari is a ten year old Iraqi boy. Sari has AIDS. It's hard enough getting treatment there, and the American occupation has only made things worse. Very, very sad.

"Freeheld"--If "La Corona" doesn't win, I sure hope this does. In New Jersey, each county is administered by a council of "freeholders". The state has granted every county the right to decide whether or not employee health benefits extend to same-sex partners. Many counties have decided yes. But Ocean County has said no. That's a pity for Laurel Hester, a long-serving police detective who's now dying of cancer. Her story galvanizes the community so that every freeholder meeting is full of protesters demanding they change their policy. Even when neighboring counties change their policy based on her story, they still hold firm. They're slammed every day in the press, and finally a call from the governor sets them on the right path. It's an emotional race against death.

Jason watches "The Savages"

So now all the Oscar nominees I haven't seen are not in theaters (the shorts are playing Feb. 15-21 at the Landmark Shattuck and Embarcadero). The documentaries usually play as a free screening at the Balboa if I can make it. The foreign films are looking pretty impossible to see as anything other than an illegal download. And there's still no fucking way I'm watching "Norbit".

Anyway, as for "The Savages", the trailers for this movie inaccurately play up the comedy elements. Really it's a very serious drama about taking care of a parent in the last stages of their lives. Particularly, a single father who for some not-quite-specified reason didn't do a good job raising his son (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and daughter (Best Actress nominee Laura Linney), and so they're both too screwed-up and selfish to do a good job taking care of him. It's a little painful to watch at times. At least, if you try to sympathize with any of the characters it can be. But it's got some excellent acting and writing, and all in all a well made movie.

Jason watches "Persepolis"

And I'll tell you, "Teeth" and "Persepolis" makes a pretty weird double feature. I probably should have seen them in the other order.

Anyway, "Persepolis" is a fine movie and it would've been an insult if it hadn't been nominated for the best animated feature Oscar. In fact, it probably has a great chance of winning. I liked the clean, simple lines of the animation. Hell, I liked the fact that it's hand drawn instead of computer animated. Other countries still do that. Just like other countries tell intelligent, adult stories in animation, instead of just kid's stuff. "Persepolis" is the autobiography of director Marjane Satrapi, who was a little girl in Iran during the revolution. She was a precocious and outspoken girl, proud of her uncle (who had been imprisoned by the Shah, and after a bit of freedom, executed by the new regime) and her kind, witty, outspoken grandmother. She has a number of run-ins with the morality police and leaves to study in Europe for a while. But she's miserable there and almost dies of bronchitis. She returns to Iran, but she's a stranger in her own country now. Eventually she moves to France and told her story, first as a graphic novel and now as this movie. It's a beautiful little story that gives you a personal view into Iran that's very different from what we see on the news. Yeah, there's some fucked up things going on, but the ordinary people don't really want it. There are some jerks in power now, but that's not really the soul of the country (same can be said for us).

Jason watches "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"

And as a result, I've now seen every best director Oscar nominee.

Many people have written great things about this movie, so I'll keep this brief. It's an amazing true story, about a man who suffers a stroke and "locked-in" syndrome. He can only move one eye, but dictates an entire book by blinking. His assistant recites the alphabet, and he blinks at the letter he wants (if nothing else, you should learn the French alphabet by watching this movie). It's a gutsy decision to shoot a lot of the movie (especially the beginning parts) from his point of view (an immobile guy who can't even focus well). In fact, it's pretty frustrating for a while, and I found myself hoping the whole movie wouldn't be like that. Fortunately, it isn't. But then I started missing his interior monologue, which is possibly the best part of the movie.

All in all, it feels like a very good semi-experimental festival film (i.e., a little pretentious, but more or less deserving of its self-praise) that somehow made it into a general release. I felt somewhat the same way about "Atonement". I wonder if that's a real trend.

Jason glances at the Oscar nominees

Every year I do the same thing--when the Oscar nominees are announced, I try to see as many of the nominees as I can, then after the ceremony, I don't give a damn anymore (my other tradition is drinking my way through the ceremony and passing out for the second half).

Anyway, my first reaction was that I have to go see "Atonement" now. Done, see my previous post. Now "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" is at the top of my list.

However, I can guarantee I won't see every nominee. Chances are the foreign pictures will be impossible anyway, but even if I get everything else there's no fucking way in hell I will ever see "Norbit" (nominated for makeup)! You can't make, and I hate you for even suggesting it! I'm saddened to even live in a world where "Norbit" can advertise as an Oscar nominated film.

I will, however, see "The Bourne Ultimatum" on DVD. I liked the first Bourne movie, mostly because it was one of the few recent action movies that didn't use too much shaky-cam. I could actually see what was going on, hooray! And it was relatively smart for an action film. The second one still had a clever enough plot, but the action scenes drove me bonkers with the shaky-cam. I heard from a trusted friend that the third was likewise shaky, so I skipped it. But I'll give it a chance on DVD.

I'm very happy to see "Juno" get a Best Picture nod. Ditto for Ellen Page. This movie is keeping form as this year's "Little Miss Sunshine" (which was the last highly touted indie-hipster comedy that I actually liked).

Categories in which I've seen all the nominees (now that I've seen "Atonement"): Best Picture, Supporting Actress (BTW, I love Cate Blanchett getting a nomination for a male role), Art Direction, Score, Visual Effects (and I'll kill someone if "Transformers" wins).

"Enchanted" has three nominations--all for songs? Way to split the vote, guys!

For feature length documentary, "Sicko" was a given, but I'm very happy that "Taxi to the Dark Side" got a nod. I haven't seen the other entries (although 2 of them are available on DVD already), but if it came down to those two, I'd vote for Taxi. It's the same team that made "Enron: the Smartest Guys in the Room" (which I'd recommend highly) and they have a great gift for explaining the concrete facts of a very complicated issue (sometimes complicated only by media and spin) in a way that makes it very understandable without dumbing it down. They're providing a truly great service and need to be encouraged as much as possible.

I have some lawyer friends who will be very happy about how many nominations "Michael Clayton" got. And it is a very good movie, but I just don't see it winning much.

Okay, that's all my thoughts for now. I'll go into each category later, and at least until the end I'll only go into categories where I've seen all the nominees.

Jason watches "Atonement"

As soon as the Oscar nominations came out yesterday (more on that later), "Atonement" jumped to the top of my list. I figured this was inevitable. As soon as I saw the previews, I figured this was a big juicy glob of Oscar bait. And I guess it worked.

So I went straight to the local cinema right after work and caught this. And for the first 15 minutes or so, I was dreaming up dirty Oscar-bait puns I could use in this write-up. "Oscarbation"..."Oscarbatory"..."Oscar-baiting in my face".... But then it actually became a pretty good movie. Good acting, engaging story, clever editing, a surprising twist at the end, and a horrors-of-war-scene featuring a Ferris wheel? Okay, I don't quite get that one. There are a few dashes of pretension (the dream sequence). But all in all I came out thinking it was a strong, thoughtful, interesting movie.

And then this morning I was thinking about it some more and realized (warning, here be minor spoilers!) Did it actually make the case that if you do something horrible and ruin the lives of two people you really care about, it's okay as long as you write a novel about it 60 years after the fact? Or is the title ironic--there are actually some betrayals so terrible that there is no hope for atonement?

Jason looks at how well he did predicting the Oscars

Bottom line, I got only 11 out of 24 correct. But I did predict "The Blood of Yingzhou District" without having seen any nominees, how's that for skills? In fact, I was 2 for 2 in categories in which I hadn't seen every nominee.

Of the 13 I predicted wrong, for 7 of them I can be convinced to change my opinion. That leaves 6 for which I still disagree. They are:

Live Action Short--and I only disagree slightly, I can see voting for "West Bank Story" after seeing everything just once. Having seen it and "Binta" twice, "Binta" is better.
Supporting Actress--I'll soften my stance that Abigail Breslin should've won, and Jennifer Hudson was fine, but I wouldn't put her above any of the other nominees, much less all of them.
Directing--I still think Eastwood should've won, for the combined effect of "Flags" and "Iwo Jima". But I guess if you just narrow it to the nominated film, maybe.... Nah, I think this was just pity for Martin Scorsese.
Adapted Screenplay--I guess "The Departed" was just rolling. It was a fine adaptation, but "Children of Men" was all-around an awesomer movie (and was sadly shut out).
Cinematography--although I am happy for "Pan's Labyrinth", again I thought it should've been "Children of Men"
Score--"Pan's Labyrinth" is the only nominated music that can bring me back to the movie instantly.

And that's it. Funny thing, as soon as the Oscars are over, I no longer care about them. I get so spun up about trying to see all the nominees, and now it just doesn't matter.

Jason gets drunk while watching the Oscars

That's been a tradition of mine for a number of years. Sometimes with friends, last year at a Cinequest hosted party, this year at home alone. My drink of choice was a bottle of 2001 Olde Lockeford Lodi Viognier which might've been a little past its prime. Anyway, I took drunken notes, let's see what I wrote (italics indicates clarifications I came up with this morning):

Pre-Oscar blather pisses me off.
"Happy Feet" opening was borderline tolerable. This refers to the pre-show opening, not the main show.
Man, I'm being a curmudgeon!
The 3 Amigos (Del Toro, Iñárritu, and Cuarón) just admitted they don't really like each other's work, it's just sexual attraction. (Iñárritu said that)
Intro's going on too long! Intro to the actual show, where nominees are in front of a white screen talking about the people who inspired them.
Stan Brakhage call-out!
Sound is wrong, I can see people applauding Ellen DeGeneres but can't hear it over the music.
Ellen's doing an okay opening monologue.
I liked the Al Gore joke. Pointing out that America didn't vote for Jennifer Hudson, but here she is, and America did vote for Al Gore...
Yay for "Pan's Labyrinth" (Art Direction)
1/1 so far.
That shadow Oscar was trippy!
WTF was up with Maggie Gyllenhaal calling herself a "visual effect"? It felt like a line she didn't like but was compelled to say.
Will Ferrell's hair--ha ha ha...
Yay, John C. Reilly!
2/2, for me and "Pan's Labyrinth"
2/3, but "The Danish Poet" was a cool short, and Will Smith's kid's flub was cute.
2/4, but "West Bank Story" was cool, I just hope people don't look at it as a model for mideast peace.
You know, having seen them both twice, I'll say that "Binta and the Great Idea" holds up better than "West Bank Story".
Applause sound is still muted and it's bugging me!
Priscilla clip! (in the sound effects choir) turns out there were lots more clips from even better movies, so I gave up trying to call them all out.
Sound Editing--I can't remember my pick so no more n/m for me.
Alan Arkin--Whoooo!!! (didn't know I'd be that excited, but I'm 90% done with the bottle)
That shadow shit is awesome!!!
6:33, Melissa Etheridge just started her song, and I just finished my bottle and opened a 2002 Tamás Chardonnay.
Al Gore and Leo (onstage together) is surreal?
Playing Gore off as he was about to announce a run for President was awesome!
"Mad Max" director (George Miller) just won for dancing penguins. The ending is still dumb.
Did Jack Nicholson shave his head? Yes, as it turns out it's for a role as a cancer patient who escapes the hospital to go do everything he wants to do before he dies. Co-starring Morgan Freeman, titled "The Bucket List", slated for release in November. Directed by Rob Reiner.
Adapted Screenplay--"The Departed" getting some love, interesting!
"Marie Antoinette" won something? Suck it, critics!
Cinematography--"Pan's Labyrinth", but "Children of Men" shoulda won. Only time I'll be annoyed that "Pan's Labyrinth" won.
Fuck Visual Effects!
"The Lives of Others" is awesome, even above "After the Wedding".
7:334, and I'm seeing double and yes, that's what I wrote.
Jennifer Hudson is...a winner!
Jason sees double! 7:36 and apparently doesn't remember noting that exact same thing 2 minutes earlier.

Then I woke up and it was all over. I had to go online to learn that Marty finally got his Oscar. Luckily I had recorded the whole thing, so I'll watch the last part of it tonight.

Jason predicts the Oscars, part 3

Okay, let's do the short films. First a comment, again thanking Magnolia Pictures for putting out this program, and the Landmark Lumiere and Shattuck and the Rafael Film Center for showing them. Also, as I mentioned before, I saw them on President's day just after a week of Indiefest shows and before the last few. It was odd, after some rather extreme cinema to realize how tame and unchallenging the Oscar nominees are in comparison. They are all well made, though. Okay let's continue.

Live Action Short Film:
"Eramos Pocos (One Too Many)" was the least memorable. "Binta and the Great Idea" and "West Bank Story" were most memorable just because I'd seen them before, although I think "West Bank Story" is a little too silly to win (still, I'm happy it was nominated). "The Saviour" was awkward, but funny. And "Helmer & Son" was hilarious. I'm going with "Binta and the Great Idea".

Animated Short Film:
By the way, Magnolia's program added a few bonus animated shorts, because the nominees alone took up just 40 minutes. Some of the bonus shorts were better than the nominees. I particularly like "A Gentleman's Duel" (about a pair of medieval gentleman, who battle for the hand of a fair maiden, using giant robots), "Guide Dog" (Bill Plympton's follow-up to "Guard Dog"), and "The Passenger" (about a timid schoolboy who finds a fish that turns into a monster when it hears the right music).

Anyway, as for the actual nominees. "No Time for Nuts" is too silly. "Lifted" was the Pixar nominee, and they're always cool. "The Little Matchgirl" will only win if the Academy suddenly gets some 'the winner has to be sad' idea. "The Danish Poet" will only win if the Academy gets a 'the winner should be hand-drawn but not sad' idea. And my pick is "Maestro". It's a single joke, but built up so perfectly, and with no dialogue so it works in any language. By coincidence, it's the one short I had seen before. So that might've biased me.

Best Foreign Language Film:
I have to start this with a rant. This is the first year I've actually (kinda) seen everything nominated in this category, so it's actually the wrong year for this rant, but I wanna do it anyway. In the Best Foreign Language Film category, unlike most other categories, there's a requirement that the voters have to have seen every nominee. The assumption is for other categories (except documentaries and shorts), they're out in general release and all members of the Academy will have a chance to see them. But for this category there are special screenings for the members. You can vote if you go to the screenings or provide some other proof that you've seen them all (in a theater, not on video). Now, in principle I agree with this, but there's an unintended consequence. If you have a nominee that is likely to appeal especially to the people who go to those screenings (who tend to be older and retired), you might hold it out of general release to limit the voting pool and enhance your chances of winning. You might call this the "Amelie" effect, where "Amelie" was very popular among general audience but lost to "No Man's Land" which hardly no one had seen (BTW, I agree with that call, "No Man's Land" was excellent and "Amelie", while cute, was treacle).

Anyway, this is actually a poor year to rant about this, because 2 of the films ("Pan's Labyrinth" and "The Lives of Others") I saw in general release. One ("Water"), I saw at Cinequest. And one "Indigenes") is out now at the Landmark Embarcadero, but I didn't know it would play there until after I downloaded it and watched it on my computer. That's right, I downloaded a movie (that and "After the Wedding", which gets a general release on March 30). I hated doing it, and as soon as I watched it I deleted it, but at the time it was the only way I could see it. I will watch both of them in the theater when they come out (in fact, if I have time I'll see "Indigenes" today before the Oscars). And, in fact, even on my tiny monitor I loved "After the Wedding" so much I already want to see it on the big screen and own the DVD. I had started downloading "The Lives of Others", too, before I saw that it's release date was moved up so I could see it on the big screen before the Oscars. When I saw that I canceled the download immediately.

Anyway, that was a long, incoherent rant about how the voting process can incentivize distributors to keep their films out of distribution in order to win awards, and as a film fan who wants to see all the nominees, that pisses me off. But, as I said, this is the wrong year to bitch about that, because in fact 3 of the nominees are already released, the other two have release dates, and one of them I already saw in a film festival.

With that said, as much as I love "Pan's Labyrinth", I think it might be too violent for the Academy voters, and I loved "After the Wedding" even seeing it in a small, crappy format. Mads Mikkelsen is awesome, so it gets my vote. By the way, in an only tangentially related topic, Mads Mikkelsen was the best thing about "Casino Royale". I didn't even know he was in it when I went to see it, and when his name came up in the opening credits I blurted out, "Mads Mikkelsen, awesome!" and everyone around me laughed assuming I was joking. I wasn't.

Okay that just leaves Best Directing and Best Picture. But first some comments about the documentaries. Actually, my only comment is I want to thank the Balboa Theater and International Documentary Association for putting on a program of all the Oscar nominated features and shorts. If only I wasn't so exhausted after Indiefest that I just couldn't drag myself up to the city for another full day of movies last Wednesday. I needed a rest, so I went into work, instead. If only I had done that, I would've seen everything nominated for anything in the Oscars. Oh, well, maybe next year. BTW, even though I only saw it and "Jesus Camp", I'm predicting "An Inconvenient Truth" will win. And even though I've seen none of the nominees, based on description alone I'm predicting "The Blood of Yingzhou District" will win best short doc. How's that for a ballsy prediction?

Best Directing and Best Picture:
Okay, finally the big two awards, and I'm putting them together. For me, it comes down to "Babel", "Letters From Iwo Jima", and "The Departed". It's incredibly rare for a movie not nominated in both categories to win either category (I don't feel like researching how often it's happened. Anyone with some time on their hands want to do it for me?) But in recent years it's been pretty common to split the awards. "Babel" is the dark horse in my opinion. It's parallel storylines, one of which just barely tangentially touches the other two, appeals to an intellectual crowd, but I think might be too much for most of the Academy (but I'll be thrilled if it wins). For me it's a matter of whether they want to finally give perpetual bridesmaid Martin Scorsese a ring. There's a part of me that thinks they'll give Scorsese best director but "Letters From Iwo Jima" best picture. But I think that'd be backwards. Clint Eastwood has to win best director, for "Letters From Iwo Jima" and "Flags of Our Fathers". He wasn't nominated for the latter, but it's impossible for me to separate the the two, and his accomplishment in making the companion pieces back to back is incredible. So he's my pick for best director. Now I'm really torn on Best Picture, and have only now noticed that two of the nominees are primarily or entirely in foreign languages. I could trust in the conventional wisdom that the Academy has a bias for English, and go with "The Departed". And I guess that's what I'll do.

Okay, for better or worse I'm done. I'll look at how I did vs. the results tonight.

Jason predicts the Oscars, part 2

Okay, I just got back from seeing "The Lives of Others" and "Volver". Both excellent movies. Now let's continue.

Actress in a Leading Role:
It has to be Helen Mirren. Interesting note, Kate Winslet is now the youngest actress to pick up six nominations, and still no win. If she continues picking up nominations at the same rate until she's 87 (the age that her "Titanic" co-star Gloria Stuart was when she was nominated), she'll have 36 nominations, with zero wins. And there's no chance she'll win this year. The London bookmakers even stopped taking bets on this category. Traditionally, the last year's best actor winner announces the best actress and vice-versa. If Philip Seymour Hoffman comes out on stage, tears off his human shell to reveal he is actually a crab person, it would not be as shocking if he retained his human form and announced Kate Winslet won. By the way, in the interest of disclosure, I saw Meryl Streep in "The Devil Wears Prada" on DVD instead of the big screen. I don't think that matters.

Actress in a Supporting Role:
Oh, I really, really want it to be Abigail Breslin. So what the hell, that's my pick.

Film Editing:
In the interest of full disclosure, I should say I saw "United 93" on DVD. This might in fact matter, because I couldn't sit still while watching it. I think this'll be "Babel". Actually, this is one of the toughest for me to call. I also have a feeling it could be "The Departed" or "Children of Men". But "Children of Men" was more noteworthy for not editing (see my comment on best cinematography). If "The Departed" wins this, then it'll be Scorsese's night (finally), but I'm just not feeling it.

Makeup:
Gotta be "Pan's Labyrinth". By the way, I'm still pissed that "Click" is nominated for anything. Okay, they put Adam Sandler in a fat suit and then in old man makeup. Both been done before, but has anyone ever done both in the same movie? Who cares?

Music (Score):
"Pan's Labyrinth". It was the only tune I still had in my mind when I left the theater, and if you played all the scores, it'll probably be the only one that'll bring me back to the movie.

Music (Song):
I guess I could be cheesy and say "Dreamgirls" without specifying the song. But I think they'll actually split the vote. "Our Town" from "Cars" is exactly the stuff the academy likes. But I think they'll go political with "I Need to Wake Up" from "An Inconvenient Truth".

Sound Editing:
Here's an interesting one, "Flags of Our Fathers" up against "Letters From Iwo Jima". And some other junk in the category. For the record, I saw "Flags of Our Fathers" on DVD because no theater was cool enough to play the double feature of "Flags" and "Iwo Jima" that I wanted. I think "Letters From Iwo Jima" will take it.

Sound Mixing:
And this one "Dreamgirls" will take.

Visual Effects:
It doesn't matter which will win, I'll throw up a little in my mouth whatever happens. "Pirates" looked like bad CGI, especially the ending where spoiler, highlight to read Johnny Depp threw himself in the kraken's mouthend spoiler. "Superman Returns" looked like bad CGI all the way through. I think the only reason I didn't notice the bad CGI on "Poseidon" is because I saw it on DVD and didn't really pay attention. So I'm giving the award to "The Fountain". Screw this category!

...

Okay, I've calmed down a little, and I'll predict "Superman Returns", but I don't like it. But on a completely unrelated point, I'm pissed "The Fountain" didn't receive the critical or popular acclaim it deserved on any front.

Adapted Screenplay:
Seriously, can you really count "Borat" as being "adapted"...or as having a "screenplay"? I'm going with "Children of Men".

Original Screenplay:
As a wild-ass guess, I'm going with "Babel".

Okay, I'm taking another break. I'll finish up with the short films, foreign films, directing and best picture tomorrow morning. And maybe some comments on the documentaries, the two categories for which I haven't seen everything.

Jason predicts the Oscars, part 1

Okay, I've put this off far too long, and I'm going out in about a half hour to see "The Lives of Others" and "Volver", the last two nominated films I haven't seen that still in theaters. This'll be as quick as I can make it. In past years (pre-bloggery) I've made detailed arguments for why I think which movie should win and what movies should've been nominated instead. Now that the Oscars were moved up and are now tucked in between Indiefest and Cinequest, I just don't have time. I'm also not making a distinction between what I think will win and what I think should win. I've done that in the past and I've found my choices actually correspond better to the winners than my predictions of what the Academy will choose. So sometimes I'm going with my gut and who I'd vote for, and sometimes I'm double-guessing my gut. I'll try (and probably fail) to specify when.

Actor in a Leading Role:
Forest Whitaker will win, then celebrate by eating the losers. I know there's a lot of sympathy for Peter O'toole, but screw him. He's a fine actor, but as I said earlier, he's not even my favorite cinematic geezer of the year. Donald Sutherland could geeze circles around him.

Actor in a Supporting Role:
I still can't believe Eddie Murphy got nominated. By the way, isn't the whole premise of "Norbit" watching Eddie Murphy make love to himself in a fat suit? Isn't that kind of sick? But I digress. I'm torn between Alan Arkin and Mark Wahlberg. But I think I'm only considering Mark Wahlberg because he's the one major role in "The Departed" that wasn't in "Infernal Affairs", and so he was the one role that had any surprises for me. So screw him, I'm going with Alan Arkin, because the line he delivers to his granddaughter, "I'm madly in love with you, and it's not because of your brains or personality" was one of my favorite things in any movie this past year.

I'll do the actresses later tonight, after I've seen "Volver"

Tee hee, I just said "I'll do the actresses"

Animated Film:
Okay, seriously they should've put the category on hiatus for this year, if these were the top three. I would've said "Happy Feet" if the last 10 minutes made any freakin' sense! Spoiler Alert! Highlight text to read: 'Oh look the penguins are dancing, maybe we should stop fishing Antarctic waters!'End Spoiler Alert. Okay, now that I got that out of my system, I guess I'll go with "Cars", just because as silly and hypocritical it is to preach about a simpler bygone time while using the most advanced storytelling technology out there, it was the best made movie.


Art Direction:
Better freakin' go to "Pan's Labyrinth"!

Cinematography:
Better freakin' be "Children of Men"! Actually, let me elaborate. While not the most beautiful of the nominees, it's incredibly long single takes, including during intense action scenes like car chases and shootouts, were beyond anything I've ever seen, and have broken the limits on what can be done. Freakin' amazing! Even if I know some people who didn't like it and possibly few other movies will copy it, it's still freakin' amazing!

Costume Design:
Shoot, I don't know, how about "Curse of the Golden Flower" because it was the most visually striking of the nominees.

Okay, I've gotta go now, I'll finish my picks tonight.

Jason researches past honorary oscar winners

In a previous post I asked the question--regarding Peter O'toole--what's the record for the most years between a "lifetime achievement" oscar and a regular oscar nomination. Well, the answer is a little tricky.

First, I went to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/BasicSearchInput.jsp. If you highlight "honorary award" in the "Award Category" box and enter nothing in the search boxes, you can get a list of every honorary award given. I set "Display Results" to "nominee (alpha)" to sort by name of honoree.

Then I clicked through one-by-one to find all the honorees who subsequently received a regular oscar nomination. This is where it gets a little tricky. You see, there's nothing officially called a "lifetime achievement" oscar. You have to read the description of their honorary award. Many got it for a single movie (e.g., Charlie Chaplin for writing, directing, producing, and starring in "The Circus"). Some for an individual achievement (Walt Disney got his first of many honorary awards for creating Mickey Mouse). Many were for specific technical advances, and the honorees went on to win oscars for special effects. A ridiculous number were for the wonderful short film "The House I Live In". Many were for child actors who went on to have illustrious careers the rest of their lives (Mickey Rooney, Judy Garland). Anyway, the complete list of honorary oscar recipients who went on to garner regular oscar nomination is:




Now there's some interesting trivia to this. Chaplin is particularly interesting, for reasons I'll get into later. Disney picked up a veritable crapload of oscars, honorary and regular (including 1 regular size and 7 mini oscars for "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs"), but never something that could be descrived as a lifetime achievement award. Noel Coward got an honorary award in 1942 for producing "In Which We Serve", and then got a nomination the next year for writing the very same movie.

Okay, then I narrowed it down to just the honorary awards that could legitimately, in some interpretation, be called a "lifetime achievement" award (based on the description of the award). They are:



There's some interesting trivia here. Obviously what first jumps out is that Sir Lawrence Olivier recieved a lifetime achievement award the same year he garnered his final regular oscar nomination. But the more interesting story is Charlie Chaplin, who picked up his lifetime achievement award and was then nominated (and won, posthumously) for best dramatic score for "Limelight". The interesting thing about that is "Limelight was actually made twenty years earlier, but because it was first released in Los Angeles in 1972, it was eligible for the oscars that year. The academy has since changed its rules regarding eligibility.

Anyway, the bottom line is Peter O'toole must stay around for another 13 years just to tie Paul Newman's record. Interesting note, Paul Newman was given an award presumably to recognize his 7 nominations (6 acting and 1 best picture) without a win, and then the very next year he won best actor for "The Color of Money". He went on to get 2 more nominations and a Thalberg humanitarian award. Go Paul Newman!

Jason watches "Venus"

It was pretty good. I can't quite put my finger on why I'm not more enthusiastic about calling it great. I laughed at all the funny parts, I cried (well, not really but close) at the sad parts. Maybe the title character was a little too unlikable (her story is about her redemption, but maybe they went a little too far in places). Maybe it was too much effort for me to decipher the british accents. Or maybe I was just tired.

And yeah, Peter O'toole is excellent. But he won't win the oscar. And you know what, he wasn't even the best geezer of the year. But nobody knows that, because nobody saw Donald Sutherland geeze it up brilliantly in "Aurora Borealis". Anyway, now I've seen all the best actor nominees.

Jason watches "Little Children"

And it's funnier than I thought it would be. I expected a serious drama about suburbanites and their problems, but I ended up cracking up about half the time. Yeah, there was tragedy, too. But in a nutshell, this movie is about how children are inscrutable, idiotic creatures, and adults are children.

Anyway, I've now seen everything that's been nominated for best supporting actor and best adapted screenplay.

Jason watches "Italienetz" and "Letters From Iwo Jima"

So I've now seen every best picture oscar nominee.

But first, "Italienetz", aka "The Italian". I knew nothing about this movie going in. In fact, I was at work (on Saturday, of all days), was done with what I came in for, and wanted to go to the movies. "Letters From Iwo Jima" didn't start for 2 hours, and "Italienetz" filled that time perfectly. And, as a bonus, it turned out to be fantastic. It's a Russian movie, about an orphanage wear 6-year old Vanya has just been adopted by a rich Italian couple (and so, until it's finalized and he moves away with them, he's called "The Italian" by the rest of the boys in the orphanage). Everyone in the orphanage dreams of being adopted by a nice family. Before Vanya gets adopted, his friend Kolyan has that luck, too. However, a couple of days later, Kolyan's birth mother shows up wanting him back. She's turned away, but it gets Vanya thinking about his real mother, and what if she shows up? So instead of being happy to live with the Italians, he starts looking for information about his real mother, and eventually runs away to look for her. It's a wonderful, bittersweet story with surprising sadness as well as comedy. And a great job by the child actor Kolya Spiridonov as Vanya.

And then I saw "Letters From Iwo Jima". As I've mentioned before, I was hoping some theater would play this as a double feature with "Flags of Our Fathers", but alas, no such luck. And I'd be hard pressed to watch the DVD of "Flags of Our Fathers" (which comes out this Tuesday) and see "Letters From Iwo Jima" before Indiefest, so this was my best chance to see it. I can't wait to see the same battle from the American side. Anyway, "Letters From Iwo Jima" was fantastic, especially Ken Watanabe. In keeping with my custom, I won't say too much more about it, as I don't think I'd be able to say anything that the critics haven't already said.

Okay, that is all. Hopefully I'll be able to see "Little Children" and/or "Venus" and/or "Volver" around the Super Bowl tomorrow.

--Jason

Jason watches "The Good German" and "Lost Highway"

And after watching "The Good German" I've seen everything nominated for best art direction. I promise I'll start writing up my oscar picks soon. I also hope to see "Letters from Iwo Jima" today.

Anyway, "The Good German" was pretty cool, and Steven Soderbergh continues to be, for better or worse, one of the most interesting and individualistic directors working today. It's one thing to make a movie about 1945 Berlin (specifically, during the Potsdam peace conference). It's another thing to make it look like a movie from 1945. It's a whole different level to be so committed to the 1945 look that you insist on using 1945 technology and techniques. And I say this is interesting for better or worse because the end result is that you can "see the strings"--you can see what is real and what is fake (and most of it is fake). Still, that can be part of the charm, and it really does feel like watching a 1940's movie, but with modern actors. In fact, news footage of Churchill, Truman, and Stalin feels less out of place than George Clooney, Tobey Maguire, and Cate Blanchett.

Besides the technical fascination and how the look of a movie can put you immediately in that time period, there's also a really good mystery story here. In fact, I'm tempted to pick up Joseph Kanon's novel on which it was based and read it.

Okay, then I saw "Lost Highway" for a few reasons:
1. I had to drive all the way down to Santa Cruz to see "The Good German" because it was no longer playing anywhere closer. "Lost Highway" was the midnight movie shortly after "The Good German" got out.
2. "Lost Highway" is a movie I like, but don't quite understand yet. Everytime I watch it, I think I get a little closer (and I might have it now, more below).
3. Watching a David Lynch mind-fuck is good practice for "Inland Empire", which opens Indiefest this Thursday.

Okay, so "Lost Highway" is ten years old, so I'm going to assume if you're reading this, you've seen it (if not, I'm not going to get into the plot, but it's possible what I write might constitute a "spoiler", in as much as it might change how you watch the movie). For me, the key to the movie is Fred Madison's (Bill Pullman) assertion that he doesn't like video cameras because he prefers to remember things his way, "How I remembered them. Not necessarily the way they happened." So, the premise is that most--if not all--of the movie is his inaccurate memories. Quite possibly it's even his life flashing before his eyes and he dies (in the electric chair? For murdering his wife?). There are still some small points to dissect--is he really Fred Madison, or is he Peter Raymond Dayton (Balthazar Getty)? Or, a pet theory I have, he's actually the mystery man and he's remembering himself as either Fred or Peter at any given time (and how freaky that he's played by Robert Blake, who went on to allegedly kill his wife in real life?) Yeah, there's still stuff I can tease out of it. But on a higher level, what is it all about? Whether it's Fred remembering himself as Peter, or vice-versa, or the mystery man remembering himself as both; whether it's his final thoughts as he's being executed or just a really bad dream, there's still an overarching theme. And that is, "man's disgust at his own libido." Okay, now everyone go rent the movie and watch it while thinking about that.

--Jason

Jason watches "Notes on a Scandal"

And it's pretty good. Especially the acting. Dame Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett are brilliant. Brilliant enough to actually make me care about the problems of an old, lonely dyke (okay, that's not explicit but pretty heavily implied) and a younger statutory rapist. Brilliant enough to overcome the heavy-handed use of voice over narration of Judi Dench writing in her diary. And composer Phillip Glass once again pulls off the seemingly impossible feat of being both minimalist and overbearing (which somehow is pitch-perfect for this film). All in all, I'd say it got exactly the Oscar nominations it deserved and none that it didn't deserve.