Kinematoscope

Here's a fun category- the next best indicator to director of how well put-together a picture is made. Up In The Air likely saw missing the cut as the final nail in the coffin, while Precious and District 9 must have been a little surprised to make it.

It can be a surefire indicator of how the night will end (like Crash winning it and little else), or sometimes it can go to a popular movie with impressive work like The Bourne Ultimatum. This year? Probably the former, but we'll see.

1. Avatar- Stephen E. Rivkin (0 for 0), John Refoua (0 for 0), James Cameron (3 for 3)

The word is that Cameron and co. had to basically edit during shooting, watching "mintutelies" instead of dailies and structuring the film on the fly. That's great for them, but the finished product is what counts, and said product cut a very sleepy pace indeed.

2. District 9- Julian Clarke (0 for 0)

Fun fact: Julian Clarke's previous most recognizable credit is Uwe Boll's Postal. The counterpoint to Avatar, District 9 uses a faux-documentary style to get any backstory right out of the way, and thrills non-stop to the end.

3. The Hurt Locker- Bob Murawski (0 for 0), Chris Innis (0 for 0)

The likely winners and the ones that deserve it, to my mind. An epic 2:10 run-time combines a half-dozen odd bombs scares with about as many various character scenes without ever losing steam, and individual standout sequences abound.

4. Inglourious Basterds- Sally Menke (0 for 1)

Longtime Tarantino editor Menke is the only previous nominee (besides Cameron) in the race, for Pulp Fiction. Basterds is certainly a well tuned film, and it's got a knack for cutting the scene right after a punchline. I'd say this is just as much of a potential spoiler as Avatar, slim though the chance may be.

5. Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire- Joe Klotz (0 for 0)

An unexpected nominee, but a fair one: witness the pastiche terror-flashback scenes in Precious that play like Lynch on fast-forward. It's fun work, but gimmicky.


The Hurt Locker all the way. And so end the tech awards. We've got two more BP previews and Animated Feature to discuss, then it's time for the money categories.

One of my favorite categories, which I invariably get wrong because I pick with my heart. And the guild is no help, they're great at matching nominees, but awful at getting the same winner. Let's get to the nominees, along with my favorite shot from each one (except for The White Ribbon, which I refuse to see).

1. Avatar- Mauro Fiore (0 for 0)

Fiore seems to have kicked around making mostly undistinguished action movies like The Kingdom and The Island before scoring his first nomination for Avatar. Beyond the impressive 3D elements, the film has a pretty straightforward "Look at this! Isn't this AWESOME!" look to it. It goes down easy, but doesn't say Oscar to me.

Favorite Shot: Long view of the transport ship.


Even without 3D I like the framing of Worthington getting out of cryo as we see how massive the Pandora operation really is.

2. The White Ribbon -Christian Berger (0 for 0)

Berger is a long time Haneke DP, whose job mainly consists of leaving the camera stationary and going to get a hot dog (ba-zing!). But hey, it was black and white, so there were issues with contrast and lighting and all that to deal with, I'm sure.

Every Shot In This Film: Someone looking sad while not talking for five minutes.

3. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince- Bruno Delbonnel

Two time nominee for his work with Jean Pierre Jeunet (Amelie, A Very Long Engagement), Delbonnel added a welcome visual flair, giving the sixth installment a melting aesthetic all its own.

Favorite Shot: Fire in the Cave


I know, it's FX heavy, but the whole scene helped fill the Lord Of The Rings hole in my heart for a while.

4. The Hurt Locker- Barry Ackroyd (0 for 0)

Ackroyd had some practice going for a documentary feel with Battle in Seattle and United 93, and made The Hurt Locker seem like it was happening live even as it threw in plenty of beautfiul compositions. I had trouble choosing my favorite sequence- was it the split second shots of bullets hitting the sand or rust shattering off of old cars? A harrowing night scene as three soldiers flicker in and out of view in the blue light of a flare? Or:

Favorite Shot: Walking through the smoke


On Jeremy Renner's first mission as the new bomb squad leader, he puts on the heavy protective tech suit and walks down toward an IED. He throws out a smoke grenade, allegedly to "create a distraction," but clearly the only reason he did it was to create this awesome shot of him disspearing into and reappearing from the myst, like some sort of reverse deep-sea diver.

5. Inglourious Basterds- Robert Richardson (2 for 5)

With Oscars for JFK and The Aviator, Richardson is the heavyweight this year, but I can't remember too many images from Basterds for some reason. Mostly I recall a lot of back and forth panning as characters translated for one another.

Favorite Shot: Burning the Cinema


But who can forget Shoshanna's maniacally laughing face as the screen cathes fire, about to burn a theater-full of Nazis to death. Best prank ever.


I think this will be the point in the ceremony where The Hurt Locker starts its run-up to the big prize. Call it a hunch. It's also the one I want to win, so take the prediction with a grain of salt.

Fun fact: this award was originally called "Best Interior Decoration," because movies used to just be shot in rooms in studios and nowhere else.

Also from 1940 to 1956 (and then randomly again in 1959) they gave separate awards to color and black & white films. I feel like a similar division should happen soon for CGI and non-CGI. Seriously, how can we consider Avatar to win an award that's supposed to be for production design and set decoration when it had barely any sets?

1. Avatar- Art Direction: Rick Carter (0 for 1) and Robert Stromberg (0 for 1); Set Decoration: Kim Sinclair (0 for 0)

This seems like the best place to recognize the extent to which James Cameron and his team nerded out making this a complete world. Apparently they put together a 380-page book called "Pandorapedia" with all sorts of information about fake aliens species, and even a Sigourney-Weaver-narrated short Discovery Channel style special about it, which will no doubt be on the DVD.

2. The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus- Art Direction: Dave Warren and Anastasia Masaro; Set Decoration: Caroline Smith (all 0 for 0)

Like I said, the awards that Gilliam's films should always get never seem to materialize. That said, while Parnassus was better than his last few efforts by far, it was still haphazard and disjointed- the fantasia sequences had nothing to do with reality at all.

Compare this to say, Time Bandits, which frames the fantastic with the mundane in a wonderful way.

3. Nine- Art Direction: John Myhre (2 for 4); Set Decoration: Gordon Sim (1 for 1)

Oh, Nine. So many awards were yours to lose a while ago: Best Original Song, costumes, art direction... Maybe even supporting actress for one of the eight thousand big name actresses you seem to have.

Then you had to come out and pretty much blow. Go figure.

4. Sherlock Holmes- Art Direction: Sarah Greenwood (0 for 2); Set Decoration: Katie Spencer (0 for 2)

I'm super proud of myself for remembering that Greenwood and Spencer are the team from all of Joe Wright's films (including Pride & Prejudice and Atonement, with nominations for both), whose work I quite enjoy. If there's a potential spoiler for this award, I say it's Sherlock, which had just as much (relative) sucess late in the year, and is a more traditional period piece to boot.

5. The Young Victoria- Art Direction: Patrice Vermette (0 for 0); Set Decoration: Maggie Gray (0 for 1)

Still haven't seen it, but I'm sure the work was solid. Not solid enough to overcome less than $10 million at the box office though.

Art Direction is a goofy category, sometimes going with the obvious frontrunner (The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button last year), and sometimes going for a wildcard that actually merits it (like Sweeney Todd or Pan's Labyrinth).

And the Art Director's Guild is no help at all, since they take the coward's route and have seperate categories for fantasy (Avatar), period (Sherlock Holmes), and contemporary films (The Hurt Locker).

My call is Avatar once again, but with little certainty this time.

Although it had its usual share of hiccups yet again (like disqualifying Where The Wild Things Are), the Score category surprised me with two of my favorites that I thought would be overlooked, and another great inclusion that didn't even occur to me.

1. Avatar- James Horner (2 for 8)

For your consideration: "War"


Funny how the future as depicted in cinema looks better and fancier all the time, but the soundtrack is the same old bombastic thing. Witness the above selection, a pretty standard Greek-chorus type of thing- seems like it could be from a chariot race or gladiator fight, not a huge battle between twin-blade space helicopters, robot-exoskeletons and big alien dinosaurs. If you want to see the future done right, see Clint Mansell's great work on the indie Moon.

Horner is a frequent nominee, but has wins only for Titanic's score and song. If he takes the trophy, it will probably be good news for the film's Best Picture chances.

2. Fantastic Mr. Fox- Alexandre Desplat (0 for 2)

For your consideration: "Kristofferson's Theme"


Desplat had a busy year in 2009- so much that I was sure that he'd get nominated for his work in Coco Before Chanel, A Prophet, Julie and Julia, or even New Moon before his wonderfully vibrant Fox score.

He matches frequent Wes Anderson composer Mark Mothersbaugh's plucky string work with some richer, more emotional compositions which helped make Fantastic Mr. Fox arguably Anderson's most affecting film.

3. The Hurt Locker- Marco Beltrami (0 for 1) and Buck Sanders (0 for 0)

For your consideration: "The Way I Am"


Hey did you know there's super-loud death metal band called "Hurtlocker"? Just a tip if you're looking for score clips on YouTube and have headphones in. I learned the hard away.

Anyway, a wonderful inclusion of a score I forgot about. It seems a lot like the branch trying to make up for certain past omissions, since the score has a lot of similarities to Zimmer and Howard's dark, atonal Dark Knight score- plus one track (from the six IED scene) is even entitled "There Will Be Bombs," an homage to Johnny Greenwood's tragically disqualified score from '07.

4. Sherlock Holmes- Hans Zimmer (1 for 7)

For your consideration: "Not In Blood, But In Bond"


Loved Zimmer's work here, especially the plaintive tack above when it looks like Watson died in an explosion (spoiler- he was fine. I'm sure you're shocked). The whole score had a very broken-piano, ranshackle, steampunk feel to it that was superb.

5. Up- Michael Giacchino (0 for 1)

For your consideration: "Married Life"


Your likely winner, thanks to the unforgettable early montage in Up that made everyone all teary-eyed. Giacchino's score does most of the heavy lifting in that sequence, and the score weaves in and out of the rest of the film nicely.

As previously stated, this award is for the film that best interweaves effects, dialogue, and music into the overall sound design. Let's hop to it:

1. Avatar- Christopher Boyes (4 for 11), Gary Summers (5 for 7), Andy Nelson (1 for 12), and Tony Johnson (0 for 1)

I can't say there was anything interesting or unique about the sound mix in Avatar, but the scope remains impressive. It's hard to think anything will beat it- remember that while the specific branch members choose the nominees, the entire Academy votes on winners, so the bigger picture often takes the prize.

Even with Slumdog Millionaire pulling a hardly deserved win in this category last year, I think Avatar won't get overlooked in the categories where it merits winning. It's just too big.

2. The Hurt Locker- Paul N.J. Ottosson (0 for 1) and Ray Beckett (0 for 0)

But if anything's going to split the Sounds up, it's the wonderful mixing in The Hurt Locker- so many moments pack a sonic punch in this film: the split-second breakdown of the opening explosion:



...the lurch of the score when the car trunk opens to reveal enough bombs to level a city, or when Jeremy Renner follows the wire to find he is surrounded by bombs and it builds to a howl.

3. Inglourious Basterds- Michael Minkler (3 for 10), Tony Lamberti (0 for 0), and Mark Ulano (1 for 1)

I'm much more game for Basterds' inclusion in this category, as Tarantino films are always multiple sounds at once: part rambling talk-radio, part noise-maker, and part jukebox.

4. Star Trek- Anna Behlmer (0 for 9), Andy Nelson (1 for 12), and Peter J. Devlin (0 for 2)

That would be the same Andy Nelson from Avatar- something about the number of people with double-digit nominations makes me suspect this isn't a very big field. Star Trek might stand a better chance if it had a Best Pciture nomination, but the opening transition from Giancchino's score to the blips and beeps of the U.S.S. Kelvin is one of the most memorable moments of the year for me.

5. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen- Greg P. Russell (0 for 12), Gary Summers (5 for 7), and Geoffrey Patterson (0 for 1)

Didn't see it. But I'm sure it was fine work with all the aircrafts, imaginary robots, and awesome dialogue like the following:


Anyway, another call for the tall blue people.

They really need to rename the two sound awards, to avoid the yearly confusion about which is which. Don't get me wrong, I don't think people at large care all that much about the tech awards, but at least all the rest are self-explanatory (we all know what costumes, makeup, visual effects, and cinematography are, right?).

To wit: sound effects editing should really be called Sound Effects Creation- it's for the making, from scratch, of footsteps and explosion sounds and gunshots to match pre-existing footage (or CGI-work). To a lesser extent Editing is also about cleaning up dialogue shot on-set and removing background noises and imperfections to make it better for the finished film.

Got that? Sound Mixing is exactly what it sounds like: mixing all of the finished audio together- the effects that the sound designers created, the on-set dialogue they've cleaned up, Additional Dialogue Recording in post-production, and the score.

An analogy: Sound Effects Editing is to Sound Mixing what Cinematography is to Film Editing- the first one designs the raw materials, the second one fits it all together.

Now, let's see what kind of effects our five nominees had to create.

1. Avatar- Christopher Boyes (4 for 11) and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle (0 for 0)

If this seems like another Avatar vs. The Hurt Locker category, remember this: Critics Don't Matter. Past winners of this trophy include Pearl Harbor, U-571 and Peter Jackson's King Kong. They like big things, expansive projects- Avatar fits that bill to a T and should win this award- Boyes is also the only heavyweight in the field with four sound wins.

It's got everything: explosions, multiple alien creature noises- they even made Sam Worthington sound like he had a pulse two or three times.

2. The Hurt Locker- Paul N.J. Ottosson (0 for 1)

Another war film, with plenty of explosions, lots of gunfire, and what must've clearly been difficult dialogue to record onset in blistering conditions. If people are really in love with this film, it has the potential to sweep (except for Best Actor), but considering the indie darling (Slumdog Millionaire) lost to the popular action movie (The Dark Knight) in this category last year, I wouldn't bet on it.

3. Inglourious Basterds- Wylie Stateman (0 for 4)

Not really one that occurred to me would be here, but hey- it had as much going on as any other. I wouldn't necessarily vote for multiple sounds of Christoph Waltz chewing things over a giant spaceship shattering every window in Johannesburg, but I don't get a ballot, do I?

4. Star Trek- Mark Stoeckinger (0 for 1) and Alan Rankin (0 for 0)

Another worthy entry, perhaps a winner in a weaker year. Between the background noises on the enterprise, the destruction of planets, and your various beeps and boops, there were more sounds to create than there were lens flares to perfect.

5. Up- Michael Silvers (1 for 4) and Tom Myers(0 for 1)

Pixar is a frequent combatant in Effects Editing, but has only won for The Incredibles, which Silvers shared. Up, however, is the least sonically diverse thing they've made in a while, and another thing that I think shouldn't have beaten out District 9.

So for the record that's my pick going to Avatar. But will it win any more than this and Visual Effects? Stay tuned to find out.

A short entry in the Oscarthon, with only three nominees and a clear winner already. Each individual nominee's name is followed by their record at the ceremony. Let's get to it:

1. Star Trek- Roger Guyett (0 for 1), Russell Earl (0 for 1), Paul Kavanagh (0 for 0) and Burt Dalton (1 for 1)

With Dalton's win for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button behind them, the Star Trek team seems nominated more for workmanlike efficiency than anything innovative.

For all the press about the casting choices that came with updating an old universe, the effects crew did just as well putting their own stamp on classic touched like warp speed and transporter beams. They also came up with some impressive effects involving planet destroying singularities.

2. District 9- Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros and Matt Aitken (all 0 for 0)

Not that I'm in the know among FX Academy members, but it's easy to think that this nomination was largely for stretching out a dollar.

With a $30 Million budget to $150 for Trek and $237 for Avatar, it certainly doesn't appear to have one-fifth of the effects-shots at all.

3. Avatar- Joe Letteri (3 for 4), Stephen Rosenbaum (1 for 1), Richard Baneham (0 for 0) and Andrew R. Jones (0 for 1)

The heavyweights from WETA digital, winners past for Lord Of The Rings and King Kong, are joined with the unstoppable James Cameron machine for aneasy trip to the podium.

Full 3D environments, special motion-capture face-cameras, these guys are the real stars of the highest grossing film ever, and I sincerely hope they each get time to speak up there.

A ten part series on the Best Picture nominees, structured around four basic questions.

Was It Any Good?

Well...I guess it was. If that seems reluctant, it's because I'm not sure if I saw it because I wanted to, or because I knew the rest of the world was going to see it, AMPAS included.

It's entertaining, sure, if overlong, stilted, cliche-ridden and stuffed with weird racial undertones. For all the cynicism with which I watched it the first time, I was noticably rooting for the good guys in the climactic showdown- mostly because the under-mentioned Stephen Lang played such a greatly cartoonish villain.

But "good"? Meh. Since comparisons to Titanic are clearly impossible to avoid: the second half breakdowns of both films are impressive, but Avatar manages to make Titanic's first half look like a master case of nuanced storytelling.

More...

Would I See It Again?

Full disclosure: I saw it twice. Once, I snuck into a 2D showing after I saw Sherlock Holmes around Christmas. Then, after weeks after record paying grosses and everyone saying how the 3D effects were the BEST THING EVER OMG, I went out to AMC and caught the IMAX 3D "Experience."

Do I plan on buying it? Not at all. Would I watch it again on cable? If there were nothing else on. For all the wow-factor of the effects (even if 3D someday becomes commonplace in a home theater setting), the story is only as compelling as any run-of-the-mill actioner.



What Did It Acheive?

I'm not going to argue with the momentousness of the work that went into Avatar. They created an entire virtual world, revolutionized motion capture, Jim Cameron invented a new type of camera or something and grew six extra arms over the course of shooting.

I guess my real question is: how impressive is all that measured against the current field of CGI ubiquitousness? It's everywhere, and pretty soon 3D is going to be everywhere too.

To use a sports anaolgy, is Avatar Babe Ruth, head and shoulders above the field, or is it Barry Bonds, hitting home runs only slightly more often in a juiced-up field? Clearly it's paving the way for hugely successful 3D block-busters to be commonplace, but in 2D it didn't impress me in any unusual way.

I wish the Special Effects artists well at the Oscars, and I hope they're working on speeches already. But all the bells and whistles in the world don't make up for weak storytelling, not when it's Oscar-time.

Will I Remember It Years From Now?

I will, but for mixed reasons. It's visually striking and technologically memorable, but it has some easy pop-culture punchlines that will follow it, from the "Pocahontas with blue people" plot to (sigh) "unobtainium."

I'll remember the Avatar/Hurt Locker, Cameron/Bigelow Oscar narrative more than Avatar itself, especially watching Cameron give speeches and self-implode any goodwill he might've had brewing.

But Avatar isn't going to be treated well in my memory, and sadly, it's making Titanic look better and better all the time.