Kinematoscope

1. Matt Damon (1 for 2) for Invictus

"This team was asked to exceed their expectations. It’s a metaphor for what the country needed to do because everybody was expecting them to not be able to heal. It was Francois’s integrity and leadership that I needed to get across with the role." -collider

Damon finally returns to the ranks of Oscar nominee after Good Will Hunting, but it couldn't be for a more boring role. Invictus is fascinating at points, in the same way the non-fiction book its based on must be- that all happened? But the workmanlike Eastwood approach doesn't lend much to the drama of the role, so it's hard to get behind Damon as an Oscar candidate- especially when his role in The Informant! is the best of his career so far.


2. Woody Harrelson (0 for 1) for The Messenger

"There are certain protocols they have in the Army and the rest of the military, but there's no easy way to do it. You just say, "The Secretary of the Army regrets to inform you..." And it's the hardest job in the Army. Even people I met at Walter Reed who had lost an arm or a leg would say, "Oh, no, I don't want to do that. I'd much rather go back into combat." Nobody wants that job, because you're walking in and breaking someone's heart." -amc

The Messenger is a wonderful character piece that's less histronic than any film about Casualty Notifcation officers has any right to be. Harrelson gets the more subtle role as the mentor to Ben Foster's Iraq war veteran, and is surprisingly perfect for it.


3. Christopher Plummer (0 for 0) for The Last Station

"There was a chance to redeem [Tolstoy] from a kind of universal view that he was dry. He wrote these long, heavy going – wonderful though they were, human novels. But was he fun? Did he have a lark every now and then?" -darkhorizons

Plummer took the relatively blank slate that is Tolstoy in most of the pop consciousness and put an emphatic stamp of his own on it in a vibrant, alternately hilarious and stately turn. BUt how this is billed as a supporting performance (while Helen Mirren is a "leading" one) is beyond me.

Moreover, how on earth has Plummer never been nominated before? And why isn't he getting any "Oscar for the whole career" buzz this season?


4. Stanley Tucci (0 for 0) for The Lovely Bones

“It was hard in every respect. I was very reticent to take the part at first. I have kids and I can’t really read anything or watch anything with kids getting harmed. I don’t like things about serial killers. There’s so much serial killer information out there in documentaries constantly. A lot of it’s just sort of gratuitous or it’s almost like pornographic really. There’s no reason for it being shown. This was not that.” -canmag

I've never been interested in reading The Lovely Bones, and was sort of relieved that the lack of critical love (and nominations) for the film adaptation exempted me from seeing it as well. So I'm sure Tucci does a great job going to a dark place, but he's not winning anyway.


5. Christoph Waltz (0 for 0) for Inglourious Basterds

"What makes [Landa] so intriguing is exactly that; he’s not driven by an ideology. When people say “Nazi,” it’s such a gross generalization, I feel. And sometimes I feel compelled to say, 'Well, he’s not even a Nazi.' Yes, he wears that uniform, but he doesn’t care. Not about Nazi ideology. He’s completely unideological. He just understands how the world turns, and in that way, he’s three steps ahead of everyone else." -slashfilm

Another year, another sure-thing supporting actor winner for a role as a complete psychopath (after Javier Bardem and Heath Ledger). Waltz is the flashier, most memorable, and most deftly-played part of Tarantino's sprawling love-letter to WWII, and has no doubt politely declined to dust off a space on his mantle just yet- but he defintiely has his speech ready.

In all four acting categories, I managed to see four out of five performances. So I can actually sort of speak with authority, which is little consolation: the winners were all decided long ago, for the most part.


1. Penélope Cruz (1 for 2) for Nine

"There is a lot of chaos on a movie set, which Nine is a lot about. Nine is about the chaos of creating and the crisis of a director. So, it’s been very interesting for me. The whole year has been about movies that were an homage to cinema." -collider

This is of course the one I didn't see, but the consensus is that the academy nominated Cruz for the wrong film- her role in Almodovar's Broken Embraces was a leading one, but less over-the-top and lost-in-the-crowd. But maybe they discounted the lingerie factor?


2. Vera Farmiga (0 for 0) for Up in the Air

"It was cool to see female desire portrayed in such a masculine way. And that was an interesting take on female desire -- you know, something that was kind of demanding and wanton and unapologetic ... and yet treading that line of femininity and softness; and being appealing; and not frightening people; and having dignity -- not having the character being bereft of dignity, but giving her self-esteem." -moviefone

Watching Up In The Air a second time (with certain late revelations about Farmiga's character in mind), you appreciate the fact that this character has an entire, Clooney-less life of her own- we never get to see it, but too often movies just sort of assume it isn't there.


3. Maggie Gyllenhaal (0 for 0) for Crazy Heart

"She seems like a real person to me -- someone who is strong in some ways and yet knows she is weak in others, and that’s what I look for in the people I play – that they feel real. That appealed tremendously to me." -moviesonline

The surprise inclusion to the field, Gyllenhaal brings as much heart and pathos to Crazy Heart as Bridges, and squashes potential complaints about unrealistic May-December romances by making the whole thing seem, well, real.


4. Anna Kendrick (0 for 0) for Up in the Air

"Natalie and I are both people who like to maintain a level of control. But I think being out of our element makes us react very differently. I tend to get progressively more awkward and fall apart more. And she sort of clings to her rigidity. And her physical appearance has a lot to do with that. Her posture and her voice and her hair and her wardrobe is all about clinging to a sense of order, and if she can get her ponytail a little bit tighter, maybe things won't feel like they're falling apart." -moviefone

Probably the best scene of Up In The Air is one in which George Clooney barely speaks- Anna Kendrick gets to cut loose and pepper Farmiga with questions about what the future will hold, as a fellow career-woman. One plays baffled desperation, the other wise acceptance as the ostensibly star of the film just smiles and nods.


5. Mo'Nique (0 for 0) for Precious

"I think that all of us know Mary. I had to put her shoes on. If I were that person, I would want forgiveness. You do feel sorry for her because you begin to understand she’s mentally ill. She ain’t just being a bitch. She’s sick, and the society that we’re in, they threw her away. Nobody asked any questions, nobody got involved. That illness doesn’t just start. People know for years. We wanted to bring that world and put it right in your face." -spout

Mo'Nique has seemingly had this wrapped up since Precious, then known as Push, premiered at Sundance. Her performance is moving, powerful, and stems from real-life abuse- there's really no word against it and no stopping her at this point.

A look at the taglines for this week's major releases. How do studios try to hook us when they only have a sentence?

Actual tagline: You've got a very important date.

Do I? What an obvious choice- I wonder why the marketing nowhere chooses to explain that this is a story about Alice returning to Wonderland as 19-year-old (not just a version with an older Alice).

Can I just say Tim Burton needs to direct something less whimsical for once? Even though it went terribly, terribly wrong, I respected the attempt at something different with the Planet Of The Apes remake.

And I'm kind of tired of Weirdo Johnny Depp. We get it, you're a pirate, Willy Wonka, now the Mad Hatter. Good for you. What happend to Serious Actor Johnny Depp?




Actual tagline: This is War. This is Brooklyn.

Look at the Trailer for me and tell me the tag shouldn't just be "This is The Departed meets Training Day!"

You got Don Cheadle as the undercover good guy, and Ethan Hawke as not a mole but a cop corrupted by drug money. Two sides of a drug war with one traitor apiece.

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

Was It Any Good?

It was solidly entertaining and "important," like a fine Oscar-flavored wine. Even as someone let go at the beginning of 2008 due to the down economy, I didn't find the firing interviews intercut with the main story all that moving, but the stars and the even-handed direction make it a worthy effort.

George Clooney in particular is his usual self, which is a blessing for the film overall, but a little bit of a hindrance for the character- does anyone really buy that someone so seemingly mature would be hung up on collecting airline miles? I didn't, and the early-film petulance as Ryan Bingham tried to cling to his solitary way of life rang a little false as well. But Clooney, the eternal bachelor, was of course the perfect choice to play the second half of the film as he contemplates coming down to earth.

Would I See It Again?

I think so- the supporting cast, especially Anna Kendrick, make it worth repeat viewings, and I find the subtle Rolfe Kent score growing on me. Reitman knows, of course, how to find a catchy soundtrack, and found airports fertile ground for memorable images.

Again, I could care less about the idea of being fired. Most of the victims in the film are shrugged off as soon as they leave the screen, except for one late breaking revelation (mild spoiler) about a woman who commits suicide, an element seemingly played for laughs and then mined for underserved pathos.

Other than Jason Bateman's well=played sleazeball, there's nothing really gained from the entire premise. But everyone is just so damn likeable, and Young MC randomly shows up!



What Did It Acheive?

Around the time of the Toronto film festival, it looked like Up In The Air was the clear Best Picture frontrunner, and Clooney was on the was to his second Oscar. The tides clearly have changed since, as Bridges will win easily, and voters loved The Hurt Locker and District 9 so much they forgot to even nominate Up In The Air for Editing (a deathblow).

But Reitman is now in the critical stratosphere, having moved from farce (Thank You For Smoking) and tweeness (Juno) into Serious Oscar Movies. Kendrick should get work outside of Twilight sequels for sure, and Farmiga can add Oscar nominee to her growing resume. Clooney- he was already a huge likeable star.

Will I Remember It Years From Now?

Whether it worked for me or not, the employment crisis angle lends a lot of timeliness to Up In The Air that will fix it in memory. It's also somewhat universal for anyone who's ever traveled alone. It hits a lot of cliches (a groom with cold feet? Really?) but has the right cast and director to hit them very well.

What a great, great category this year. Apparently it takes 16 animated films in a year to expand the nominations to five, and we just barely squeaked by in '09.

There's your obligatory Pixar, an old-school hand-drawn Disney film, two great claymation entires (one based on a book by my favorite author), and just when you thought the last spot would go to a generic crowd-pleaser like Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs, along comes an unheralded but awesome-looking Irish sleeper.

1. Coraline

Neil Gaiman would be the aforementioned favorite author of mine (better luck next time, Roald Dahl), and while Stardust was passable entertainment, Henry Selick's Coraline is by far superior in both overall quality and in capturing the spirit of Gaiman's work, seamlessly blending fright with wonder.

Dakota Fanning manages not to annoy the stuffing out of me in pure voice form, and beyond Teri Hatcher every other choice is a ringer: John Hodgman, Ian McShane, Dawn and French, and even a brief cameo by a They Might Be Giant.

2. Fantastic Mr. Fox

Not only would I have included this in the Best Picture race over Up, I would also venture that it was grieviously overlooked for both Adapted Screenplay and Art Direction- isn't set decoration harder when it's really, really small?

3. The Princess and the Frog

Didn't see it, sure it's fun, and so on. Not sure if I ever will, even though frogs are my favorite animals.

4. The Secret Of Kells

This hasn't been released in the U.S. as of yet, but my "friend" who lives in "Ireland" and has no idea what a torrent is whatsoever saw it and told me it was amazing.

A visually mesmerizing, hand-crafted style and Bruno Callais' painfully-snubbed score support a story set in the 9th century about monks, vikings, forest spirits, and an adorable cat. It's snappy, but has the straightforward, unexplained mysticism of a Miyazaki film.

...or so I hear.

5. Up

See the previous post on how this film was fine enough, but not a home run- more Cars than Wall-E, at least for me. But there's pretty much no way it's losing, unless enough people fall in love with The Secret of Kells- and hey, they're technically required to see all five before voting.

My altered Oscar Nominations, if I could only nominate the films I have seen (A rule I made up for mine.- Duncan). Sin Nombre to Me = The Blind Side to the Academy.

Best Visual Effects

District 9
Star Trek
Terminator: Salvation

Best Sound Effects

District 9
Drag Me to Hell
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Star Trek

Best Sound Effects Editing

District 9
Drag Me to Hell
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Star Trek

Best Make Up

District 9
The Road
Star Trek

More...

Best Costume Design

Inglourious Basterds
A Serious Man
Watchmen
Where the Wild Things Are

Best Art Direction

District 9
Inglourious Basterds
The Road
Watchmen
Where the Wild Things Are

Best Song

Crazy Heart – “The Weary Kind”
Fantastic Mr. Fox – “Petey’s Song”
The Hangover – “Stu’s Song”
It Might Get Loud – “Fly Farm Blues”
Where the Wild Things Are – “All Is Love”

Best Score

Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Hurt Locker
Star Trek
Up
Where the Wild Things Are

Best Animated Feature

Coraline
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Up

Best Cinematography

District 9
Drag Me to Hell
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
A Serious Man

Best Film Editing

District 9
Drag Me to Hell
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
A Serious Man

Best Adapted Screenplay

Coraline
District 9
Fantastic Mr. Fox
In the Loop
Star Trek

Best Original Screenplay

Drag Me to Hell
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
A Serious Man
Up

Best Supporting Actress

Rinko Kikuchi – The Brothers Bloom
Diane Krueger – Inglourious Basterds
Melanie Laurent – Inglourious Basterds
Mo’Nique – Precious
Lorna Raver – Drag Me to Hell

Best Supporting Actor

Peter Capaldi – In the Loop
Billy Crudup - Watchmen
Richard Kind – A Serious Man
Anthony Mackie – The Hurt Locker
Christoph Waltz – Inglourious Basterds

Best Actress

Sandra Bullock – The Proposal
Paulina Gaitan – Sin Nombre
Alison Lohman – Drag Me to Hell
Gabourey Sidibe – Precious
Meryl Streep – Julie and Julia
Rachel Weisz – The Brothers Bloom

Best Actor

Sharlto Copley – District 9
Liam Neeson – Taken
Brad Pitt – Inglourious Basterds
Jeremy Renner – The Hurt Locker
Michael Stuhlbarg – A Serious Man





Best Director

Kathryn Bigelow – The Hurt Locker
Neil Blomkamp – District 9
Pete Docter – Up
Sam Raimi – Drag Me to Hell
Quentin Tarantino – Inglourious Basterds

Best Picture

District 9
Drag Me to Hell
Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Hurt Locker
In the Loop
Inglourious Basterds
A Serious Man
Sin Nombre
Star Trek
Up

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

Was It Any Good?

We're well past the point that we should just amend the dictionery to contain:

Pixarian- adj.- of consistently superior quality.
The ballplayer put up winningly Pixarian numbers from season to season.

Up continues the 10 film winning streak, this time all the way to the Best Picture race. The story is whimsically simple, something of a regression from recent concepts like Wall-E and Ratatouille: widower grows cranky, leaves society by tying balloons to his house.

My verdict was good, not great.

Would I See It Again?

Sure, I guess- I actually put it on my Christmas list before seeing it on blnd faith, and I can't say I'm dissapointed.

It's just a bit of a letdown after Wall-E, a film that deserved a Best Picture nomination last year even before the expansion, given the field (cough). And although the image of the house is unique and the animation splendid as always, it's by far the most pedestrian Pixar concept so far: the list goes toys come to life, bugs run a circus, toys come to life again, monsters harvest screams for power, clown fish loses son, superheroes faced with lawsuit, talking car gets lost, rat wants to cook, last robot on earth falls in love, and then... old man is cranky?

And the characters aren't terribly rich, either. As wonderful as the opening montage of Carl's lifetime with his wife was, he's a pretty generic cranky-old-dude archetype for the rest of the film. His little sidekick Russel is a pretty run of the mill annoying kid, until some revelations about his parents' divorce halfway through.



What Did It Acheive?

Second highest grossing Pixar film, and of course along with Avatar the first animated Best Picture nominee since Beauty And The Beast. And we all know that it's bringing in the fifth Animated Feature Oscar on March 7th.

Will I Remember It Years From Now?

I did see, at some point, Pete Docter's other Pixar collaboration, Monsters, Inc., but I find my memories of it very sketchy. So I'll have to get back to you. Though only a few moments in Up made me roll my eyes as much as Billy Crystal's tired Vaudevillian schtick (namely when the dogs played poker and obvious gags like the GPS falling).

Maybe it doesn't help that it's the first Pixar movie with human protagonists, as I found myself wondering a lot of pragmatic questions, about how long it would take to float to South America and so forth. Pixar's great at animals and robots, but it might still be south of the uncanny valley for humanfolk.

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.

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

Was It Any Good?

There's a moment in A Serious Man when Michael Stuhlbarg, as a put-upon Jewish physics professor with his life falling apart, goes to the second of three rabbis for counsel. The rabbi tells him a story of a dentist confronted with a bewildering mystery, one that turned out to have no answer. A frustrated Stuhlbarg asks "Why even tell me the story?!"

As much as I like the Coen Bros., I have to say: seconded.

A Serious Man is executed well, and clearly complete in its nostalgia for the suburbs of Minneapolis in 1967, but I was sort of left wondering why we were bothering to visit. There are questions raised, but little pontificating and no answers at all.

The "black comedy" seems to be mostly terrible things happening to Stuhlbarg's character, as well as interminably long pacing while we wait for old Jewish people to speak- a very similar scene late in Intolerable Cruelty makes me think the Coens and I differ greatly in how funny we think old men wheezing for breath happen to be.

Would I See It Again?

Nyet. No thank you, I'm afraid. Is this the license the Coen brothers are granted after winning four Oscars apiece? An inscrutable labor of love to their own childhoods that's as dour and humorless as they seem to be in interviews?

It would help if the film were focused to Stuhlbarg alone, but several scenes follow his pothead son about to have his bar mitzvah- I can't think of any reason the story necessitates that we follow him at all, other than that the directors were about his age at the time that's depicted.



What Did It Acheive?

Well, 87% of critics disagree with me in general, according to Rotten Tomatoes, and enough AMPAS voters as well. And beyond any issues I had, it's certainly a finely crafted movie, with Roger Deakins beautiful framing and the ever popular "Roderick Jaynes" cutting together one great sequence in the middle (during the second rabbi's story).

Will I Remember It Years From Now?

Not in particular. Maybe it would speak to me more if I were religious myself, but I found it empty.

Sure, there's a universal idea there- as Stuhlbarg says, "Why Me?" But I get enough of that movie outside of the theater.

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

Was It Any Good?

It was certainly quite the acting showcase, if nothing else. Gabourey Sidibe more than earns a lead actress nomination, and nearly every scene Mo'Nique is in leads to one of those patented Oscar Moments that pave the way to an unstoppable awards run.

Lee Daniels sets a sort of frenetic early pace that really makes it seem like the second half of the film is dragging, but I can see why Precious: Based on that film "Push" that had Chris Evans and Dakota Fanning earned an editing nomination over Up In The Air.

The story itself is almot pathologically relentless- it got to the point where (spoiler) after the late revelation that Precious also has AIDS I was kind of throwing up my hands. What is this, "RENT"? It might have been less of an extreme pile-up if Daniels hadn't made the travails of the beginning so thoroughly in our faces. Between the fluttering images, rapid Requiem For A Dream-style edits, and horror-film flashbacks, it's hard to have anything left for the home stretch.

Would I See It Again?

I'm going to abstain- even the dramas that leave me utterly speechless are things I'm unlikely to watch again. I'm glad I watched it, but I don't think I missed much the first time around.

The thing is, Precious: Based on the "Push" Sign Often Seen On Doors wants to have it several ways at once: powerful character drama, light-hearted coming of age story, and wry social commentary (Precious has several fantasy sequences of being a model or movie star that jar with the rest of the movie).



What Did It Acheive?

A best picture nomination is no small feat for an indie movie about uncomfortable subjects (and we all know that Precious: Based on the song "Push" by Matchbox Twenty is one of the five "real" nominees).

Time will tell if it launches careers, but it certainly has one Oscar in the bag as of yesterday.

Will I Remember It Years From Now?

I'll certainly carry the viewing experience longer than most other films, and I'm always happy with clunky titles.

I mean, Precious: Based on a Tie in the Game Of Blackjack is the best title since The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford!

One more note: Paula Patton plays a pretty standard heart-of-gold teacher very well, but the real supporting turn I was impressed with? Mariah Carey summons up a gravelly voice and an odd wig and puts in a few great scenes as a prickly social worker. She wasn't all that likeable, but she seemed like a real person that wanted to help. The movie ends with a key confrontation scene between the two leads, but Carey's mediating presence in that scene is important.

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.

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

Was It Any Good?

Plenty of fun, easy to forget is the best way to describe it. It's like somebody asked Quentin Tarantino "if you could time travel, what would you do first?" and instead of just saying "I'd kill Hitler" like a normal person he went and made this movie instead.

It's full of some labored pacing, in my opinion- at this point, hasn't QT done enough Mexican standoffs? Enough tension filled conversations in which double agents are desperate not to be discovered?

But that's just his style, I guess.

Would I See It Again?

Just watched it for the second time, and found it just as much fun, I'd say. It helps, in certain situations, to know that Jews are hiding under floorboards the whole time, or to know that the bar scene won't go on forever.

Though there's no way to replicate the first time you see it and (spoilers from here) Hitler and Goebbels are riddled with bullets. It sort of makes you realize that movies aren't beholden to reality, which I suppose should be obvious to begin with, but hey.

Take Valkyrie, based on a real-life failed plot to kill Hitler. Basterds I think relies on the same exact tension until the final fifteen minutes or so, when it just goes "Psych!" and everything explodes brilliantly.

Not sure if I need to own it, though- it's got some annoying Tarantino quirks that I've never really been down for. The title, which he's referred to as both "a Basquiat-esque touch" and the "Tarantino way of spelling it," is just ridiculous to me. If there is an explanation, no doubt it's more pointless than withholding the name of The Bride in the Kill Bill movies. Hans Landa, while I loved Christoph Waltz's portrayal, is a character that can only exist in Tarantino-world, making us listen to him chew things and take forever to get to the point at every opportunity.



What Did It Acheive?

Well, it's the most profitable and lauded Tarantino film to date, and it's definitely a dark horse for Best Picture. It's easy to think it would have a real chance at winning if the camera panned up whenever they were scalping people, or if Samuel L. Jackson didn't randomly narrate flashbacks from time to time.

Will I Remember It Years From Now?

Brad Pitt ends the film as a mouthpiece for Tarantino, claiming "this might just be my masterpiece," but I can't say I agree. It's fun, sure, and I liked it.

But it's just a little on the surface for me. Though it's told chronologically, it's still split into five parts, and each one is either a tense standoff or a melee- things like characterization happen in between all these moments. I could've standed to lose one subplot or another to actually build up the others.

And there's no morality here- it's basically Godwin's law made into a film. Only Waltz is frightening, and he jumps at the chance to betray the rest of the Nazis, who to a man are incompetent, buffoonish, and shrieking cowards. I expected them to start stepping on rakes and falling down stairs. It makes the potshots taken at the Third Reich's propoganda films seem a little hypocritical.

Goebbels in particular is portrayed as a simpering egomaniac that's convinced he's creating the future of cinema- maybe it's just me, but doesn't that stray a little bit into self-parody?

Moving on, we come to a category wherein I've only seen one of the five nominees. Guesswork it is, although reputation seems to matter a lot to costumers.


1. Bright Star- Janet Patterson (0 for 3)

This is Patterson's third nomination for her work with director Jane Campion- I'm sure the work is admirable, but nobody saw this film.


2. Coco before Chanel- Catherine Leterrier (0 for 0)

I'd be surprised for a rookie to win here- especially since the consensus about the film seemed to be mostly "Who cares about Coco before Chanel?" I would assume the odd choice of focus led to some missed costuming opportunities.


3. The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus- Monique Prudhomme (0 for 0)

Number of Oscars won by any Terry Gilliam film: 1, for Mercedes Ruehl in The Fisher King. They always deserve to win in costumes and art direction, but they never do. It's a fact.


4. Nine- Colleen Atwood (2 for 8)

My gut is telling me that Atwood takes this- this is based mostly on her win for Rob Marshall's Chicago, and the reputation of Nine as being pretty to look at, but little else. Plus, none of the other nominees have any buzz.


5. The Young Victoria- Sandy Powell (2 for 7)

The biggest potential spoiler- some might even say it's foolish of me not to back the period piece, since The Duchess , Elizabeth: The Golden Age, and Marie Antoionette took the last three awards despite similar lackluster receptions. Hmmm....

Box Office breaks the tie: Nine ekes by at $38 million to $24 million worldwide.

ETA: The Young Victoria takes the guild award, so I'm officially reversing this pick as of 2/25/10. I'm allowed to do these things.