There are filmmakers, and then there is Lars Von Trier. Known for pushing his audiences, actresses, actors and himself to the brink of exhaustion, testing comfort zones and obliterating anything that will make a film conventionally accessible and easy, it's always a thrill to find out what he's up to. This time, it's a horror film called Antichrist that finds Charlotte Gainsbourg and Willem Dafoe in some creepy woods, slowly losing their minds. Here's the awesome trailer:
Lars von Trier's Antichrist - Official Trailer from Zentropa on Vimeo.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Piracy begins at home
Last week, a copy of the hotly anticipated film X-Men Origins: Wolverine made its way online, and onto the hard drives of film nerds everywhere. While it was ten minutes shorter than the final cut, and had many of the special effects still incomplete, Hollywood executives and American congressmen quickly found another excuse furrow their brows at pirates and make more noise for broader internet laws that would compel internet service providers to identify the names of users downloading copyrighted content.
Yesterday, a congressional hearing convened in California where executives, filmmakers and politicians all wrung their hands over the supposed billions of dollars in revenue lost due to piracy. Richard Cook, the chairman of Walt Disney Studios claimed a copy of Wall-E recorded on a camcorder in a theater in Kiev made its way onto street corners worldwide. However, in all of these discussions, not one word was made of the source of the biggest leaks in Hollywood - the industry itself.
What hasn't been mentioned in most of the articles covering the leak of X-Men Origins: Wolverine is that there is only one place where a copy of a unfinished film could've been made: inside a post-production house. But what is unique about this situation, is that it's not unique at all. Just this past winter I found copies of Gran Torino, Doubt, Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button and The Wrestler online in perfect DVD quality bootlegs. The source of these copies were from Oscar screeners given to Hollywood executives, producers, critics and I'm assuming, anyone who wants a copy.
What Hollywood doesn't get - or doesn't want to acknowledge - is that the days of camcorder quality copies being the acceptable standard is long gone. Are they still being sold on street corners? I have no doubt they are, but these are from vendors who know are making a quick buck from people who think if they spend $2 they are going to get a high quality copy of the film, but instead get something that looks like Kramer filmed it. I go to quite a few preview screenings of films every year, and each time, the rent-a-cops make a big deal of waving their metal detectors and asking everyone who has cells phone with them to turn them off before being allowed to enter the theater. Do you really think someone is sitting at home, waiting for me to take a blurry photo or video with my iPhone to be uploaded to the web? Or would they rather wait for the rip of the DVD screener that will appear online? If Hollywood suits actually took to the time to really take a look at the torrent sites out there, they will see them teeming with superior quality bootlegs of films that are in theaters.
Piracy is a complex issue that will require a complex answer. An RIAA styled approach of identifying users and handing out lawsuits simply doesn't work. Their method often ended up targeting users who had done nothing wrong, and in the long run did absolutely nothing to stop piracy and turned the general public against them with their misguided tactics. However, if Hollywood and politicians are serious about curbing piracy, it will only work if they begin the search in their own backyard. Workprints, screener and promotional copies need to tracked and encrypted more vigorously. Each studio should consider moving toward a password protected site where movies can stream for internal, industry use only. When leaks like what happened with X-Men Origins: Wolverine occur, their anger needs to be pointed in the right direction. As much of a hack as he is, writer Roger Friedman is the wrong person to be losing his job. What Fox needs to do is get every head of every post-production company who would've had access to the workprint on the phone and let them know in no uncertain terms that the company or companies involved in the leak must do their own internal investigation and bring the perpetrators to light. If Fox is the one who ends up finding out who it is on their own, they will cease all further business with that company moving forward. No company is going to want to risk losing the business of a major Hollywood studio and I think Fox will be amazed at how quickly the person or persons responsible will be found.
The movie industry is quickly finding themselves in a situation that the music industry found itself in about seven years ago. Unlike the RIAA who stubbornly clung to their old distribution method to the point of destroying themselves, Hollywood has at least taken to digital distribution and are experimenting with new models of creating excitement for not only new releases, but for their back catalog titles as well. Warner Brothers recently launched Warner Archive, a made to order DVD service for the more obscure or less commercial films in their vast back catalog. Cinephiles, who have long been reduced to trader to trader copies of various quality levels for these kinds of films, are rejoicing at the studio for taking this kind of initiative. If Hollywood continues to find new ways to engage their customers, while doing the necessary steps behind the scenes to better protect their property, piracy - while it will never go away completely - can at least be more manageably contained.
Yesterday, a congressional hearing convened in California where executives, filmmakers and politicians all wrung their hands over the supposed billions of dollars in revenue lost due to piracy. Richard Cook, the chairman of Walt Disney Studios claimed a copy of Wall-E recorded on a camcorder in a theater in Kiev made its way onto street corners worldwide. However, in all of these discussions, not one word was made of the source of the biggest leaks in Hollywood - the industry itself.
What hasn't been mentioned in most of the articles covering the leak of X-Men Origins: Wolverine is that there is only one place where a copy of a unfinished film could've been made: inside a post-production house. But what is unique about this situation, is that it's not unique at all. Just this past winter I found copies of Gran Torino, Doubt, Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button and The Wrestler online in perfect DVD quality bootlegs. The source of these copies were from Oscar screeners given to Hollywood executives, producers, critics and I'm assuming, anyone who wants a copy.
What Hollywood doesn't get - or doesn't want to acknowledge - is that the days of camcorder quality copies being the acceptable standard is long gone. Are they still being sold on street corners? I have no doubt they are, but these are from vendors who know are making a quick buck from people who think if they spend $2 they are going to get a high quality copy of the film, but instead get something that looks like Kramer filmed it. I go to quite a few preview screenings of films every year, and each time, the rent-a-cops make a big deal of waving their metal detectors and asking everyone who has cells phone with them to turn them off before being allowed to enter the theater. Do you really think someone is sitting at home, waiting for me to take a blurry photo or video with my iPhone to be uploaded to the web? Or would they rather wait for the rip of the DVD screener that will appear online? If Hollywood suits actually took to the time to really take a look at the torrent sites out there, they will see them teeming with superior quality bootlegs of films that are in theaters.
Piracy is a complex issue that will require a complex answer. An RIAA styled approach of identifying users and handing out lawsuits simply doesn't work. Their method often ended up targeting users who had done nothing wrong, and in the long run did absolutely nothing to stop piracy and turned the general public against them with their misguided tactics. However, if Hollywood and politicians are serious about curbing piracy, it will only work if they begin the search in their own backyard. Workprints, screener and promotional copies need to tracked and encrypted more vigorously. Each studio should consider moving toward a password protected site where movies can stream for internal, industry use only. When leaks like what happened with X-Men Origins: Wolverine occur, their anger needs to be pointed in the right direction. As much of a hack as he is, writer Roger Friedman is the wrong person to be losing his job. What Fox needs to do is get every head of every post-production company who would've had access to the workprint on the phone and let them know in no uncertain terms that the company or companies involved in the leak must do their own internal investigation and bring the perpetrators to light. If Fox is the one who ends up finding out who it is on their own, they will cease all further business with that company moving forward. No company is going to want to risk losing the business of a major Hollywood studio and I think Fox will be amazed at how quickly the person or persons responsible will be found.
The movie industry is quickly finding themselves in a situation that the music industry found itself in about seven years ago. Unlike the RIAA who stubbornly clung to their old distribution method to the point of destroying themselves, Hollywood has at least taken to digital distribution and are experimenting with new models of creating excitement for not only new releases, but for their back catalog titles as well. Warner Brothers recently launched Warner Archive, a made to order DVD service for the more obscure or less commercial films in their vast back catalog. Cinephiles, who have long been reduced to trader to trader copies of various quality levels for these kinds of films, are rejoicing at the studio for taking this kind of initiative. If Hollywood continues to find new ways to engage their customers, while doing the necessary steps behind the scenes to better protect their property, piracy - while it will never go away completely - can at least be more manageably contained.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Love and desire
When Leonard (Joaquin Phoenix) and Sandra (Vinessa Shaw) meet for the first time, it’s at a get together arranged by their parents. They make small talk, but when they get a moment alone, Sandra shyly admits that when she first saw Leonard at the dry cleaning store owned by his father, she wanted to meet him. After this revelation, the camera pulls back to show Sandra in a medium shot, sitting in the center of a couch, as Leonard seems to see her for the first time. It’s these kinds of touches that make elevate James Gray’s Two Lovers from a standard melodrama into something enigmatic and sensual.
Leonard, still reeling from the dissolution of his engagement with his fiancé, is back living at home, working at his father’s store and trying to figure out what to do with his life. In addition to Sandra, the daughter of another dry cleaning storeowner in negotiations to buy Leonard’s family business, there is Michelle (Gwyneth Paltrow), the mysterious neighbor upstairs. Leonard, attracted to both, begins a journey to try and replace the wound left by his fiancé. With Sandra, there are no surprises. She puts her heart on her sleeve, and though she doesn’t know the depth of Leonard’s emotional damage, she is committed to being there for him. She finds trust in Leonard’s tact, and unlike the other men who have tried to woo her, she admires that he doesn’t try to pretend to be something he’s not. However, Michelle is a wildcard, outgoing and seemingly successful. However, her ongoing affair with married lawyer Ronald (Elias Koteas) has left her needy and vulnerable, unable to contemplate a future without him.
If this all sounds rather dramatic and salacious on paper, in execution, it’s far more subtle and powerful. The linchpin to the film’s success is in the phenomenal performance by Joaquin Phoenix. Uncomfortable in his own skin and by turns charming and withdrawn, his take on Leonard finds the complexity and loss of a man drifting in his loneliness. There is a magnificent setpiece in a Manhattan restaurant, where Leonard is meeting Michelle and Ronald for dinner. He’s there to help Michelle assess whether or not Ronald really is sincere when he says he will leave his family to be with her. Leonard arrives early in a slightly rumpled suit and is seated at the table, set in a half circle booth. As he waits, he shifts uncomfortably, trying desperately to look at home in surroundings well outside his tax bracket. When Ronald and Michelle arrive and slide in, Leonard moves from the middle of the frame, in the center of the booth to the edge and almost outside the camera’s range, cowed by Ronald’s stature. It's a small touch that speaks volumes about Phoenix's character. The supporting cast also works wonders with the script, particularly Isabella Rossellini as Leonard’s mother Ruth. Her lines are few, however much of her performance is on her face, as she looks at Leonard with a mother’s knowledge of his pain combined with her maternal concern. Her presence in these scenes with Leonard is astonishing.
Two Lovers is a devastatingly beautiful look at the difference between love and desire, and the vulnerability that comes with giving your heart to another. Mature in a way that few films are, and surrounded by an aura of breathless longing, Two Lovers finds hope in the deepest of despair.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Whatever It Is, I'm Against It!
A few weeks ago, I reacquainted myself with the films of the Marx Brothers. I hadn't watched them in about a decade and as they proceeded to leave me in paroxysms of laughter, I wondered why I waited so long. I had planned to write a post about Groucho, Harpo, Chico and Zeppo but it's difficult to articulate what makes them so utterly charming and effortlessly funny. So instead, I spent this evening grabbing some clips from YouTube that will hopefully do the work for me. If you like what you see below, please go rent or buy Monkey Business and Duck Soup, two excellent starting points for this team that produced the kind of laughs they just don't make anymore.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Homeland or death!
The roadshow version of Che finally arrived in Montreal, and to be sure, four and a half hours in a movie theater (including intermission) is a test for any moviegoer. But when it’s a dense, Spanish language film about revolutionary politics and guerilla warfare, the film demands a certain dedication. But not only does director Steven Soderbergh reward the audience for sticking with him through his riveting film, he has created one of the most intriguing portraits of a political figure in recent memory.
Part One of the film covers the intial meeting of Guevara and Fidel Castro, the roots of the Cuban revolution and the gradual taking of the entire country. Spliced into the story, is a narrative covering Guevara’s interview by CBS reporter Lisa Howard, his 1964 visit to New York City and speech to the United Nations. At first, the connection between the stories isn’t quite apparent, but what emerges is a study of contrasts. Soderbergh’s film instead of being a straight biography of Che Guevara, uses the figure to investigate where ideological and political warfare intersect and separate. As we watch Guevara gradually construct an army built from peasants, introduce reading and writing in makeshift camps and bring medical care to those who’ve never had it, we are blunted by this same man in military fatigues in swanky Manhattan apartments being asked for autographs and having his photo taken. And as Guevara speaks to the UN, it becomes apparent that the direct actions that are perhaps required in a third world nation, are not easily rationalized to an audience of first world politicians where warfare is conducted in meetings and handshakes.
While Castro transitioned easily from revolutionary to politician, Guevara’s ideals still drove him, and Part Two finds him in the jungles of Bolivia bringing the ideals forged in Cuba to a new struggle for independence. But more than a decade has passed, and the United States in the thick of Vietnam and an emerging Cold War have become more active in quashing unfriendly movements and anything perceived as being communist. The Bolivian government’s response to rumors of Guevara organizing in the countryside isn’t an ideological affront, but rather politically calculating. They engage US intelligence, spread propaganda and initially deny the presence of Guevara at all. Meanwhile, Guevara sticks to his methods used earlier in Cuba but finds loyalty harder to earn, discipline lacking, peasants more fearful and stigmatization because of his foreign status.
What emerges is a complex portrait of a man that Soderbergh bravely decides not to pass judgment on in either direction. Guevara is neither idolized nor pilloried, instead it’s only the results of his actions that are depicted. We see a man committed to educating his people and creating a society based on communal resources and values. However, we also see a man who at times is so stubbornly committed to his political vision, that he is blinded to their consequences which are more often than not, tragic.
Many have criticized Che for skipping over key parts of Guevara’s life or not being more critical about the blood on his hands, however, Soderbergh is wise in not trying to summarize a life that has become mythic in stature. Che is an ideological sketch of a man who struggled between his political, guerilla and humanitarian beliefs right up until his death.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Teasing An Embrace
The thirty second teaser for my fifth most anticipated film of the year is now online, and it looks absolutely gorgeous. Watch it here.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
If I Picked The Winners
Well, the Oscars are now a few days away so here are my predictions along with who I would pick to win, nominated or not. And yes, the title of this post is an homage to the great Siskel & Ebert Oscar special If We Picked The Winners that I used to watch religiously every year.
Performance by an actor in a leading role
Richard Jenkins in The Visitor
Frank Langella in Frost/Nixon
Sean Penn in Milk
Brad Pitt in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler
Prediction: Mickey Rourke
Who Should Win: Mickey Rourke
Firstly, kudos to the Academy for recognizing Richard Jenkins for his graceful work in The Visitor. It's great to see such a consistent character actor get recognized, especially for a film without a megabucks marketing campaign behind it. However, no other performance this year was as deeply felt or wrenchingly moving as Rourke’s turn as a wrestler on his last legs. With his career revitalizing turn, Rourke proves there are few actors working today who can exude such raw masculinity and aching vulnerability at the same time, the way he does here. Hopefully he’ll stay clean, make some smart choices and finally live up to the promise that has only been hinted at for much of his career.
Performance by an actor in a supporting role
Josh Brolin in Milk
Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder
Philip Seymour Hoffman in Doubt
Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight
Michael Shannon in Revolutionary Road
Prediction: Heath Ledger
Who Should Win: Heath Ledger
Who Should’ve Been Nominated: Bill Irwin in Rachel Getting Married
There is no doubt that Heath Ledger’s incarnation of the gleefully psychotic Joker was the performance of the year. However, the Academy should’ve honored Bill Irwin with a nomination for his fantastic work in Rachel Getting Married, instead of rewarding Robert Downey Jr. for his funny, if somewhat one-dimensional turn in the otherwise tepid Tropic Thunder.
Performance by an actress in a leading role
Anne Hathaway in Rachel Getting Married
Angelina Jolie in Changeling
Melissa Leo in Frozen River
Meryl Streep in Doubt
Kate Winslet in The Reader
Prediction: Kate Winslet
Who Should Win: Meryl Streep
You’ve got to hand it to Harvey Weinstein. The man can Oscar campaign like no one else, and what he has done with the critically shrugged Holocaust melodrama The Reader is remarkable. The biggest beneficiary has been Kate Winslet who has won a surprising number of nominations for her role in the film. I haven’t seen the film, but I have no doubt Winslet is fine in it, but really, for a film that critics have been holding at arms length, it’s been purely positioning and glad handing that have gotten the film this far. Streep, who has been nominated for an Oscar a staggering fifteen times and won twice, is loved by the Academy but taken for granted for exactly the kind of work she does in Doubt. There is a pivotal moment in the final minutes of Doubt in which Streep does the kind of acting that is a shocking reminder of just how great she can be. What she does with her character in those moments is so perfectly executed, it completely shapes the outcome of the entire film, and is a reminder of why she is one of the greatest actresses’ of her generation.
Performance by an actress in a supporting role
Amy Adams in Doubt
Penélope Cruz in Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Viola Davis in Doubt
Taraji P. Henson in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Marisa Tomei in The Wrestler
Prediction: Penelope Cruz
Who Should Win: Penelope Cruz
Penelope Cruz only enters Vicky Cristina Barcelona about halfway through the film, but when she does, she’s a tornado of fiery emotion. Playing Javier Bardem’s volatile ex-wife, it’s Cruz who brings Woody Allen’s vision full circle with a performance that edges her character with a flinty vulnerability. Yes, it’s a showy performance, but it’s honest and is crucial to holding the thematic arc of the film together.
Achievement in cinematography
Tom Stern for Changeling
Claudio Miranda for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Wally Pfister for The Dark Knight
Chris Menges and Roger Deakins for The Reader
Anthony Dod Mantle for Slumdog Millionaire
Prediction: Wally Pfister
Who Should Win: Javier Aguirresarobe for Vicky Cristina Barcelona
There is no doubt that Wally Pfister’s work on The Dark Knight was nothing short of breathtaking. Using Chicago as a stand-in for Gotham City, Pfister created some truly dazzling scenes, particularly during the IMAX sequences that completely brought a new angle to metropolitan based crime dramas. However, nothing affected me as greatly this year as Javier Aguirresrobe’s work on Vicky Cristina Barcelona. His honey colored scenes of Barcelona and rural towns were awe-inspiring, dreamlike and utterly gorgeous, making it quite understandable to see how the two transplanted Americans could so easily be charmed by the Spanish countryside.
Achievement in directing
David Fincher for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Ron Howard for Frost/Nixon
Gus Van Sant for Milk
Stephen Daldry for The Reader
Danny Boyle for Slumdog Millionaire
Prediction: Danny Boyle
Who Should Win: Darren Aronofsky for The Wrestler
No other director this year made such a stylistic 180 as Darren Aronofsky. Usually known for his highly visual, individual work, The Wrestler, found Aronofsky borrowing a page from the Dardennes brothers and going for a simple handheld, observational style. The result allowed Rourke’s extraordinary performance to really shine, as well as create a remarkably intimate connection between the audience and the characters. With The Wrestler, Aronofsky reveals himself as an evolving, maturing director.
Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original score)
Alexandre Desplat for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
James Newton Howard for Defiance
Danny Elfman for Milk
A.R. Rahman for Slumdog Millionaire
Thomas Newman for WALL-E
Prediction: Alexandre Desplat
Who Should Win: Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard for The Dark Knight
Though I think Alexandre Desplat is one of the best contemporary film composers working today, his score The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button is not his best stuff. On the other hand, James Newton Howard has had some good pieces here and there (his work on Signs is a stand out for me), but he truly surprised me with the collaborative compositions put together with Hans Zimmer for The Dark Knight. I can’t recall the last time a mainstream, blockbuster film so readily made use of something so avant garde as “A Little Push” for a character signal. However, that one brief piece of music used for the Joker added a dimension of unease to Ledger’s already magnetically terrifying performance. It’s no surprise that after the Academy’s embarrassing infighting regarding the duo’s eligibility for Oscar consideration that they ultimately weren’t nominated, but they should be recognized for daring to push mainstream film composition in interesting new directions.
Best motion picture of the year
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Prediction: Slumdog Millionaire
Who Should Win: Vicky Cristina Barcelona
No surprise here. Vicky Cristina Barcelona was my favorite film of last year, and if it were up to me I’d give it an Oscar too. But something tells me that Woody Allen, who is by choice not an Academy member and has stated having no interest in the awards, is happy to continue working without being bothered by the momentary glam and glitz of Hollywood’s biggest night.
Performance by an actor in a leading role
Richard Jenkins in The Visitor
Frank Langella in Frost/Nixon
Sean Penn in Milk
Brad Pitt in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler
Prediction: Mickey Rourke
Who Should Win: Mickey Rourke
Firstly, kudos to the Academy for recognizing Richard Jenkins for his graceful work in The Visitor. It's great to see such a consistent character actor get recognized, especially for a film without a megabucks marketing campaign behind it. However, no other performance this year was as deeply felt or wrenchingly moving as Rourke’s turn as a wrestler on his last legs. With his career revitalizing turn, Rourke proves there are few actors working today who can exude such raw masculinity and aching vulnerability at the same time, the way he does here. Hopefully he’ll stay clean, make some smart choices and finally live up to the promise that has only been hinted at for much of his career.
Performance by an actor in a supporting role
Josh Brolin in Milk
Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder
Philip Seymour Hoffman in Doubt
Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight
Michael Shannon in Revolutionary Road
Prediction: Heath Ledger
Who Should Win: Heath Ledger
Who Should’ve Been Nominated: Bill Irwin in Rachel Getting Married
There is no doubt that Heath Ledger’s incarnation of the gleefully psychotic Joker was the performance of the year. However, the Academy should’ve honored Bill Irwin with a nomination for his fantastic work in Rachel Getting Married, instead of rewarding Robert Downey Jr. for his funny, if somewhat one-dimensional turn in the otherwise tepid Tropic Thunder.
Performance by an actress in a leading role
Anne Hathaway in Rachel Getting Married
Angelina Jolie in Changeling
Melissa Leo in Frozen River
Meryl Streep in Doubt
Kate Winslet in The Reader
Prediction: Kate Winslet
Who Should Win: Meryl Streep
You’ve got to hand it to Harvey Weinstein. The man can Oscar campaign like no one else, and what he has done with the critically shrugged Holocaust melodrama The Reader is remarkable. The biggest beneficiary has been Kate Winslet who has won a surprising number of nominations for her role in the film. I haven’t seen the film, but I have no doubt Winslet is fine in it, but really, for a film that critics have been holding at arms length, it’s been purely positioning and glad handing that have gotten the film this far. Streep, who has been nominated for an Oscar a staggering fifteen times and won twice, is loved by the Academy but taken for granted for exactly the kind of work she does in Doubt. There is a pivotal moment in the final minutes of Doubt in which Streep does the kind of acting that is a shocking reminder of just how great she can be. What she does with her character in those moments is so perfectly executed, it completely shapes the outcome of the entire film, and is a reminder of why she is one of the greatest actresses’ of her generation.
Performance by an actress in a supporting role
Amy Adams in Doubt
Penélope Cruz in Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Viola Davis in Doubt
Taraji P. Henson in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Marisa Tomei in The Wrestler
Prediction: Penelope Cruz
Who Should Win: Penelope Cruz
Penelope Cruz only enters Vicky Cristina Barcelona about halfway through the film, but when she does, she’s a tornado of fiery emotion. Playing Javier Bardem’s volatile ex-wife, it’s Cruz who brings Woody Allen’s vision full circle with a performance that edges her character with a flinty vulnerability. Yes, it’s a showy performance, but it’s honest and is crucial to holding the thematic arc of the film together.
Achievement in cinematography
Tom Stern for Changeling
Claudio Miranda for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Wally Pfister for The Dark Knight
Chris Menges and Roger Deakins for The Reader
Anthony Dod Mantle for Slumdog Millionaire
Prediction: Wally Pfister
Who Should Win: Javier Aguirresarobe for Vicky Cristina Barcelona
There is no doubt that Wally Pfister’s work on The Dark Knight was nothing short of breathtaking. Using Chicago as a stand-in for Gotham City, Pfister created some truly dazzling scenes, particularly during the IMAX sequences that completely brought a new angle to metropolitan based crime dramas. However, nothing affected me as greatly this year as Javier Aguirresrobe’s work on Vicky Cristina Barcelona. His honey colored scenes of Barcelona and rural towns were awe-inspiring, dreamlike and utterly gorgeous, making it quite understandable to see how the two transplanted Americans could so easily be charmed by the Spanish countryside.
Achievement in directing
David Fincher for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Ron Howard for Frost/Nixon
Gus Van Sant for Milk
Stephen Daldry for The Reader
Danny Boyle for Slumdog Millionaire
Prediction: Danny Boyle
Who Should Win: Darren Aronofsky for The Wrestler
No other director this year made such a stylistic 180 as Darren Aronofsky. Usually known for his highly visual, individual work, The Wrestler, found Aronofsky borrowing a page from the Dardennes brothers and going for a simple handheld, observational style. The result allowed Rourke’s extraordinary performance to really shine, as well as create a remarkably intimate connection between the audience and the characters. With The Wrestler, Aronofsky reveals himself as an evolving, maturing director.
Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original score)
Alexandre Desplat for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
James Newton Howard for Defiance
Danny Elfman for Milk
A.R. Rahman for Slumdog Millionaire
Thomas Newman for WALL-E
Prediction: Alexandre Desplat
Who Should Win: Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard for The Dark Knight
Though I think Alexandre Desplat is one of the best contemporary film composers working today, his score The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button is not his best stuff. On the other hand, James Newton Howard has had some good pieces here and there (his work on Signs is a stand out for me), but he truly surprised me with the collaborative compositions put together with Hans Zimmer for The Dark Knight. I can’t recall the last time a mainstream, blockbuster film so readily made use of something so avant garde as “A Little Push” for a character signal. However, that one brief piece of music used for the Joker added a dimension of unease to Ledger’s already magnetically terrifying performance. It’s no surprise that after the Academy’s embarrassing infighting regarding the duo’s eligibility for Oscar consideration that they ultimately weren’t nominated, but they should be recognized for daring to push mainstream film composition in interesting new directions.
Best motion picture of the year
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Prediction: Slumdog Millionaire
Who Should Win: Vicky Cristina Barcelona
No surprise here. Vicky Cristina Barcelona was my favorite film of last year, and if it were up to me I’d give it an Oscar too. But something tells me that Woody Allen, who is by choice not an Academy member and has stated having no interest in the awards, is happy to continue working without being bothered by the momentary glam and glitz of Hollywood’s biggest night.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
