Oscars 2014: the results

Well, the Academy has finally held its annual ritual, so let's see how many Oscar winners I guessed right. Or expertly deduced correctly, if you prefer.

Best Picture: correct! It seems the time was right for a movie directed by a coloured man to win in this category. This is the Age of Obama after all. Too bad he didn't also win Best Director, but let's not push things, right?
I have yet to see 12 Years a Slave.

Best Actor: incorrect. Matthew McConaughey seems to have been on a roll last year with Mud, The Wolf of Wall Street and the movie he won for, so he was really actively pushing for that Oscar, and successfully so it appears. Though I won't deny him his prize, I feel kinda sad for both Bruce Dern and Chiwetel.
Second choice: also incorrect.
I have yet to see Dallas Buyers Club.

Best Actress: correct! This one just seemed a given. Blanchett deserved a Best Lead win for a change, Best Supporting Actress is good, but just not as good. Woody Allen's recent sex scandal hasn't hurt Blanchett for starring in his film.

Best Supporting Actor: incorrect. I should have known the Academy wouldn't go for a first-time actor, no matter how impressive his performance. Jared Leto proved a more conservative winner, despite him playing a transsexual.
Second choice: also incorrect.

Best Supporting Actress: incorrect. Jennifer Lawrence got her spotlight moment last year and she tripped over her dress while walking the stairs... never again! Plus, 'twas all white folks winning acting awards so far, so this evens the score a little.
Second choice: correct.

Best Director: incorrect. Considering all the technical stuff, I didn't see this one coming. The Academy has a tendency to overlook such aspects of filmmaking when it comes to this particular category, in favor of more trite but true apporaches. No more it seems. Apparently all the technical stuff was just too groundbreaking to ignore for a change.
Second choice: also incorrect.

Best Original Screenplay: incorrect. Poor American Hustle got snubbed good! A story about man and his increasingly accepting mentality towards anthropomorphizing non-human machinery fit right in with appreciating Cuaron's technical stuff. The Academy has finally learned to embrace the digital age then.
Second choice: correct.
I have yet to see Her.

Best Adapted Screenplay: correct! There just had to be a few more wins for 12 Years a Slave to go with that Best Picture win. Right before Gravity took all the rest.

The Academy clearly didn't take a hint from Gravity's tag line.


Best Animated Feature: correct! When Disney gets good again, all other animation is silenced. Like it or not. Let it go.

Best Foreign Film: correct! It just had to be, considering all the raving critical acclaim. Its competitors just didn't stand a chance.
I have yet to see La Grande Bellezza.

Best Cinematography: correct! Duh!

Best Editing: correct! See above.

Best Production Design: correct! Gatsby may not have felt like a great movie, but it sure looked like one.

Best Costume Design: correct! Same.

Best Make-Up: correct! The performances of McConaughey and Leto were undoubtedly stirred to great heights thanks to the way they looked.

Best Music: incorrect. Despite all the innovations, a grand picture still needs a solid soundtrack. Gravity got one.
Second choice: also incorrect.

Best Song: correct! The Academy, too, let it go. Good for them!

Best Sound Mixing: correct! It didn't matter that in space, nobody can hear you scream. For your information.

Best Sound Editing: correct! *insert second joke about the uneasy relationship between space and sound here*

Best Visual Effects: correct! The most obvious winner of the bunch, courtesy of the year's most jaw-dropping sights.

Best Documentary: incorrect. This unexpected pick is the one I take umbrage with the most. There's this hugely unsettling, daringly executed, effectively engaging shock doc about Indonesian genocide, and the Academy opts for a bunch of singing people instead. I'd say they 'let it go' a little too much in this case.
Second choice: also incorrect.

Correct: 14
Second choice: 5-2.
Incorrect: 7

Last year's results: 6 correct, 5 second choices correct and 9 blatantly wrong. There's some personal improvement there!
Most of the choices in the "lesser" categories were just glaringly obvious this year. It was an easy year in that regard. However, the 86th Academy Awards ceremony just proved once again how fickle Academy members can be when it comes to the acting categories. And also just how much the Academy likes to compromise. Then again, American Hustle received 10 nominations and ended up completely empty handed... Maybe because we once again didn't see Jennifer Lawrence's boobs? Oh well, let it go.

Oscars 2014: My list of predictions

The long and dreary road to this year's Oscars has been put into motion, and no doubt people will want to know what I expect this year's winners to be. Not that I tend to care all that much about the Acadamy Awards or the whole dull press circus in the first few months of the year that accompanies it. It's just one big ritual going through all the usual motions. I much prefer to focus on the quality of these films on their own merits, without the huge buzz that surrounds them. Nevertheless, here's my list of guesses (which honestly is what they are, since you can analyze all you want but the Academy still has a habit of surprising you in the choices it makes, and often not pleasantly). I am not ashamed to say that in many cases I just go with what my gut tells me, something most critics are not prepared to admit.

Best Picture:

First choice: A tough one, as always. I can tell you which movies it won't be for sure, but as to the winner, for me it's a toss-up - as these events usually revolve around two very promising films with the results being about even, just as with the recent Golden Globes - between 12 Years a Slave, American Hustle, while possibly The Wolf of Wall Street has a shot as well. For now, my money is on 12 Years a Slave, which by itself must make up for the lack of other "black" pictures in these nominations, like The Butler and Fruitvale Station, which were lobbying for an award but didn't get very far apparently.
Second Choice: American Hustle.

Best Actor:

First Choice: Chiwetel Ejiofor, 12 Years a Slave. Same reason as above really. Plus, Chiwetel is a damn fine actor and though a first time Oscar nominee, he has already five Golden Globe nominations on his resumé. It's about time he won something.
Second choice: Bruce Dern for Nebraska.

Best Actress:

First Choice: Cate Blanchett for Blue Jasmine. An Oscar favorite that really needs a Lead Actress win, as opposed to a Supporting Actress take a decade ago. All the other female performances are impeccable, but this one just stands out supremely.
Second choice: Any Adams for American Hustle.

Best Supporting Actor:

First Choice: Barkhad Abdi for Captain Phillips. A stellar performance from a first time actor, holding his own opposite a veteran like Tom Hanks. You don't see that every day.
Second choice: Michael Fassbender for 12 Years a Slave.

Best Supporting Actress:

First Choice: No truly safe bets here, so I'll go with Jennifer Lawrence, since everybody likes her and so do I. Yes, that's also how this game sometimes works.
Second choice: Lupita Nyong'o for 12 Years a Slave. Same reason as Barkhad Abdi, except she has done slightly more.

Best Director:

First Choice: Steve McQueen for 12 Years a Slave. Again, same reason as why 12 Years a Slave is on this list of mine most of the times (though also because I haven't yet seen it so I can't underscore my argument in more detail). A black director winning an Oscar, doesn't happen often enough. Call me a racist if you must, but remember the b(l)acklash not so long ago when there weren't so many coloured people even nominated despite their considerable contribution to otherwise hugely nominated movies. Yes, they can!
Second choice: Martin Scorsese for The Wolf of Wall Street. Because it's about friggin' time this man took home another statue, considering how often he gets nominated but leaves empty handed.

Best Original Screenplay:

First Choice: American Hustle.
Second choice: Her.

Best Adapted Screenplay:

First Choice: 12 Years a Slave.
Second choice: The Wolf of Wall Street.

Best Animated Feature:

First Choice: Frozen. Apart from The Wind Rises, the other nominess are nothing remarkable (and poor Pixar simply got ignored this year, which was a long time coming really). However, that film seems too controversial, plus it's foreign material too. Frozen is a safer bet, as it carries all the good traits of a typical Disney movie, but shows the Mouse House is finally flowing with the times a little.
Second choice: The Wind Rises.

Best Foreign Film:

First Choice: La Grande Bellezza. This year's smash hit in arthouse theaters.
Second choice: Jagten. Better late than never, but not in time for a win. This movie is like 18 months old by now!

Best Cinematography:

First Choice: Gravity. The finest, most groundbreaking and impressive camera work I've seen in many years.
Second choice: Inside Llewyn Davis.

Best Editing:

First Choice: Gravity. Cuaron and his team once again make fabulous use of his trademark long takes, and the trick is you don't even notice the cutting.
Second choice: American Hustle.

Best Production Design:

First Choice: The Great Gatsby. Spectacularly lavish, the main reason to watch this film, which leaves something to be desired in terms of story and character. But it looks flawless.
Second choice: Gravity.

Best Costume Design:

First Choice: The Great Gatsby. Like I said, it all looks grand (characters included), it just doesn't feel it.
Second choice: American Hustle.

Best Make-up:

First Choice: already an uproar has commenced due to American Hustle being wrongfully snubbed in this category. Dallas Buyer's Club therefore seems the most eligible choice left.
Second choice: The Lone Ranger.

Best Music:

First Choice: Her. It needs to win something after all.
Second choice: The Book Thief. There's scoring, and there's John Williams.

Best Song:

First Choice: Frozen. Let it go, Academy! Let it gooooohooo!!
Second choice: Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom.

Best Sound Mixing:

First Choice: Gravity.
Second choice: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.

Best Sound Editing:

First Choice: Gravity.
Second choice: All is Lost.

Best Visual Effects:

First Choice: Gravity. I rarely experienced a movie that deserved this honour so badly. If Gravity loses, I call shenanigans on the Academy! Wouldn't be the first time though.
Second choice: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. The dragon looked badass, though I admit some other things in the film didn't appear nearly as stunning.

Best Documentary:

First Choice: The Act of Killing. Very disturbing but equally intriguing. May not be the Academy's cup of tea though.
Second choice: Dirty wars.

The first week of March will tell me how wrong, or maybe how right for a change, I just happen to be.

Today's Column: Resurgence of the 'how do they do that' sensation

This month's column I wrote for MovieScene can now be read here as well:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151186/column_heropleving_van_het_hoe-doen-ze-dat_gevoel

Needless to say I am not fond of the overabundance of digital effects in the cinema these days. It has caused an 'effects saturated' visual market, as well as raised a spoiled audience that has seen it all. Of course, this does make the consumers more demanding in terms of plot, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Except that they're finding it at home on TV instead of at the movies, which slowly but surely degrades cinema as a medium. I'm not at all against good television of course (quite the opposite in fact!), but I would like to believe the possibility of quality television and quality movies co-existing is reachable. Of course there's still plenty of excellent movies made, but people are having an increasingly hard time catching them in theaters as they're often dropped from regular circulation swiftly or aren't awarded a decent cinematic release at all. Watching them on-demand at home is a solution, but nothing beats seeing them on the big screen as their makers intended (usually, at least). They're often only making money in the long run, as opposed to the big budget spectacles that get all the attention in theaters but are ever more often relying solely on visual sensations that make them ever more interchangeable, bland routines, despite the hype generated for them to lure audiences in. But every once in a while, a visually spectacular blockbuster sees a release and provides something new in terms of technology, transporting the audience to brave new worlds and sights as yet unseen. This year it's Gravity, definitely the most immersive viewing experience since Avatar (which was released four years ago). Alfonso Cuarón's thrilling tale of space peril continues to advance cinematic technology in a tradition of fantastic films over the course of the evolution of the medium that have truly amazed and inspired audiences like few other movies have done. It really makes you wonder how these amazing effects were accomplished, a question most modern audiences find themselves asking less and less. And that's where the angle of my column kicks in.

Another column done, now for next month's piece. Currently I have no clue as to what it will be about. But I'm sure I'll manage, as I've done so far.

Today's Mini-Review: Gravity

Gravity: ****/*****, or 8/10

It is rare these days to encounter effects in movies that look so astounding that they pull the audience in completely and won't let go until the credits roll. After twenty-odd years of increasing overuse of CGI, it seemed positive that everything had been done, also owing to the plethora of home video releases containing behind-the-scenes footage that reveals in detail the tricks of the trade, thus enhancing the audience's expertise on what is real and what is not when watching a film. It has diminished the emotional impact of the contemporary blockbuster, which often tends to rely heavily on such big budget effects work, because we spectators think we've seen it all and know it all by now. But once in a while a movie comes along that does manage to sweep us off our feet entirely and immerses us completely into the world its director has envisioned for our viewing pleasure. In such uncommon cases, the often derogatory term 'effects film' turns out both wholly justified and incorrect: the effects it contains do not make a film, but instead engage us into a full fledged cinematic experience we cannot help but be captivated by so strongly that all we can do is undergo it until it releases its grip on us. And then we still sit back in awe for a while longer, with that most pertinent of questions firmly on our minds: how on Earth did they do that?! Alfonso Cuaron (Children of Men, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) has crafted just such a fantastic experience with Gravity, a superior science-fact feature that adheres to the laws of physics but constructs its own laws in terms of what you can accomplish cinematographically these days. From a narrative point of view it's simply the struggle of two astronauts (George Clooney and Sandra Bullock) to survive in our planet's orbit after their space shuttle has been devastated by space debris caused by the demolition of a Russian satellite. In every other regard, there is nothing simple about Gravity. 
 

It is most definitely one of the greatest accomplishments in the field of visual effects and 3-D technology in recent years and an incredible tour-de-force on the part of both actors whose capabilities are put to the most extreme test imaginable. In fact, you are pulled in so deeply you neither have the time nor the interest to agree the story is pretty bare and the few attempts at introducing deeper levels of character development – including Bullock's character still trying to cope with the death of her young daughter – don't add all that much to the protagonists' plight. We run with them because we cannot help but feel we are one of them, and we too must get out of this ordeal in one piece before time (and oxygen) runs out. Applying his signature use of the 'long take', Cuaron opens the movie on a quiet, peaceful note as we witness “our fellow astronauts” working on a telescope, a job that suddenly turns extremely hazardous as the debris field hits their workplace hard, cutting them loose, adrift into the endless black ocean of space: all in a single, apparently uninterrupted shot (though few will actually consider that fact as we are already engaged fully by this point). We're slowly introduced to their Zero-G environment, but soon must deal with intense camera movements as we float around the shuttle in fast motions at first, and soon almost unchecked as the mission is spiralling out of control. Their spacecraft lost, our fellow pair of astronauts must make its way to the ISS before it too gets hit by the rubble, and before they run out of breathable air, if they ever hope to get back down to Earth. Unfortunately physics don't make it easy on them and reaching their goal appears ever more hopeless. All to our benefit, as we are treated to some of the most spectacular visual imagery seen on the big screen in years. Gravity is a prime showcase of what 3-D can add to a film other than a higher admission price. Not only is the cinematography breathtaking, we feel part of a three-dimensional environment at all times, surrounded by pieces of space rubble on every side, or Bullock's sweat and tears when we are locked in an escape pod with her in very close quarters. The intricate shots of floating equipment and people going up, over and around each other adds a layer of depth that is not likely to be surpassed in film any time soon. Even though the lack of sound in space deprives us of an auditory experience the likes of Star Wars, the immersive visuals make us forget all about any lack where other sense are concerned. Credit is also due to the seasoned actors, Bullock in particular, that make the whole experience feel that much more convincing – though the effect the film has on our stomachs does half their work already – by delivering excellent performances few of their colleagues could have matched as they play off against each other and... yes, against what else, exactly? How much, if anything, of what we seen on screen was there to aid them? Even for a trained eye, it's nigh impossible to tell where the real setting ends and the fictional construct begins. Yet we never get the feeling we are watching visual effects, which is of course exactly the trick such effects aim to pull off: don't let the audience know you are only an effect. The result is a staggering, completely compelling cinematic experience, one best seen on the big screen as it is doubtful its full physical and emotional impact is done justice on a home cinema release, though hopefully the latter can tell us just how Cuaron and his team managed to accomplish this extraordinary feat. One thing is for sure, Gravity is gravitating towards well deserved Best Visual Effects and Best Cinematography Oscars.