THE OSCAR SHOW
Well...
That was painful.
A year after what I would rate as the single best Oscar show I have seen, comes one of the worst.
Part of what made last year special was the theming, but lots of interesting choices made for facinating viewing. This year, it just seemed like slapdash decisions.
The opening monologue was painful, the decision not to perform the songs stupid, the deision to perform the score nominees with street dancers stupider, and the horror montage with such notable horror films as Edward Scissorhands stupidest.
And the opening number? Yikes. A pale imitation of the wonderful Emmy number, complete with its host. One thing the Oscars shouldn't be is a pale imitation of the Emmys.
THE PROLEM WITH SURVIVOR
Not my first thing to complain about the show, but reading the interviews with the first five out, there is a major problem with this season. A good portion of Survivor contestants are still living in their past glory. Some contestants move on with their life. The people out so far, with the possible exception of Sugar, are not from the professional contestant file, These are the people who have moved on with their lives. And they don't have a chance against the professional contestants, who are working together. It does not work.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Let's Spend the Night Together (1982)
Director Hal Ashby has achieved something quite impressive here: he's made Mick Jagger seem boring.
The first third or so of this film is the Rolling Stones playing in the middle of the day in a stadium somewhere. Their stage presence has all the excitement of a contractual obligation. There's nothing visual about the experience. Just four stick figures playing instruments and Mick walking around them. It isn't helped by the apparent decision to shoot mostly in long shot, to show five bored musicians on a huge stage that dwarfs them.
My mind wandered. I've seen three stadium shows in my life, in three different cities. Where any of them this boring. I saw the Jacksons in Cleveland in 1984. I thought the show seemed canned, preprogrammed. But there was a sense of spetacle. Not with the Stones movie.
When I saw Paul McCartney in the mid 90s in Cincinnati, he certainly wanted to be there. There was a sense of excitement. And when I saw U2 in Columbus, it was the PopMart tour. Definitely more of a visual experience.
Part of the problem is the Stones. I've seen two concert movies of them made since this. At the Max was much more visual. I came out of that movie excited. Were the Stones more invigorated 10 years later? I think so. But I also think Julian Temple made more of an effort to be visual, not just aural.
Then there was Shine A Light. With Scorsese directing. He used more close-ups. But there is a pure joy in performing in Shine A Light that is flat out missing in Let's Spend the Night Together.
And I don't think this is just because I saw both those films in IMAX and I saw Let's Spend the Night Together on a 36 inch television.
There are some bad decisions here. When the film switches to an indoor arena, the entirety of Going to a Go-Go is used to show the stage being put together in fast forward speed. Uh-huh. I don't really know why archival footage was shown during Time Is On My Side, but it added nothing. And the decision for a long shot in the indoor stadium to shoot through the light grid. I know its an angle we never see, but the band looks like ants in the shot, when you can see them.
The ending sums up the experience all too well. As the credits roll, shots of fireworks -- where were they during the performances -- are shown to the sound of Jimi Hendrix playing the Star-Spangled Banner. Great. To try and salvage the energy of the movie, the filmmakers decide to use a 10 year old taped performance than additional music from the concerts.
Grade: D-
The first third or so of this film is the Rolling Stones playing in the middle of the day in a stadium somewhere. Their stage presence has all the excitement of a contractual obligation. There's nothing visual about the experience. Just four stick figures playing instruments and Mick walking around them. It isn't helped by the apparent decision to shoot mostly in long shot, to show five bored musicians on a huge stage that dwarfs them.
My mind wandered. I've seen three stadium shows in my life, in three different cities. Where any of them this boring. I saw the Jacksons in Cleveland in 1984. I thought the show seemed canned, preprogrammed. But there was a sense of spetacle. Not with the Stones movie.
When I saw Paul McCartney in the mid 90s in Cincinnati, he certainly wanted to be there. There was a sense of excitement. And when I saw U2 in Columbus, it was the PopMart tour. Definitely more of a visual experience.
Part of the problem is the Stones. I've seen two concert movies of them made since this. At the Max was much more visual. I came out of that movie excited. Were the Stones more invigorated 10 years later? I think so. But I also think Julian Temple made more of an effort to be visual, not just aural.
Then there was Shine A Light. With Scorsese directing. He used more close-ups. But there is a pure joy in performing in Shine A Light that is flat out missing in Let's Spend the Night Together.
And I don't think this is just because I saw both those films in IMAX and I saw Let's Spend the Night Together on a 36 inch television.
There are some bad decisions here. When the film switches to an indoor arena, the entirety of Going to a Go-Go is used to show the stage being put together in fast forward speed. Uh-huh. I don't really know why archival footage was shown during Time Is On My Side, but it added nothing. And the decision for a long shot in the indoor stadium to shoot through the light grid. I know its an angle we never see, but the band looks like ants in the shot, when you can see them.
The ending sums up the experience all too well. As the credits roll, shots of fireworks -- where were they during the performances -- are shown to the sound of Jimi Hendrix playing the Star-Spangled Banner. Great. To try and salvage the energy of the movie, the filmmakers decide to use a 10 year old taped performance than additional music from the concerts.
Grade: D-
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Sunday 3/710
THE PLAN FOR NOW
Well, that was a lousy month for posting. The first half of February was without a computer, and the second half I'll address below, leaves a month where the stop and start of me trying to create a habit of blogging was at full stop.
Thanks to the AMC Best Picture Showcase, I have in the past week revisited nine of the best picture nominees (and saw one for the first time). Over the next week I plan to write up reasctions to all ten.
I've seen three films off my Disney list, so I need to post thm, plus one of the worst concert films I've ever seen, which I inexplicably watched yesterday.
And then I might get around to the 2009 10 best list, which is now two months overdue.
OLYMPICS
I am a sports fan. Now when most Americans say that, they mean the holy trinity of baseball, basketball, and football. Well I will watch almost any sport. That's why I love the Olmpics. Every four years, I get to see one of my favorite summer sports, team handball. And in winter, I get to see curling.
So due to my enjoyment of multiple sports, I watch NBC's coverage of the Americans in the Olympics. IS the IOC watching? Do they realize NBC has little clue how special the Olympics are. Here's some of my problems:
1. There are other countries besides the US and Canada. I understand there needs to be some coverage of the Americans. But when your announcing team spends most of the first race telling us how much of a medal threat the top American is, and he finishes 41st, the focus is a bit off.
2. Medal ceremonies. Where are they? This is the Olympics. The medal ceremonies are part of what makes it special. NBC rarely shows them.
3. Shut up announcers! This especially goes for figure skating. There is a nice presentation, complete with music. To appreciate it, I want no announcing. Between the performace and the judges scores, you can tell me why it will or won't win a medal.
4. Polar bears. I tune in one night, and there is a segament on freaking polar bears. Not what I watch the Olmpics for. Too many of these pieces showing us how wonderful Canada is were shown. I already knew it is a great country. Air that stuff on the Today show.
I got my first DVR just before the Olympics. Made my life a lot easier. I watched almost nothing as NBC was showing it, so I could skip through all of NBC's non-sports Olympics coverage. It will be in use next time, as it was the only way to make NBC's mess tolerable.
Well, that was a lousy month for posting. The first half of February was without a computer, and the second half I'll address below, leaves a month where the stop and start of me trying to create a habit of blogging was at full stop.
Thanks to the AMC Best Picture Showcase, I have in the past week revisited nine of the best picture nominees (and saw one for the first time). Over the next week I plan to write up reasctions to all ten.
I've seen three films off my Disney list, so I need to post thm, plus one of the worst concert films I've ever seen, which I inexplicably watched yesterday.
And then I might get around to the 2009 10 best list, which is now two months overdue.
OLYMPICS
I am a sports fan. Now when most Americans say that, they mean the holy trinity of baseball, basketball, and football. Well I will watch almost any sport. That's why I love the Olmpics. Every four years, I get to see one of my favorite summer sports, team handball. And in winter, I get to see curling.
So due to my enjoyment of multiple sports, I watch NBC's coverage of the Americans in the Olympics. IS the IOC watching? Do they realize NBC has little clue how special the Olympics are. Here's some of my problems:
1. There are other countries besides the US and Canada. I understand there needs to be some coverage of the Americans. But when your announcing team spends most of the first race telling us how much of a medal threat the top American is, and he finishes 41st, the focus is a bit off.
2. Medal ceremonies. Where are they? This is the Olympics. The medal ceremonies are part of what makes it special. NBC rarely shows them.
3. Shut up announcers! This especially goes for figure skating. There is a nice presentation, complete with music. To appreciate it, I want no announcing. Between the performace and the judges scores, you can tell me why it will or won't win a medal.
4. Polar bears. I tune in one night, and there is a segament on freaking polar bears. Not what I watch the Olmpics for. Too many of these pieces showing us how wonderful Canada is were shown. I already knew it is a great country. Air that stuff on the Today show.
I got my first DVR just before the Olympics. Made my life a lot easier. I watched almost nothing as NBC was showing it, so I could skip through all of NBC's non-sports Olympics coverage. It will be in use next time, as it was the only way to make NBC's mess tolerable.
Oscar predictions
To me, the odd part of this year is that many categories are easy calls, but there is a genuine race at the top.
PICTURE
Only three have a chance: The Hurt Locker, Avatar, and Up in the Air. And Up in the Air is a longshot at best. So it really comes down to two. The academy is traditionally older, and more Hollywood insider, than most awards voters. And the voters may be politcally liberal, sort of, but they artistically conservative. And they do tend to reward box office success more than other awards. Given those factors, while The Hurt Locker has won the most awarrds and seems like the front runner, even though I think it is a very close race, I am predicting Avatar for the big prize.
ACTOR
He's a multiple nominee without a win, well liked, really good in this role, and did you see the standing ovation at the Golden Globes? Jeff Bridges is a lock.
ACTRESS
Sandra Bullock is not the shoo-in many predictors would have you believe. I am recalling 2001, when Russell Crowe was winning most of the precursors for A Beautiful Mind, but Denzel Washington won the Oscar for Training Day. What many people forgot then was Oscar history, where Crowe had already won a best actor Oscar and Washington had not. Is that what is at play here?
Or is this like when Julia Roberts finally broke through with Erin Brockovich? America's Sweetheart, finally in a best picture nominee, finally breaks through?
One of those is correct. But I am uneasy about two facts: Bullock has never been nominated before, and Streep keeps getting nominated. And while she keeps winning in other awards shows -- she won a SAG for Doubt, for example, she hasn't won an Oscar since 1983. That's too long. So in what I admit is an upset, I will continue to predict what I have since I first saw Julie & Julia, that Streep is finally going to win Oscar number three.
SUPPORTING
Both categories are locks. Christop Walt has won almost everything for Inglorious Basterds, and Mo'Nique the same for Precious. They are both locks.
DIRECTOR
History is a factor here, as James Cameron doesn't need more Oscars after the three he won for Titanic, and it is waaaay past time a woman won this award. It also helps Kathryn Bigelow did such a good job with The Hurt Locker. Bigelow should win easily.
DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
Everything I see has The Cove winning.
DOCUMENTARY SHORT
I sure hope its The Last Truck. Not only is it set in my part of the country, but I have actually met Julia Reichert, its co-director, and so I have no pretense of caring about any of the other nominees.
ANIMATED FEATURE
Up has a best picture nomination, a screen play nomination, and others. The other four combine for one additional nomination. Up in a walk.
FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Most years, the voters pick with their hearts, voting sentimentality over quality. But since no nominee seems to fit that description, I'll go with the most acclaimed of the five, The White Ribbon.
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
WHat seems to be a two fim race between Inglorious Basterds and The Hurt Locker. The Hurt Locker could have a near sweep tonight, and the script gets swept in. But I think this is Quentin Tarentino's consolation prize as he has no chance to win director.
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
And this is the consolation prize for Jason Reitman and Up in the Air.
CINEMATOGRAPHY
Avatar ve The Hurt Locker here, and I think Avatar is going to be (unfairly) penalized for having so many effects. The Hurt Locker will be the deserving winner.
ART DIRECTION
This may be the toughest category to call this year. I can make an argument for almost any film. I think the period piece work of The Young Victoria and Sherlock Homes may split voters, so I will predict Avatar.
ANIMATED SHORT
Never bet against Wallace and Gromiy. A MAtter of Loaf and Death is them.
VISUAL EFEECTS
Easiest call of the night. Avatar was truly groundbreaking.
COSTUME DESIGN
Sandy Powell has a lot of respect in the business, plus her work is a period piece: The Young Victoria. Although Coco Before Chanel would not be a surprise.
EDITING
Avatar vs The Hurt Locker. This should be close. I think The Hurt Locker in a very close vote.
SOUND
Avatar took the viewer into another world with its outstanding effects work, but also with an amazing sound design. I think it wins both sound categories for that achievement. This is an indicator category. If The Hurt Locker wins either of these categories, it will win picture.
SCORE
\
For the dialogue free sequence telling the story of the mariiage of CArl and Ellie alone, Up wins this category.
SONG
The Weary Kind from Crazy HEart. Alomst as much a lock as Jeff Bridges' win.
MAKEUP
Since Star Trek earned ten times as musch as the other two nominees combined, it wins easy.
LIVE ACTION SHORT
Oh, I'm sorry: We are out of time so I won't be able to make a pick here. The fact I have no clue in this category has nothing to do with it.
PICTURE
Only three have a chance: The Hurt Locker, Avatar, and Up in the Air. And Up in the Air is a longshot at best. So it really comes down to two. The academy is traditionally older, and more Hollywood insider, than most awards voters. And the voters may be politcally liberal, sort of, but they artistically conservative. And they do tend to reward box office success more than other awards. Given those factors, while The Hurt Locker has won the most awarrds and seems like the front runner, even though I think it is a very close race, I am predicting Avatar for the big prize.
ACTOR
He's a multiple nominee without a win, well liked, really good in this role, and did you see the standing ovation at the Golden Globes? Jeff Bridges is a lock.
ACTRESS
Sandra Bullock is not the shoo-in many predictors would have you believe. I am recalling 2001, when Russell Crowe was winning most of the precursors for A Beautiful Mind, but Denzel Washington won the Oscar for Training Day. What many people forgot then was Oscar history, where Crowe had already won a best actor Oscar and Washington had not. Is that what is at play here?
Or is this like when Julia Roberts finally broke through with Erin Brockovich? America's Sweetheart, finally in a best picture nominee, finally breaks through?
One of those is correct. But I am uneasy about two facts: Bullock has never been nominated before, and Streep keeps getting nominated. And while she keeps winning in other awards shows -- she won a SAG for Doubt, for example, she hasn't won an Oscar since 1983. That's too long. So in what I admit is an upset, I will continue to predict what I have since I first saw Julie & Julia, that Streep is finally going to win Oscar number three.
SUPPORTING
Both categories are locks. Christop Walt has won almost everything for Inglorious Basterds, and Mo'Nique the same for Precious. They are both locks.
DIRECTOR
History is a factor here, as James Cameron doesn't need more Oscars after the three he won for Titanic, and it is waaaay past time a woman won this award. It also helps Kathryn Bigelow did such a good job with The Hurt Locker. Bigelow should win easily.
DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
Everything I see has The Cove winning.
DOCUMENTARY SHORT
I sure hope its The Last Truck. Not only is it set in my part of the country, but I have actually met Julia Reichert, its co-director, and so I have no pretense of caring about any of the other nominees.
ANIMATED FEATURE
Up has a best picture nomination, a screen play nomination, and others. The other four combine for one additional nomination. Up in a walk.
FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Most years, the voters pick with their hearts, voting sentimentality over quality. But since no nominee seems to fit that description, I'll go with the most acclaimed of the five, The White Ribbon.
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
WHat seems to be a two fim race between Inglorious Basterds and The Hurt Locker. The Hurt Locker could have a near sweep tonight, and the script gets swept in. But I think this is Quentin Tarentino's consolation prize as he has no chance to win director.
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
And this is the consolation prize for Jason Reitman and Up in the Air.
CINEMATOGRAPHY
Avatar ve The Hurt Locker here, and I think Avatar is going to be (unfairly) penalized for having so many effects. The Hurt Locker will be the deserving winner.
ART DIRECTION
This may be the toughest category to call this year. I can make an argument for almost any film. I think the period piece work of The Young Victoria and Sherlock Homes may split voters, so I will predict Avatar.
ANIMATED SHORT
Never bet against Wallace and Gromiy. A MAtter of Loaf and Death is them.
VISUAL EFEECTS
Easiest call of the night. Avatar was truly groundbreaking.
COSTUME DESIGN
Sandy Powell has a lot of respect in the business, plus her work is a period piece: The Young Victoria. Although Coco Before Chanel would not be a surprise.
EDITING
Avatar vs The Hurt Locker. This should be close. I think The Hurt Locker in a very close vote.
SOUND
Avatar took the viewer into another world with its outstanding effects work, but also with an amazing sound design. I think it wins both sound categories for that achievement. This is an indicator category. If The Hurt Locker wins either of these categories, it will win picture.
SCORE
\
For the dialogue free sequence telling the story of the mariiage of CArl and Ellie alone, Up wins this category.
SONG
The Weary Kind from Crazy HEart. Alomst as much a lock as Jeff Bridges' win.
MAKEUP
Since Star Trek earned ten times as musch as the other two nominees combined, it wins easy.
LIVE ACTION SHORT
Oh, I'm sorry: We are out of time so I won't be able to make a pick here. The fact I have no clue in this category has nothing to do with it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
