Ah it's that time of year again...the time of year when Hollywood nominates some of the most awful movies as Best Picture and I do my darndest to watch them all and report back to you. With the OSCARS airing this Sunday, time is running short. I've seen 9 of the 10 nominated films and I have some very strong feelings about all 10 of them. I'll review them for you, and then I'll put up some Oscar night scenarios for the ones I think about the to actually be best picture.
So it's more of a ten or fifteen for Friday.
Ready?
Here we go:
All Quiet on the Western Front
A German remake of a German masterpiece. (Don't bother with anything starring Richard Thomas.) Set in WWI, this is trench warfare from a German perspective. The original film was very anti-war, and this one doesn't change that path. What changes, an in this case, what is improved since the original 1930 film, (which did not stop the Nazis from blowing the world apart 9 years later, but whatever) are the effects and the approach to storytelling. It's dark. It's bleak. It's a macabre masterpiece. Do not watching with English dubbing. Go with German dialogue and English subtitles.
Score: 5 stars
Avatar: The Way of Water
Mega bloated budget sequel to the visually beautiful, yet woefully preachy, and not that well written "Avatar" from 20009. This is the film I have not seen, which is weird because it's been in theaters what, like six years already? But even when it came out, I knew this one was going to be a hard sell for me. The original "Avatar" was like a gorgeous model. Pretty to look at, but a big dumb dud at dinner cuz she won't eat anything. Do i really want to spend more than 3 hours dedicated to a movie whose writers couldn't be bothered to come up with anything better than "unobtanium?"
Score: No score. Haven't seen as of this writing.
The Banshees of Inisherin
Reuniting one of my favorite movie dues, Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson, "Banshees" a somewhat bleak, but not completely cold-hearted look at the suffocation of small-town life and the sacrifices we make for those we truly love. Farrell/Gleeson movies always bring something beautiful and original, without forgetting the humor.
Score: 4 stars
Elvis
Watching "Elvis" and then hearing the comments from people who'd seen the movie reminded me of two things: 1) I LOVE Baz Lurhman films. They are bright, they are shiny, they are full of a colorful frenetic energy. 2) Americans do NOT understand the concept of the "imperfect narrator." Those howling that this isn't the REAL story of Elvis need to sit down and have a cool drink of water. This movie is told from the viewpoint of Colonel Tom Parker. OF COURSE his tales won't mesh with the oft told history of The King. OF COURSE NOT! This is not a story ABOUT Elvis. This is a story about how Tom Parker saw ELVIS, saw himself, and saw his actions. Tom Hanks is brilliant, as always, and Austin Butler blew me away with his interpretation of Elvis.
Score 4.5 stars
Everything Everywhere All at Once
I. LOVED. THIS. MOVIE!
This was not a remake. This was not a sequel. This was not a biopic of a beloved character. This was not under the direction of anyone well established in Hollywood. At first glance this isn't even a coherent story. And yet...this might have been the most beautiful depiction of the "what if" theory, and also of mother/daughter relationships I've ever seen. Brilliant. Chaotic. Hilarious. Violent. Subtle. Bombastic. This movie lived up to its name. It was EVERYTHING.
Score: 5 stars
The Fabelmans
Ah yes, the semi fictional re-imagining of Steven Spielberg's life.
I guess if you slap Steven's name on a pile of dog droppings, someone will love it. And, apparently, this is the pile of dog droppings the Academy wants us to love. I thought this might be a delightful little romp through some kind of family movies or something. Nope. This "re-imaging" is a slag heap of self-involved crap. Endlessly long. Pointlessly depressing. The bit with the monkey was nice.
Score: 1 star
Tár
A female orchestra director has personal problems. And she drives through a lot of tunnels.
See, now I thought this was a biopic. And I love Cate Blanchett. Turns out...it's not. And I love Cate Blancett a little less.
WORST PICTURE I'VE EVER SEEN. There is not one redeeming feature about this movie. It's boring. It's annoying. The main character is someone you want to slap a thousand times. There are about four minutes of real entertainment. Oh, and then there are the tunnel. You could, and if you're forced to watch this movie, you SHOULD make a drinking game. Every time Tar goes through a tunnel, do a shot. By the time you reach the end of this steaming turd of a film, you'll at least think you had a good time. This officially replaces "The Royal Tenenbaums" and "Dude Where's My Car" as the worst film I've ever seen.
Score: 0.5 stars
Top Gun: Maverick
Sequel to the 1986 "Top Gun" this time Maverick is older, more mature, and still getting into trouble with the Navy brass.
Quite possibly the PERFECT movie. You don't need to have seen the original film...but it doesn't hurt to appreciate the new, more mature touch Tom Cruise has with his character and those around him. A touching performance by Val Kilmer brings tears to the eyes. Meanwhile, attention to detail and reality (yes, the actors really are flying those planes) shines in every scene. Maybe this won't be an award winner. It doesn't matter. This movie will live on for generations as a great American film.
Rating: 5 stars
Triangle of Sadness
Rich people mistreat poor people on a yacht. Then bad things happen.
Okay, here's how to watch this hot mess: Skip the first hour. I'm not kidding. Skip the first hour of the movie. Fast forward until you see Woody Harrellson on screen. I promise you, you will have missed very little and saved yourself a lot of time. What you have left is actually not bad. You still have an hour and a half of rich people being bastards to poor people. And, by the time you finally get to the POINT of the story, you're not worn out watching a 60 minute perfume commercial. And honestly, the point of the movie is a pretty good one.
Rating: with the first hour- 2.0 stars. Without the first hour: 3.5 stars.
Women Talking
Women in an ultraconservative Mennonite colony vote to decide if they are going to continue living under horrifying conditions or strike out on their own.
Well, the writers didn't spend much energy on the title...because yeah, "Women Talking" is about...well...women talking. But in this case, it's not just women sitting around chatting. What they have to say is almost less important than how they say it and who says the words. The movie, based on the novel by the same name (so I guess we have to give the writers a pass, right?) is a missed opportunity. There are a lot of topics, important, vital topics to women today (the movie is set in 2010, but you can't believe it because of the pioneer lifestyle of the colony.) Rape, love, children, religion, honor, obedience, loyalty, freedom, heaven, safety: Everything women have talked about since the dawn of time is touched on by this cast. And oh, what a cast. This is the class A list of actresses. But, unfortunately, in spite of the impressive material and topics, in spite of the star-studded cast, this movie is a missed opportunity. Much was left on the editing floor, I think. Some topics, like what did Claire Foy spray in her kid's face, are left dangling. What was going on with that schoolteacher? We aren't told. Can Frances McDormand actually have a part where she expounds LESS energy than she did in "Nomadland?"
Oh wait, we get the answer to that. Yes. Apparently. Ms. McDormand is in this movie about seven minutes more than I am. And almost as comatose.
Judith Ivy, a longtime favorite of mine, shines in this film, as do most of the actresses, given the stilted dialogue they're forced to spew. "Women Talking" is lovely, warm, sad, and eye-opening. Ultimately, however, it's a victim of poor editing.
Rating: 3 stars
okay. Those are my ratings. So, Sarah, you may ask. WHAT IS GOING TO BE BEST PICTURE?
Well, let's start with what I know. I know I want "Maverick" or "All Quiet on the Western Front" or "Everything Everywhere all at Once" to be best picture.
I think Maverick is going to be completely overlooked. It's too...what's the word...oh, right, fun for the common moviegoer. Yeah, why would we want a movie that everyone who saw it enjoyed thoroughly to be the best picture of the year? Who wants that?
"All Quiet on the Western Front" will win best foreign language film. It won't win Best Picture. It should. But it won't.
Now we get to the nitty gritty.
Elvis, Tar, Triangle of Sadness, Women Talking, and Banshees are also not going to be Best Picture. Too odd, too weird, too whatever. Not happening.
Which leaves us with: Avatar and Fabelman's.
Here's a little Oscar History: Back in 2010, when the original Avatar was nominated for Best Picture, the Oscar night was all about the battle between Avatar and "The hurt Locker" a tense war film directed by Kathryn Bigelow. (James Cameron's ex-wife.) James had become quite the big fat jerkface after "Titanic", so I was out of control happy with The Hurt Locker beat Avatar. Unfortunately, this time around, I don't believe there's anything strong enough in this field of films to overtake Cameron's ego.
Then we have the Fabelmans. This film is so bad, but I can totally see the Academy bending over and kissing Steven Spielberg's butt. I mean, that would mean James Cameron is disappointed again, which is good. But then will Spielberg go back to making good, watchable movies, or will this encourage him to make more soppy depression medication movies?
So... will Hollywood kowtow to one of these long-time guys OR, will they do what they should and make something that was original AND entertaining AND fresh AND fun Best Picture? Because if they do, then hands down it should be "Everything Everywhere All At Once."
A few other predictions:
Guillermo Del Toro's Pinocchio should win best Animated Picture.
Best original song should go to "Naatu, Naatu" from the Indian film "RRR." Fun movie, awesome song. "Life me Up" from that wet blanket of a Marvel movie, "Wakanda Forever" will probably win, but it shouldn't.
If "Blonde" wins anything on Oscar night, I will probably throw a shoe at my TV.
