Up In The Air

A bout of heavy turbulence would probably be preferable to an existential crisis.


Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) is a man who is always on the move. Bingham is a corporate downsizer; he is hired by companies to fire their employees because "people will do crazy shit" when they lose their jobs, and bringing in a third party to carry out the termination seems the safest option. Ryan spends the majority of his time in airplanes, airports or hotels, rather than the apartment that he owns in Omaha, Nebraska, where his office is actually based.

His no commitment, no responsibilities lifestyle is put under threat by the arrival of two women in his life; Alex (Vera Farmiga), who shares Ryan's traveling life and as such is able to form a connection with him, and Natalie (Anna Kendrick), a young ambitious woman who is trying to institute a 'new media' termination process at his company. This would allow Ryan and his ilk to stay at home and fire people over the internet. Ryan believes that this would take away the aspects of the job which he considers noble, as noble as being a corporate downsizer-for-hire can be, and he and Natalie go out on the road so that she will be able to see what the job really entails.

I really liked Jason Reitman's two previous films, Thank You For Smoking and Juno, and Up In The Air combines the best elements of those films to deliver his most mature work to date. The film mixes the caustic, biting humour that typifies Thank You For Smoking with the well-formed relationships and emotional arcs of Juno. (Though without the occasionally grating Diablo Cody dialogue.) Much of the humour derives from Clooney's laconic voiceover (which starts off as the dominant voice of the film but which slowly fades out as the story takes hold) and its delivery of Bingham's philosophy, a misanthropic creed that sees all human relationships as excess baggage and values 'freedom', even if that freedom results in an existence of complete emptiness, and an obsession with loyalty schemes and minutaie over actual people.

Considering that it is a story about people traveling in planes, the film is solidly grounded by the dynamics of the characters. The development of Ryan's relationship with Alex feels very natural, largely due to the undeniable chemistry between Clooney and Farmiga but also because the writing makes it seem possible that these two characters could actually happen. The growing attraction between them, starting from a shared isolation and blossoming into a genuine connection, feels very real and makes for some of the film's most touching and warmly funny moments.

The key dynamic in the film, though, is that between Ryan and Natalie, since they spend the most time with each other. It is Ryan's exposure to Natalie's optimism and belief in love, even after she is unceremoniously dumped by her fiancee halfway through the film, that brings him to question his very existence and the meaning of his life. Plus, their sparkling exchanges result in the film's biggest laughs. Reitman make good use of natural Clooney's timing by contrasting it with Kendricks ability to deliver unintentionally biting dialogue in a believably naive way,

Clooney is just marvelous. With his customary charm turned up to 11 and his greying temples, he really does resemble the modern-day Cary Grant that he has so often been called. The way he defuses possibly tense situations, such as firing an employee played by Reitman favourite J.K. Simmons, is effortlessly cool. But it's his vulnerability that is most important to the film as a whole. Beneath the veneer of cool and platitudes you get a real sense that this is a man who has always been in control of his life facing a life-changing series of events. Clooney's performance perfectly captures the essence of someone trying to stay cool in the face of change, and without his steadying presence the film would not work.

But it does work and it does work very well.

Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father

A tribute to those lost, and to those left behind.


In the interesting but slapdash documentary Manufacturing Dissent, the great Albert Maysles says that one of the basic tenets of making a documentary is affection, or at least sympathy for the subject, since only those emotions can force a film-maker to depict their subject as they truly are. I can think of few films that exemplify that idea better than Kurt Kuenne's documentary Dear Zachary.

On November 5, 2001, Dr. Andrew Bagby was shot five times at point blank range by his ex-girlfriend, Dr. Shirley Turner. He was killed more or less instantly, and was discovered the next day. Despite being the prime suspect in the murder, Turner was able to travel to Canada, where she fought against being extradited to the United States. It's a sad, sad tale of hate and malice.

That is far from the end of the story, though. Whilst awaiting trial in Canada, Turner revealed that she was four months pregnant with Andrew Bagby's child. Realising that this last remnant of Andrew would never know his father, Kurt Kuenne - who had grown up with Andrew and whose first films had starred Andrew - set out to interview the people who had known Andrew in life, his friends, family and co-workers, so that he could then assemble all the footage into a tape for the newborn child, Zachary. He hoped that by making one more film with Andrew, he would keep some part of Andrew alive and show Zachary who his father was.

Starting out as a touching tribute to a good man who died senselessly and tragically, Dear Zachary gradually opens up into a much grander, but no less personal film. Kuenne's love for Andrew shines through in his editing: he creates a portrait of a man who was loved by pretty much everyone he met, who dedicated his life to treating others and trying to do good in the world. The many interviews that make up the film give us a real sense of who Andrew was, how his background shaped him and what he meant to the people he loved and who loved him. As the film progresses, though, another emotion starts to shape the narrative: anger.

As Kuenne conducted his interviews, Andrews' parents David and Kathleen were in Canada, fighting for custody of their still unborn grandchild. Kuenne documents their trials and tribulations with a force and emotion that is equal to the tender affection with which he describes Andrew. As the Canadian justice system repeatedly fails the Bagbys, first by allowing Shirley Turner to walk free, and then by repeatedly stopping them from getting custody of Zachary. Their frustration - as well as Kuenne's - is expressed visibly and vocally. At several points throughout the film, David Bagby rails against the woman that killed his son and the system that failed to acknowledge that fact. They are moments of explosive, raw emotion that are heartbreaking to watch, and the sort of unchecked outbursts that a documentary made by someone more removed from the story might have left out.

Kurt Kuenne's presence is felt in every frame of the film. As well as being director, editor and composer, he also narrates the entire film. His breathless voiceover unites the disparate elements of a story which is by turns a haunting biography, a compelling true crime story, and a complex, involving legal drama. Kuenne never tries to hide his feelings about the subject - at one point he is so overcome with emotion that his voice breaks and he has to start a line again - and whilst there is a certain manipulative aspect to his choices that only becomes apparent at the end, you never doubt that you are watching someone working out their pain, rage and grief on screen in the most beautiful and heartbreaking way.

I have been deliberately vague throughout this review about the film since there are things about it which I would not want to divulge, because to do so would remove much of their power. The story twists and turns throughout in ways shocking and gutwrenching, and to reveal them would be to deprive the film of much of its unexpected power. All I will say is that it's an intimate and provocative film that has stayed with me far longer than most. It's one of the best documentaries, nay, best films I've ever seen.

Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story

You mean I'm not even a quarter of the boy my brother was?

As Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story begins, a runner is trying to find the titular Cox, (John C. Reilly) a legendary country musician, so that he can go on-stage. Finding him standing alone, leaning on a wall, the runner is told to leave Dewey alone, because he has to remember his entire life before he plays. It's at this point that the film unfolds as an extended flashback, taking us back to Dewey's Depression-era childhood, which was marred by tragedy when Dewey accidentally cut his more talented brother in half during an ill-fated machete fight, through his success in the 50s and 60s, and eventual drug and relationship problems.

Right off the bat, the film associates itself with the Johnny Cash biopic, Walk The Line. Not in order to humourlessly replay scenes from that film, a la Epic Movie, but because director Jake Kasdan and co-writer Judd Apatow use Walk The Line to highlight the cliches of the music biopic genre in general; a tragic childhood, battles with drug addiction, infidelity, a last minute redemption, these are all standard aspects of biopics, and Kasdan and Apatow use the blueprint of Walk The Line to highlight their foibles.

On top of the ridiculous dialogue and characterisation - Dewey's first wife, played by Kristen Wiig, repeatedly tells him that he will never succeed, even after he's had several number one records, and his father constantly tells Dewey that "The wrong kid died!", regardless of any other circumstance - the film-makers add an extra layer of irony to proceedings by making the film look gorgeous. At the risk of falling foul of that old cliche about praising a comedy for its production design probably means the film isn't all that funny, Walk Hard is a seriously good-looking film. The entire production has the sheen of an Oscar contender, and the level of detail and care that has gone into making it look just right contrasts nicely with the silly one-liners and puerile jokes.

And in casting John C. Reilly, a man who has appeared in both crowd-pleasing comedies and Oscar-worthy fare, the film gets someone who can reconcile both aspects of its humour. He gives a completely committed performance that makes Dewey feel like both a real character with genuine pain and a completely silly caricature. In the middle of a fight with his wife, Reilly can say lines like "Edith I told you I can't build your candy house! It will fall apart, the sun will melt the candy, it won't work!" with a deadly seriousness that is far, far funnier than an intentionally wacky delivery. It helps that he can also sing the film's songs, which are all pitch-perfect musical parodies that make for lovely compositions on their own. Walk Hard is at its best when it mixes the ridiculous with the sublime.

However, for all the good of the film there is a paradox at its heart that is never comfortably resolved; it links itself overtly to a specific film, yet it aims to be a satire on a entire genre. Whilst the first half draws primarily on Walk The Line, its second half adopts a more scatter-shot approach. There's an internal consistency to the start that comes from being based on a single source, and that consistency makes the jokes about the cliched nature of biopics all the sharper. Once you have scenes of Dewey meeting the Beatles, as a Brian Wilson surrogate conducting a psychedelic jam, and holding a press conference looking and acting like Bob Dylan circa Don't Look Back, (Reporter: What do your parents think about your protest songs? Dewey: What do your parents think about my protest songs?) that consistency disappears. It's still funny, but it all seems so toothless.

Incidentally, as someone who has always maintained a healthy skepticism regarding the genius and cult of Bob Dylan, the moment in which one character asks what a song with the lyrics "The mouse with the overbite explained/how the rabbits were ensnared" is about, whilst another argues that the song is "very deep", amused me a great deal.

Whilst it never quite matches the comedic heights of its opening half, Walk Hard is a superior spoof in an age when they are few and far between. The love and attention that has clearly gone into the film does much to compensate for its comedic shortcomings, though it does not quite redeem its drop-off halfway through.

The Princess and the Frog

Louis: You sure this is the right blind voodoo lady who lives in the boat in the tree in the bayou?
Ray: Pretty sure.


I grew up during the American Animation Renaissance of the 1980's and 90's and I clearly remember the sheer joy and excitement I felt every time a new Disney animated film was released. Trips to the cinema to see films like Beauty and the Beast - the first film I ever saw in a cinema -, Aladdin and the Lion King were almost holy experiences for me growing up. That same childish sense of wonder came over me as I sat down to watch Disney's return to hand-drawn animation, The Princess and the Frog.

I mention all of this so that you will know just how strongly I feel about these films. Please keep my love of Disney in mind when reading this review, not because it blinds me to the flaws of the film, but because I hold the films to which The Princess and the Frog aspires in very high regard and I went in with very high expectations. Despite those expectations, I came away feeling giddy and joyous. It's almost too good to be true. Like a fairytale, in fact.

Enough dewy-eyed reminiscing, to the plot.

The princess of the title is not a princess at all, but a poor working class black woman named Tiana. (Voiced by Aniki Noni Rose.) Tiana is a poor waitress in New Orleans during the Jazz Age, and has worked all her life to fulfill her late father's dream of opening a restaurant. Her dream seems on the brink of falling apart when she learns that she has been outbid, and she's in need of a miracle.

Whilst wishing on a star, of course, Tiana spies a frog. Asking the frog if he wants a kiss, he replies "Kissing would be nice". No, this is no mere frog, this is Prince Naveen (Voiced by Bruno Campos.), a philandering young fellow who has been turned into a frog by a local voodoo man (Voiced with gusto by Keith David.) who plans to use the stolen form of Naveen to make himself very wealthy. Tiana and Naveen strike a deal: Tiana will kiss Naveen, in doing so turning him back, and Naveen will give Tiana the money she needs to buy her restaurant. Things don't go according to plan, though, since the kiss turns Tiana into a frog as well, and the two find themselves lost in the bayou as they try to break the curse, aided by a firefly who is in love with the moon (Yes, really.) and an alligator who just wants to play trumpet in a jazz band.

The worst thing that could be said The Princess and the Frog is that it doesn't stretch the animated musical beyond what has been done before. Watching it is like watching a potted history of Disney animation: Evil wizard. Check. Bickering male/female leads who start out hating each other then fall in love. Check. The guarantee of a song and dance number every few minutes. Check . To denounce it for that is to miss the point - it's a big, glorious celebration of an artform that Disney excelled at in the past and, on the basis of The Princess and the Frog, still excel at.

The script, written by co-directors Ron Clements and John Musker, is incredibly funny. There's plenty of delightful sight gags, witty spins on traditional Disney tropes, a sincerity to it that, like the best of Disney, pulls at the heartstrings without tearing them out and enough moments of darkness to scare kids. The relationship between Tiana and Naveen has just the right level of prickliness to add friction to their scenes, but not so much that their eventual romance feels forced, and the sentimentality is never allowed to trample the gags or the songs.

Having said that The Princess and The Frog doesn't reinvent the animated musical, it does slip a few little surprises in: The music, rather than being inspired by pop or classical music, is largely gospel and jazz-derived, giving it a different feel to previous Disney outings. Randy Newman's score and original songs create a rich aural texture to match the beautiful hand-drawn animation.

Time will tell whether or not this will usher in Disney's third golden age or go down as John Lasseter's folly, but let's forget history for a moment and appreciate how magical it is to see a film like this being made. Anyone who grew up with Disney will fall in love with The Princess and The Frog. I know I did.

The Book of Eli

If Cormac McCarthy wrote manga, it might look a little like this.


The Book of Eli is the sort of film that shouldn't be a big-budget blockbuster. Not because it is a bad film, but because it seems too odd for a studio to spend $80 million making it. It's an apocalyptic pseudo-Western in which Denzel Washington plays a Johnny Cash-quoting Man With No Name - though he does have a name. It's Eli - who walks through the wasteland, fighting off bandits and trying to protect his book, which a maniacal bibliophile (Gary Oldman) sorely wants because he thinks that it will give him tremendous power, which in turn is an analogy about the power of words and faith. It's an odd duck, and no mistake.

Denzel Washington is as watchable as ever and has this kind of gruff, likable character type down to a fine art now, giving Eli a mixture of gravitas and affability that a film with this scope and grit sorely needs as a window into the reality of the film. Gary Oldman, as the villain of the film, is riotously game and over-the-top, delighting in the opportunity to chew every piece of available scenery. His performance reminded me very much of the Gary Oldman of yesteryear, the consummate character actor who never turned down the chance to be a drugged-up corrupt cop, evil galactic businessman, or faux-Rasta drug dealer. I felt a pleasant wave of nostalgia wash over me at getting to see Gary Oldman be bouncing-off-the-walls insane again.

The Hughes Brothers - directing for the first time in nine years - give the film the dusty, autumnal look that so often characterises these sort of films but manage to find a harsh beauty in the barren landscapes and remnants of civilisation. The action scenes that litter the film have style and energy, and there's an emphasis on continuity to the fights that I found quite refreshing. Rather than the frantic cutcutcutcutcutcut editing favoured by most modern action films, The Hughes Brothers stage fights, such as an opening scene in which Denzel dispatches a group of bandits silhouetted under a bridge, in as few takes as possible, allowing the choreography to shine. This idea is taken to a slightly silly extreme when, during a shoot out at an old house, the camera moves between the two sides and around the house in a seemingly unbroken take which is clearly several stitched together, but I applaud the ethos behind it.

The most interesting aspect of the film is the role of the Book itself, which - and don't read beyond here if you don't want to know what it is - is a copy The Bible. Now, the idea that a Bible is the key to humanity's salvation suggests that the film is going to be a preachy Christian tract, and if this were a Kirk Cameron film it would be, but Eli's book is representative of knowledge, rather than Christian beliefs. Furthermore, the film makes it clear that words are not as important as the people who use them; Eli thinks they could provide people with hope and comfort in a time of crisis, whilst Carnegie sees them as a weapon that would allow him to control people by exploiting their beliefs. It's almost like a science fiction reimagining of The Reformation, with Denzel Washington as Martin Luther.

Unfortunately, since The Book of Eli is a blockbuster, the film winds up conforming to type, to whit, it is littered with fight scenes that don't serve any purpose. Similarly, Mila Kunis as a sort of (But not really.) love interest for Eli serves no real purpose other than to move the plot along. Kunis' presence in the film in general is quite distracting. She much too glamourous exist in the same world as Eli and Carnegie. With her sunglasses and fur-lined coat, contrasted with the unforgiving backdrop of the film, leaves Kunis looking like Angelina Jolie trying to adopt some cannibal children.

Whilst flawed, The Book of Eli is interesting and, when you get past its slightly too serious tone, it is a lot of fun. By no means a great film, and certainly no great shakes when compared to more consistent post-apocalyptic films, it's still an engaging watch. I wouldn't carry a copy of it across a barren wasteland, but I'd happily watch it again.

Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll

Is very good indeed.


In Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll, a biopic of the singer Ian Dury, director Mat Whitecross and writer Paul Viragh use a vaudevillian stage motif in which Dury, played by Andy Serkis, performs in front of a live audience. It's a bold and exciting conceit that allows them to mix storming performances with anecdotes as Dury tells the story of his life, us of his time in a children's hospital after a bout with polio that left him crippled, his relationship with his father (Ray Winstone), and son Baxter (Bill Milner). These performances then lead into the more classically cinematic - but no less enjoyable - sequences depicting events from Dury's eventful life. Taken together, these disparate pieces create a chaotic and exciting portrait of a complicated and contradictory individual.

I couldn't help but think that a more traditional - and lesser - film would have chosen to use Dury's childhood battle with polio, which left him crippled for the rest of his life, as a life-affirming example of someone overcoming their personal demons, in the style of painfully worthy biopics like Ray. Whitecross, Serkis and Viragh do something much more interesting: They take the view that Dury's polio was not something he overcame but something he channeled. His anger at the treatment he received as a child, being told at one point by a dictatorial orderly (Toby Jones) to accept his crippled nature and give up trying to be "normal", drove him to try to prove the world wrong at any cost.

Serkis delivers one of the finest performances of his career, giving Dury all the fire, swagger and snarl that he had in life. Whether singing live on stage - Serkis performs all his own vocals and the likeness to Dury's voice is eerie - or acting alongside his co-stars, he completely inhabits the skin of Dury, a dedication which extended to allowing one of his legs to atrophy in order to better mimic Dury's gait. He shows off Dury's humour and undeniable magnetism, both on - and off-stage, but also the darker, self-destructive side of his persona, the side that made him quite an isolated figure at the height of the Blockheads' success. Serkis shows us that the very same desire to live life to the fullest was the same thing that led him to hurt those around him.

It's very much a film about relationships between fathers and sons, with the relationship between Ian and his father Bill, and the one between Ian and his son Baxter forming the backbone of the story. We see how Ian's love for his father, despite it being his father who placed him in the hospital that Ian so despised, was key to Ian's personality; it was his father's tough love and belief that everyone has to stand on their own that helped make Ian such a tough, uncompromising character.

Elsewhere, we are shown the effects that Ian's success has on his young son, Baxter. Though they are initially very distant, with Baxter living with Ian's ex-wife, the success of The Blockheads brings them together as Baxter learns to respect and admire his father, whilst also being privy to the darker side of his father's success, an exposure that very nearly kills him. As Baxter, Bill Milner continues to mark himself out as one of the best young British actors out there at the moment. He absolutely nails the mix of love, awe and anger that Baxter feels for his father. If he can stay this good as he grows up then he could very well be the next Christian Bale.

Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll is an absolutely wonderful film. It's a worthy celebration of a uniquely British figure whose love for life oozes out of the screen. It's joyous and uplifting but not mawkish or sentimental. It's a reason to be cheerful.

Film Review: The Room (2003)

This film is tearing me apart, Lisa!


I'm always wary of hype, since having a film praised to high heavens before seeing it often leads me to feel confrontational, as if I'm saying to the film, "Go on, then. Impress me", which is pretty much the least helpful attitude in the world to have when going into a film. What's odd, though, is when a film comes with a reputation as one of the worst films ever made, even if it's known as a film that is 'so bad it's good'. In those instances, such as when I watched much of the back-catalogue of Ed Wood after seeing the excellent Tim Burton film about his life, I approach the film in a more open and accepting way. I want to hug the film to my breast and care for it like an injured bird, saying, "It's okay, it's okay. You're horribly disfigured, but I love you". That pretty much sums up what I felt whilst watching Tommy Wiseau's now legendary The Room.

Oscar Predictions: The Major Awards

And we're back with the live telecast of Ed's Oscar Predictions. Hope the adverts weren't too loud and annoying.

Having looked through the Technical Awards with an occasionally surgical, but largely slapdash, precision, I will now be considering the Major categories as defined by me and, judging by the way in which the ceremony is conducted, by the Academy. I'm not saying the Technical Awards aren't important, just saying that if Best Editing was so important to the Academy it'd be the last award they hand out.

As with previous predictions, for each one I'll say who should win, who will win, and who the dark horse will be for each category, since that allows me to hedge my bets and come away from the whole thing claiming I was all clever and shit.


Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published
Nominees:

District 9 (2009): Neill Blomkamp, Terri Tatchell
An Education (2009): Nick Hornby
In the Loop (2009): Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche
Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009): Geoffrey Fletcher
Up in the Air (2009/I): Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner

I must not have been the only one surprised and delighted by the nomination for In The Loop. Armando Iannucci, Oscar nominee just seems really strange to me. Pleasant surprise aside, I' can't quite bring myself to believe that it'll win, despite how bizarre and wonderful such an eventuality would be. It just seems too caustic and too British to win through. This category is actually quite interesting since, without a serious Best Picture contender behind any of them (Precious, maybe, but District 9? Can't see it happening) the field is wide open. If I had to choose (and I kind of have to, given the nature of this enterprise) I'm going to plump for Up In The Air. It's attracted plenty of attention throughout awards season and Jason Reitman is already an Academy fave.

What Should Win: In The Loop

What Will Win: Up In The Air

Dark Horse: District 9


Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen
Nominees:

The Hurt Locker (2008): Mark Boal
Inglourious Basterds (2009): Quentin Tarantino
The Messenger (2009/I): Alessandro Camon, Oren Moverman
A Serious Man (2009): Joel Coen, Ethan Coen
Up (2009): Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Thomas McCarthy

This category is very tight this year, as four of the nominees are Best Pictures contenders and, since Avatar's cliched, cheesy and downright awful script was rightly ignored, there isn't the sweep factor that usually allows the Best Picture winner to take the screenplay prize along with it. First, the films that definitely won't win: The Coens', despite writing a brilliant film, won't win because A Serious Man is too odd and personal to appeal to a broad selection of voters; and The Messenger won't win because it's a film that almost no one had heard of or was discussing as an Oscar contender prior to the nominations. That leaves Up, Inglourious Basterds and The Hurt Locker. I'd love for Up to win it, if only so Thomas McCarthy could get an Oscar and use the clout to get more films like The Station Agent and The Visitor made, but Pixar have always been bridemaids, never brides when it comes to the Original Screenplay award (Toy Story, Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Ratatouille, and WALL-E were all nominated for the same award in previous years) and I can't see that trend ending with Up. So, Inglourious Basterds, or The Hurt Locker? I think that Inglourious Basterds will just pip it for having the showier, more loquacious script at the expense of The Hurt Locker's gripping and realistic writing, giving Quentin Tarantino his second Original Screenplay Oscar, after his win in 1995 for Pulp Fiction.

What Should Win: The Hurt Locker or Up

What Will Win: Inglourious Basterds

Dark Horse: A Serious Man


Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role
Nominees:

Penélope Cruz for Nine (2009)
Vera Farmiga for Up in the Air (2009/I)
Maggie Gyllenhaal for Crazy Heart (2009)
Anna Kendrick for Up in the Air (2009/I)
Mo'Nique for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009)

Even if Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendricks weren't splitting the Up In The Air vote, Mo'Nique's had this award sewn up for months now. Her performance as Mary, the abusive, hateful mother of Precious is truly astounding; she creates a compelling monster who completely dominates every scene she is in, but it's the final scene of the film, in which she breaks down and lays bare the years of abuse visited on her daughter and the reason why she let it happen, is spellbinding. Mo'Nique takes us into the mind of a truly horrible human being and shows us what twisted logic led her to think that letting her husband sexually abuse their daughter for years was not only acceptable, but that somehow it was all Precious' fault. It's a brilliant performance.

Who Should Win: Mo'Nique

Who Will Win: Mo'Nique

Dark Horse: At this point, the rest of the nominees.


Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role
Nominees:

Matt Damon for Invictus (2009)
Woody Harrelson for The Messenger (2009/I)
Christopher Plummer for The Last Station (2009)
Stanley Tucci for The Lovely Bones (2009)
Christoph Waltz for Inglourious Basterds (2009)

It's interesting that this year both Supporting Awards became foregone conclusions so early in the awards season, and that both will go to actors portraying villains. Unlike Mo'Nique, Christoph Waltz will be waltzing home with an Oscar for playing a villain who is, despite being a Jew-killing Nazi, actually quite charming. Hans Landa, the Jew Hunter, is a man who is very, very good at his job, and from the moment he enters a farm house and asks its owner for a glass of his delicious milk, the audience never takes their eyes from him. He completely dominates every scene he is in and maintains a delicate balancing act between being the embodiment of all that is evil in the world and being downright hilarious.

Who Should Win: Christoph Waltz

Who Will Win: Christoph Waltz

Dark Horse: Unless, during the ceremony, Brad Pitt takes Waltz out, I don't think anyone else is going to have a look in.


Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role
Nominees:

Sandra Bullock for The Blind Side (2009)
Helen Mirren for The Last Station (2009)
Carey Mulligan for An Education (2009)
Gabourey Sidibe for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009)
Meryl Streep for Julie & Julia (2009)

Up until a few months ago, if you had presented me with this list, I'd have said Carrey Mulligan without a moments hesitation. Whilst the rest of the nominees have either seniority on their side (Streep, Mirren, Bullock), or are in films that have real muscle behind them in other categories (Sidibe) none of them display the same insouciant charm and brittle fragility that Mulligan did as a schoolgirl seduced by an older man. That's what I would have said a few months ago, then The Blind Side made $244 million off the back of Sandra Bullock's performance, and suddenly things weren't so clear cut. Though I still think that Mulligan's is the better performance, Sandra Bullock is going to take home the statuette on the night. The Academy loves a comeback, and an Oscar would be the perfect cap to a year in which Bullock appeared in the two biggest hits of her career (The Proposal and The Blind Side) and gained some of her best notices, too. Though, when they talk about her success on the night, I think they'll skim over All About Steve. There's definitely a sense that it's Bullock's turn, whereas everyone else has either won Oscars in the past, or are young and talented enough to get a second crack a few years down the road.

Who Should Win: Carrey Mulligan

Who Will Win: Sandra Bullock

Dark Horse: Gabourey Sidibe


Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role
Nominees:

Jeff Bridges for Crazy Heart (2009)
George Clooney for Up in the Air (2009/I)
Colin Firth for A Single Man (2009)
Morgan Freeman for Invictus (2009)
Jeremy Renner for The Hurt Locker (2008)

In any other year, Morgan Freeman's performance as Nelson Mandela, a role that he's always seemed just perfect for, or Colin Firth's subtle, achingly sad portrayal of a gay man brought to the brink of suicide by the death of his lover, would be a shoo-in, but there's been a real swell of support for Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart recently. It's not hard to see why, many people have compared his role to Mickey Rourke's role in The Wrestler last year, with his vulnerable, haggard old country star showcasing the sort of affable charm/hidden depths combination that Bridge's does so well. This is also the fifth time Bridges has been nominated, and there seems to be a sense that it's time he won to make up for the times he didn't. This is known as the Scorsese Factor. So, with all that in mind, I think it'll go to Jeff Bridges: Clooney and Freeman have already won in the past; Jeremy Renner, despite giving the best performance out of the lot, is still young and will have other chances; and they gave Sean Penn an Oscar for playing a gay man last year, so they don't have to acknowledge the existence of gay people for at least another decade. It's The Dude's turn.

Who Should Win: Jeremy Renner

Who Will Win: Jeff Bridges

Dark Horse: Colin Firth


Best Achievement in Directing
Nominees:

Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker (2008)
James Cameron for Avatar (2009)
Lee Daniels for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009)
Jason Reitman for Up in the Air (2009/I)
Quentin Tarantino for Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Now, some of you may have gleamed from the rest of this post that I strongly believe that Avatar will win Best Picture, and there's lots of reasons why it will win, some of which I'll list in a moment. Now, generally, Best Picture and Best Director are paired together; of the 80 films that have won Best Picture, 59 have also won Best Director. However, I don't think that this will be the case this year since, whilst Avatar will win Best Picture, Kathryn Bigelow will win Best Director. Given that Bigelow used to be married to James Cameron, director of Avatar, this could be seen as the highest profile divorce settlement of all time ("You take Best Director, I'll take Best Picture. You can have the china plates, I'll have the silverware."), but more importantly it just seems like the wheels of history have turned and brought us to a point where, finally, a woman will win Best Director. It's long overdue and I can't see the Academy missing out on this opportunity to right a wrong that has persisted for far, far too long.

Who Should Win: Kathryn Bigelow

Who Will Win: Kathyrn Bigelow

Dark Horse: Jason Reitman


Best Motion Picture of the Year
Nominees:

Avatar (2009): James Cameron, Jon Landau
The Blind Side (2009): Gil Netter, Andrew A. Kosove, Broderick Johnson
District 9 (2009): Peter Jackson, Carolynne Cunningham
An Education (2009): Finola Dwyer, Amanda Posey
The Hurt Locker (2008): Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal, Nicolas Chartier, Greg Shapiro
Inglourious Basterds (2009): Lawrence Bender
Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009): Lee Daniels, Sarah Siegel-Magness, Gary Magness
A Serious Man (2009): Joel Coen, Ethan Coen
Up (2009): Jonas Rivera
Up in the Air (2009/I): Daniel Dubiecki, Ivan Reitman, Jason Reitman

The decision to expand the list of nominees to ten this year, rather than five - in response to very vocal criticism of the Academy over the exclusion of The Dark Knight last year -has certainly turned up some interesting candidates (who, last summer, could have foreseen that Peter Jackson wouldn't be nominated for Best Picture for The Lovely Bones but for that weird South African science fiction film about giant prawns?) but the award won't go to interesting candidates like the aforementioned District 9, A Serious Man, or Up (the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture since Beauty and the Beast in 1991, and only the second one ever) or Academy-pleasers like An Education, The Blind Side Up In The Air, but to Avatar.

The monumental success of Avatar makes it pretty much a certainty that it will win Best Picture because, frankly, the film industry needs it to win Best Picture. So much time, money and effort has been spent developing 3-D and telling audiences that 3-D is the future that Avatar seemed to hold the entire history of cinema on its shoulders prior to release. Now that it has been released and, to the shock of pretty much everyone, become the most successful film of all time - unadjusted for inflation, of course - it only seems fitting that they should reward it for, if not changing the course of cinema history, at least offering concrete proof that 3-D is viable. Whilst I maintain, as I have throughout these predictions and elsewhere on the blog, that Avatar is not the best film that was released last year (The Hurt Locker was, naturally) I can't help but feel that Avatar deserves it. Regardless of what I feel about the film, its success is staggering, and James Cameron has, in the face of all the pessimism and jeers of the world, made himself King of the World again. Or the king of his own, bioluminescent world.

What Should Win: The Hurt Locker

What Will Win: Avatar

Dark Horse: The rest of them, but Up In The Air probably has the best chance of causing an upset on the night.

Right, that's your lot. Take your gift bags and piss off.

Oscar Predictions: The Technical Awards

Has it really been a year since I last dusted off my (virtual) tux and sat down to ruminate on the year's Oscars in a vain - in both senses of the word - attempt to try to figure out who is going to win? It has? Oh, well, best get started then. I'm going to do things slightly differently this year by splitting the predictions into two posts: The Technical Awards and the Major Awards. This is mainly because the Technical Oscars are ones that I can write up very quickly, so I'll be able to write this one up sharpish and spend more time on the main ones, but also because, theoretically, two separate posts will be more easily digestible than one turgidly long one.

Let's begin.

Ed's Predictions:

Best Short Film, Live Action
Nominees:

The Door (2008): Juanita Wilson, James Flynn
Istället för abrakadabra (2008): Patrik Eklund, Mathias Fjällström
Kavi (2009): Gregg Helvey
Miracle Fish (2009): Luke Doolan, Drew Bailey
The New Tenants (2009): Joachim Back, Tivi Magnusson

As with the last two years, I haven't seen any of these so will have to use a completely arbitrary system of judgement. This year, I'm plumping for Kavi, because Gregg Helvey was interviewed on an episode of Battleship Pretension a few months ago and he sounded like a nice, interesting guy, and the other nominees could all murder kittens for pleasure, as far as I know.


Best Short Film, Animated
Nominees:

French Roast (2008): Fabrice Joubert
Granny O'Grimm's Sleeping Beauty (2008): Nicky Phelan, Darragh O'Connell
La dama y la muerte (2009): Javier Recio Gracia
Logorama (2009): Nicolas Schmerkin
Wallace and Gromit in 'A Matter of Loaf and Death' (2008) (TV): Nick Park

Easy; Nick Park. Just look at his Oscar track record: nominated five times before, won four of those times, and only lost the fifth because he was nominated twice in the same year; he only lost because he was competing against himself.


Best Documentary, Short Subjects
Nominees:

China's Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province (2009) (TV): Jon Alpert, Matthew O'Neill
The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner (2009): Daniel Junge, Henry Ansbacher
The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant (2009) (TV): Steven Bognar, Julia Reichert
Królik po berlinsku (2009): Bartosz Konopka, Anna Wydra
Music by Prudence (2010): Roger Ross Williams, Elinor Burkett

The Documentary categories are one of the few sections of the Oscars that is, year in year out, allowed to be overtly political. Whilst the main awards will occasionally hand out awards to politically aware and progressive films, they tend to ignore them in favour of glitzier fare. With this in mind, I think The Last Truck will win, since it seems to have a timeliness to it that the others lack.


Best Documentary, Features
Nominees:

Burma VJ: Reporter i et lukket land (2008): Anders Østergaard, Lise Lense-Møller
The Cove (2009): Louie Psihoyos, Fisher Stevens
Food, Inc. (2008): Robert Kenner, Elise Pearlstein
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers (2009): Judith Ehrlich, Rick Goldsmith
Which Way Home (2009): Rebecca Cammisa

A decidedly strong bunch here, with much to recommend them; Burma VJ is one of the most vital and incendiary documentaries of the last few years; The Cove is one of the most acclaimed documentaries of the last few years; and Food Inc. has recently seen a surge of popularity after Oprah Winfrey profiled it, making the DVD the number one in America. I think that The Cove will ultimately win out, though, since, much like Man On Wire last year, it's built a strong swell of critical and popular support over the course of the year.


Best Foreign Language Film of the Year
Nominees:

Ajami (2009)(Israel)
Das weisse Band - Eine deutsche Kindergeschichte (2009)(Germany)
El secreto de sus ojos (2009)(Argentina)
Un prophète (2009)(France)
La teta asustada (2009)(Peru)

Gah! Two of the best films I've seen in the last year going head to head in a repeat of last year's Cannes film festival ! Even though I think Un prophète is a better film, I think that Das weisse Band will win out because it's had longer to make an impact and because Michael Haneke is one of those directors who has long been a critical darling but whose work has never been recognised by the Academy.


Best Animated Feature Film of the Year
Nominees:

Coraline (2009): Henry Selick
Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009): Wes Anderson
The Princess and the Frog (2009): John Musker, Ron Clements
The Secret of Kells (2009): Tomm Moore
Up (2009): Pete Docter

I think that Up's nomination in the Best Picture category - which I am ecstatic about, by the way - could hurt its chances here, since people may ignore it if they think that it is in with a shot of winning a 'proper' award, even if it almost certainly won't. However, the fact that it is the most successful of the nominees - as well as the most universally praised, though it's a stellar bunch - will see it win out.

Best Achievement in Visual Effects
Nominees:

Avatar (2009): Joe Letteri, Stephen Rosenbaum, Richard Baneham, Andy Jones
District 9 (2009): Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros, Matt Aitken
Star Trek (2009): Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh, Burt Dalton

Even though District 9 and Star Trek are much, much better films that are more inventive and entertaining, Avatar will certainly win this because, as ambivalent as I am about the merits of the film in terms of storytelling, the effects are amazing.


Best Achievement in Sound Editing
Nominees:

Avatar (2009): Christopher Boyes, Gwendolyn Yates Whittle
The Hurt Locker (2008): Paul N.J. Ottosson
Inglourious Basterds (2009): Wylie Stateman
Star Trek (2009): Mark P. Stoeckinger, Alan Rankin
Up (2009): Michael Silvers, Tom Myers

There's a chance that Avatar's visual splendour will bleed into the other categories, allowing it to pick up some of the audio awards along the way, but I think this could be the first win for The Hurt Locker, since the sound of the film is hugely important in creating its unbearably tense atmosphere.


Best Achievement in Sound Mixing
Nominees:

Avatar (2009): Christopher Boyes, Gary Summers, Andy Nelson, Tony Johnson
The Hurt Locker (2008): Paul N.J. Ottosson, Ray Beckett
Inglourious Basterds (2009): Michael Minkler, Tony Lamberti, Mark Ulano
Star Trek (2009): Anna Behlmer, Andy Nelson, Peter J. Devlin
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009): Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers, Geoffrey Patterson

Seriously? Transformers gets a nomination? Well, it's certainly the loudest of the nominees, which might count for something, but I think this will be another win for The Hurt Locker, since I've never really understood what the difference is between Sound 'Editing' and Sound 'Mixing', so they tend to go hand in hand.


Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures, Original Song
Nominees:

Crazy Heart (2009): T-Bone Burnett, Ryan Bingham("The Weary Kind")
Faubourg 36 (2008): Reinhardt Wagner, Frank Thomas("Loin de Paname")
Nine (2009): Maury Yeston("Take It All")
The Princess and the Frog (2009): Randy Newman("Almost There")
The Princess and the Frog (2009): Randy Newman("Down in New Orleans")

I was originally going to give this one to Crazy Heart based purely on the fact that having multiple nominations for songs, as The Princess and The Frog does here, tends to lead to a splitting of the vote, allowing for songs from smaller films to win. The best recent example of this being when 'Falling Slowly' from Once managed to win against three songs from Enchanted. For that reason, and because it's a lovely song, I'm plucking for 'The Weary Kind.'


Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures, Original Score
Nominees:

Avatar (2009): James Horner
Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009): Alexandre Desplat
The Hurt Locker (2008): Marco Beltrami, Buck Sanders
Sherlock Holmes (2009): Hans Zimmer
Up (2009): Michael Giacchino

I'm going to throw my support being Michael Giacchino's beautiful score for Up. Whilst James Horner's score for Avatar is effective, it just isn't as inventive or haunting as Giacchino's repeated motifs and subtle tones in Up.


Best Achievement in Makeup
Nominees:

Il divo (2008): Aldo Signoretti, Vittorio Sodano
Star Trek (2009): Barney Burman, Mindy Hall, Joel Harlow
The Young Victoria (2009): John Henry Gordon, Jenny Shircore

I'm so surprised to see Paolo Sorrentino's Il Divo nominated that I'm going to say it'll win. It seems like one of those La vie en rose nominations that winds up winning because, despite its showier competition, it's just so much better.


Best Achievement in Costume Design
Nominees:

Bright Star (2009): Janet Patterson
Coco avant Chanel (2009): Catherine Leterrier
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (2009): Monique Prudhomme
Nine (2009): Colleen Atwood
The Young Victoria (2009): Sandy Powell

Coco avant Chanel will win for the chic factor, if nothing else.


Best Achievement in Art Direction
Nominees:

Avatar (2009): Rick Carter, Robert Stromberg, Kim Sinclair
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (2009): David Warren, Anastasia Masaro, Caroline Smith
Nine (2009): John Myhre, Gordon Sim
Sherlock Holmes (2009): Sarah Greenwood, Katie Spencer
The Young Victoria (2009): Patrice Vermette, Maggie Gray

Wow, what a hodge-podge of nominees. This feels like an Avatar win, to me; creating an entire world just seems more impressive that getting period trappings just right.


Best Achievement in Editing
Nominees:

Avatar (2009): Stephen E. Rivkin, John Refoua, James Cameron
District 9 (2009): Julian Clarke
The Hurt Locker (2008): Bob Murawski, Chris Innis
Inglourious Basterds (2009): Sally Menke
Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009): Joe Klotz

The battle between Avatar and The Hurt Locker for awards supremacy rages on and The Hurt Locker will win this bout for its visceral action sequences and palpable tension.


Best Achievement in Cinematography
Nominees:

Avatar (2009): Mauro Fiore
Das weisse Band - Eine deutsche Kindergeschichte (2009): Christian Berger
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009): Bruno Delbonnel
The Hurt Locker (2008): Barry Ackroyd
Inglourious Basterds (2009): Robert Richardson

I'm quite delighted to see Harry Potter nominated here. I thought it was one of the most visually arresting films of last year and made for an uncommonly beautiful blockbuster, particularly one that is the sixth in a series. It won't win, but it was nice all the same. Neither will Das weisse Band or Inglourious Basterds, despite both being hugely accomplished pieces of work. It's Team Bigelow and Team Cameron again and, this time, it'll be Avatar that takes the glory.


Right, that's the end of Part One. I shall return tomorrow with my thoughts on the Major Awards.

Stay Tuned; Same Mighty Fine Time, Same Mighty Fine Channel.

Nowhere Boy

And we're back! After a long, broken laptop-induced break, I'm back to blogging. I'm going to do my yearly Oscar predictions tomorrow, but for the moment I'm going to try to catch up on some reviews I've missed out on.

Mother, you had me/but I never had you - "Mother", John Lennon


When I was a faintly ridiculous, pretentious 16-year old - as opposed to my current standing as a faintly ridiculous, pretentious 23-year old - I was obsessed with The Beatles and I read Ray Coleman's exhaustive Lennon: The Definitive Biography. Whilst I no longer have quite the blind devotion I once did - I would not, for instance, consider re-buying all their albums in stereo - Coleman's book has stayed with me because it offered an insight into Lennon's traumatic childhood, and the way in which his relationships with two women, his mother Julia and aunt Mimi, defined him and his music.

It is this relationship that artist Sam Taylor-Wood focuses on in her debut feature, Nowhere Boy. John Lennon (Aaron Johnson) is a 17-year old tearaway who spends his days listening to music, skiving school and chasing after girls. With his Buddy Holly glasses, sardonic wit and aimless intelligence, he seems out of place amongst his peers, but he's trapped, with no outlet for his energies. This begins to change when, after his uncle dies, John becomes reacquainted with his mother (Anne-Marie Duff), who introduces him to the sexually charged world of rock and roll, to the chagrin of John's stern aunt Mimi (Kristin Scott Thomas).

Rather than try to make a definitive film about the artistic life of John Lennon, Taylor-Wood and written Matt Greenhalgh - who has prior form at penning musical biopics, having written Ian Curtis film Control - craft an affecting, if unimaginative, melodrama about a young man torn between two women; the one who raised him, and the one who gave birth to him.

Like the best music biopics, the film sets out to explore the personal development of its subject, rather than the musical development. Whilst there are scenes in which Julia teaches John how to play the banjo and Paul (Thomas Sangster) talks about the need for them to write their own songs, the focus of the film is on John's relationship with Julia and Mimi and the tug-of-war between them. There's a strangely Oedipal tension to the scenes between Johnson and Duff as son and mother, having never really known each other, are unsure how to act around each other, further confusing John's already turbulent adolescence. Johnson is pretty magnetic as Lennon, and even if he veers towards caricature rather than character, he at least captures the essence of the young Lennon and gets across his undoubted charisma and darker, sullen side.

The key performance in the film, though, is that of Kristin Scott Thomas, who exudes glacial calm and poise as Aunt Mimi. Mimi has taken on a minor pop culture cache of her own, being such an important figure in the life of a man who would help redefine popular music, and Thomas' performance stands as both a rendition of the mythical Mimi but, more importantly, as a real human character in her own right. She manages a delicate balance of sarcasm, stoicism (upon telling John that her husband, his uncle George, has died she tells him to stop crying and that "It's just the two of us now, so let's get on with it") and deeply felt love for John. It's a really nuanced performance that adds the most dramatic weight to the relationship, and makes the final third of the film - in which John learns the "truth" about why Mimi adopted him - much more powerful than it would otherwise be.

I say "truth" because, as with all music biopics, the film-makers play fast and loose with the facts of John's relationship with his mother in order to suit the narrative and the story, so whilst there is a degree of truth to the film, it is still a constructed narrative used to explore the tensions that would forge John Lennon, musician, from John Lennon, scared teenage boy. And I think it works very well since, even though I knew the film was taking liberties, I completely believed in its world and its versions of events as a self-contained story.

It won't start a revolution (Groan.) but Nowhere Boy is a well-crafted, well-acted chamber piece that avoids the banality of most biopics by ignoring the music in search of a more emotional truth.