Oscar 2012 - Best Picture

Finally we got this year too at the last entry in the Oscar series, and I hope I'll finish to write in fast enough to still have sense to read it before the awards :) (I'm gettin' slow with this "live" writing lately ... even if I usually do it on the run). Considering the expectations had regarding my available time and the 8 postings on 9 categories I made (including the current one) I can declare myself pleased at least with the quantity (anyway smaller than last year with 10, respectively 12). But probably counting this doesn't interest anybody, so let's get to the movies:

"The Artist" - the small French production that ended up a big success is quite predictable also the winning option we have here ( statistically until last year I didn't screwed up with this prevision since "Chicago", maybe I won't do it twice in a row :) ). About the story, which for me is a bit too simplistic, I'll let the clip below to say some stuff. About the rest, as an impression I'll risk saying that we have something like the "Avatar effect" no matter how weird this sounds :) Meaning ... the movie managed to catch the audience especially due to the difference on what you can usually see in the cinemas. Silent, black-and-white, frame dimensions and visual filters to look like in the 20s, etc. In other words, keeping the proportions, it was something as "new" as "Avatar". The difference is a major one in what's left besides the technical part though = if "Avatar" has a script targeted for an IQ of 60, "The Artist" although quite simple as said, still it's much better, and you also have the actors who though not speaking they do play and they do it extremely well (what makes me wonder if "Avatar" wouldn't have been better if it was silent). Still, the fact that "The Artist" is (probably, didn't check) the favorite on bets, comes mostly due to the lack of competition. If the last year was the best in the latest 10 considering the nominees value, if you do an average this year you come up with exactly the opposite. What would be interesting is to take some silent movies from the beginning of last century, hypothetically remade these days, and compare. And I believe (still hypothetically :) ) that we'll get the chance to reach the conclusion that you should send the Oscar back in time ;)



"The Descendants" - is the movie that I'd like to break my previous prediction. I wrote enough on other occasions to get as long as I did above (you can check the blog entry from January). Shortly, the movie is the one that had the most powerful impact as feeling for me, in a positive way (because there is a title somewhere below that's slightly in a different register). I kept telling about the location and about how well is used the Hawaii setting. What I don't remember is if I wrote about the fact that it gives some chance at some point to build a sort of relation between the comic of the issues there with what problems you might have in your own life ( especially if these come close to the level of weirdness of the ones in the movie :) ), stuff that at least temporarily has the chance to make you feel better. And that's because the movie is warm enough (and that's not about Hawaii :) although this helps) to draw you out from a chilly state (and that's not about the winter :) although it happened to be like this).



"Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close" - is I guess statistically speaking the lowest-rated film nominated here since '95 (and that's because my memory doesn't help me beyond that date). Fact that confirms the level of this year. I wonder why they set nine nominees instead of ten ? ... although to be fair there are movies that could fill the spot. Well, getting back to EL & IC, I was expecting, due to the critics, to be much worse than it was. That doesn't make it the opposite. The story has a sort of potential - shortly, we have a boy, apparently suffering from Asperger, who passes through the trauma of losing his father on the 9/11. The part with the potential comes from a "quest" that the kid builds to find out the lock for a key, apparently left by the one who passed away. Well, I don't know how clear that was, but the movie will bring you more info. The first issue comes from the tragedy style that's a bit exaggerated, starting with the script, following with the acting and others. The second issue comes from action threads that are left hanging, situations that are not very credible although this is wanted, and other stuff like that ... Conclusion: it's probably the safest bet for something like: who do you think that won't get an Oscar this year ?



"The Help" - it's another movie that, with the risk to sound insensitive, is a bit too "tear-jerking" especially towards the end, but at the same time is at a completely different level from the one above. I think it's the production that I liked the most (as far as I remember) from any movie I've ever seen centered around racial segregation & stuff like that. The action is set in the '60s in Jackson, Mississippi where a young journalist woman more open (and normal) minded than the white community of which she's part of, decides to write a book about the black maids condition. Despite the subject the movie is really fun to watch, you don't feel at all the almost two and a half hours it has, and for the acting (since I've skipped the categorie) is I guess pretty much the only title that gets to the same level with the cast in "The Artist".



"Hugo" - is the movie having the most nominations this year, and that makes it somehow the main pretender to the Oscar after "The Artist". On the other hand if we consider for example "True Grit" from last year having also 10 nominations and getting 0 awards the things look different (well, I should count anyway, that last year's nominees looked different too). If I should compare it, the story from "Hugo" is not much more complex than the one in "The Artist". But, as I was saying, even if here we have the 3D - "the Avatar effect" moved in the other direction towards something more original at this moment. Since due to the number of nominations, I ended up writing every time this year about "Hugo", I'm gonna short it now and leave the trailer to do the summary of the story which is after all mostly about Georges Melies (I'm just realizing .. it's funny that the movie + the book have a name + even the trailer it's a bit missing it and finally the main point is the life of somebody else).



"Midnight in Paris" - is the I don't know which episode from the "Woody Allen reloaded" series. What to say more than what I already said when I wrote about directing and art direction ... I really don't know. I'll do a "reload" too :) : it's the story of an aspiring writer who went to Paris where he discovers a "teleporter" in the shape of an old car that each midnight transports him somewhere at the beginning of the XX-th century in the middle of the American literature classics, and not only them. Everything in a pure Woody Allen style = the same type of dialogues and social comic about which seemingly the critic never has enough since 20 years ago (even the fonts on the credits are the same ... I've recently watched "Hannah & her Sisters" from .. '86 ! no change). Anyway .. the result is still something decent to watch before you go to sleep ...



"Moneyball" - we had to have a sports related movie, and if it's not boxing is baseball. I don't know if I haven't said it already but the main thing to note here is Brad Pitt's performance, which I'm gonna risk saying is the best of what I've seen (a bit on top of "Army of the 12 Monkeys"). I have no idea how is really the team manager, who accepted to to introduce the statistic theory as instrument for creating the teams in the American Baseball (this is the subject of the movie - more or less) but Pitt carries on an exceptional part. Probably he won't get the Oscarul (there's still "The Artist" around, with Jean Dujardin in great form), but anyway he did rise at least in my eyes as acting talent. The rest is in the trailer ...



"The Tree of Life" - is probably the most "deep" movie from what we got nominated here, and actually it's not probably, I think it is the only one (with "The Descendants" having a slight tendency of hidden philosophy behind what you can directly get, just a slight one). I won't try to analyze "The Tree of Life" now. It's the type of movie that deserves left to each viewer to "chew" on it how he/she is able to. There isn't much of a subject - bits'n pieces from the life of a boy having an authoritarian father (again Brad Pitt, but not really at the same level as above). What keeps you near the screen is the way it's made, and once again a plus for Malick as director and one even bigger for Lubecki as cinematographer. It's a movie that took Palme d'Or at Cannes and was completely ignored at BAFTA. Two reasons for which I didn't expect much - I always found Cannes more like a "critic snobbery" than real value + even now I can't really say that I like Malick as director - I'm waiting to get confirmed this wasn't an accident. If I were to judge objectively after what I've seen among the nominees, this is probably the most entitled film to get here. I'm still keeping my preference for "Descendants" but I can't ignore the superiority this one has in some areas where there you have almost nothing, like the cinematography for example which matters a lot. And because of this I can include "The Tree of Life" besides the one above and "Hugo" on the list of possible surprise this year on the final announcement of "And the Oscar goes to ...".



"War Horse" - wraps alphabetically the list of this year. Too much to say besides what I've commented on other categories I don't have. In other years (as other titles here) this movie wouldn't have got with the nominees that far. To be short, it competes with "Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close" for the exaggerated tear-jerking style and in Spielberg's list of directed movies is probably on the bottom quarter (it seems the first World War doesn't fit him as well as the second). Still, and I think I've actually said it before ... it's a movie that as a story is watchable = sufficiently wide as temporal space so it won't seem artificially stretched and with enough in-depth content too so it won't seem too simple. But is definitely not to "deep" either ...



So .. since it seems we have a French domination at the Oscars de this year, I can say a "c'est fini" :) up until the next February. About the awards stuff of cours, next week back to the usual movie entries ;)

Oscar 2012 - Directing

Like I was saying, I don't have the time to spend on other categories (and actually not to fill the list of unseen movies to get an opinion about all the nominees), so I'll jump straight to the directing.

"Midnight in Paris" - Woody Allen - I'll be franc (no pun intended): zero chances. The movie is ok, we have some bits of originality as idea with the integrated time traveling, but that's more story & script. Script which has anyway still the dialogues and the types of characters specific to Woody Allen, and the directing closes any doubt on this. I think that considering the style is the most constant well-known director nowadays. If I wouldn't know who made the movie I don't think I would need more than 10 minutes to guess. And even if the result is not bad, actually watchable, for me starts to look from one movie to another more and more like a reheated soup.



"The Artist" - Michel Hazanavicius - is on the favorites list this year, and to give a more exact prevision I would risk saying that he has the biggest chances on directing (where the competition is more or less between three of the five nominees). From all my impression is that this guy was the most involved effectively in the production (and that without considering his nomination also for editing). But, if I should characterize as synthetically as possible an appreciation for directing, generally speaking, I would skip the activity itself and regard it from a different perspective: it's about how you finally get as spectator to feel what was transmitted to you - from how original the movie looked like in all its aspects up to how hard did it hit you as emotion (and to sum it up more: "the feeling you get"). If for the last part I would have other preference, I have to admit the overall merits (and as said in the beginning the consequent big chances).



"The Tree of Life" - Terrence Malick - is probably the main threat on directing for "The Artist". Malick is a guy who up 'til soon did something like a movie in I don't know how many years (5 since the '70s if I'm not messing up, now having apparently the intention to double his CV in the next period). Probably that's some reason for which he got to get an image (keeping the proportion) comparable to Kubrick in his last part of the life. And risking to sound mean, by this I mostly refer to the idea of something a bit snobbish - in the sense that the critics (and not only them) wait his movies as a rare delight with the praising lines prepared before seeing the first minute. Not to be extremely mean, this is however supported by the value of the production, which a bit overrated I would say, are not anyway to be thrown away. From what I've seen by him - "Badlands" which I barely remember, the beginning of "The Thin Red Line" (something like 3 times and I gave up), "The New World" (on which I was falling asleep) and "The Tree of Life" - I can say that the last deserves indeed its notes of appreciation. I'll postpone a more detailed discussion for the next time, but as directing - expect something a bit different (in regard to the rest and partially his older stuff). It's still a bit to chaotic - looks too much like an experiment/improvisation as way of doing it that transposes from the movie to make me believe that it can steal the Oscar from "The Artist". But the nominee is well deserved.



"The Descendants" - Alexander Payne - is the second near the bottom as probability to get the Oscar I would say, but I'd really really like to be wrong. When I wrote about "The Descendants" I made a comparison for Alexander Payne as something like "a better Woody Allen" without thinking that both of them will get a nomination here. I'm keeping my opinion. Maybe it's subjective, but what this guy succeeds as a comic-drama mix results in a very strong impression as feeling created at least for me (if I would make a top of comedies, "Sideways" has chances to get in the first 3, with "The Descendants" a bit lower). And as I remember I wrote already, and as he declares below, he's probably one of the few directors who exploits the location at maximum - you can "feel" the place (I don't know how close it is to the truth ... but after 15-20 minutes it becomes familiar, what I can't say about the Paris in the first entry). And this contributes a lot to what I consider to be the most important thing in a movie = to get you out for a couple of hours from "your daily life".



"Hugo" - Martin Scorsese - is somewhere in the middle this year, but I wouldn't be surprised to seii it win (not as much as seeing the one above :) which I wish). If I would make a personal top I would put "Hugo" at the bottom. For me it's one of the flawed movies Scorsese did (acting, script, and others) and in the same time also the most "Hollywoodish" (I wonder why I'm not surprised by the tons of appreciations received from James Cameron). Fortunately for the result the flaws are compensated on the technical side. If you remove for instance the production design & the set decoration (which I keep praising but this is the main stuff in there, I can't help it), think what you have left... So ...



Next time I'll wrap it up - best movie.

Oscar 2012 - Cinematography

Although I'm generally disappointed by the last year's movies, I still have to admit that there are a few sections which individually taken (and exclusively) for what they are offering, do not leave room for negative opinion. And the cinematography it's actually pretty much yearly sufficiently high to put you in doubt about any prediction.

"The Artist" - Guillaume Schiffman - is again the "different" entry due to it's black & white cinematography. The final result, starting with the dimensions up to the nuances wants to be something close to what you could have seen in cinemas in the '20s (well .. with the quality of the film of the present days and both the much lesser degradation factor). The movie was shot in color in the original, and the changes were applied after, but the result looks excellent. And it's not just about the color, but also the framing, etc. I find to be hard to predict something here, also because Schiffman (of whom I didn't hear up to this moment, working apparently only in the French cinema) just got the BAFTA. However ... the last movie in black & white that I remember to get the Oscar was "Schindler's List" (filmed directly in black & white). "The White Ribbon", recently nominated and "The Man Who Wasn't There" a bit older (which visually is a masterpiece although I've seen it in color, both being shot using the same subsequent "decoloring" procedure) passed unnoticed. So, the next one ...



"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" - Jeff Cronenweth - is probably the least likely to win here, but I can say that I loved what I've seen in it. The cinematography it's probably the biggest difference (positive one) from the original Swedish version. I have to admit that I am slightly subjective, because I have a weakness for filters and here we have cold ones alternating on the present action (and maintaining part of the eerie atmosphere) with warm tones, even close to sepia, covering basically all the flashbacks. Besides these the movie really has some exceptional shots, the type that you'll remember (at least in theory :) ) probably even after one year from seeing the movie = one example - the first trip in the car to the Vanger house. The last year I was totally unimpressed by the nomination Cronenweth got for "The Social Network". This year I would place him the second in my valor scale. However, as I was saying .. I doubt that he has any chances from the American Academy ...



"Hugo" - Robert Richardson - is the only 3D from the nominees, and probably that's its advantage (if it has any advantage). I don't know anyway how much from the 3D is actually part of the cinematography. If I would make a personal top, Richardson for me is at the first place in the list of who works at Hollywood in this area (overall I remain a devoted fan of Christopher Doyle, but I can't remember when that guy appeared on the credits of a mainstream movie outside Asia). What I like is especially the way Richardson handles the chromatic - "Shutter Island" and "Inglorious Basterds" being just two recent examples. Although "Hugo" looks very good, I think a big contribution to this is brought by the production design, and in lesser extent by the cinematography. On top of that, I'm not the biggest 3D fan and to cut it short, we have other titles that are I think at least more original on the visuals this year.



"The Tree of Life" - Emmanuel Lubezki - is I guess, although completely ignored at BAFTA, the most entitled to take a cinematography award this year, and I really think it will be like that (although I wouldn't bet ...). About the movie, I can say for now that it was a pleasant surprise. More, generally speaking I'll tell some other time. Because it's not the case to mix to much stuff now when I should be talking about the visuals. The problem is that I don't really know what to tell. It's probably the most different image from the five nominees talking about framing and focus. Stuff that really gives a note of originality. But the really nice part is that this doesn't come gratuitously, it's somehow in a similar tone with what we can call the action of the move and it helps a lot for the "watchability". Overall (= including also the VFX) I can say that visually the movie offers you something close to the feeling, if not over what "The Fountain" did (if the title doesn't sound familiar, you should watch it - if it sounds, I didn't pick it randomly having some common elements somewhere more or less in depth). The cinematography is clearly the part that gives weight to this production, and for me also the main reason to be seen.



"War Horse" - Janusz Kaminski - is the outdoor movie, in what we have here. Large spaces, panoramas, war scenes, stuff like that. Filmul has anyway also some very nice close-ups (= I got stuck in my head with a gros-plan with a reflection in horse's eye). I can't figure anyway how it could impress enough to grab an Oscar, mostly after the surprise (sort of) from last year when "True Grit" missed the award, being also outdoors, being also above what's here, and with Roger Deakins at his eighth nominee I guess without an Oscar. And talking about awards, Kaminski, the main cinematographer who works with Spielberg, did clearly better movies before (I mentioned "Schindler's List" a bit earlier).



Since my free time is shrinking down, with one week left until the Oscars, and since anyway I'm writing in quite a rush, I guess next time I'll jump to the final categories directly.

Oscar 2012 - Film Editing

There is said that at the Oscars the award for film editing announced the final one for best movie. I have no idea where I heard that, and I don't really believe it (a clear example: last year wasn't like this .. and still .. this year sounds more plausible). But let's check out the nominees ...

"The Artist" is I guess the best placed here. First, it's something different from the rest because the cuts in the scenes for the written inserts is something you see only in a silent movie. To that add also the air of the '20s at the way the scenes flow under your eyes. More exactly .. the line of the story in this movie is unrolled especially through the editing, not having any lines and it's something sufficiently well done so you won't feel the need for any dialogue (= short scenes + fast switching between frames). And to add something more (well .. let's say so) with one exception I'm pretty disappointed by the rest of the nominees here, so I don't see much competition.



I wrote about "The Descendants" last month. I don't remember saying anything about the editing. That's because, like the rest of the more technical aspects (having as exception the score & sound) is not that obvious. The only scene that stuck into my head (and that's also probably the reason why there is a clip with it + they included in the trailer) in which you can "feel" a bit the effect of what the editing does is obviously an alert one.



I liked the editing in "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". It's sufficiently "helpful" for keeping the cold air and in the same time tensed that the movie has. And for looks a bit above what the same team (Angus Wall & Kirk Baxter) managed to do last year when they got the Oscar for "The Social Network". If I should choose according to my liking a movie from here it would be pretty hard to decide between this one and "The Artist". Dar obiectiv vorbind parca as merge pe varianta muta ;)



"Hugo" has as editor the all-time movie collaborator of Scorsese and a recognized name in this area: Thelma Schoonmaker. And this should mean two things: 1. there are clearly chances for an Oscar 2. if we look at the films the nominee has in her CV starting from before "Raging Bull" (as a sole example) and we make a comparison ... the chances here are mostly due inertia. But still "The Artist" has more.



Finally we have "Moneyball". Where I see no reason to be here besides filling the number of five nominees. I didn't even found (again ... after "the sound" entry) a clip to be very appropriate ...



Next time = very soon, something more interesting considering this year's nominees -> cinematography ;)

Oscar 2012 - Art Direction

This week I intend to do a posting marathon (at least compared to the usual rate of one/week) despite the fact that it's the last thing on a long list I really must get done (yeah, obviously I'm complaining again at the start of the entry, I'll do that forever - or at least until I'll get my pension and retire, live with it :p). To get faster to the subject anyway .. today art direction aka production design & set decoration aka shortly .. actually I won't stay and explain like list year because as I said I have no time, so I'll just quote:

" From early in pre-production, the production designer collaborates with the director and director of photography to establish the visual feel and specific aesthetic needs of the project. The production designer guides key staff in other departments such as the costume designer, the key hair and make-up stylists, the special effects director and the locations manager (among others) to establish a unified visual appearance to the film. " (from Wikipedia)

.. with an accent on the scene setting (arrangement, props, etc) in regard to the Oscar category. So, who are the nominees ..

In "The Artist" we have here the recreation of the 20's Hollywood = the locations + the film sets include .. other film sets, streets with the aspect of that period (= cars, shops, etc), cinemas, etc. What is wanted after all is not just a look & feel supposedly identical to that epoch but even something more, something that should look also a bit like what you can see in the movies from that time. I can say that the outcome is quite ok and for me it would be probably the second here, but quite far from the top of the list ..



The last "Harry Potter" is excellent on art direction, but this is sufficiently supplemented by VFX (and I refer to the classic type, not only CGI). At some point, you get a bit confused where one starts and where the other ends. Besides this you might be tempted to say that being the last from the series is the best on this area but I wouldn't bet on it. However, it's a bit hard to start digging my memory about what and where I've seen in the other .. seven episodes ...



"Hugo" as winner for art direction is the safest prediction I can make this year (I'm even more sure about it than the score about I talked last time). And for me it's right to be so because what the couple Dante Ferretti & Francesca LoSchiavo managed to do here is absolutely delightful. They won some years ago the Oscar for Sweeney Todd which I liked almost exclusively for this part. What you get to see here is more than you had there. The train station, the Paris at the beginning of the XXth century, Melies' studio, the clocks, and many other stuff practically form more than two thirds of what creates the feeling of this movie. But it's probably better to stop with the writing and leave the clip below including a short summary to visually display what's been done.



I finished (alphabetically and not only) with the top of the list. I'll pass to the outsiders with "Midnight in Paris" which as "Hugo" has (if I would be mean I could say as a real disadvantage comparatively) the location setting also in Paris (obviously ...). Woody Allen brings a bit of fantasy in his characteristic social comic, the result being a story in which a screenwriter aspiring to become a novelist, gone in vacation along his fiancee and her parents, makes a transition night by night somewhere in other temporal dimension. More about this when we get to the best movie nominees. For art direction we don't have something terribly spectacular (= neither the originality in "The Artist", neither the variation in "Harry Potter", and I won't start talking about "Hugo"). Well, the movie doesn't require it. The result is anyway decent enough, talking about the interiors, the streets, etc, being quite nice to watch. For me actually, unlike other sections where I still got a bunch of "?", here I can say I agree with all the nominees.



"War Horse" ends the list for art direction placing the focus mostly on location setting, considering that probably more than 80% of the movie takes place in open air (filmed apparently almost entirely in UK). Besides this we have the specific stuff for the first WW .. guns .. canons .. other guns .. And that's pretty much about it ..



Next time = very soon -> film editing ;)

Oscar 2012 - Film Score

This is another category where I had to check twice to be sure I'm not having hallucinations about what's on the list. The thing is that considering what it got here we have a more easier result to foresee, being already quite predictable even before the nomination process. And like specially set to support it we have three of five OSTs this tear which have more or less a French first half of the XXth century "air" (= accordion parts & stuff like that). So, guess about which I'm talking ... Well, maybe it's not clear enough :) Conclusion: let me go through the entries anyway, although it doesn't make much sense to get very long in what's next, all I hope for is that the audio material to stay on YouTube for at least a while from now ...

"The Adventures of Tintin" is the first surprise. Especially considering that Spielberg's production got excluded from "best animation". To be honest it was a pretty lame year for this area (and not only) and my expectation about this title were a bit bigger than a simplified and compressed story a la Indiana Jones looking like made specifically for an under 10 target (well .. maybe it's the fact that I got frozen in a cinema hall as real cause for my disappointment ...). Still, for me it sounds better for this to be here than the other nomination of John Williams (or let me say it more straightly: sounds more original to be here)



"The Artist" with the music by Ludovic Bource is clearly the winner here. Leaving the statistics aside = the Globe + other awards, it's probably the only soundtrack this year that makes itself heard when you watch the move, obviously one reason being that the movie is silent. Maybe it's a matter of taste, but generally I prefer a soundtrack that you can feel it's there (= Zimmer, Mansel, Morricone would be some examples) and not one which only is fits with the action on screen sufficiently so you won't notice the silence periods (as in the 60's or the 70's). From here comes probably also the main merit in this score = it supplements at a decent level (I can't say that I was extremely impressed) "the silence". And also I guess it has a bit more personality than the rest. Besides that .. more about "The Artist" when talking about other sections, it's enough space there to do it.



"Hugo" is the last from the series of three with the "French air" (which is normal considering the action setting). If I were to do a top probably Howard Shore would be the main candidate at this Oscar, after the one above. But as real chances it still quite far, so let's not spend to much time here ...



"Tinker, Taylor, Soldier, Spy" with the music by Alberto Iglesias is the second surprise on this category. And one which gives me the opportunity to get a bit off-topic and say a few things about the movie because I don't know when I'll be able to do it next. It was the main title on the "must see" list for me this spring, and probably because of this I got a bit disappointed of the outcome. It's a spy thriller set somewhere in the 60's-70's (maybe there is an exact date around there, I don't remember) having as main subject the return in service of a British counter-intelligence agent having the secret mission to unmask a soviet mole infiltrated at the top of the hierarchy. The main problem of the movie is the bunch of flashbacks poorly edited (despite the fact that BAFTA threw a nomination also here .. well, it's an UK movie) which doesn't make any favor to the narrative style belonging to John le Carre ("The Russia House" with Sean Connery & Michelle Pfeiffer suffered from the same disease long ago). The soundtrack however is ok, although regarding what I said above you can't really feel it and send you to sleep once in a while (note that the piece below is an alert one). But again .. I have to refer to John le Carre, and who has seen something else adapted after him ("The Spy Who Came in from the Cold", "The Constant Gardener", etc) could probably confirm that is nothing more appropriate than a melancholic, slow tone, with slight spikes here and there, cold on each piece, but warm as a whole. However, what's missing is a sufficiently strong theme to remember ...



"War Horse" brings the second nomination this year (and a pretty predictable one considering the lack of candidates) for John Williams. I have a problem (which maybe it's a bit more taste related, I don't know ...) about the music composed by this guy. I can't argue with the cinematic character of the track, generally speaking, not only for "War Horse". But either he composed too much, either he recycled too much from what he composed, so for me it's a bit hard to listen one of his soundtracks from beginning to the end without getting bored (the exception remains "Star Wars" and specifically "The Phantom Menace"). Unfortunately it's pretty much the same case here. As I said "Tintin" sounds slightly better for me.



Finally I'll allow myself to do this year something that I've never done before = to revolt about an absence - Cliff Martinez for "Drive". Yes, I know that in "Drive" what's more obvious on the soundtrack is the songs part, and yes, I know that the idea when evaluating this category is not as much how it sounds to you when you listen in your headphones but more how it fits into the movie. I have considered these, and the verdict still stands that it deserved at least a nominee, especially compared with what got on the above list this year ....

Oscar 2012 - Sound Editing & Mixing

I wanted to post on Tuesday this entry, but I didn't have the time so I'll get a more "dense" weekend = I'll probably be back on Sunday with what we have for soundtracks this year. But until there, let's get back to the "pure sound". To summarized what is what, "editing" implies pretty much everything related to preprocessing, effects, ADR (dubbing over the initial recording), etc and "mixing" to be short, the merging of everything that's sound related (including the music parte aka "the soundtrack") into a final track that's what you finally hear. Not clear yet ? Check this out : http://www.mpse.org/education/whatis.html .

As usual (I'm actually starting to wonder if it's not something like a written rule somewhere ...) we have six movies here, from which four have a common nomination on both mixing and editing, and two only one on each side. Still as usual (at least I don't remember anything in the last years to contradict this ...) the two less nominated can be basically cut off the list as chances to win. ... But I see that I start forgetting the purpose of these entries which is less speculating Oscar predictions and more discussing the actual movies, so let's get to the point:

I wrote about "Drive" last year when I got four years of blogging. And I guess I said there how good is this movie regarding the sound. For what's strictly related to its nominee - only editing - I can tell that I remember even now after three months that's not only about screeches and engines sound but also Foley (check the link above) + something on which my ear (probably a bit deaf ...) doesn't get impressed very often: the volume fluctuations. But I assume that I already start to bore with what I'm rambling about, so I don't know if it's really the case to get into technical details that are anyway far from me to know them at a sufficient level. The thing is that in the end, strictly speaking between the score, mixing and editing the nominee came for the last. And the last no matter the level of appreciation from my war it's still not as good as the first two (what I was saying above about the volume + what the guy below tells about the elevator scene are more related with the mixing). This is one of the many weird things that I avoided to discuss about the nominees from this year. To conclude (considering also the "statistics" for chances had by movies uniquely nominated), although I'd like to be wrong, I doubt that "Drive" has much chance.



"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" - with a double nominee here - it's the American version of the probably well known Swedish original (at least as a book). What can I say about the movie .. for me is a bit overrated = I prefer the original version. It looks a bit more .. "natural" or different said "less hollywoodish" (and mostly due to Noomi Rapace, who although an actress that lacks the power of expression in my opinion managed to make a role better than what Rooney Mara did). I have to admit though that in the Fincher version the movie is better technically. And this includes the sound, and especially the final mix, where I'll take my risks in saying that I see it positioned first among the favorites (for editing they are clearly other movies which have better effects, and that's what counts a lot in there). To be fair, I have to say that I actually wouldn't bet a dime on the "sound mixing" this year, the opinion above being based on personal taste :) = which sounds better for my ear. If I would have to do a more objective analysis it would be hard to split between three titles, the next of these being just below the next clip ...



"Hugo" has also nominations for both editing and mixing. As above I don't see much chance on the editing. Yes, it may be full of clock ticks + other related effects but for me doesn't look that impressive to get an award. Besides that, if you manage to stay up without falling asleep (in my case it didn't work but just because I was extremely tired) while watching this clip http://soundworkscollection.com/hugo you'll probably conclude (from what I managed to get ..) that the preprocessing part was smaller and the accent was set on the final mix. Where, considering the bunch of nominations "Hugo" has there are chances for an Oscar (that might draw along it also one for Editing ...) but I still have hope that it will postponed for other categories. Off-topic: I preferred the clip below instead of the one longer than half an hour from the previous link, but I have to mention that this entry would be much "lifeless" without the excellent material released by Soundworks Collection, which produces this kind of clips for quite a while and bring a bit of light over the usual obscurity of this area.



If I can say something 100% sure for this entry (well .. 99.99% :P), is that "Moneyball" is clearly at the bottom of the list. The film is a real story from the baseball world, and has also other nominees, that will allow to detail it's subject other time. For sound however id just one - for mixing - and considering the other candidates I wouldn't even discuss it. Besides that, I can't even say that I heard something decent enough for being nominated. I mean ... there are ton of "sports related" movies where you have full stadiums, and the sound effects mixed on top, intersequenced with other stuff, etc, so smth like this won't raise any attention. I didn't even manage to find something relevant .. the only clip, in some sense related, being the one below (for how long it lasts on YouTube ...):



"Transformers" - episode 3 - has a double nomination. Which comes somehow naturally for a movie having the density of shells, explosions and other weaponry related stuff over the recommended limit (or in other terms the noise quantity prodiced by these). No matter the appraise for the sound here - and to be fair with real chances at least for editing considering the amount of work on prerecordings, robotized voices & stuff like that - I refuse to believe that, .. this thing .. can grab an Oscar. Hopefully I won't be disappointed by the results.



The last on the list (alphabetically) - "War Horse" - is in my opinion the first with chances on editing this year, and a serious candidate also for mixing (now, to be honest, if I manage to get right on something considering the rush in seeing the movies, it would be a real wonder :P). The movie is a story, a bit to tear-jerking and over-cliched in how it's told for me, about a horse which gets lost from his owner during WWI. As subject itself I can say that it has some more potential than I was expecting .. but more on this another time. The sound: for editing we have plenty of effects + .. the horse itself (or "the horses" to be more specific) .. I mean, to imagine everything that you here as the sounds it makes as production track (= shooting recorded material) I guess it's naive. The movie is perfect made in the end on this segment, and even if it's not something you'll see .. well hear .. for the first time it's a big plus over the rest of the nominees. And the rest (= the war, sound 7.1, etc) can be put without concerns at the same level with "Transformers". For mixing I'll be short: for me is not something extraordinary, but seems that the complexity which comes from what you hear on the effects side raises the level high enough to get something at least comparable with "Hugo" and "The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo" => so "War Horse" gets on the favorites list.



That's all for today .. I've already written probably too much for somebody who's evaluating "by the ear" :P. Stuff that I'll obviously do (very soon I hope) also for the "music" section :)

Oscar 2012 - VFX

Ok .. I'm back. Unfortunately, I don't have much time on my hands, but enough to start my pass through few of this years' categories with the VFX one. So, let's take the nominees one by one as they're officially anounced (= alphabetical):

It's been a while since the last "Harry Potter" came out in cinemas. Sufficient enough to cause me the same trouble I've always had with this series (too long and too re-entangled from one episode to the other due to the classic syndrome of "I have no clue how I'm gonna finish this" from the author's mind .. which can be felt from miles away even from the first movie). The trouble is I don't remember enough details to make at least a coherent summary of the story (obviously except the part in which Voldemort dies and Harry lives). Not to be mean, the movie was ok, but as the rest of them in my opinion quite far from LotR or Stardust or Neverending Story, just to give only three different options as a fantasy. But I was talking about VFX, so back to the point. It's clearly visually the most spectacular from all the parts (this, I can remember) and I can say I liked it. However I don't think it's sufficiently original/inovative to have a big shot at this category. I see it somewhere in the middle of the 5 nominees. And I refer here especially at the fact that "Deathly Hallows Part 2" comes after "Deathly Hallows Part 1" which comes after ... I don't recall after what .. but what's about VFX in it doesn't get way far different technically speaking from one part to the other. I have to admit anyway that from these year's entries here I guess this is the most varied. But this variation includes also a sufficient amount of motion capture, and we have seen motion capture before, and we have also another example for this among the five which gives class to "Harry Potter" specifically on this (and I guess it will matter a lot).



"Hugo" is an adaptation (a bit atypical for what usually Scorsese directs) after a semi-fictitious novel centered arounf Georges Melies, one of the most important names connected to the beginnings of the cinematography. More about the movie some other time, when I'll get to the Best Picture category, but as a short note Melies is probably the first important name linked to the usage of VFX in movies (as far as I know for the beginning of the XX-th century there wasn't anybody else to achieve something at a similar level). This would be an indirect reason, besides the 11 nominees that "Hugo" got this year, for which I see it as one of the two favorites on this section. On the other hand, I would give more credit to the movie for the art direction and cinematography + editing than for VFX in regard to the visual impression. As effects I don't see something really extraordinary. The most spectacular scene is probably the one involving a train crash, and the details about this show, at least for me, pretty conclusive the difference in complexity on the technical side in respect to at least one of the other nominees (if not more of them). Yes, well .. the VFX in "Hugo" are not reduced at just a single scene and I have to admit that I didn't see the move in 3D, but unlike "Avatar" where the 3D and the effects were going hand-in-hand, here the 3D however that would be, in my opinion is probably much more connected to the cinematography. And that's a completely different story (I have some fears that for the Academy might be not ... again remember "Avatar").



I had an entry about "Real Steel" in December so I won't get very long with it. It's clearly one of the two outsiders here, and also the title that probably has the least chances to nail an Oscar from the Academy (for me it would be the 4th though). Once again, lots of motion capture, and like I say for this we have this year's "the masterpiece" among the nominees. And it's not "Real Steel" ...



... It's "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" (long title .. I wonder how is the abbreviation .. guess it would still be long). The prequel for all the movies I guess, newer or older, from the "Planet of the Apes" franchise, which says to us "how all started", is indeed something superb considering the VFX. I personally have faith that the Academy won't be blind and see that objectively speaking, the Oscar should land here. It happened already for "Benjamin Button" a few years ago, and also for effects where the dominant and innovative part was related to the motion capture technique. What WETA from New Zealand managed to do (same team from LotR, Avatar & King Kong) is at least at the same level. Unfortunately, to say so, it's also the best part of the movie (the only nominee it has after all, and that's why I'm afraid that "Hugo" might grab this one), the rest being ok, but not something to remember. I've seen it last summer, and I don't want to get very long about it, especially since it's been a while and I don't remember it very well, but what I was assuming then proved to be true: if you see the three trailers released before, it's enough for not having anything essentially important more in the movie. Well .. except of the effects ;) ...



About the last (I really hope is the last ...) "Transformers" I don't have much to tell. They say (check the clip below) that they tried something different than the previous parts. Maybe .. I don't know .. what's certain is that's a difference also in the number of explosions, debris, etc, samd (obviously rising). "Dark of the Moon" bored me even more than "Transformers 2" ... and considering the script itself, even if it's not the right criteria, I would ban the movie from any type of nominee (they gave it 3 this year .... :|). To be fair, I have to admit that the VFX are probably the sole reason to watch this movie (well .. there is also Rosie around there, but still Megan was more ok .. a matter of taste anyway :P).



That's pretty much all for VFX ... I'll try to be back soon with an entry for sound ( one of my favorites ;) )