Oscar 2013 - Best Picture

I think I start to get tired doing this "coverage" and I also don't really like how it gets out (I'm mostly referring to the writing because the prediction rate is anyways going down), so I'm wondering if I should cut the talking completely and limit only to posting clips next year. If not skipping completely the "event". In any case, the subject today are not my endless laments, but the nominations for best picture. Let's see ...

"Amour" is Haneke's movie about which I've written when discussing direction. An Austrian production, with a French cast and a German director. The result is indeed very European as feeling, strongly anchored in everyday life. A grim and slow drama, hard to digest. Especially if you had some relatives that went on the other side slowly when they got old, and if you don't it has all the chances to make you anxious about how it would be. But it is a drama told in a way that makes me except it from my own rule that I see a movie mainly to take me out from reality. And that's because, despite the appearance what's below is not that dark.

"Argo" is one of the two title fighting for the Oscar this year, and I think (I actually hope against the other one) that it will get it. I wrote enough on other categories, so I won't replay. But it must be said that it's a rare movie. Rare due to the fact that you don't have many subjects with a real basis, but so out of reality that look like fiction. And even more, with a happy-end. So, it must be appreciated that somebody thought to use the material for the scree. Maybe others will start to look for some stories like that too.

"Beasts of the Southern Wild" is the American way to tell a drama. Not that rough as the European one above, and dressed in a story told by a little girl in a monologue, and taking it a bit further from the real tension. And it's ok, I've always liked that version :) I already said before that I prefer a movie as "escape" and not "drive me back to hell", at least not completely ;).

"Django Unchained" comes apparently as a sequel to an "alternate history", but not that alternate, after "Inglorious Basterds". Or at least that's the rumour, that Tarantino would like to continue the series with something else beside prematurely ending WW2 and freeing a black slave that ends up dealing the law in the middle of the cotton plantations. I hope that the rumor has a basis and I wait to see what "supporting" role will Christoph Waltz get.

"Les Miserables" is probably the most lame adaptation of the novel that I've seen. Well, I said it. I'm sorry but I can't be objective here. 1. I don't like the genre 2. I said myself to be open to it, but it still was hilarious to see Hugo's novel in singing from one end to the other. The only dramatic part was Russell Crowe trying to find his voice. I could say that from a certain point of view the movie was entertaining in the comic sense. But this sort of misses the scope. For who wants an adaptation that's something different I fully recommend the French version from '95 directed by Claude Lelouch and which got a Golden Globe. That really deserves your time.

"Life of Pi" is the movie that should get the Oscar but I don't think we'll have that surprise. I've finished what I had to say about it in the December entry, and also on the other categories. Probably I would have the chance to find something else if I would see it again. For sure there must be another metaphor hidden somewhere in the tiger's fur which I didn't get yet :) And that makes a clear difference from the rest of the nominees. And it's not because the rest don't have tigers in the cast ;)

"Lincoln" is the other title fighting "Argo" for the Oscar. I don't have anything against Spielberg. My childhood was positively marked from what he made :) But, with all the respect, I totally disregard with "Lincoln" as best movie. It's an ok biopic, but it doesn't have anything special as a movie (Daniel-Day Lewis actually had better roles than here), and it's killed by the amount of cliche. For real = I still can't get out of my head that after the assassination we still get another patriotic speech from the crowd gathered around the corpse. No comment.

"Silver Linings Playbook" is the comedy present here this year. If I look behind though and I see "The Descendants", "A Serious Man", "Juno", "Little Miss Sunshine" and the list could go on ... well, this is decent as light romance, but I don't have to ask myself why it's highly overrated and doesn't belong here - because it just doesn't.

"Zero Dark Thirty" alphabetically ends the list. Maybe if there weren't for the controversies about the practices of CIA this movie would have had better chances. On the other, hand if it would have been politically correct probably wouldn't have been as good as it is, and also not get much success on the public. This doesn't mean that's a masterpiece, but clearly at least for me is above "The Hurt Locker" ( as a movie, for the historic accuracy I'll be reserved :) ).

That's pretty much about this year's Oscars. As in the other years I hope I didn't bore to much :) Next week, back to the regular movie entry ;)

Oscar 2013 - Leading Actress

Ok, the entry from yesterday was written because I wanted to mention "The Master". The one today is because I have a sufficient dose of nerve tension built up today that I have to consume somehow. And is also a subjective one :) So, indulge me ..

Jessica Chastain in "Zero Dark Thirty" begins a list that's a bit opposed to the one from yesterday = this time we have the outsiders at the end of the alphabet. In different words the role of the CIA agent that seems to exist somewhere in reality (at least this is what they say) and who coordinated the search for Bin Laden, seems to be one of the potential winners on the Oscars this year. But considering that the movie was sufficiently criticized to get to legal actions it seems ...

Jennifer Lawrence in the role of the .. a bit "different" girl from "Silver Linings Playbook" seems to have the best chances for this year Oscar. To be a bit objective at least, I think that the part she has is the best thing in this movie. At least compared to the other nominations it got. Subjectively speaking ( call it a guilty pleasure ;) ) my all support for this category is definitely going here.

Emanuelle Riva in "Amour" is the first of the extremes we have here. The eldest actress nominated ever. To be fair, I think the nomination is supported by the role, which is one of an elderly woman on the death bed in diverse stages of the disease, and it offers a lot of space to the actor to manifest in equally diverse postures. Therefore, I think that the one to appreciate more is actually the part of the husband (Jean-Louis Trintignant), really well done and which I think is much harder to get right.

Quvenzhané Wallis in "Beasts of the Southern Wild" is the other extreme, in the same year, being the youngest actress ever nominated for leading role. As a career start is ok, nothing to comment. But I always thought to be unfair to mix children's parts with adults, because it's quite clear that this one doesn't have much chance. To establish a separate category would be a better idea.

Naomi Watts in "Lo Imposible" is pretty much the equivalent of De Niro from the previous entry. It just completes the list. The difference is that here we have a drama, and the role is of a dying mother, who somehow manages to survive, after the Thailand tsunami of 2004. In other words, I think it's the role having the least amount of lines. And the smallest chances.

Oscar 2013 - Animation

It's probably the most complicated category to predict this year. As I see it, four of the five entries here have pretty much the same chances. But let's get to the point ...

"Brave" is the first on the nominees list and the one representing Pixar this year. We have a story set somewhere in a Middle Ages Scotland, not a very complex one, but sufficiently original to not give more spoilers. Especially since the trailers fortunately don't do that. I think it's one of the few Pixar productions that is a bit less tear-jerking in the most explicit way (ok, shoot me, but I'll keep saying this) or better said, hides that part behind a sufficiently light-hearted animation. Stuff that DreamWorks mastered since ages ago. And reason for most of the critic (sufficiently blind to not be able to see a bit below the script lines) has always taken the side of Pixar. And the same thing turned a bit against brave now being labeled in the first place as one of the "weakest" releases from Pixar. But somehow it managed to get the Globe. And more recently also the BAFTA, although the location setting of the story might have had an influence in that. So I tend to believe we might have also a surprise at the Oscars too, although, again, the majority of the critic circles awards were split among other titles. Maybe I'm a bit subjective, partially due to liking the Scottish accent and that area in general (and Kelly MacDonald & Billy Connolly are doing one of the best voice acting ever). But mostly due to the fact that I avoided seeing this for a while, believing that's nothing else than a gratuitous praising of the idea of "follow your goal & change your life" as superficial as many others do + adding to that billions of FB shared quotes, Internet memes, etc, samd. However, finally I had the surprise to see that the movie is waaaaay, way more mature than than resuming itself to the quotes above :) ...

"Frankenweenie" is Tim Burton's adaptation after an older idea of a short. In brief, what we have here is a "Frankenstein" transposed in the universe of a little boy who wants to resurrect his best friend: the dog hit by a car. I think it's the best animation technically speaking from what we have this year, and that in the conditions that is on black & white. But the style (stop motion, character design, the shadows & lighting) catches that well the air of an old horror, or of a parody for an old horror (with obvious reference to the Boris Karloff "Frankenstein") that gives me reason to think if it shouldn't be the case to include animations also in the nominees from Production Design. To conclude, I guess it's the best movie by Tim Burton since "Big Fish" (= almost 10 years ago). Besides that, as a researcher on IT with deadlines and experiments on the current agenda, I have to say that the scene below touched me a little bit :) and reminded me that I have also a personal motivation for what I'm doing besides just a job ...

"ParaNorman" is another animated "horror". Norman is pretty much the equivalent of Viktor, the boy from "Frankenweenie", but instead of the talent to reanimate corpses, he can see ghosts. From here onwards, things get more complicated. Some say that this has the nicest story from all this year's nominees, and I tend to believe that as complexity is probably in top two. About how nice it is, that's subjective and my opinion on that is on an entry above :) I have to admit one thing though. If the movie itself wasn't above the others, and the animation is probably the most simplistic from all the nominations, the final hits you damn hard. It's clearly the strongest as emotional impact supplemented also technically (despite of what I just said before).

"The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!" is the outsider this year. The plot revolves around a "pirate of the year" contest and dodo bird. Technically - more details below. As an additional information to the clip, the movie is indeed produced by Aardman Studios, responsible for Wallace & Gromit, but unfortunately doesn't have much in common with Nick Park - the genius behind Wallace & Gromit. And it shows.

"Wreck-It Ralph!" from DreamWorks wraps up the least. Initially, being close to the field, it made me to roll my eyes a bit considering the story of a game character "escaped" from an arcade game and rambling into others. But I realized that there's a Tron, the hacking attempts from Skyfall, or other things like that from the computer science area that get on the big screen to catch a general public and I said myself to keep an open-mind (as a parenthesis one of the few movies that doesn't get exaggerated in this matter and which I give as an example whenever I can is "Antitrust"). Leaving apart the viewing conditions in a pretty expensive cinema, I can say that I was pleasantly surprised. To get to an end with this entry, if above I've noted the deepest story, the best technique and the strongest ending, here I can say that we had the most lovely characters ;).

Oscar 2013 - Supporting Actor

Actors are normally a category that I prefer to skip, because either I'm getting way to subjective, or I really don't feel having any pertinent comments. I'll do some exceptions this year, and one is supporting actor, the reason being that here as on makeup I have the chance to stop a bit more to a certain movie. More than this, the category is interesting this year, as opposed to the leading one where the score is pretty settled.

Alan Arkin has in "Argo" the role of a film producer, the only major character in the story who doesn't have a real corespondent. It's a pretty consistent role, and his performance is sufficiently memorable. But as Oscar chances is quite far from other three nominees present here.

Robert de Niro got his first nomination after more then 10 years for the role in "Silver Linings Playbook". I'll just say that is the one to fill the ranks this year for the category = if we compare with "Meet the Parents" (+ the sequels if needed) I guess it was more appropriate to get it there at the time if it was to be for a comedy on this type of character.

Philip Seymour Hoffman is the first serious contestant in the list, for "The Master" where he plays a cult leader from the 50's-60's. From what I've seen of him up to the moment I guess it's his best performance ever, and also the best in this category now. As a prediction is hard to say though since we have the ones below too, but I'll try to bet on a sort of surprise here to confirm what I've just said before. And since we're here I'll take the opportunity to say a couple of words about the movie, that being one of the reasons to get into this category. The movie, written & directed by Paul Thomas Anderson ("There Will Be Blood"), created sufficient controversy in U.S. being accused that connects to the Scientology Church. I think that more "problematic" (with big "") is that the movie can be applied as a successful allegory for any cult, movement, up to subgroup of "followers" inside a sect, formed around a particular leader with a certain personal ideology (and since there are enough such groups from bigger to small ones is normal to upset). The movie doesn't have a well defined narrative structure, following an adept (brilliant role made by Joaquin Phoenix) through several years while being close to such a group. It's a movie that might be hard to watch at times, but which doesn't try to give you in the end an explicit "pro" or even more an absolute "anti". It lets you decide, maybe based also along your life experience that you have. I'll refrain from more comments, but I'll have to say that when I left the cinema where I've seen it I had a major feeling of content that there was somebody who had the guts to make this movie.

Tommy Lee Jones has the part of a republican in "Lincoln", a historic figure apparently quite important in the slavery abolishing. Although the role is so to speak, more supporting than the others around here (maybe with the exception of De Niro) it seems that the chances to get an Oscar are relatively high. About the role itself, I could say is theatrical enough, which probably is the factor making it more impressive.

Christoph Waltz acts as a German bounty hunter in Tarantino's wild west from "Django Unchained". Really good performance, which rightfully said by some looks more like leading than supporting in the movie. A problem though is that Waltz had an Oscar before, also for a Tarantino movie, and with a role that was even better than the one here. More, the two roles are close in playing style, even though the character is completely different. So, maybe if I wouldn't have seen already what he offered here, I would've been blown away by the performance, but like that I start thinking if the guy is not by chance extremely good only on a specific type of role.

Oscar 2013 - Directing

Since I still have headaches + also a ear bothers me (just to know it's there ...) I'll make this entry short. Anyway, this year the Oscar nominations for directing were quite surprising leaving apart Kathryn Bigelow for "Zero Dark Thirty" and mostly Ben Affleck for "Argo". Which is actually fine for me considering what movie I support ;) ...

Michael Haneke is nominated for "Amour". The movie is partly hard to watch, but to be honest not as much as I was expecting. Anyway, for who has seen something else by Haneke, the directorial styles is easy to recognize. You have the same background tension maintained from beginning to the end. As directing value for me is the second from the nominees here, but as chances for Oscar I don't think it has more than "Best Foreign Language Film" (and even there we might have a surprise).

Ang Lee has a nomination for "Life of Pi". I think it's one class above the rest of the nominees. "Life of Pi" is a director's movie from beginning to the end. Maybe with the exception of "Amour" from above, I don't think there is another nomination in which the direction influence is that visible compared to other aspects (script, actors, etc). On top of that, I also think it's the first Ang Lee movie where the lengths are proper dosed to get the desired effect on the more dense parts (unlike "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" for instance where you end up suffering of chronic sleepiness up to the last 15 minutes). To conclude here, I think/hope that's the movie with the best chances to get an Oscar, especially with the absences above, although .. there would be also another candidate.

David O. Russell is nominated "Silver Linings Playbook". As in the case of the script, I have nothing to comment. The movie is ok, but it doesn't pass the level of a decent romantic comedy. Not even on directing ...

Steven Spielberg, with "Lincoln" is I think the only "problem" that might steal the Oscar here. At least that's what's said it might happen. If it happens though, I only can qualify it as lame. Not that the directing is bad. After all to make a catchy biopic is not that easy, and "Lincoln" is watchable. But I didn't see anything remarkable (unlike "Hitchcock" for instance, but I think there's mostly the fault of the script).

Benh Zeitlin for "Beasts of the Southern Wild" is the surprise on this category. What probably also makes it the last on the possible winners list. It's a debut movie, and for a debut movie - especially an indie - I can't say more than a "well done" and leave further comments for the director ...

Oscar 2013 - Makeup

It's possible that some to believe that I went nuts since I'm writing about makeup, but I have to pretty good reasons: 1. it's the only place where I have the opportunity to talk about a movie, generally speaking 2. I needed some short activity to get me sleepy at this hour :) So ...

"Hitchcock" is the title about I was saying above, which is actually quite clear regarding the topic. I can't say it's a masterpiece but I think it's the best biopic I've seen in the last years (and yes, I've seen that thing called "King's Speech" which not even today I don't know how it managed to nail the Oscar for best picture). As subject, the movie revolves on the time piece around shooting "Psycho". I won't say more besides that the way this is handled as script is very clever. About Anthony Hopkins, I think he had better parts, but what's more interesting on the acting side here is James D'Arcy as Anthony Perkins. Although the screen time is quite short, it's incredible how well this guy can enter into the role to say it bluntly. And of course, another reason to watch this was Scarlett Johansson, but for that I'm extremely subjective :) I think I was supposed to talk about makeup though ... Well .. not much to be said here .. Going forward ...

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is my preference on this category, not that I have any expertise but more to compensate some credit assumed by the VFX team versus makeup, with which I'm not really agreeing ... However, the Oscar goes (probably) to ...

"Les Miserables" .. where I don't have more to say than that I have no idea how Jean Valjean seems to get younger at some moment .. But, maybe I'm blind or this is also an Oscar worthy effect ...

Oscar 2013 - Sound Editing & Mixing

I'll start (as in many other occasions ...) complaining that I'm not really in the mood for writing, Not as many other occasions though, I have a headache lasting for over a week (with some small breaks ..) which starts to get stressful .. Fortunately (as in other years), mostly thanks to Soundworks Collection that makes an excellent job in documenting for public an area that's not that popular, I can shorten a bit my comments. And talking about that, also as in other year I should say maybe again (as reminder) why we have two categories here .. or more exactly what each of them means. Very briefly: mixing = final audio track - combining effects, soundtrack, dialogues and anything else sound related in one piece ; editing = the pieces for the track - effects editing, ADR (Additional Dialogue Recording), etc. Ok, let's see what we have around this year ...

"Argo"is nominated on both sides. And is also an outsider on both sides. I don't see many chances for editing either. But as a mix, it's true that it gets a bit lost among the others, but for me it was the most ok of all. Anyway, I'm probably subjective because from the rest of nominees on this section, three left me completely unimpressed (and not just on the sound side), and "Life of Pi" ... well, it's ok but still no ..

"Les Miserables" is nominated just for mixing. And I'll risk saying that's probably also going to win. On this category the prognosis is after all quite easy to make, considering that the movie is a musical = other league (at least apparently, I've stated my opinion above). The only counter-argument would be that since "sound" was split in "mixing" and "editing", it didn't happen often that one of these to be won by a movie that wasn't nominated on the other. Well, the last exception, I don't know how many years ago was "Dreamgirls" if my memory is still working ... and guess what genre of a movie that was ..

"Life of Pi" has a nomination on both the categories. The mix is nice, helping on some parts to build an effect of a "dreamy atmosphere", although I think the soundtrack contributes to that more than the arrangement. Anyway, as I was saying above the odds look quite simple on the mixing side, so let's leave that and have a look or drop an ear on the other one. Where the situation is more complicated. I'll go for editing on "Life of Pi" though both as prediction and mostly as preference. It's by far the movie with the most complex sound effects, given the amount of CGI that needed to be "brought to life", from animals to the storm. More on that, below ..

"Lincoln" is only on the mixing list. And it's the title to fill it up to five. That's all. I won't bother talking more. The clip below it's lengthy enough .. Even though is about editing .. Or about Lincoln's watches .. aka editing overkill .. I'm really curious if there's somewhere written on the credits "Lincoln original watch used", or how different does that sound from a contemporary watch (well I know I won't re-watch the movie to find out) ..

"Skyfall" aka the last Bond has a double nomination. I agree that the sound is good. Actually I think that's the best part of that movie, which for me is incredibly overrated (what secret agent leaves with the boss of MI6 after him to an isolated cottage in northern Scotland, all alone, without taking at least a damn submachine gun with him when he expects waves of evil guys storming in .. literally, waves .. = not all at once, and organized at equal distance in the field .. to look as a wave .. and I have more .. don't get me started). Getting back to sound, 007 is probably the only title that has a chance to produce a surprise on mixing (well I still hope for "Argo" to do that). For editing as I said it's more complicated, but I could place it here also on 2nd position after "Pi" ...

"Django Unchained" is on editing pretty much in the same position as "Lincoln" on mixing. And still, at least here we have some typical western effects = guns, horses, more guns, more horses, dynamite, more horses ...

"Zero Dark Thirty" completes the list on editing. There's not much to be said ... I was expecting to see this movie on the mixing nominations, but well .. there wasn't any place left after "Lincoln". For editing, it's a movie with a lot of noise, which automatically places it as contender for this area. But we had already "The Hurt Locker" not very long ago, with a sort of similar noise, the same sound editor, and I don't really think it will take the same Oscar ...