2011 Pretentious Film Awards - Best Actor in a Leading Role

And the nominees are...

Jean Dujardin in The Artist

For taking broad strokes and giving them shading, texture and depth. More than charming mincing. The film's success (and it is successful in its goals) rests completely on Dujardin's shoulders. The reductive claim that his is the easiest of this year's lauded performances is ludicrous. What Jean Dujardin can convey with his face, without the benefit of dialogue is wondrous.

Michael Fassbender in Shame

Brandon is often written as blankly as the art direction that surrounds him. Fassbender digs into this character's tortured, ambiguously unpleasant backstory with fierce intensity. The moments of rage (particularly toward Sissy, but especially toward himself) are brilliant. Even more brilliant are the quieter moments (the date with Marianne) where its clear that this man may be incapable of being at peace. A stirring and accomplished performance through and through.

Ryan Gosling in Drive

As the unnamed driver, Gosling ramps up his charisma and the ferocity, while remaining relatively quiet and playing the character's cards close to the vest. The performances that look the easiest are often the trickier ones to nail as well as Gosling does it here. Not many actors could have sold the driver's tactical silence without seeming blank (paging Taylor Lautner). Gosling doesn't lean too heavily on the stylization of the film, but simply uses it to enhance the driver's intrigue. A great turn by a performer who is quickly becoming the gold standard in acting for his generation.

Ewan McGregor in Beginners

McGregor, who has had a career full of great turns, has not (for my money) been as good in years as he is here. So much of what is set up for his character here could have led to facile and trite indie-by-numbers character beats. McGregor instead imbues Oliver with specificity and a certain warmth that's slightly world-weary. He sells the character quirks while simultaneously remembering to infuse them with the character backstory. Very subtle and interesting work.

Brad Pitt – Moneyball

The star turn is an undervalued commodity in Hollywood, often taken for granted when they're as skillfully delivered as Brad Pitt's performance in Moneyball. He does some of his best work here (and it's not even his best performance this year!). Would that he could find more roles that suit his charisma and charm and allow him to fashion such an interesting character creation as he does here. Billy Beane has no huge arc to speak of. The team loses, his opinion of the sport does not markedly change (he approaches it as a tactician even before he meets up with Jonah Hill). And (not to go there, because this is about celebrating great acting), but as far as crying scenes go, he blows George Clooney out of the park. And with less tears.

2011 Pretentious Film Awards - Best Actress in a Leading Role

And the nominees are...

Viola Davis in The Help

Neither clumsy pacing nor on-the-nose dialogue will stop Viola Davis. Where the urge may have been present in other actors to play Aibileen as a simple woman with simple, modest goals, Davis turns the part on its head with her watchfulness, soul and complexity. Through silence and an unending register of conflicting emotions, Davis spins gold out of a role that, while not totally thankless as some have reductively called it, certainly would give no script reader to expect all that Davis gives here. Bonus points for “I told him I drank too much coffee.”

Kirsten Dunst in Melancholia

An actress who has always been gifted, even if she has been adrift in roles that either don't suit her or don't utilize her talents, Dunst works marvels here as Justine. What's even more marvelous? I'm not even sure she's given much to work with on paper. Still, I love the choices she makes. Though she morphs tragically from apprehension to near complete catatonia/nihilism (only VonTrier...), she remains the most recognizably human character in this piece. Even in the film's earliest moments (the maneuvering of the limousine, for instance) she makes it interesting and modulated as we watch her play a woman playing at being happy. I hope this marks an exciting new phase in the career of an actress I've always been intrigued and impressed by, but no more so than here.

  

 Elizabeth Olsen in Martha Marcy May Marlene

Watchful, reactive, without a hugely recognizable external arc. None of these elements inherently make for good drama, but man Olsen knocks it out of the park here. In one of the year's most terrifying films, she takes much of the credit for the eery pall of impending doom that envelopes Martha Marcy May Marlene. She is quiet, but still recognizably womanly and damaged. Bonus points for the film's opening scene where Olsen gives us an incredible, almost unspoken etching of a woman troubled beyond the telling of it—a promise she makes good on for the rest of the movie.

Tilda Swinton in We Need to Talk About Kevin

Swinton lands her third consecutive Pretentious Film Award nomination (I'm sure she's proud) for yet another one of her searing, indelible cinematic marks. Largely a silent, watchful performance, Swinton plays a woman whose situation we can't help but empathize with (and we do). But, she doesn't garner empathy for Eva by making her perfect or even likeable most of the time. The difference between Eva before the incident and after is not that of a woman who is whole versus one who is broken, respectively. It is that of a woman who knows the truth, even if it is self-fulfilling prophecy (how much of Kevin's proclivities are her fault?) and one who has the truth horribly confirmed from her. It is fascinating to watch a character empty out before your eyes. It is even more fascinating the way Swinton makes interesting watching a woman who has already emptied out.

Charlize Theron in Young Adult

In a category of roles that contains a downtrodden maid, the mother of a serial killer, the traumatized survivor of a cult and a recently jilted bride facing the end of the world, Charlize Theron's Mavis Gary is, believe it or not, the most damaged. I love the way Theron (and Reitman) don't easily show us the roots of Mavis's jaded and poisonous core. Theron taps into the comedienne we've seen only shades of before (her interviews, “Arrested Development”) and births a compelling, specific and funny creation. The control she has over her voice, the most important part of this performance, is something to behold. Bonus points for “I love your sweat-errr...”

2011 Pretentious Film Awards - Best Supporting Actor

 And the nominees are...
 

Ezra Miller in We Need to Talk About Kevin

Arguably a cartoonish portrayal of a villain, but never atonal as the movie itself operates on a certain level of hyper-reality from first frame. Extremely well cast in his almost otherworldly androgynous beauty, he is a formidable scene partner for Tilda Swinton. Bonus points for his final scene. He absolutely nails it by not trying to humanize Kevin in any obvious or cloying ways.

Christopher Plummer in Beginners

One of the best portrayals of a man in the winter of his life. Much of the film's success can be attributed to his humanity, his register and the way he takes what could have easily been a larger, more outwardly showy role (even in this film) and anchors it in a deep well of years of emotion. Bonus points for the way he asks about house music.

Patton Oswalt – Young Adult

Plays a needy, desperate man without any of the usual, predictable beats. In a character study full of ugly people and even uglier behavior, Oswalt understands the temptation to play the film's ethical compass. He instead opts for the more difficult, but much more interesting route of showing Matt's moralizing as the result of a man with clear vulnerabilities and limitations. Bonus points for the scene in the woods. He gets the best out of Theron and himself in these scenes.

Brad Pitt – The Tree of Life

Malick's film, accomplished as it is, contains not so much characters, but markers and guideposts for larger concepts. Pitt manages to eke out an accomplished, career-best performance as the stern yet emotional Mr. O'Brien. His age and wear, something most roles try to suppress, are his greatest asset here as he employs them to a past his prime, unwilling to face it, flawed yet loving patriarch. Bonus points for the lighter scene. The way he asks for a kiss from his son is both character-deepening and fascinating.

Corey Stoll in Midnight in Paris

Plays not just Gil's (Owen Wilson) idea of Ernest Hemingway, but what many perceived him to be. Stoll's Hemingway is thinly written, but masterfully elevated. Every line-reading, mouthfuls they may indeed be, seem to roll out of him effortlessly with gruff humor and fierce intensity, unmatched by any of the imaginary figures in this piece. Bonus points for the eyes. So expressive, never relenting, never ceasing to pass judgment, even in silence.

2011 Pretentious Film Awards - Best Supporting Actress

And the nominees are...

Nicole Beharie in Shame

She's reticent, but the only character in this ode to wounded and damaged souls who knows who she is. Beharie adeptly shows us the precise moment Marianne bristles and decides she's out, but plays it with authenticity and unfussy reserve. Bonus points for the date scene, easily the best in the film.

Rose Byrne in Bridesmaids

In a sea of broad, often serviceably dismounted comedy, Byrne has the most difficult task, which incidentally looks like the least difficult task; playing humor subtly, on character as the least showy part of a gifted ensemble. An inspired, hilarious take on fermented, well-intentioned bitchery. Bonus points for the bridal shop scene. Some of her best bits and her character doesn't even have the benefit of the food-poisoning comedy to play with.

Jessica Chastain in The Help

For doing the most with the role that, of her slew of performances this year, arguably asks the least of her. On paper, Celia Foote could easily read as nothing more than “wall to wall white carpet with gold trim” and a Big Dramatic Moment™ . Chastain elevates this character beyond the vocal tics, mannered acting and scenery chewing that a lesser actor may have employed. She has it all down—the walk, the timbre in the voice, the facial expression. Bonus points for the conflicted “Thank you for telling me?” and “I really need a maid,” two of the best line-readings in the entire film.

Carey Mulligan in Shame

Not to sound reductive, but Mulligan could not have chose a role like this soon enough. Though a previous Pretentious Film Awards nominee (one I stand by), I have to admit to being impressed by the formal, superbly polished performative elements of much of her previous work while still desiring more. As Sissy in Shame, Mulligan delivers one of the best “Where did that come from?” performances in recent memory, digging down deep and conveying the longing, selfishness and pain of an emotionally fragmented young woman with heartbreaking realism. Bonus Points for: “New York, New York.” A fascinating scene of a character unobtrusively, yet clearly collapse.

Sarah Paulson in Martha Marcy May Marlene

A believable sibling dynamic is one of the most difficult things to convey. Sarah Paulson's Lucy conveys a certain exasperation and marmish exterior that is part who she is and part who she becomes when she's around Martha (Elizabeth Olsen). I love how her voice and her attitude shifts perceptibly when she's talking to Martha versus when she's talking to Ted (Hugh Dancy). In a film justifiably lauded (though not enough) for its tremendous lead performance, Paulson is an example of a truly supporting performance in every sense of the word. Bonus points for “Can you get your feet off the counter?” Nothing about the delivery begs for attention, but it's such a great bit of character detail.

Five Talking Points About "The Descendants"

I had honestly hoped it wouldn't come to this.  For this lowly Oscar-obsessive, even I recognized that wishing for a total shut out of The Descendants was a bridge too far.  But, I did hope for something akin to Frost/Nixon or Finding Neverland.  That is, an inevitable Best Picture nominee whose appeal remains alien to me, but becomes easy to ignore past the nomination announcement due to its unlikelihood of actually winning any major awards.  (Truthfully, that Best Original Score trophy for Finding Neverland does still loom as a minor "what the fuck" moment in Oscar history, but I suppose that's a conversation for 2004).

Alas, not only is Alexander Payne's latest effort a nominee for Best Picture, but it has a decent enough chance of picking up a couple of trophies as well.  Fine.  Even then, I'm happy enough to leave it alone.  The Descendants lovers, up until today have more or less behaved themselves.  But things, as is their wont to do this time of year, are getting ugly.   I'm not going to pretend that the nine films selected as Best Picture nominees by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences represent the pinnacle of cinematic excellence in 2011.  Hardly anyone is making that claim.  What I can no longer abide nor stomach is the vitriol being thrown at The Artist, a film I'm not even particularly passionate about but, given the slate, is clearly in the upper tier of that list.  I'm especially baffled when this Artist hatred comes from people who say they love Payne's milquetoast paradise milieu. Rather than writing a review of The Descendants, I thought I would position it against films that were in the Oscar hunt this year that are being torn down, ripped-apart and otherwise lambasted.  These are all criticisms that, regardless of my opinions on the other films, these same charges should easily be levied (but are not) against The Descendants.  Not wanting to incur any rath (because my blog has such enormous readership) I'll merely paraphrase and refrain from directly quoting anyone (aforementioned link aside).


1. The Artist is a shallow trifle that does not stand on its own as a resonant piece of cinema.  In short, it's not about anything.

I've heard some variation of this more than I can even count this awards season.  To be fair, it's not an accusation that The Artist can refute with any modicum of truth.  But, hasn't The Artist always, more or less, presented itself as a film that is all about appropriation for the sake of novelty?  I have less problems with a film that wears its intentions on its sleeve and is rewarded or rebuked as such than I do with a film that claims, on paper, to be about something deeper than it really is.

The Descendants masquerades as a probing character study about a man dealing with grief while coming to terms with his role as a father to his two daughters.  I say masquerade because the film only half-commits to setting up this dynamic, then proceeds to treat its viewer to paint-by-numbers beats, arriving at a conclusion that feels at once predictable given the film's lack of ambition and unlikely given how little the film has worked to earn any of its payoffs.  Matt's (Clooney) narration tells us that he's "the back-up parent."  This bit of info is sandwiched between two scenes of he and his youngest daughter Scottie (Amara Miller) getting along more or less famously.  Later, we're told (there's that word again) that Matt and eldest daughter Alex (Shailene Woodley) have a troubled relationship and that she is the type of out-of-control adolescent that Sally Jesse used to ship off to boot camp in the 90s.  This is "evidenced" by a tame episode of teenage drinking, some uttered profanities (clutch the pearls!) and a therapeutic dunk in the pool, which is right about where Woodley's bafflingly lauded performance sinks for me (no pun intended).  Alex then tells Matt that her mother was cheating on him.  For the rest of the film, their relationship is easy like Sunday morning, with nothing to speak to the character details we were plainly and obtusely presented with.  The Descendants is a textbook case of a film that avoids conflict, even when logic dictates that there's no other place to go.  That, to me, is a hallmark of lazy, easy writing, which is almost never not shallow.  I can take shallow when I'm being sold shallow.  It's a little harder to swallow that pill when it's being presented as the great new story about the twenty-first century experience.

 2. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is a chauvinistic male fantasy cloaked in something that resembles feminism if you squint and turn your head to the right.

Okay, so the bit about feminism may not apply directly to The Descendants, but I smell a rat where sexism is concerned.  Every female character in this film feels narratively neutered and is barely given a "character" to speak of.  Say what you will about Rooney Mara's Lisbeth Salander (and plenty has been said), but at least she's dynamic and she also exists in a film that relies on a conceit of heightened, stylized reality.  The women in The Descendants totally bend and conform to what the film needs them to do in any given moment and I would argue that they are just as much creations of male fantasy.  The difference is that here they are being presented as realistic reflections of the human condition.  Judy Greer's Julie Speer (the wife of the man Matt's wife cheated with) is at sea as well, being asked to play blissful and ignorant, then shrill and scorned with little modulation.  I've already spoken of Shailene Woodley's Alex, who seems to totally evaporate as if she was lobotomized in a scene that was left on the cutting room floor.  I also want to add that I have nothing against Woodley.  In every interview I've seen with her, she seemed lovely, articulate, primed and genuinely excited about awards season, even though her nomination did not come to pass.  Though the nominees are entitled to experience the distinction in their own way, on some selfish level, I have to admit that the season is more fun to watch with people who enjoy being there.  In short, I welcome more Shailene Woodley levels of enthusiasm, with the caveat that they come with performances to match the acclaim.  Sadly for her, when the pretty young things are just-misses for Oscar nominations, the opportunity rarely presents itself again.  One can look at examples ranging from Scarlett Johansson to Cameron Diaz of young performers who, at one time or another, just missed nominations for baity parts only to have the world slowly but surely realize their apparent actorly limitations.  Where Woodley is concerned, I'm more than happy to be proven wrong.  

I'm not sure what accounts for the simplistic ways in which this film fails to humanize Matt's comatose, philandering wife.  Yes, she is in a coma, but the film's desire to demonize this woman without any real context into the texture or dynamic of the marriage is rather glaring.  Payne will try to have you believe that this is not the case in the scene where Matt tearfully kisses his wife goodbye while uttering niceties wrapped in thinly veiled hostility.  Don't believe it!  He might as well be saying "Well, you are a cheating slut.  But we were married for a long time.  And you are the mother of my two lovely daughters with whom I have no real relationship problems.  And for that, I guess you're worth something.  Goodbye, whore."  I'm oversimplifying(?), but given the film's unwillingness to even entertain the idea that Matt King is not perfect (outside of him telling us that he's not perfect), I see some serious chauvinism afoot.

3. Young Adult...beyond the fact that the protagonist is completely unlikeable, am I supposed to believe this behavior?  No one acts like this.

Okay, so I'm cheating a little.  Young Adult is not technically in the Oscar race anymore (though, by all rights, it should be).  I like Clooney.  I think he's a talented actor.  The Descendants clearly likes him too.  I think he plays a big part in the aforementioned inability of the film to paint Matt King as a man with any real character flaws.  We are left with a movie about a gorgeous father of two whose bitch of a wife has the gall to step out on him.  Take likeable Clooney out of the equation and actually look at the sequence of events.  Matt King comes out looking like a grade-A asshole.  This may seem hypocritical to call his character an asshole and also say that he's not flawed.  Not so.  Why?  Because the film deifies him and does not depict his bad behavior as bad behavior.  What kind of man drags his daughters island hopping in search of the man who slept with his wife?  Okay, it was also in the interest of a business deal that would make this already wealthy man even wealthier.  Is that any better?  Especially since his wife is in a coma and already on borrowed time, but a confrontation with the philandering Matthew Lillard can surely wait until after the funeral.  And why, for the love of God, would he ever consent to his troubled teenage daughter bringing her cro magnon boyfriend along for the ride?  The small, easy bits of comic relief that Nick Krause provides aren't worth the questions his presence in the film raise.  When all is said and done, Matt King isn''t called to task for what I see as incredibly selfish, passive-aggressive transgressions.  At least in Young Adult, Charlize Theron's Mavis Gary pays somewhat of a price.  Matt King's actions could have easily been framed as a grief-stricken man on an ill-advised warpath.  It's hard to say whether such a change would fix what's wrong with this film at its core, but that would have made for some much needed ass-handing by Shailene Woodley to break up the uneventful, even-keel of the film's last act.  This is an unlikeable protagonist, coddled and protected by the writer/director and therefore made to look likeable.  This is a protagonist whose motivations aren't logical, but are given a pass by the film.  Am I supposed to believe/abide this behavior?

4. What's with The Ides of March nomination for adapted screenplay?  Is it doing anything new in the cinematic landscape?  Does it tell us anything about America that we don't already know?

Losing your wife really sucks.  Especially if she's cheating on you.  Living in Hawaii is not nearly the vacation you would think it is.  But make no mistake.  It's still Hawaii.  And Hawaii's beautiful.  And George Clooney is so handsome.  Thank you, The Descendants.  

5. The Help's ideas about race and ethnicity are indelicately handled in ways that make it at cross-purposes with its own message on one end and offensive on the other.

As a person of color, I found the hullabaloo surrounding The Help to be just a tad overstated.  The talking points about that film are all in line, certainly.  I feel its gravest sins are that it's not graceful, neither in pacing nor in the way it handles its subject matter, like a toddler holding china with oven mitts.  But what about race as it relates to The Descendants?

Clooney's narration contains a brief, atonal sequence that goes into the King family lineage, bending over backwards to double as an explanation to the viewer about why we're not dealing with any non-white Hawaiian protagonists.  I was flummoxed.  It was the only part of the movie that made me genuinely curious to read the source material.  Were the ethnic and cultural politics handled this clumsily in the novel?  Before you come at me with torches and pitchforks, I don't think that The Descendants is a decidedly racist film.  If anything, this strange subplot is likely a symptom of the film's larger problems.  The narrative is a hastily gathered collection of half-formed ideas that don't seem to coalesce with one another in a meaningful or satisfying way.  Among these are some very peculiar hypotheses about Hawaiian culture that suggest a certain level of unease on the part of the filmmakers about how white this movie is in contrast to pre-ordained ideas about its locale.  And Matt's oddly worded "We're the true Hawaiians!" (or something) speech at the end certainly does this assertion no favors, nor do the twee music choices throughout the film. When it comes to whiteness vs. other, The Help is clumsy, but well-meaning.  That's way more credit than I can give to The Descendants.


None of the films mentioned above are films that I no-holds-barred love, nor are they without their own unique flaws and shortcomings.  I do at least understand why people love them.  There's real craft and commitment to conceit in a lot of cases, even if I don't agree with the love.

I hold no ill-will against Alexander Payne.  I love Election and Sideways (in that order).  There are large portions of About Schmidt that really work for me.  Citizen Ruth, while not without its limitations (there are definite moments in that movie where it's clear that we're watching a first-time director) is an interesting watch.  That being said, The Descendants is unquestionably Payne's worst film to date, I'm sad to report.  I sincerely ask anyone who loves The Descendants and thinks it deserves the pedigree it has received to point me to the article that explains why.  If no such article exists, write it yourself.  Refute my points one-by-one.  I'm not being facetious.  I'm genuinely looking for a level of discussion that I'm just not seeing from people who love The Descendants and are quick to point the finger at other movies as being bastions of mediocrity that brought AMPAS down a few notches in their estimations.  I wrote this long piece, not to dump all over Payne or Clooney.  I wrote it because it seems like the most misguided thing someone could say about The Descendants, even if they are cool on it, is that it's bland, but enjoyable.  That is simply not the case.

Grade: D+

My First (and Final) Stab at 2011 Oscar Predictions (pt. 1)

Although this year has many a pundit in a tizzy about not only which films will be nominated for the Best Picture prize, but how many.  In the first year of a fluid number of Best Picture nominees, one would expect more excitement.  For a while there, before The Artist's official frontrunner position was writ-large over the critics and many other voting bodies, it seemed like an open race.  But the die, it appears, has been cast and things will go the way of The Artist, which is what many were saying in the first place before they had any "evidence" to support the notion.  As I have stated before, I have no problems with The Artist, a film I enjoyed quite a bit.  I guess my lack of enthusiasm stems from my lack of a real dog in the eventual Best Picture race.  It wasn't a bad year for movies or even a bad year for Oscar movies, necessarily (save The Descendants...more on that later).  It was certainly a middling year for the latter.  As a cinema enthusiast, I admired Hugo well enough to grade it a "B" when I first saw it.  As time passes and I consider Scorsese's latest offering, I do find myself somewhat baffled by its prominence in this year's awards race as it is not without its significant problems, both narratively and stylistically.  At any rate, here are my predictions.


Best Picture
 1. The Artist (lock)
2. The Descendants (lock)
3. Hugo (lock)
4. The Help (probable)
5. Midnight in Paris (probable)
6. Moneyball (shaky)
7. Bridesmaids (somewhat wildcard)

Likely to Spoil: War Horse, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, The Tree of Life, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

As my above predictions indicate, I think we're looking at seven best picture nominees.  I am going out on a rather big limb and predicting Bridesmaids as the seventh nominee.  Before you tell me how crazy I am, consider the guild support for Bridesmaids (PGA, WGA, SAG, ACE, ADG, CDG, plus probably a few more that I'm forgetting).  It's considerably more than War Horse has gotten, so I suspect that it gets left off in a year where a film needs five percent number one votes to land a slot.  Also, this isn't the 1980s.  That's the last time Steven Spielberg was able to get into the Best Picture race without a corresponding nod for his direction.  Despite claims that AMPAS loves him, they tend to be all or nothing where he's concerned.  Regarding The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, which has gotten guild nods from the big four (PGA, WGA, DGA and ACE), it's obviously a bigger threat than any of us thought.  How much of this is residual guilt for last year's about-face that turned the tide from The King's Speech to The Social Network is up for debate.  I do suspect that the guild love for Dragon Tattoo will help it, if not necessarily in Best Picture.

Best Director
1. Michel Hazanavicius - The Artist (lock)
2. Martin Scorsese - Hugo (lock)
3. Alexander Payne - The Descendants (lock)
4. Woody Allen - Midnight in Paris (probable)
5. Tate Taylor - The Help (wildcard)

Likely to Spoil: David Fincher (The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo), Bennett Miller (Moneyball), Steven Spielberg (War Horse), Terrence Malick (The Tree of Life), Nicolas Winding Refn (Drive)

Tate Taylor is the big question mark here, which gets to the question of how much will the Academy really love The Help?  Call me crazy, but when a film has such solid guild support as The Help, it's silly to not consider it even a threat for Best Director.  Lest we forget that Marc Forster, Bill Condon and Sean Penn all got up early on Oscar nomination morning (well, maybe not Sean Penn).  Then it was Mike Leigh, Paul Greengrass and Jason Reitman who were awoken by phone calls from agents, cutting short what I'm sure they assumed would be a morning of uninterrupted sleeping in.  My point is, there are always kinks to be seen and I do have a feeling about Tate Taylor.  It may seem insane, but is there really an abundance of sound logic in instead predicting Steven Spielberg, whose film has been largely shut out by the key guilds?  Or Terrence Malick, whose film I love and who certainly engenders respect in the directing branch, but at the end of the day, may have crafted something too self-consciously esoteric for the straight-laced Academy?  Even when he somewhat surprisingly got in for The Thin Red Line, there was a corresponding DGA nod to predict it.  Plus, it's not like Malick would show up if they nominated him anyway.  Really, from where I'm sitting, David Fincher is the only one who you can justifiably put ahead of Tate Taylor in that he's in the club and has the guild support to boot.  Yes, Tate Taylor is a newbie, but if they love the film (ie. Jason Reitman's suprise nod for Juno), anything can happen.

Best Actor in a Leading Role
1. George Clooney - The Descendants (lock)
2. Jean Du Jardin - The Artist (lock)
3. Brad Pitt - Moneyball (lock)
4. Michael Fassbender - Shame (probable)
5. Gary Oldman - Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (wildcard)

Likely to Spoil: Leonardo DiCaprio (J. Edgar), Michael Shannon (Take Shelter), Ryan Gosling (Drive), Demian Bichir (A Better Life)

My reasons for omitting DiCaprio, but keeping Fassbender may seem contradictory.  I'm chucking DiCaprio because his movie was so poorly reviewed and it seems so quiet right now for him.  He's hit many of the precursors thus far, but where's the heat? Where's the passion?  Michael Fassbender may seem quiet too and he did miss SAG, which might prove to be the death knell in hindsight should he miss at AMPAS.  I think Fassbender's charm, his cinematic ubiquity in 2011 combined with the performance itself puts him in for a "We're happy you're getting famous" nomination that even Academy members who neglected to pop in their Shame screeners won't feel badly about.  They already gave one of those nods to Michael Shannon back in 2008 and given the general lack of real buzz surrounding Take Shelter, I doubt they'll feel compelled to oblige him again, though many are predicting such an outcome.  Ryan Gosling had a high-profile year as well, following up his career-best performance in Blue Valentine.  In a weaker year, he'd have a shot for either Drive or The Ides of March.  Let me rephrase.  In a year where a weak performance like George Clooney's wasn't so solidly in the five, Gosling might have a chance.  But, as it stands, the top three are looking good to go and your winner will likely come from that list of names.  I'm just praying it's not Clooney.  Not just to beat up on The Descendants, but because Brad Pitt is so good and so understated in Moneyball.  And Du Jardin is so charismatic and committed in The Artist.  And (back to beating up on The Descendants for just a moment), isn't Clooney's unremarkable, autopilot, death-rattle of a performance exactly the type of turn we should avoid rewarding to an actor of his considerable talents, lest we encourage more unimaginative and facile project choices for him in the future?  Basically, I'm saying less The Descendants and Up in the Airs, more Michael Claytons, please.

Best Actress in a Leading Role 
1. Viola Davis - The Help (lock)
2. Meryl Streep - The Iron Lady (lock)
3. Michelle Williams - My Week With Marilyn (lock)
4. Tilda Swinton - We Need to Talk About Kevin (probable)
5. Rooney Mara - The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (shaky)

Likely to Spoil: Glenn Close (Albert Nobbs), Charlize Theron (Young Adult), Kristen Wiig (Bridesmaids)

I'm very tempted to put Close in over Swinton, whose role is tricky and even fans of hers doubt that she really pulled it off.  I could also see Close replacing Mara, who is a late surge in the race, is absent from much of her movie and (rumor has it) is anything but warm and fuzzy on the press circuit.  But, Swinton stays because she's hit all the major precursors (Globes, SAG, BFCA, BAFTA and an NBR win to boot).  Also, Tilda Swinton is uber-personable, despite her seemingly impenetrably "weird" persona and a lot of people like her, even if they aren't going to rush to pop in their Kevin screeners.  If the guild support for The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is going to help anyone, it's Rooney Mara.  This category rarely lacks a PYT and if it can't be Elizabeth Olsen or Kirsten Dunst, I'll predict Mara and just be glad it's not Felicity Jones (Like Crazy).  Given the at best tepid response to Albert Nobbs, I see no reason to put her in ahead of either of these women, though she could obviously get in there simply for the respect her name still commands.  The win is likely down to Davis vs. Streep.  For a while, it looked like a three woman race with Michelle Williams getting her fair share of critical citations.  After her gracious, but hardly gushing or effusive Golden Globes speech last weekend, I don't think people are eager to hand her the win just yet.  To that, I say fine.  I haven't seen My Week With Marilyn, but for an actress as interesting and versatile as Williams to go down in the history books as winning an Oscar for a Marilyn Monroe biopic seems wrong somehow.  After 2010's banner year in Best Actress (seriously, take a gander again. What a phenomenal list of performances and roles), it's a little hard to get truly excited about this lineup, however it happens to shake down.  There are really two things keeping my favorite Oscar category salvageable in terms of my own overwhelming enthusiasm.  Finally (knock on wood) seeing Swinton as a lead actress nominee without having sanded her edges to get there and that they may award Viola Davis the statue.  Kristen Wiig would certainly be an exciting, if not necessarily worthy choice.  But, since they are likely to give her a screenplay nod, that may have to suffice as her reward.  Charlize Theron really should have been more solidly in there, not just because she's so good in Young Adult, but because she's campaigned so well.  A perfect mixture of enthusiasm, gratitude and humor, without seeming desperate.   I sincerely hope that Kirsten Dunst (Melancholia) and Elizabeth Olsen (Martha, Marcy, May, Marlene) don't take the awards season cold shoulder as a sign that they should stop challenging themselves with great performances in prickly, difficult parts.  March on, ladies.  I'm in your corner.

Best Actor in a Supporting Role
 1. Christopher Plummer - Beginners (lock)
2. Albert Brooks - Drive (lock)
3. Kenneth Branagh - My Week With Marilyn (lock)
4. Jonah Hill - Moneyball (probable)
5. Brad Pitt - The Tree of Life (shaky)

Likely to Spoil: Nick Nolte (Warrior), Patton Oswalt (Young Adult), Viggo Mortensen (The Dangerous Method)

I think this is the lineup, honestly.  Despite the fact that there has been relative fluidity in terms of the precursor rosters (give an Armie Hammer here or take an Andy Serkis there), there does seem to be lack of real spoilers who could jump into the race at this point.  Although Brad Pitt hasn't been cited for The Tree of Life anywhere, I do believe that he's always been comfortably on the outside as a just miss in many of those cases.  He is very beloved in Hollywood, as evidenced by how he always escapes unscathed in the tiredly retreaded Jolie vs. Aniston debate.  He's excellent in both The Tree of Life and Moneyball (in that order) and I'm hoping what would be a relatively surprising double-nomination is what it takes to push him ahead of George Clooney in Best Actor.  Plummer looks good on paper for a win that, despite my love for the performance and film, baffles me.  In an expanded Best Picture field, Beginners has failed to catch fire in any other category and yet Plummer is solidly in there for the trophy?  The math doesn't add up for me and I still think that Albert Brooks could upset at the end of the day.

Best Actress in a Supporting Role
1. Octavia Spencer - The Help (lock)
2. Berenice Bejo - The Artist (lock)
3. Jessica Chastain - The Help (lock)
4. Shailene Woodley - The Descendants (probable)
5. Melissa McCarthy - Bridesmaids (probable)


Likely to Spoil: Janet McTeer (Albert Nobbs) and...really, not much else.  Sorry, Vanessa Redgrave.

Again, what once seemed like a wide-open race has firmed up nicely.  Spencer is looking more and more like the frontrunner for the win and the other two are locks.  Chastain hardly seems like a lock to many and I'm hearing pundits dusting off the old "vote splitting may hurt her" theory, which rarely happens in practice.  I think she's in and she's a lock for two reasons.   Firstly, despite being everywhere this year, the voting bodies have clearly rallied around The Help as the Chastain performance d'annee.  Does anyone think her work in Take Shelter, The Debt or even The Tree of Life for that matter are really going to be pulling that many votes away from the machine that is The Help?  Secondly, regarding vote-splitting with Octavia, I'm going to give you some years.  2000, 2001, 2002*, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010*.  Those are the years where two people from the same film managed to get nominated in supporting actress.  It's happened more often in the past ten years than it hasn't happened, with asterisks next to the years where one of the actresses won the trophy.  Know your history, pundits.  It's not that difficult.  Shailene will likely ride The Descendants train to a nomination, though I'd gladly give her the boot.  Would it be for Janet McTeer, whose film I haven't seen?  I can't say at this point.  Like Close, I think McTeer will suffer from the lack of enthusiasm surrounding Albert Nobbs and come up empty on nomination morning.  Since I'm predicting Bridesmaids for a Best Picture nomination, it doesn't make sense to exclude Melissa McCarthy, who even managed a BAFTA nomination.  On the outside of these six contenders are Vanessa Redgrave and Carey Mulligan, neither of which has any real shot, though I'd love to see Mulligan get in.


Coming Next: Screenplays and Other Below the Line Predictions...

A Break in Our Regulalry Scheduled Programming...Or Rather, Some Programming

The Pretentious Know it All is alive and well.  Rather than doing the usual apology about my long absence and how I fully intend to blog more regularly (which I do), let's discuss the game plan.

Firstly, I have every noble intention of completing my Best of the 2000s series.  Expect to see that in the coming weeks, as I am not merely publishing the list (as you can tell if you've been reading it...to the one person out there who reads my blog).  It is a painstaking, albeit reward task, not just to do a write-up of one of the films from every grouping of ten on my top 100 list, but deciding which film to cover?  Oy vey.  These are my favorite films of the decade, each one in its own complicated way very near and dear to my heart and I can't wait to share more.

Secondly, the fourth annual Pretentious Film Awards (Fourth!) are fully under way.  The nominees have mostly been selected, though I still have a few films from 2011 left to watch.  Full disclosure, my list of films seen in 2011 is slightly thinner than in previous years due to factors I won't bore you with here.  I have not seen My Week With Marilyn, The Iron Lady, Carnage, Albert Nobbs, War Horse, J. Edgar or The Ides of March (though I did read the script for The Ides of March last summer).  Though each of the previous films may factor into the Oscar race, though to what degree is being hotly contested on all counts, I no huge rush to see them in order for me to cite my personal favorites.  As lazy and patently unadventurous as it sounds, nothing I've heard about any of these titles qualifies them as urgent viewing in my book, outside of their supposed awards potential. 

Conversely, there are a lot of films from 2011 that I am genuinely sad to have missed in time for this year's Pretentious Film Awards, though I do plan on viewing them as soon as possible.  For reasons, both complicated and uncomplicated, I was unable to see (in descending order of personal excitement/enthusiasm) Margaret, A Separation, Pariah, Poetry, Submarine, Attack the Block, Potiche, A Dangerous Method, Pina and Jane Eyre.  As one of my resolutions for the new year is to write more, this blog included, I will surely make every effort to watch these films and any and every film I can get my hands on and write about them year round.  You will be hearing from me.  I can assure you of that.

Thirdly (and lastly) regarding my year end film awards, be prepared for what might be the most off-consensus year I've had yet in terms of the general landscape of film awards.  Despite this blog's title, this is a rather dubious claim to fame and not one I was planning in the slightest.  Consider 2010, where my top ten list included four of the eventual Best Picture nominees (and my feelings were generally warm about the entire ten).  Regarding my list, I must reiterate again (not that film criticism should ever include "defense" of one's taste in the strictest sense of the word) that I am not, nor have I ever feinted left to go right in terms of my cinematic proclivities.  For instance, although The Artist, our probably Best Picture winner at this point, does not appear on my top ten list, I have no real objections to its eventual victory in the Oscar race.  I will delve more into these thoughts when I review most of the films I saw in 2011 over the next few days.  You'll hear me weigh in on the heavily debated politics of The Help.  You'll learn why I gave a "D+" to The Descendants, a film so seemingly innocuous that, even if it weren't your cup of tea, one wonders how anyone could ever possibly feel so passionately against it to award it such a low grade.  All will be revealed. 

So, as I often say, I look forward to sharing more of my thoughts here on this blog, which (though it has been sporadic) I'm happy to have kept up with for the past four years. 

Peace, Love and Pretension.

The Best Films of the Aughts (60-69)

69. Talk to Her - dir. Pedro Almodóvar (2002)

"A woman’s brain is a mystery, and in this state even more so. You have to pay attention to women, talk to them, be thoughtful occasionally. Caress them. Remember they exist, they’re alive and they matter to us. That’s the only therapy. I know from experience."


68. Sherrybaby - dir. Laurie Collyer (2006)

"Lord please please please please please hear my extra prayer tonight. Forgive me my weaknesses and my mistakes. Give me the strength to take life one day at a time and take care of my daughter again. Amen."


67. The Savages - dir. Tamra Jenkins (2007)

"People are dying, Wendy! Right inside that beautiful building. Right now! It’s a fucking horror show! And all this wellness propaganda and landscaping is just trying to obscure the miserable fact that people die and death is gaseous and gruesome and filled with piss and shit and rot and stink."


66. Lost in Translation - dir. Sofia Coppola (2003)

"Let's never come here again because it will never be as much fun."


Spotlight--65. Erin Brockovich - dir. Steven Soderbergh (2000)

"Well, um, seeing as how I have no brains or legal expertise, and Ed here was losing all faith in the system, am I right? I just went out there and performed sexual favors. Six hundred and thirty-four blow jobs in five days... I'm really quite tired."

It's a serendipitous and wonderful thing when a movie star is celebrated for a star turn, deserving of all accolades and hyperbole, that seems to steamroll through all awards season precursors all the way to the podium on Oscar night. So rarely does it happen this way, particularly in the Best Actress category. There often seems to be a finely tuned mix of people's actual response to said performance and another, hard to pinpoint x-factor of "something else" that leads to people winning the Best Actress trophy.


Why have I begun my write-up of 2000's Erin Brockovich by bringing up the Best Actress race? Because (and I may be misreading the climate) it seems to be a widely held view that Julia Roberts coasted to an easy victory that she didn't deserve, or at the very least should have been met with more resistance (out come the Ellen Burstyn fans, complete with their torches and pitchforks). Eleven years later, I am proud to throw my full, weighty support, not just behind Roberts's radiant and accomplished turn, but the film itself. I worry that even fans of Julia's work here may write off the film as a feel-good trifle/bloated whistle-blower picture, all the while completely ignoring how richly Roberts and the film serve each other.

We open with a wonderful sequence of finely spliced together monologues by Erin (Julia Roberts), who is on the painstakingly difficult hunt for a job. In those early moments, we learn nearly all we need to about Erin Brockovich to warrant serious investment in this character. A little self-effacing, but intelligent. Wry, yet totally aware of the seriousness of her circumstances. It's quiet, unfussy and consistently on-character work in these first minutes that allow for the big meaty moments later on where Erin lets her frustration/lack of practical training get the better of her. On paper, all of this could read incredibly obvious and facile, but Roberts layers all of the elements beautifully, never forgetting one, when the scene mostly calls for the other. She has never been better, before or since. I say that not to denigrate Julia Roberts, who I actually like. I think that for any performer, her turn in Erin Brockovich is a tough thing to top. Her string of roles after this stunner don't really seem to be utilizing her talents appropriately, though the missteps are certainly understandable (Closer aside, in which I actually think Mike Nichols got some very interesting notes out of her). Her post-Brockovich directors, even Steven Soderbergh himself, seem content to saddle her with either large, external affectation (Charlie Wilson's War) or attempt to play on her stardom and her public persona in ways that are transparent in how commercially minded they are (Eat, Pray, Love). What I love about what Steven Soderbergh gets out of Roberts here is that he enhances so much about what already works about her as a performer--her comedic undertones, her sassiness, her accessible beauty and her warmth--while still fashioning a fascinating character that feels neither cloying nor obtusely against type.



Erin Brockovich is predictable, make no mistake. Even without knowing the details of the "true story" of how a plucky legal secretary took down a major corporation, one can probably guess with great accuracy where the film is headed. What we have here is an example of how dedication/investment in the craft of filmmaking can elevate even the most simple and seemingly rote of stories. Take, for example the scene of Erin describing her past as a beauty queen to George (Aaron Eckhart) in a fun, yet character-deepening scene of post-coital conversation. Would one have read that scene on the page and seen the frisky, creative editing or how the camera knows exactly during which moments to get close to Erin and George?

Not to take anything away from Susannah Grant's script, which is accomplished and serviceable and filled with great one-liners to boot ("Bite my ass, Krispy Kreme!" It just rolls off the tongue...). But I can't help but feel that there a more pedestrian version of this film could have easily existed, perhaps made for television, perhaps directed theatrically by the likes of Ron Howard, Stephen Frears or Tom Hooper. If we must have biopics and straight-down-the-middle narratives (and from Hollywood's output, apparently we must) why can't they all be as specific and well-crafted as this?


64. The 40-Year-Old Virgin - dir. Judd Apatow (2005)

"You know when you, like...you grab a woman's breast and it's...and you feel it and...it feels like a bag of sand when you're touching it?"


63. Paranoid Park - dir. Gus Van Sant (2008)

"I just feel like there's something outside of normal life. Outside of teachers, breakups, girlfriends. Like, right out there, like outside - there's like different levels of... stuff."


62. The Class - dir. Laurent Cantet (2008)

"I'm Souleymane. I have nothing to say about me because no one knows me but me."ˆ

61. Once - dir. John Carney (2007)

"During the daytime people would want to hear songs that they know, just songs that they recognize. I play these song at night or I wouldn't make any money. People wouldn't listen."


60. The Bourne Ultimatum - dir. Paul Greengrass (2007)

"It was difficult for me...with you."

The Best Films of the Aughts (70-79)

79. WALL-E - dir. Andrew Stanton (2008)

"Computer. Define 'dancing'."



78. Fish Tank - dir. Andrea Arnold (2009)

"You dance like a black. It's a compliment."



77. Reprise - dir. Joachim Trier (2008)

"We're supposed to write and read. And if we feel the urge we'll practice deviant, fetishistic sex with prostitutes."



76. Million Dollar Baby - dir. Clint Eastwood (2004)
"Mama, you take Mardell and JD and get home before I tell that lawyer there that you were so worried about your welfare you never signed those house papers like you were supposed to. So anytime I feel like it I can sell that house from under your fat, lazy, hillbilly ass. And if you ever come back, that's exactly what I'll do."


75. The Cell - dir. Tarsem Singh (2000)

"My World. My Rules."



Spotlight--74. Raising Victor Vargas - dir. Peter Sollett (2003)

"Listen. I'm a private person. What we do is between me and you. You still want this loving, right?"

Peter Sollett's jolting, vibrant and energetic tale of adolescent love and folly abounds with discovery nearly at every turn. Nearly every one of the principle players (with the exception of under-the-radar Indie queen Melonie Diaz) makes his or her feature film debut here. Peter Sollett announced himself as a powerful and interesting new cinematic voice. An aside: I have yet to watch his 2008 follow-up, the relatively high profile Nick and Nora's Infinite Playlist. Should I?

At first glance, this would appear to be exactly the type of cinematic outing designed to bore the shit out of movie-watcher who complains about what is perceived to be the current trend of meandering, navel-gazing independent cinema, heralded as brilliant and cutting-edge by the flannel clad temp at your office (stay with me). I sympathize with this frustration, often siding with it. In my brief write-up of Winter's Bone, I talked about an air of human truth that's sometimes hard to pinpoint, but adds such richness to a great movie. There wasn't a moment of Raising Victor Vargas that felt false or playing to my very contrary, untested perceptions of twenty-first century life in the Lower East Side for these characters.

Victor Vargas (a fabulous Victor Rasuk) speaks the line quoted above. It is one of the first lines uttered in this film and it lets you know that you are in capable hands. Victor Vargas drips with a confident, slightly insular teenage male bravado that permeates everything from his words to his gestures. But what, if anything, is it masking? And why is Judy (Judy Marte), the wise girl he chases after seem more put off by Victor than any of the other boys in her neighborhood? Especially given that one young man candidly offers Judy anal sex in a manner that can only be described as less than chivalrous. These are questions that are answered by last frame. Victor is confident, yes. But the confidence he wears is something akin to a fancy pair of shoes worn by a newborn baby. Shiny and new, certainly. But Victor is still forming, still growing, still becoming himself and he may discover one day soon that his own self-perceived greatness may not fit the person he ultimately becomes. And Judy, for all of her womanly wisdom, for all of her desire to be anything but just another notch in the bedpost of one of the many boys who wish to bed her, really does like Victor. Sounds like your run-of-the-mill romantic comedy, doesn't it? Perhaps it does. But Raising Victor Vargas is anything but.


I spoke, very briefly, about Melonie Diaz. Like many of the actors in the film, she shares her character's first name. In a storyline that exists almost completely parallel to everything else in the film, Melonie (Judy's best friend) falls for one of Victor's chums, the sweet but somewhat cocky Harold (Kevin Rivera). Melonie and Harold's courtship is different than that of Victor and Judy. She is resistant and he is persistent, but not in the same ways and not for the same reasons. Melonie keeps what becomes a very deep, meaningful relationship with Harold a secret from Judy for most of the film. She is desperate to avoid Judy's judgmental stares and comments, not because they would influence her greatly, but because with a look in her eyes and a small gesture, Diaz lets you know that Melonie knows exactly how it's going to turn out and she's already kind of rolling her eyes. I've noticed this consistency in many of Melonie Diaz's performances. She seems naturally aplomb at playing that character who "gets it" just a little bit more than all the other characters around her, who are a a little slow on the uptake. It is a small performance that betrays how integral Diaz's watchfulness and knack for conveying teenage conflict is to the film.

While the Lower East Side of Manhattan has become somewhat of a gentrified hipster haven, that is not the Lower East Side presented in this film. That being the case, it's rife for poverty porn, but Peter Sollett wisely resists the urge to make this a story about a group of minority youths trapped by their circumstances. Or rather, he resists to urge to tell that tired story in the rote, pedestrian fashion that has become all too familiar. The neighborhood is replete with life and there is a youthful innocence and a playfulness that runs throughout Raising Victor Vargas. These are not wealthy people, but, like all young people, they live in and engage with their surroundings.

A key element that lets the viewer know that this is not a typical story of inner-city youths and strife is Victor's grandmother, Altagracia (played by Altagracia Guzman). She is hard on Victor, constantly demanding he set a good example for his younger brother and younger sister. She gifts the movie with soft, maternal humor that is steeped in obliviousness and a clinging to the old guard. At one point, she takes Victor down to social services, probably just to scare him, with the stated intention of turning him over to foster care as punishment for his wild ways and misbehavior. Why? Because she has caught Victor's brother Nino (Victor Rasuk's real life younger brother, Silvestre Rasuk) masturbating and she is almost certain he picked up this vile habit from Victor. Nino is far too sweet and innocent to have learned it elsewhere. Social services of course turns Altagracia away, stating that it is illegal to abandon children for no good reason. There is obviously a sweet humor in the sad ridiculousness of this situation. The subtext may also be that for all of his outlandish behavior, Victor is, at his core, a good kid. Furthermore, given the universe these characters inhabit, there are problems worse than masturbation where a teenage boy is concerned that Altagracia very well could be, but thankfully doesn't have to deal with.

In the end, Victor's conflicted relationship with his grandmother still remains, especially in a key scene near the end where the realities of his relationship with Judy are laid bare and everyone is forced to feel the way they feel. The last frame of the film doesn't offer an entirely tidy conclusion. But it's a lovely, subtle and graceful note to end on. One that doesn't lay out the paths of these characters for very long beyond the narrative, but also doesn't leave you unsatisfied. And in a film about teenage love and discovery (an honest one anyway) this is the truest way to leave it.

73. Zombieland - dir. Ruben Fleishcer (2009)

"You are like a like a giant cock-blocking robot. Like, developed in a secret fucking government lab."



72. Head-On - dir. Fatih Akin (2004)

"If you want to end your life, end it. You don't have to kill yourself to do that."



71. Inglourious Basterds - dir. Quentin Tarantino (2009)

"Not so fast, Willi. We only have a deal if we trust each other. A Mexican standoff ain't trust."



70. The Darjeeling Limited - dir. Wes Anderson (2007)

"I wonder if the three of us would have been friends in real life. Not as brothers, but as people."

Next: 60-69