|
|
|
Oscars 2005 with Lumino critics |
|
|
|
Written by ALEX MECHLIN and NED O'REILLY
|
|
Friday, 25 March 2005 |
Oscar night is a big party for some – a big bore for others. At Lumino, we recognize the import and the impact of the Academy Awards on our audience and indeed on American pop culture.
Regardless of who wins what awards, it's the debate and argument about the awards that most interests people. To that end, we're presenting two separately formed and articulated opinions about the major awards. Ned speaks first, followed by Alex (because alphabetical order is boring) – and then you. The two critics don't always disagree, but we know you've got your own opinions.
BEST ACTOR
NED: Jamie Foxx will win for "Ray" because he plays a blind man and an icon. Regardless of how thorough his performance, those gimmicks get him the Oscar. Don Cheadle was just as strong in his portrayal of a dedicated hotel manager during the Rwandan genocide, but hasn't gotten the hype. Clint Eastwood has a shot for stupid, Hollywoody sentimental reasons, but cooler heads should prevail. What they missed: Duh. Paul Giamatti in "Sideways" gave the best performance of the year – male or female – in any film that got Oscar attention.
ALEX: It will be shocking if Jamie Foxx loses - the academy even nominated him twice (supporting role for "Collateral", even if it was really a lead). His performance is a great one, completely channeling Ray Charles while making us forget about the actor. The level of difficulty was high for playing a blind, piano playing drug addict, and then on top of that the character was Charles! Leonardo Dicaprio was also great, going through twenty years of Howard Hughes, part visionary and part disease ridden.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
NED: Thomas Haden Church was a B-movie and TV schmuck and he allowed a director to completely exploit that while serving as both straight man and comic relief for three quarters of "Sideways." His was not only a great performance, but the kind the Academy loves to recognize in this category. Alan Alda will get votes for being a television lifer with his first nod, but Church should win out. What they missed: Peter Sarsgaard was the best thing in "Kinsey," not just because he played a bisexual, but because his character was the soul of the story.
ALEX: Morgan Freeman is the elder statesman here, and his only real challenge will be from Thomas Haden Church. Church gave a very funny, almost pathetic performance that perfectly played off Paul Giamatti. Tom Cruise, who really was the supporting actor in "Collateral", should have been nominated for his focused, ruthless, and finally strangely endearing role.
BEST ACTRESS
NED: Hilary Swank has simply gotten too much hype since the release of "Million Dollar Baby" to lose this award. She trained as a boxer for it (the Academy eats up that kind of dedication) and she also has to play the end scenes with only her face and voice. Imelda Staunton is the dark horse after having won numerous other awards for playing "Vera Drake." What they missed: Uma Thurman fans are up in arms that she's not nominated for her "Kill Bill, Vol. 2" performance. She may have been hurt by sequelitis.
ALEX: Kate Winslet probably made the biggest stretch of the nominees, playing a loud, spontaneous character for the first time in her career. Annete Bening and Hilary Swank are the favorites, in a replay of their 1999 battle. Swank will probably win, just because her role is much better, allowing her to go from nobody to champ to a surprising revelation in the third act.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
NED: Sideways is an actor's picture – the kind that bring home supporting acting awards. Virginia Madsen is a complete delight as a mature, complex, contemporary woman here – not fierce or cause oriented, just very strong, very smart, and very real. Again, her out-of-nowhere status will help push her past the competition, which primarily comes from Cate Blanchett in The Aviator. What they missed: Kirsten Dunst in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind finally showed me what directors and casting directors keep seeing in her.
ALEX: Meryl Streep missed out on a nomination here for her delicious performance in "The Manchurian Candidate", probably because it has all but been forgotten at this point. Cate Blanchett gave the most challenging performance, while Virginia Madsen's is the most heartfelt. The Oscar will probably go to Madsen, as a comeback combined with the well written role is hard to resist.
BEST ANIMATED FILM
NED: "The Incredibles" has this wrapped up. Critics everywhere reviewed this like it was a straight film and included it in Top 10 lists because of its full and rewarding story and inventive supporting characters. "Shrek 2" was a very entertaining sequel, but a sequel nonetheless. What they missed: It wasn't a masterpiece, but how did "The Polar Express" get three other Oscar nods while missing out in this category?
ALEX: The obvious choice is for "The Incredibles", which is indeed better than the other two choices. "Shark Tale" and "Shrek 2" relied on cheap jokes and pop culture references to great financial success, while "The Incredibles" has more three-dimensional characters than a live action film.
BEST SONG
NED: Accidentally In Love: The Counting Crows tune from "Shrek 2" is the only pop hit among the nominees, which usually means it won't win the Oscar. But it's a catchy tune, should be one of the highlights of the television broadcast, and it sure would be fun to see the whole band get up for an acceptance speech. More likely to win is either "Believe" from "The Polar Express "or "Learn To Be Lonely" from "The Phantom of the Opera." What they missed: Changing the rules. With soundtracks like those for "Ray" and "Garden State," and even "The Aviator," why can't there be an award for the best application of existing songs?
ALEX: Another category where the nominations are mostly safe choices. The "Phantom of the Opera" song will probably win, if only for its pedigree. The real oversight is Mick Jagger's "Old Habits Die Hard" from "Alfie", probably victimized because of the quick disappearance of the movie. The song is quite good, and perfectly fits the tone of the picture.
BEST SCORE
NED: Alex paid a whole lot more attention to this than I did. I do agree with the oversights he mentions, especially for "The Incredibles." Also, see my comment about soundtracks using existing songs under the Best Song category.
ALEX: This is the category that the voters made the most mistakes, with not one of the nominees being all that memorable. Two great scores that weren't nominated are Jon Brion's "I Heart Huckabees" and Michael Giacchino's "The Incredibles". Both were fun and inventive, with Brion taking his cue from pop songs and Giacchino from the James Bond movies.
BEST SCREENPLAY(S)
NED: The writing categories tend to include all the strong films that missed the Best Picture cut and one of the awards is often the only Oscar given to that film. I'm picking "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" in a close race over "The Incredibles" for Original Screenplay, largely because of Charlie Kauffman's reputation. As for Adapted Screenplay, three of these are up for Best Picture and while I preferred Sideways, I believe the Academy will go with Million Dollar Baby. What they missed: Again, Zach Braff's "Garden State," people! The film includes convincing dialogue and unexpected plot turns and captures a generation in a way that these older filmmakers could not possibly do.
ALEX: Original Screenplay - This is the category where the winner tends to be a daring film that isn't quite prestigious enough for best picture. For that reason, "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" will probably win, and deservedly so. It is Charlie Kaufman's third nomination, and his most empathetic script. Some scripts that were overlooked for nominations were "The Life Aquatic", "I Heart Huckabees", and "Garden State", if only for their off-beat originality. Adapted Screenplay - This is where the heavyweights reside, as three nominees were also nominated for best picture. This gives "Before Sunset" little chance, even though it is slightly better than the others. The difficulty of getting an entire movie to work around one conversation between two people (while still looking effortless) is enough to put it over the top. Not to mention the screenplay works in drama, comedy, nostalgia, regret, two character arcs, and a satisfying ending.
BEST DIRECTOR
NED: Alexander Payne deserves all the credit he can get for "Sideways." Unlike in "Election" and "About Schmidt," he used anti-star power to its best advantage while making us feel that we were making the wine country tour right along with the characters. He's my choice, but the academy will go with either Martin Scorsese (despite "The Aviator" losing for Best Picture) or Clint Eastwood. What they missed: Zach Braff for "Garden State." Not only was this a "who knew?" exposition of a great triple-threat talent, but the film tells a true and deep story of American life.
ALEX: Martin Scorsese utilized color schemes, make-up, computer graphics, and intense acting to bring 20 years of Howard Hughes' life to the screen. His technical mastery, combined with his empathy for his characters, make him the director of the year. The race is between him and Eastwood, and will probably come down to what the academy thinks is the picture of the year. It would be no disgrace for Eastwood to win, as his handling of delicate material, changing genres, and masterful performances was deft. Michael Mann probably deserved a nomination, his "Collateral" utilized new digital filmmaking techniques to create a riveting film noir in downtown L.A.
BEST PICTURE
NED: "Million Dollar Baby" is a flawed film, driven by an overrated performance by the overrated Clint Eastwood, but its manipulative final act morality tale will win it the Oscar. "Sideways" is a much more interesting and more entertaining film that includes plenty of interwoven, everyday morality tales, and speaks to many more people's real lives, but will lose out to Baby because of that film's shock value. Too bad. We could have had another "Annie Hall." What they missed: "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" was the classic victim of the "too early release," more entertaining and more inventive than "Million Dollar Baby," "The Aviator," or "Finding Neverland."
ALEX: "The Aviator" finds Martin Scorsese in full-throttle mode, running through moviemaking, flying, and obsessive compulsive disorder at a breakneck pace. It is the year's best filmmaking, if not necessarily the best film. That honor goes to "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind", which of course was forgotten during awards time. "Sideways" is the best comedy of the year, as it mines the depths of depression and alcoholism more honestly than most like minded dramas.
Digging Deeper – A closer look at nominees for the major awards
By NED O'REILLY
BEST ACTOR
Don Cheadle: This is acting. In "Hotel Rwanda," Cheadle plays a hotel manager in a very western, very civilized city during the genocide of 1994. The constant terror is palpable, but the man keeps his cool in situation after situation – not hiding people away in caves or basements, but right there in a luxury hotel awaiting the political means to escape. Cheadle beautifully captures the pacifism and the quick-thinking of an amazing man. He's a dark horse for this award.
Johnny Depp: Depp was great – and perfectly cast – as playwright J.M. Barrie in "Finding Neverland." He's one of the few actors who really is believable as an adult and as an adult child. He plays interactions with business partners, his wife, and with the four boys in the film with equal dexterity. But he was even more inventive and entertaining last year in "Pirates of the Carribean," so I'd like to see him win for a goofier future role.
Leonardo DiCaprio: Leo really surprised me in "The Aviator."Early on, I felt, as I usually do with him, like he was a very talented kid acting alongside grownups. This was partially due to director Martin Scorsese's decision to do nothing to age him for the first 15 to 20 years of the epic story. But in the latter part of the film, I started to see the brilliance and leadership that made those around Howard Hughes so smitten with him. As for the Oscar, though, DiCaprio's an also-ran.
Clint Eastwood: I have said this for decades and I continue to stand by it. Clint Eastwood is dull and he lacks real range as an actor. In "Million Dollar Baby," he spends half his time giving us confused looks. This is great acting? Look across the scenes at Hilary Swank and Morgan Freeman to see why Clint supposedly looks so good. Hollywood's just in love with the guy. If he wins, it's a farce.
Jamie Foxx: Give all the kudos you want to Jamie Foxx for his portrayal of Ray Charles in "Ray." He did what the great, dedicated actors do. He wore prosthetics so he could be more truly blind, he played a dynamic character over a 30-year period, he played his own piano and sang the songs (later overdubbed by the real Ray), and he dramatized a heroin addiction – including the withdrawal. Nice work. Oscar-worthy.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Alan Alda: Why is everyone so surprised that Alda can play a creep? While I enjoyed him on "M*A*S*H" for years, it was because he was funny, not because he was likeable. In truth, as Senator Brewster in "The Aviator," Alda combines a winning mixture of folksy charm and devious intent without ever going over the top. The Academy snuck him into this category when other awards passed him by. He's got an outside chance to win.
Morgan Freeman: He's been better ("Hard Rain," "Nurse Betty," "Deep Impact"), but his steady performance in "Million Dollar Baby" certainly warrants a nomination. As I said elsewhere, I would have rather seen him in the lead role. There are so many things he naturally does to bring out the full emotion of a moment.
Jamie Foxx: Foxx delivered a complete performance in "Collateral" opposite Tom Cruise's refreshingly nasty turn as a hit man. While for screen time, I'd argue that Foxx's Max was the lead role, his passivity (appropriate and according to what the director intended) actually defines it as a supporting role. And he at least got to get creative in the gangster scene. Worthy of the nom, but not the statue.
Clive Owen: It didn't hurt that Owen got a lot of ink for having played Jude Law's role when "Closer" was on the London stage, but the menacing everyman performance he delivered in the film version got everyone's attention. It's the kind of role that the Academy can more easily honor in this category than in the lead category.
Thomas Haden Church: Give it to him. Don't even vote. The guy was a B-movie and TV schmuck and he allowed a director to completely exploit that while serving as both straight man and comic relief for three quarters of "Sideways." I loved the other performances, but Church brought it all together.
BEST ACTRESS
Annette Bening: Bening is a fine actress and fine actresses portraying fine actresses in films usually get the Academy's attention. But this nomination is as much about hype as anything else. Is there really a "rematch" between Bening and Hilary Swank? Only to trivia buffs and media writers looking for an angle.
Imelda Staunton: It's difficult to overlook all the accolades being showered upon this classic English career character actress. The bravery of the character and the idea of the controversial subject matter (abortion) being addressed in a bygone era (the 1950s) help, too. Staunton has a real shot at this award (think Jim Broadbent for "Iris" a few years back).
Catalina Sandino Moreno: Ravishing as this young actress may have been portraying a Columbian drug mule in "Maria Full of Grace," this is still a debut performance in an intriguing, yet flawed film. It's great that Hollywood continues to acknowledge non-English speaking actors, but let's leave it at that for this year.
Hilary Swank: Swank looks like a trained fighter in "Million Dollar Baby" and acts like a woman with nothing to lose, as the story dictates. She's even great when forced to use only her face and voice. I can't ignore the hype – she'll win her second Oscar for this one.
Kate Winslet: Kate is great as Clementine in "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," but this was not just her picture. At least she was more active and thus more interesting in this role than she was in "Finding Neverland." Winslet could well have won before this and will surely be nominated again, but this won't be her winning year.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Laura Linney: I was surprised that Linney was the only one involved in "Kinsey" to get a nod. I've seen her more intriguing ("Mystic River," even the much-reviled "Life and Death of David Gale"), and she may have a better performance still in her, but she does provide believable support to a difficult character and believable chemistry opposite an older actor (Liam Neesson).
Virginia Madsen: A complete delight in "Sideways." I'm surprised at the notoriety she's receiving for her role as a wine fancier, but I'm all for it. She is a mature, complex, contemporary woman here – not fierce or cause oriented, just very strong, very smart, and very real. My pick for this award.
Sophie Okonedo: It's great that Okonedo earned this nod, and a couple of her scenes with the scintillating Don Cheadle make for terrific cinema, but most of her performance is about protecting terrified children and emoting while an inch from certain death. She provides the support the film and director ask of her, but has no real chance to take over a scene.
Natalie Portman: Portman was a lot more interesting in "Garden State," but the Oscars have a history of nominating performances by attractive women willing to take off their clothes around older men (Mia Sorvino in Woody Allen's "Mighty Aphrodite" is the classic case). Portman's other movie roles helped her win the Golden Globe, but the Academy will vote more wisely.
Cate Blanchett: If anyone could pass as screen icon Katharine Hepburn, it's Blanchett. After just a few minutes of noticing how much Cate sounded like Kate, I was able to accept her as a character in the Howard Hughes epic "The Aviator." Despite the remarks about this being Hepburn's 13th nomination, Blanchett inhabits the character fully, and is very worthy of consideration for this award.
BEST DIRECTOR
Clint Eastwood: Unlike his acting, I like Eastwood's directing. I thought "Mystic River" was terrific and I enjoyed "Midnight In The Garden of Good and Evil." In "Million Dollar Baby," I admired his treatment of the boxing scenes especially, but I didn't like a lot of other choices. Using a narrator, for instance, was a cheap out. He may win anyway, but it won't be the right choice.
Taylor Hackford: If you want to compare biopics, Hackford went the extra mile over Scorsese. Ray's story makes more sense and the director's graphics and time-change gimmicks are more effective, particularly the way the childhood memories are sprinkled throughout the film, rather than used as a prologue. More importantly, the film makes us care about Ray Charles and especially about those he knew and loved. As for coaching great performances, though, after Jamie Foxx, too many of the characters in "Ray" are by the book.
Alexander Payne: Payne deserves all the credit he can get for "Sideways." While I loved his breakthrough film, "Citizen Ruth," I had problems with both "Election" and "About Schmidt," feeling that he relied too much on star power to tell those stories. But here, he used anti-star power to its best advantage while making us feel that we were making the wine country tour right along with the characters. He gets my vote for this Oscar.
Mike Leigh: Standard "we're impressed because he's British" award nod. No director whose film was not nominated for Best Picture (and there seems to be a token each year) ever wins the award anyway. "Vera Drake," while telling a good story, was powered by its lead performance more than by its direction.
Martin Scorsese: "The Aviator" is an interesting film, entertaining in long stretches, unsettling in others, bewildering in a few more. Scorsese has always commanded great performances out of his actors and does so here with DiCaprio, Blanchett, Alda, and others. But the story is disjointed enough as it sprawls over a 20-year period that it's hard to call this picture great. If Marty gets this Oscar, it will be a lifetime achievement award.
BEST PICTURE
"Finding Neverland": This was an enjoyable film, but it falls short where it should most succeed: as an examination of grieving. Johnny Depp is terrific in the lead part, Kate Winslet is fine in a reserved role, but Freddie Highmore, cited by many as the reason the film is so moving, is really just another kid actor, not fully capable of articulating his feelings. Those who've called this a contender for best picture are mostly diverted by the fact that it's British and that it takes place 100 years ago.
"Million Dollar Baby": This is a flawed film. Driven by an overrated performance by an overrated actor (Clint Eastwood), this is an intriguing story about women boxers that switches gears into a life or death morality tale that lacks punch. Yes, Hilary Swank is thorough and fabulous, but I can't help but wonder how much better the movie would have been with Morgan Freeman in the Eastwood role. I wasn't so much disappointed in the ending as I was in the whole last quarter of the film. I wanted something else to happen after the long build up and was mostly bored by it.
"The Aviator": Martin Scorsese goes for it big time here with an epic about a very colorful American (Howard Hughes) whose story is familiar enough to draw audiences in to see the details. It's also loaded with stars, even in cameos, and features terrific acting by the principle characters. But it feels like a long story with lots of the episodes missing. I was just not sure what I was supposed to get out of it when it was over. This film's a Best Picture runner-up.
"Ray": Among the many biopics this year, this one is perhaps the warmest and most appealing – largely thanks to the music and the lead performance. Intercutting the back story instead of using it as a prologue is the most significant way this movie works. We get to see how the main character might be considering each episode in his life, rather than having to try to guess. Not the year's best picture, but very deserving of the nomination.
"Sideways": My favorite film of the year, hands down. Even though I've read a thing or two about the similarities of the plot to another buddy picture or two, this is a fresh, funny, modern adult story with nothing but intriguing characters. While I love the performances of the principles, even the smaller roles are played with aplomb. Alexander Payne has continued his film journey through real American life and I can't wait for his next chapter. And I won't stop talking about the travesty of passing over Paul Giammati's performance for an Oscar nod.
Photos courtesy of Universal and Warner Bros.Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
