Oscar Predictions 2013

Regardless of what you think of the Academy, the Oscars and some of the ridiculous decisions that have been made over the years, the fact that this is the biggest awards ceremony in the world means that you can’t just ignore it. This year is no different to any other – when the nominations were announced there were shocks, snubs and cynicism in reaction from the press in equal measure, but the result is that we have one of the most interesting awards in recent years. The Oscars roll in at the end of the month and, having now watched ALL films nominated for the big six awards (I refuse to put myself through Mirror Mirror, I don’t care if it’s been nominated for Best Costume Design), which are Best Supporting Actress and Actor, Best Actress and Actor, Best Director and Best Picture, this is how the night will probably pan out, as opposed to how I think it should pan out.

BUT just a quick gripe about people and films that definitely should have been nominated. While it’s all very nice to see some well-deserved nominations for Michael Haneke and his film Amour as well as recognition for indie film Beasts of the Southern Wild, The Sessions was a film brought up to a high level not by the acting of Helen Hunt, who’s garnered a Best Supporting Actress nomination seemingly purely on the strength of going full-frontally nude for her role as a sex surrogate, but by John Hawkes, whose dedication to properly portraying polio sufferer Mark O’Brien was at such a high level that the measures he took to mirror the curvature of O’Brien’s twisted spine came at a cost to his own health, and for this and his unique portrayal of Catholic guilt mixed in with a knowledge that time is running short and a strong desire to get his rocks off for the first time at the age of 38, he should have been nominated for Best Actor, as should Jean-Louis Tritignant for Amour. Meanwhile previous winner Marion Cotillard should have merited a Best Actress nomination for her role as Stephanie, a killer whale trainer who rebuilds her life after suffering a terrible accident, in the uncompromising Rust  And Bone which, by the by, should have been in the mix for Best Picture – the two could have easily replaced surprise nominee Naomi Watts and the vastly overrated Zero Dark Thirty respectively. The Best Director category is also somewhat contentious, with Les Miserables’s Tom Hooper, Argo’s Ben Affleck, Django Unchained’s Quentin Tarantino and The Master’s Paul Thomas Anderson denied nominations by Michael Haneke (Amour), Benh Zeitlin (Beasts of the Southern Wild) and David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook) respectively

Best Supporting Actress: Amy Adams (The Master), Sally Field (Lincoln), Anne Hathaway (Les MIserables), Helen Hunt (The Sessions), Jacki Weaver (Silver Linings Playbook)

The only dead cert award of the night. Anne Hathaway’s been gathering up the awards (Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild along with various regional critics’ gongs) like they’re white plastic balls and she’s a Hungry Hungry Hippo with a pixie haircut for her fifteen-minute role as tragic prostitute Fantine in Les Miserables. While she piles on the emotion, which the Academy loves, Sally Field was more understated but no less affecting as the fragile, complex and unstable Mary Todd Lincoln, the perfect foil to Daniel Day Lewis’s Honest Abe.

Should win: Sally Field

Will win: Anne Hathaway

Best Supporting Actor: Alan Arkin (Argo), Robert De Niro (Silver Linings Playbook), Philip Seymour Hoffman (The Master), Tommy Lee Jones (Lincoln), Christoph Waltz (Django Unchained)

Conversely, this is the only award where anything could happen, much as I’d love De Niro to win another Oscar after his recent decade of dross. All nominees are previous Oscar winners but no-one’s taken the bull by the horns in terms of the awards already presented – De Niro and Hoffman have won awards but Jones has the Screen Actors Guild gong and Waltz won the Golden Globe, so it would appear to be between the two of them. Based purely on the fact that Waltz won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar in 2010 for his role in Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds, I think the Academy will plump for Jones’s performance as abolitionist Thaddeus Stevens, though Hoffman’s performance as cult leader Lancaster Dodd in The Master is more intricate, subtle and memorable.

Should win: Philip Seymour Hoffman

Will win: Tommy Lee Jones

Best Actress: Jessica Chastain (Zero Dark Thirty), Jennifer Lawrence (Silver Linings Playbook), Emmanuelle Riva (Amour), Quvenzhane Wallis (Beasts of the Southern Wild), Naomi Watts (The Impossible)

Probably the most interesting major category this year thanks to its oldest and youngest ever nominees, Emmanuelle Riva (85) and Quvenzhane Wallis (9). Neither of them will win (although Riva’s quiet, dignified performance as the ailing Anne in Amour is heartbreaking to watch) and neither will Naomi Watts – the race is between Jessica Chastain and Jennifer Lawrence, two actresses who have only burst into the mainstream in the last couple of years. Both won Golden Globes (Chastain in the Drama category, Lawrence in Musical or Comedy) but Lawrence took home the SGA and, based on the fact that Zero Dark Thirty is more about the film and the hunt for Bin Laden than Chastain’s character and the Academy by all accounts loved Silver Linings Playbook, Lawrence looks set to win on the night.

Should win: Emmanuelle Riva

Will win: Jennifer Lawrence

Best Actor: Bradley Cooper (Silver Linings Playbook), Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln), Hugh Jackman (Les Miserables), Joaquin Phoenix (The Master), Denzel Washington (Flight)

There’s really only one name that anyone’s talking about in this category, and that’s Daniel Day-Lewis. As Abraham Lincoln, he displays all of the characteristics that made the man one of the United States’s greatest presidents, embodying him in the way he’s come to embody every one of the people he’s played throughout his distinguished career. It’s unfortunate for Jackman and Phoenix – in another year, they could have been taking home the Oscar and, though Phoenix actually does run him quite close purely in terms of performance, his unfortunate slagging-off of the Oscars and Day-Lewis’s unstoppable awards run so far mean that the engraver might as well start etching his name onto the statue now.

Should win: Daniel Day-Lewis

Will win: Daniel Day-Lewis

Best Director: Michael Haneke (Amour), Ang Lee (Life of Pi), David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook), Steven Spielberg (Lincoln), Benh Zeitlin (Beasts of the Southern Wild)

The potential shock category. No-one quite knows how comeback king Ben Affleck wasn’t nominated for his stellar work on Argo, making what was actually a fairly routine film unbearably tense, but he wasn’t (despite picking up the Golden Globe and the Directors’ Guild award), so that’s that. You’d probably bet on Spielberg or Lee winning on the night, but no-one’s made a significant charge for glory, so it’s really impossible to tell. Given the choice, it’d be nice to see the Academy shake things up and give Haneke some mainstream recognition (though he’d probably say that he doesn’t need or want it) for Amour, which was probably the best film of the year. You get the feeling that deep-rooted patriotism will get the better of Academy members and subsequently Lincoln will start to clean up in the big categories, though, and that makes Spielberg likely to win his third Academy Award.

Should win: Michael Haneke

Will win: Steven Spielberg

Best Picture: Amour, Argo, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Django Unchained, Les Miserables, Life of Pi, Lincoln, Silver Linings Playbook, Zero Dark Thirty

The trick with trying to predict a Best Picture winner, especially with nine nominees, is to rule out the ones that definitely won’t win and narrow the field. Let’s begin. Amour won’t win – the Academy only included it to show that it’s down with what’s happening in European cinema, and the fact that Amour is also up for Best Foreign Language Film, which it’ll definitely win, sounds the death knell for its Best Picture chances. Beasts of the Southern Wild was nominated for much the same reason – an indie hit by first-time feature-makers, it’ll prove to be a bit too left-field for many voters. Zero Dark Thirty has garnered a bit too much controversy over its depiction of torture, and the directorial and screenwriting team of Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal were only recently honoured for The Hurt Locker. Three out, six still in the mix. Life of Pi could be seen as a bit too spiritual and wishy-washy for current tastes and relies largely on CGI, which it’ll probably clean up on in minor categories. Django Unchained, despite being the most purely entertaining film all year, is far too controversial in terms of how it portrays slavery, and the Academy has always had a bit of an uneasy relationship with Tarantino. Four still in. Les Miserables went down a storm in the US and, though Tom Hooper wasn’t nominated as Best Director, it should feel it has a decent chance on the night. Likewise, as previously mentioned, the Academy really took a shine to Silver Linings Playbook. However, the fight’s probably between Argo and Lincoln. The former sees Hollywood (the Academy’s favourite films are always about itself) assisting in the rescue of Americans trapped in a country populated by armed, rebellious brown people (Iran), while the latter is directed by one of cinema’s greatest directors and is about possibly the greatest political Amendment being pushed through by the country’s greatest president. It’ll be a tough choice but you’ve got to think that Lincoln’s greater amount of nominations overall says something about the preferences of the people who’ll be voting on the night.

Should win: Django Unchained

Will win: Lincoln

Top Ten of 2012

It’s always interesting when doing a top ten list to look back over the year and revisit films from the very start that might have been forgotten as the months passed. Although I’ve only got three from the pre-blockbuster season, they’ve pushed out films including The Avengers Assemble, Skyfall, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, Skyfall, Silver Linings Playbook, Ted, Prometheus (the year’s number-one disappointment), Chronicle, 21 Jump Street, The Descendants, Looper and the hugely overrated Life of Pi when it came to comprising 2012’s Top 10. Notably, Moonrise Kingdom is worth mentioning for being the first Wes Anderson effort I’ve actually enjoyed rather than endured (The Royal Tenenbaums, I’m looking at you), but it still didn’t get into the list

10. Killer Joe. William Friedkin, the director of 1970s classics The Exorcist and The French Connection, has been given something of a new lease of life in recent years thanks to his collaborations with playwright Tracey Letts, two of whose plays he has adapted for the screen in recent years. This adaptation stars Matthew McConaughey (also undergoing a resurgence in fortunes) as a contract killer employed by Emile Hirsch to kill his mother so he can collect her life insurance. Although Hirsch can’t afford his services, McConaughey agrees to accept Hirsch’s fifteen-year-old sister, Dottie, as payment. A violent black comedy, this will be hard going for some, who may not be able to sit through it, but rewarding for those who do.

9. The Perks of Being a Wallflower. Emma Watson and Ezra Miller play school-age characters again, but very different ones than those who made them famous, Hermione and Kevin. In Stephen Chbosky’s adaptation of his own novel (which, unsurprisingly, more than does justice to it), they populate an alternative crowd which invites the wallflower Charlie into its group and sets him off on a journey of self-development punctuated by the usual coming-of-age film moments. A brilliant soundtrack as well as humour, pathos and a swift turn into darkness elevate this story above the usual teen-aimed fare.

8. Argo. The fact that this film is massive Oscar bait in terms of cast and subject matter (CIA rescues Americans from anti-American Middle Eastern country by employing the help of – who else? – Hollywood) shouldn’t detract from the skill with which director and star Ben Affleck builds and releases tension and suspense in a film in which there is no violence or even a chase scene. He nails this film in every way, punctuating it with humour but never letting us relax or feel like everything will turn out fine, even though we assume it must do. Sometimes patchy in front of the camera throughout his career, a long and glittering one surely awaits Affleck behind it.

7. Young Adult. Jason Reitman continued his impressive run of cinematic successes by reteaming with Juno screenwriter Diablo Cody and directing Charlize Theron in arguably her best screen performance to date as former high school queen bitch Mavis Gary, who returns to her hometown with the intention of getting her claws into her old boyfriend, now happily married and a new father to boot. Sour and cynical but still recognisably human, Theron has the perfect foil in Patton Oswalt as the stereotyped high school loser who now becomes a drinking partner and confidante.

6. Rust and Bone. It’s difficult to say exactly why Jacques Audiard’s forceful, almost melodramatic French romance works so well, especially with a plot catalyst that seems as contrived as Marion Cotillard having both her legs amputated after an accident involving a killer whale. Her relationship with feckless, irresponsible kickboxer Matthias Schoenaerts (channelling Marlon Brando), which begins after her accident, comprises the film’s second and third acts, and shouldn’t work – he’s too matter-of-fact, she’s overly proud – but they seem to fit together, and the evolution of his relationship with his young son serves as a counterpoint to his burgeoning relationship with her.

5. Martha Marcy May Marlene. Although Jennifer Lawrence has been taking (admittedly deserved) plaudits for her performances in two of the year’s biggest films, Silver Linings Playbook and The Hunger Games, another actress who has made an equally impressive breakout, albeit taking a more indie route, is Elizabeth Olsen, who gives a phenomenal performance as damaged cult escapee Martha in this unsettling psychological drama which does an impressive job of crawling under your skin without you ever realising it. With his debut feature, writer/director Sean Durkin has established himself as one to watch.

4. Seven Psychopaths. Writer and director Martin McDonagh’s follow-up to In Bruges sees Colin Farrell lumped in with his slightly unhinged friend Sam Rockwell and his business partner Christopher Walken when they accidentally-on-purpose steal psychotic gangster boss Woody Harrelson’s dog. That’s the one sentence description of this film, but it packs so much more into the narrative in every sense that it doesn’t do it justice. Matching In Bruges for violence, entertainment and quotability while simultaneously deconstructing the conventions of the films it was clearly based on, this was another undeniable McDonagh triumph.

3. Amour. Cannes 2012 saw the return of one of the masters of European cinema, Michael Haneke, with the Palme D’Or-winning Amour, his examination of love, death and the inevitable onset of aging. Emmanuelle Riva and Jean-Louis Trintignant play Anne and Georges, a couple in their eighties whose lives are torn apart when Anne suffers a stroke, losing her independence and forcing Georges into the role of nurse. Had this been a Hollywood film, the most emotional parts would have been saturated by a sweeping soundtrack, but here it is resisted and Haneke films mostly in long takes, savouring the intimacy and emotion prevalent throughout the film.

2. Shame. The second collaboration between Michael Fassbender and Steve McQueen produced a riveting, intense examination of sexual addiction and put paid once and for all to the idea that it’s the best kind of addiction to have. As Brandon, Fassbender is a timebomb desperate for sexual release so that he can get on with his life, and incapable of relating to women (apart from sister Carey Mulligan) in anything other than a sexual sense. An uncompromising film in every way, and a major reason why Fassbender and McQueen’s third film, 2013’s Twelve Years a Slave, is so hotly anticipated.

1. The Dark Knight Rises. Some of the lauding of Christopher Nolan’s final part of his Batman trilogy must have come from the relief that it wasn’t a complete stinker, but we can go further and say that it’s a terrific film in its own right, more than capable of standing tall alongside Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Spectacular, complex and demanding of audience’s attentions in the way that Nolan has always demanded it, TDKR boasts strong performances from Christian Bale and Michael Caine, with fresh energy introduced in the forms of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Anne Hathaway’s revelatory Catwoman. Given what it had to live up to and the success in which it did so, taking in spectacle, acting, visuals, scripting and direction, it’s my film of the year

Life of Pi Review

Novels are often said to be unfilmable – Wuthering Heights, for example, constantly falls at the cinematic hurdle – and Life of Pi, the 2002 Man Booker Prize winner by Yann Martel, was also said to be one of those books. It has now been brought to the screen by Academy Award-winner Ang Lee, who has proven that, although the novel was very much a filmable one, perhaps he shouldn’t have wasted his time.

The film concerns the coming-of-age of Pi (Suraj Sharma), an Indian believer in all things religious – simultaneously a Hindu, Christian and Muslim, he is derided by his zoo-owner father and encouraged by his mother – who, following a shipwreck on his way from India to Canada, finds himself stranded on a lifeboat with only the tiger from his father’s zoo, Richard Parker, for company.

The film's faults are many and far outweigh its virtues - most obviously, when two thirds of a film involve only one actor and a CGI tiger interacting with each other, and when most of the dialogue in that section comes by way of voiceover narration, you need to have employed an exceptional actor and, although Sharma aesthetically fits the role of Pi, this is far too demanding a role for him in his first film, and he is consistently guilty of misjudging the tone of scenes, lurching from soap-opera melodrama to deer-caught-in-the-headlights woodenness and back again throughout. When you’re being out-acted by the tiger, you’re in the wrong business.

Looking at the film from a purely narrative-driven point-of-view, the film is utterly devoid of any sense of tension because of the framing device Lee employs showing a grown-up Pi telling his fantastical story to a writer (Rafe Spall) who is completely taken in and more than happy to bring the tale to a mass-market audience – if we know that Pi survives, what’s the point in the story? The only purpose it can have, in that case, is to make us ask serious questions about our own beliefs and the role of religion in general, but unfortunately the film isn’t nearly as spiritually inspiring and insightful as it thinks it is – an exchange between Pi and the writer towards the end acts as a ham-fisted attempt to justify what we’ve just seen and make it seem as though it all had a point, and then casts doubt on the authenticity of the entire film as it’s just been presented to us. How can we be “convinced of the existence of God”, as Pi claims the writer will be upon hearing his story, when the ideas coming out of Life of Pi are so muddled? Terrence Malick’s The Tree of Life was far more convincing in this respect, though that was an original screenplay, and it’s possible that Lee and screenwriter David Magee were hampered by the source material.

What cannot be faulted, however, are the visual effects employed throughout the film, which wonderfully complement the cinematography of Claudio Miranda. The tiger is predominantly computer-generated and for the vast majority of the lifeboat sequence it’s utterly convincing, as are the ways in which other oceanic animals are brought to life in dazzling colour, and Rhythm & Hues Studios, which has already won two Academy Awards for its previous work, must surely be on for another come the Oscars in February. From start to finish, it’s a beautiful, dazzling film, and that’s the best thing that can be said about it.

Life of Pi is a film that you’ll discuss after seeing it, but only to try and work out what the hell its point was, wonder why so much time and effort was put into adapting it and question why you spent more than necessary to see it in 3D when that seemingly-indestructible cinematic fad managed to render the stunning shipwreck sequence (undoubtedly the film’s highlight) as dark as the inside of Richard Parker’s stomach.

2/5