Best Animated Feature:
- A Cat in Paris
- Chico & Rita
- Kung Fu Panda 2
- Puss in Boots
- Rango
Of these 5 nominees, I've seen a total of 1.5. I've seen Kung-Fu Panda 2 twice (which I loved, though I couldn't remember anything about the original). And I've watched half of Rango. Why half? I was with friends, we were in a funny mood, and couldn't get over the fact of how ugly the creatures were and wondering why the proportions were so off (some of those animals should've been way bigger than they were). These nominees were funny this year. I was surprised at the lack of Tin-Tin, Winnie The Pooh and Rio. However, I think Rango is the front-runner here. It's an animated movie with Johnny Depp, and it's a wonky western. Different from everything else. And it's been picking up all the awards (or the ones Tin-Tin hasn't won). However, I'm in Camp Kung-Fu Panda. I thought it was incredibly hilarious, and you didn't really need to know the story of the 1st film to enjoy it. But expect Rango to pick up this award.
Will Win: Rango
Could Win: Puss in Boots
Dark Horse: Kung-Fu Panda 2
What I Want to Win: Kung-Fu Panda 2
Friday, 17 February 2012
Thursday, 16 February 2012
Annie Hall
Directed by Woody Allen
Up Against: The Goodbye Girl, Julia, The Turning Point, Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope
Woody Allen directs and stars in this film. While it's only the second Woody Allen film I've seen (the first being Midnight in Paris- yes I'm behind on things), it's the first film I've seen him act in.
Allen plays a wonderfully dorky, intelluctual, neurotic comedian, living in New York City. He's been married twice already, and opens up the film telling us that life is full of loneliness and it's over too quickly, and that he'd never be a part of a club that has a member like himself. Right off the bat we get an idea about who Alvy Singer is and what he's about. He's not like most guys.
Alvy is in love with a woman named Annie Hall. She's slightly ditsy, and a different kind of neurotic. She's flighty and simple-minded, while Alvy is a deep-thinker who's always pinned as being slightly hostile, obsessed with death and paranoid. The story of their love is told in a narrative that jumps back and forth between present and past, and is riddled with captions stating what they're thinking, their present selves visiting their past selves, and frequently addressing the audience with their thoughts. It's a quirky love story, but it's utterly charming.
The film tells us about how Alvy and Annie were introduced (playing tennis), how they got together, the good times, the bad times, the break-ups, the other one-night stands and the getting back together. And the circle continues. While the story doesn't have too much of a plot, it's interesting. It's more of a documentary of 2 lovers in New York, living life.
I loved Woody Allen playing Alvy. Yes I know he wrote the screenplay, but I thought he was perfectly dorky, and carried the part so well. He really understand Alvy (duh), but really portrayed him well too, with great timing and perfect awkwardness. Diane Keaton was also great as Annie. She was the perfect balance between being erratic and simple-minded. She brought passion into the part, and played Annie well. Hence her winning the Oscar for the role.
Of course, the screenplay was great. Woody Allen seems strongest suit really seems to be writing. Many times I wished he'd write novels, while watching this movie. They would be incredibly interesting.
The only few flaws of the film was many-a-times, a flashback scene would be shown, and I'm never really sure if it's ended, or if we're back in the present. It's easy when we're seeing flashbacks of Alvy and his ex-wives, but his flashbacks with Annie are less defined, and the scene at the beginning of the movie, I'm never sure if after that we went completely to the beginning and went chronologically, or if we came back to that point and did present time then flashbacks, alternating.
But overall, I really enjoyed the film. It's so different from other Best Picture's I've watched so far. It was a cute movie, it was funny and sarcastic, and it was enjoyable to watch!
Acting- 9/10
Directing- 8/10
Screenplay- 9/10
Music – 7.5/10
Visuals- 7.5/10
Entertaining- 9/10
Emotional Connection- 7.5/10
Rewatchability- 8/10
Overall Enjoyment- 9/10
Overall Package- 8.5/10
Total: 83/100
Winner Breakdown: Best Visual Effects
Best Visual Effects:
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2
- Hugo
- Real Steel
- Rise of the Planet of the Apes
- Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Here comes a really unpopular opinion. The apes in Rise of the Planet of the Apes didn't like as good as everyone said. Sure, when you looked at them by themselves, or when they interact with each other, the look good. But they look so blatantly fake when they're next to humans that it was kind of silly. I had thought maybe I was the only one who thought this, but my dad sat down and watched the movie with me last week, and said the same thing. Anyone else? Sure, they looked amazing when you saw this: http://www.themagazine.ca/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/RISE-OF-THE-PLANET-OF-THE-APES-.jpg , but looked silly here: http://bluraymedia.ign.com/bluray/image/article/121/1214134/2-1080p_1323219298_640w.jpg
However, I don't think my opinion will chance the outcome of the winners. Rise of the Planet of the Apes will likely win, since it did do a good job, and it's from the same people who did Avatar. But I'd really love to see Harry Potter win here. It had some fantastic Visual Effects (as always), this film being the big showcase for that. If anyone upsets Apes win, it'll be Potter. However, don't count out Scorsese favourite Hugo, though I feel it very less likely to win in this category.
Will Win: Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Could Win: Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows Part II
Dark Horse: Hugo
Who I Want to Win: Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows Part II
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2
- Hugo
- Real Steel
- Rise of the Planet of the Apes
- Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Here comes a really unpopular opinion. The apes in Rise of the Planet of the Apes didn't like as good as everyone said. Sure, when you looked at them by themselves, or when they interact with each other, the look good. But they look so blatantly fake when they're next to humans that it was kind of silly. I had thought maybe I was the only one who thought this, but my dad sat down and watched the movie with me last week, and said the same thing. Anyone else? Sure, they looked amazing when you saw this: http://www.themagazine.ca/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/RISE-OF-THE-PLANET-OF-THE-APES-.jpg , but looked silly here: http://bluraymedia.ign.com/bluray/image/article/121/1214134/2-1080p_1323219298_640w.jpg
However, I don't think my opinion will chance the outcome of the winners. Rise of the Planet of the Apes will likely win, since it did do a good job, and it's from the same people who did Avatar. But I'd really love to see Harry Potter win here. It had some fantastic Visual Effects (as always), this film being the big showcase for that. If anyone upsets Apes win, it'll be Potter. However, don't count out Scorsese favourite Hugo, though I feel it very less likely to win in this category.
Will Win: Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Could Win: Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows Part II
Dark Horse: Hugo
Who I Want to Win: Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows Part II
Tuesday, 14 February 2012
2012 Anticipated Films
Here are some trailers from upcoming movies I'm looking forward to. Taking a break from the Awardsy movies, and sharing some films I'm looking forward to this year!
The Hunger Games- March 23rd 2012
The Amazing Spiderman- July 3rd 2012
The Dark Knight Rises- July 20th 2012
Brave- June 22nd 2012
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
December 14th 2012
Special mentions: Les Miserables, Salmon Fishing in the Yemen, The 5 Year Engagement, Seeking a Friend for the End of the World, The Great Gatsby, Gangster Squad, Gravity
Winner Breakdown: Best Cinematography
Cinematography:- The Artist
- The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
- Hugo
- The Tree of Life
- War Horse
Once again, another solid category. While this may have been a weak year for really good films (is that just me?), but it's a strong year for the arts in movies, between Makeup, costumes, art direction, cinematography, etc. All 5 nominees here have great cinematography (while I haven't seen TGWTDT, the trailer alone showcases the bleak, Swedish landscapes, and I already knew it would likely be nominated). Hugo, which people are saying has been revolutionizing 3D, the sweeping shots of the train station, and of Paris, included. The Artist perfectly captured the time period of the film, and also filmed it in such a way that many films used to be shot, including aspect ratio, and capturing the light perfectly (light/shadows being a large focus in the film). War Horse has sweeping shots of the beautiful British landscapes, gorgeous shots that completely swallow Albert and Joey, and the scenes of war. All were so effective. And then there's the Tree of Life, the film that many people argue is the obvious winner. And I'd have to agree. While I was firmly on War Horse's side prior to watching ToL, I am now a convert. The Tree of Life perfectly captured so many things. The sun shining through the trees, Jessica Chastain walking (whether on the street, or through the woods, or on a beach), and following the character through the film, rather than having the characters follow the cinematographer. While I still would love War Horse to win, simply because the cinematography was beautifully overwhelming, The Tree of Life was both subtle at times, and so obvious at others that it's the clear winner. And yes, it won the top prize at the American Society of Cinematographers Awards.
Will Win: The Tree of Life
Could Win: War Horse
Dark Horse: Hugo
Who I Want to Win: War Horse
- The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
- Hugo
- The Tree of Life
- War Horse
Once again, another solid category. While this may have been a weak year for really good films (is that just me?), but it's a strong year for the arts in movies, between Makeup, costumes, art direction, cinematography, etc. All 5 nominees here have great cinematography (while I haven't seen TGWTDT, the trailer alone showcases the bleak, Swedish landscapes, and I already knew it would likely be nominated). Hugo, which people are saying has been revolutionizing 3D, the sweeping shots of the train station, and of Paris, included. The Artist perfectly captured the time period of the film, and also filmed it in such a way that many films used to be shot, including aspect ratio, and capturing the light perfectly (light/shadows being a large focus in the film). War Horse has sweeping shots of the beautiful British landscapes, gorgeous shots that completely swallow Albert and Joey, and the scenes of war. All were so effective. And then there's the Tree of Life, the film that many people argue is the obvious winner. And I'd have to agree. While I was firmly on War Horse's side prior to watching ToL, I am now a convert. The Tree of Life perfectly captured so many things. The sun shining through the trees, Jessica Chastain walking (whether on the street, or through the woods, or on a beach), and following the character through the film, rather than having the characters follow the cinematographer. While I still would love War Horse to win, simply because the cinematography was beautifully overwhelming, The Tree of Life was both subtle at times, and so obvious at others that it's the clear winner. And yes, it won the top prize at the American Society of Cinematographers Awards.
Will Win: The Tree of Life
Could Win: War Horse
Dark Horse: Hugo
Who I Want to Win: War Horse
Monday, 13 February 2012
The Tree of Life
The Tree of Life, 2011
Directed by Terrence Malik
Nominations Inlcude: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Cinematography
Yes, I've finally watched this movie. I find it a little ironic that the very first BP nominee to be released was this film, way back in May. And it was the very last nominee I needed to watch.
I had heard so many different things about this film. Going on the iTunes page for renting it, you either had people saying it was very boring, and wishing they could give it 0 stars, and those who loved it, and gave it 4 or 5 stars. I was under the impression that regular movie-goers didn't like it, and film buffs loved it. Therefore I wasn't too sure what to think. I knew there wasn't a whole lot of "plot" (I got this from the very vague synopsis I read on iTunes and IMDB), and from hearing about the long creation scenes, I figured I was settling in for a movie that was more art than story.
I'm glad I went in with the mindset I did, because had I been expecting plot, and character development, and dialogue, I'd be extremely disappointed. But even from the trailers that came out around this time last year, I didn't really expect an ordinary movie. And that's definitely not what this was.
This movie revolves around a young boy named Jack, and the idea of the way of nature and the way of grace. The way of nature, Mrs. O'Brien explains via voice-over in the beginning, is self-seeking and only willing to please itself, which is what society teaches us. But the way of grace, is the way of God, loving those around us, and looking to please others before pleasing yourself. While Jack starts off as an innocent child, we see him lose his innocence in a number of ways. Through seeing his friend drown at the local swimming pool, to dealing with his father, who reigns their family with an iron fist, and, fro Jack's view, doesn't seem to love his children. Jack is trying to choose between the ways of grace, and the ways of nature, his parents both embodying one (his mother, grace, his father, nature).
What I found interesting was there was very little dialogue in the film. A lot of it was whispered voice-overs, through montage scenes. We get some perspective from each character in the film, and learn what they are really thinking.
The film gets off to a little bit of a bumpy start, jumping back and forth between scenes, time periods, and character views. But the things that gets the ball really moving is the 25-minute creation sequence. We see everything from shots of the universe (dust clouds), to the collision of 2 planets creating Earth, molten Earth, cell formation and dinosaurs, all while hearing sparse whispered prayers from Mrs. O'Brien (Chastain). It isn't exactly clear why this is included, but reinforces the fact that we are but a very small speck in the span of space and time. We live a hundred years (if that), while the Universe has existed for thousands (or millions) of years, and will continue to exist long after we are gone. And how small and insignificant our lives are compared to the vastness of the Universe. Very impressionistic.
After this, we focus on the lives of the O'Briens'. We see the parents in love, the birth of their children, playing wit their children, teaching them lessons about their lives, and just their general lives, the insignificant things, like going to bed at night, or eating dinner, or playing ball on the street. Jack, the eldest son, is innocent of the evils of the world.
But as Jack is getting older, he starts realizing more and more things. He see's a friend drown at the local pool, and another friend has their house burn down, his friend suffering burns. He's learning that his parents are 2 very different people, his mother kind and loving, while his father is strong and ruling with an iron fist, and is starting to realize he's more like his father than his mother, which he isn't happy about. And he questions how he can get back what his brother's have. Their innocence.
This film was incredibly well acted, and I'm surprised it didn't get any nominations. Hunter McCracken, who played young Jack, was so magnificient in his debut film. He expressed everything with such ease, I felt like Malik was almost filming him, playing with his brothers and parents, with hidden cameras, it was so natural. He really held the film on his shoulders, and supported it with surprising ease. He conveyed all the emotions so well, and his whispered voice-overs were haunting.
Brad Pitt, also was so good. He was so subtle, but plays his best roles when he plays a parent (Moneyball, and this). He has such good fatherly instincts in his acting, and connects so well with these boys. He is utterly convincing as the rigid father who has a temper.
But Jessica Chastain is the one who truly, truly shines. This is only the second film I've seen her in of the many that were released in 2011. She gave such a beautiful performance, embodying the 'way of grace'. She was graceful and loving always. Just the way she walked, and talked was grace embodied, 100%. She was just so lovely, and so different from her portrayal of Celia Foote in the Help. I felt this performance was far superior to hers in the Help, but love that she is getting recognition, though she won't win. Jessica Chastain has proved how versatile she really is, and this performance was utter perfection.
And I retract my comment that if War Horse doesn't win Best Cinematography I might throw a hissy fit. The Tree of Life completely owned War Horse. It was a subtle cinematography at most times, simply following characters around, not having characters stay within the frames. And then there were the lovely shots of creation (does those count as cinematography, or visual effects?), and the shots of those on that beach in the last scene. And just everytime Jessica Chastain walked, it was beautifully shot. It's definitely a deserving winner, though i still have so much love for War Horse's cinematography.
Overall, I found myself insanely interested, though there wasn't a whole lot of plot or dialogue. I was interested and invested in this family, and I found I cared about all 3 sons, and the parents, and their relationships. I found them interesting, even though they showed me the mudane things about their life. While I felt it went on a little too long (my interest starting slowing around an hour and 45 minutes), it was an interesting film. It wasn't my favourite film of their year, but it was certainly an impressive film, that gives us things to think about. I can understand why a lot of people didn't like it, however. It's not a movie that's everyone's taste, and I understand that. With films like Transformers, which is all action and 'plot' and dialogue, I can see why this film would get pushed to the wayside, though it is an incredibly impressive film, should you choose to be patient, and understand it's different from regular films. Will it win Best Picture? No, it will not, but I still thought it was a mighty interesting film.
7.5/10
Directed by Terrence Malik
Nominations Inlcude: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Cinematography
Yes, I've finally watched this movie. I find it a little ironic that the very first BP nominee to be released was this film, way back in May. And it was the very last nominee I needed to watch.
I had heard so many different things about this film. Going on the iTunes page for renting it, you either had people saying it was very boring, and wishing they could give it 0 stars, and those who loved it, and gave it 4 or 5 stars. I was under the impression that regular movie-goers didn't like it, and film buffs loved it. Therefore I wasn't too sure what to think. I knew there wasn't a whole lot of "plot" (I got this from the very vague synopsis I read on iTunes and IMDB), and from hearing about the long creation scenes, I figured I was settling in for a movie that was more art than story.
I'm glad I went in with the mindset I did, because had I been expecting plot, and character development, and dialogue, I'd be extremely disappointed. But even from the trailers that came out around this time last year, I didn't really expect an ordinary movie. And that's definitely not what this was.
This movie revolves around a young boy named Jack, and the idea of the way of nature and the way of grace. The way of nature, Mrs. O'Brien explains via voice-over in the beginning, is self-seeking and only willing to please itself, which is what society teaches us. But the way of grace, is the way of God, loving those around us, and looking to please others before pleasing yourself. While Jack starts off as an innocent child, we see him lose his innocence in a number of ways. Through seeing his friend drown at the local swimming pool, to dealing with his father, who reigns their family with an iron fist, and, fro Jack's view, doesn't seem to love his children. Jack is trying to choose between the ways of grace, and the ways of nature, his parents both embodying one (his mother, grace, his father, nature).
What I found interesting was there was very little dialogue in the film. A lot of it was whispered voice-overs, through montage scenes. We get some perspective from each character in the film, and learn what they are really thinking.
The film gets off to a little bit of a bumpy start, jumping back and forth between scenes, time periods, and character views. But the things that gets the ball really moving is the 25-minute creation sequence. We see everything from shots of the universe (dust clouds), to the collision of 2 planets creating Earth, molten Earth, cell formation and dinosaurs, all while hearing sparse whispered prayers from Mrs. O'Brien (Chastain). It isn't exactly clear why this is included, but reinforces the fact that we are but a very small speck in the span of space and time. We live a hundred years (if that), while the Universe has existed for thousands (or millions) of years, and will continue to exist long after we are gone. And how small and insignificant our lives are compared to the vastness of the Universe. Very impressionistic.
After this, we focus on the lives of the O'Briens'. We see the parents in love, the birth of their children, playing wit their children, teaching them lessons about their lives, and just their general lives, the insignificant things, like going to bed at night, or eating dinner, or playing ball on the street. Jack, the eldest son, is innocent of the evils of the world.
But as Jack is getting older, he starts realizing more and more things. He see's a friend drown at the local pool, and another friend has their house burn down, his friend suffering burns. He's learning that his parents are 2 very different people, his mother kind and loving, while his father is strong and ruling with an iron fist, and is starting to realize he's more like his father than his mother, which he isn't happy about. And he questions how he can get back what his brother's have. Their innocence.
This film was incredibly well acted, and I'm surprised it didn't get any nominations. Hunter McCracken, who played young Jack, was so magnificient in his debut film. He expressed everything with such ease, I felt like Malik was almost filming him, playing with his brothers and parents, with hidden cameras, it was so natural. He really held the film on his shoulders, and supported it with surprising ease. He conveyed all the emotions so well, and his whispered voice-overs were haunting.
Brad Pitt, also was so good. He was so subtle, but plays his best roles when he plays a parent (Moneyball, and this). He has such good fatherly instincts in his acting, and connects so well with these boys. He is utterly convincing as the rigid father who has a temper.
But Jessica Chastain is the one who truly, truly shines. This is only the second film I've seen her in of the many that were released in 2011. She gave such a beautiful performance, embodying the 'way of grace'. She was graceful and loving always. Just the way she walked, and talked was grace embodied, 100%. She was just so lovely, and so different from her portrayal of Celia Foote in the Help. I felt this performance was far superior to hers in the Help, but love that she is getting recognition, though she won't win. Jessica Chastain has proved how versatile she really is, and this performance was utter perfection.
And I retract my comment that if War Horse doesn't win Best Cinematography I might throw a hissy fit. The Tree of Life completely owned War Horse. It was a subtle cinematography at most times, simply following characters around, not having characters stay within the frames. And then there were the lovely shots of creation (does those count as cinematography, or visual effects?), and the shots of those on that beach in the last scene. And just everytime Jessica Chastain walked, it was beautifully shot. It's definitely a deserving winner, though i still have so much love for War Horse's cinematography.
Overall, I found myself insanely interested, though there wasn't a whole lot of plot or dialogue. I was interested and invested in this family, and I found I cared about all 3 sons, and the parents, and their relationships. I found them interesting, even though they showed me the mudane things about their life. While I felt it went on a little too long (my interest starting slowing around an hour and 45 minutes), it was an interesting film. It wasn't my favourite film of their year, but it was certainly an impressive film, that gives us things to think about. I can understand why a lot of people didn't like it, however. It's not a movie that's everyone's taste, and I understand that. With films like Transformers, which is all action and 'plot' and dialogue, I can see why this film would get pushed to the wayside, though it is an incredibly impressive film, should you choose to be patient, and understand it's different from regular films. Will it win Best Picture? No, it will not, but I still thought it was a mighty interesting film.
7.5/10
Winner Breakdown: Art Direction
Art Direction:
- The Artist
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2
- Hugo
- Midnight in Paris
- War Horse
This is another category that I feel is super strong. There were again, so many other films that could've been nominated here too. It was definitely a good year for the Arts categories! But the 3 big contenders in this arena are Hugo, The Artist, and Harry Potter. Hugo was fantasic looking, with it's 1930's Gard du Nord train station setting, the silent films settings, and the automaton. The Artist had the glitzy 1920/30's Hollywood look, with snazzy set designs, and just making everything look genuinely old. And then Harry Potter. Harry Potter has been nominated for Art Direction, 3 times before, making this its 4th time. And it's been deserving every single year. We had the destroyed Hogwarts, the glass boat house, the flashback scenes, etc. The 3 big winners at the Art Directors Guild awards was The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, Hugo, and Harry Potter. While that doesn't exactly rule who wins, it gives Harry Potter a step up, and the Artist a step down, though only slightly. Again, Hugo has tons of nominations, and I expect it'll win a lot of them. Hugo probably has the best chance of winning it here. However, the Academy could decide to give it to Potter, after all the times it's been nominated, and not excluding the great Direction it had again for this film. If anyone will upset Hugo, it'll be Harry Potter, though don't count the Artist out. It may sweep because of it's front-runner status.
Will Win: Hugo
Could Win: Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows Part II
Dark Horse: Midnight in Paris
Who I Want to Win: Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows Part II
- The Artist
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2
- Hugo
- Midnight in Paris
- War Horse
This is another category that I feel is super strong. There were again, so many other films that could've been nominated here too. It was definitely a good year for the Arts categories! But the 3 big contenders in this arena are Hugo, The Artist, and Harry Potter. Hugo was fantasic looking, with it's 1930's Gard du Nord train station setting, the silent films settings, and the automaton. The Artist had the glitzy 1920/30's Hollywood look, with snazzy set designs, and just making everything look genuinely old. And then Harry Potter. Harry Potter has been nominated for Art Direction, 3 times before, making this its 4th time. And it's been deserving every single year. We had the destroyed Hogwarts, the glass boat house, the flashback scenes, etc. The 3 big winners at the Art Directors Guild awards was The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, Hugo, and Harry Potter. While that doesn't exactly rule who wins, it gives Harry Potter a step up, and the Artist a step down, though only slightly. Again, Hugo has tons of nominations, and I expect it'll win a lot of them. Hugo probably has the best chance of winning it here. However, the Academy could decide to give it to Potter, after all the times it's been nominated, and not excluding the great Direction it had again for this film. If anyone will upset Hugo, it'll be Harry Potter, though don't count the Artist out. It may sweep because of it's front-runner status.
Will Win: Hugo
Could Win: Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows Part II
Dark Horse: Midnight in Paris
Who I Want to Win: Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows Part II
Sunday, 12 February 2012
Winner Breakdown: Costume Design
Costume Design:- Anonymous
- The Artist
- Hugo
- Jane Eyre
- W.E.
To be honest, I'd say there's a pretty solid year for costume design, and there were many other's that could've made the list (My Week With Marilyn, Midnight in Paris, War Horse, etc). So, this is really anyone's game in this category, though I'd say most likely to win is Hugo. Hugo's been nominated in all technical/art categories except Makeup, and I expect, for the most part, it'll sweep, here in included. Hugo had a great array of costumes, from the Paris 1930's, to the Silent Film era, and all those film costumes. However, hot on it's heels is The Artist, which was 1930's Hollywood, filled with Tuxedos, flapper dresses, and an array of costumes used in- lookie here- Silent films! However, I'd say it'll most likely go to Hugo, though I'd love to see something like Jane Eyre win, simply because it did have great costumes and it's not up for anything else. But I'd say count on Hugo, but I'm not ruling anything out to steal it. Anyone could easily take it.
Will Win: Hugo
Could Win: The Artist
Dark Horse:W.E.
Who I Want to Win: Hugo
- The Artist
- Hugo
- Jane Eyre
- W.E.
To be honest, I'd say there's a pretty solid year for costume design, and there were many other's that could've made the list (My Week With Marilyn, Midnight in Paris, War Horse, etc). So, this is really anyone's game in this category, though I'd say most likely to win is Hugo. Hugo's been nominated in all technical/art categories except Makeup, and I expect, for the most part, it'll sweep, here in included. Hugo had a great array of costumes, from the Paris 1930's, to the Silent Film era, and all those film costumes. However, hot on it's heels is The Artist, which was 1930's Hollywood, filled with Tuxedos, flapper dresses, and an array of costumes used in- lookie here- Silent films! However, I'd say it'll most likely go to Hugo, though I'd love to see something like Jane Eyre win, simply because it did have great costumes and it's not up for anything else. But I'd say count on Hugo, but I'm not ruling anything out to steal it. Anyone could easily take it.
Will Win: Hugo
Could Win: The Artist
Dark Horse:W.E.
Who I Want to Win: Hugo
Thursday, 9 February 2012
Winner Breakdown: Film Editing
Film Editing:
- The Artist
- The Descendants
- The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
- Hugo
- Moneyball
This is another one of those categories where I understand it, but have a hard time noticing it when I watch the actual films. But what I do know about this category is has correlations with Best Picture. 5 our of the last 10 awards has the Best Picture winner also won editing. And those within the editing nominees are usually also Best Picture nominees. While TGWTDT was not a Best Picture nominee, I don't think you should count it out just yet. However, Hugo, having nabbed tons of nominations in the technical fields, and The Artist being the frontrunner, I'd say the race is between these two. But I wouldn't count any of these films out of the race. Yes, The Descendants and Moneyball are less likely, but I'd say they still have a shot. I'd even like to see Moneyball win, since I thought it was extremely well put together, and isn't likely to win much (or anything) this year. However, I'm officially predicting Hugo to win, but if anyone will steal it, it'll be The Artist, and equally challenging opponent.
Will Win: Hugo
Could Win: The Artist
Dark Horse: The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
Who I Want to Win: Moneyball
- The Artist
- The Descendants
- The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
- Hugo
- Moneyball
This is another one of those categories where I understand it, but have a hard time noticing it when I watch the actual films. But what I do know about this category is has correlations with Best Picture. 5 our of the last 10 awards has the Best Picture winner also won editing. And those within the editing nominees are usually also Best Picture nominees. While TGWTDT was not a Best Picture nominee, I don't think you should count it out just yet. However, Hugo, having nabbed tons of nominations in the technical fields, and The Artist being the frontrunner, I'd say the race is between these two. But I wouldn't count any of these films out of the race. Yes, The Descendants and Moneyball are less likely, but I'd say they still have a shot. I'd even like to see Moneyball win, since I thought it was extremely well put together, and isn't likely to win much (or anything) this year. However, I'm officially predicting Hugo to win, but if anyone will steal it, it'll be The Artist, and equally challenging opponent.
Will Win: Hugo
Could Win: The Artist
Dark Horse: The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
Who I Want to Win: Moneyball
Wednesday, 8 February 2012
Winner Breakdown: Original Song and Score
Music (Original Score):- The Adventures of Tintin (John Williams)
- The Artist (Ludovic Bource)
- Hugo (Howard Shore)
- Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Albert Iglesias)
- War Horse (John Williams)
This was a really good year for music, with Alexandre Desplat scoring six different films, Thomas Newman doing one or two, Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross also in there. I was slightly disappointed to see that none of these people made it in, and we got 2 John Williams nominations instead. I have no qualms against Williams, but would've loved to see Desplat in there again, or even the others I named. But this year's nominees are all really good. By far, my favourite is John William's War Horse. I'm not even a very big Williams fan, but I adored his work. However, Ludovic Bource's music carried The Artist. While I thought it was a charming score, I thought it was a little wrong in some places, or cut off mid scenes, but I suppose that's not Bource's fault. However, the score that could pose the upset, I think, would be Howard Shore's work for Hugo. It is so unlike Howard Shore's other music, and is so typically French, and is quite charming. However, I don't see Shore winning this year, nor do I see Iglesias or Williams winning either. Undoubtedly it'll go to Bource... and who can blame him?
Will Win: The Artist
Could Win: Hugo
Dark Horse: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy
Who I Want to Win: War Horse
Music (Original Song):- Man or Muppet (The Muppets)
- Real in Rio (Rio)
The big news is that there will not be live performances of the Original Songs this year at the Oscars. Personally, I don't mind, because I never really knew any of the songs anyways, and always changed the channel, or went for popcorn during this time. But it's interesting, having only 2 nominees. Many were predicting Mary J. Blidge's "The Living Proof" from The Help to win, however she wasn't nominated. But I think it's fairly obvious that "Man or Muppet" from the Muppets. While I love Rio, and the music from it, it really don't stand a chance against the Muppets.
Will Win: Man or Muppet
Could Win: -
Dark Horse: Real in Rio
Who I Want to Win: Man or Muppet
- The Artist (Ludovic Bource)
- Hugo (Howard Shore)
- Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Albert Iglesias)
- War Horse (John Williams)
This was a really good year for music, with Alexandre Desplat scoring six different films, Thomas Newman doing one or two, Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross also in there. I was slightly disappointed to see that none of these people made it in, and we got 2 John Williams nominations instead. I have no qualms against Williams, but would've loved to see Desplat in there again, or even the others I named. But this year's nominees are all really good. By far, my favourite is John William's War Horse. I'm not even a very big Williams fan, but I adored his work. However, Ludovic Bource's music carried The Artist. While I thought it was a charming score, I thought it was a little wrong in some places, or cut off mid scenes, but I suppose that's not Bource's fault. However, the score that could pose the upset, I think, would be Howard Shore's work for Hugo. It is so unlike Howard Shore's other music, and is so typically French, and is quite charming. However, I don't see Shore winning this year, nor do I see Iglesias or Williams winning either. Undoubtedly it'll go to Bource... and who can blame him?
Will Win: The Artist
Could Win: Hugo
Dark Horse: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy
Who I Want to Win: War Horse
Music (Original Song):- Man or Muppet (The Muppets)
- Real in Rio (Rio)
The big news is that there will not be live performances of the Original Songs this year at the Oscars. Personally, I don't mind, because I never really knew any of the songs anyways, and always changed the channel, or went for popcorn during this time. But it's interesting, having only 2 nominees. Many were predicting Mary J. Blidge's "The Living Proof" from The Help to win, however she wasn't nominated. But I think it's fairly obvious that "Man or Muppet" from the Muppets. While I love Rio, and the music from it, it really don't stand a chance against the Muppets.
Will Win: Man or Muppet
Could Win: -
Dark Horse: Real in Rio
Who I Want to Win: Man or Muppet
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)