Winner Breakdown: Best Supporting Actress

Best Supporting Actress:
- Berenice Bejo (The Artist)
- Jessica Chastain (The Help)
- Melissa McCarthy (Bridesmaids)
- Janet McTeer (Albert Nobbs)
- Octavia Spencer (The Help)

I'd say this is another category with a very obvious winner. Octavia Spencer has won every major award in this category. The BAFTA, the Golden Globe, the SAG, the Critics Choice, etc, etc. And she completely deserves this award, in all honesty. She was hilarious in the Help, and really stole every scene. The only one who would give her a run for her money is Jessica Chastain- also from the Help. She had an amazing breakout year, and while she was much more amazing in The Tree of Life, she could be awarded simply because she was amazing in all the films she did this year (which was roughly 6). Berenice Bejo could also make an upset, being from The Artist, but this seems quite unlikely. Snubs include Shailene Woodley from the Descendants, and Jessica Chastain in a different role.



Will Win: Octavia Spencer
Could Win: Jessica Chastain
Dark Horse: Berenice Bejo
Who I Want to Win: Octavia Spencer

Oliver!

Oliver!, 1968
Directed by Carol Reed
Nominated for 11 Oscars, Won 5
Up Against: Funny Girl, The Lion in Winter, Rachel, Rachel, Romeo and Juliet

This musical was one of my favourite musicals growing up. My grandparents owned it, and whenever we traveled north and stayed at their house for the weekend, we frequently would watch this movie. So naturally, I was excited when I read that it had won Best Picture. It's funny, realizing movies that you liked as a child or even a teen turned out to be Best Picture nominees/winners.

This musical is "freely based" on the classic book, Oliver Twist, by Charles Dickens. It's about a young boy, named Oliver Twist. He's an orphan, and after asking for more gruel (he lost at drawing straw rope), he is sold to an Undertaker. After a short while of being abused and living miserable still, he escapes and heads to London to "seek his fortune" as he so puts it. Upon his arrival, he means Jack Dodger (The Artful Dodger- or just Dodger). Dodger is a young boy also, maybe Oliver's age or a bit older. He tells him he knows where he can get lodgings, and Oliver follows. But Dodger doesn't seem as innocent as he is. He's part of a band of crooks, run by a man named Fagan. Fagan lodges dozens of young boys, who pick-pockets for him. And with this group is a few adults, namely Bill Sykes (the crook everyone aspires to be), and Nancy (Bill's girlfriend, and friend to all the children in the ring).

Like I've stated before, this movie is a personal favourite, as I've grown up with it. So I've got a bit of a bias but I'll try to be good.

I've got to say, this film is pretty underrated in terms of Movie Musicals. Nowhere will you see it on top 10 lists, or hear people covering these songs. Yet this is probably my number 2 favourite musical. This song has some fantastic numbers. The opening, "Food, Glorious Food" is just so fantastic, and really shows the desperation of these orphans. And then Consider Yourself, and Who Will Buy? really show London as it was for Dodger, Oliver, and simply how it was back in the 1800's. It captured the different jobs and lifestyles people had so well, and showed just how different the rich and the poor/middle class were. And anything with Ron Moody (Fagan) was just brilliant. He has such incredible charisma, and just likeability (yet you hate him too), and he just is so crazy. Things like "Be Back Soon", "Pick a Pocket or Two", "Be Back Soon" and "Reviewing the Situation" are all so great too.

The story is really well done, pairing the story about a young, innocent boy escaping his miserable life, alongside the story of Bill Sykes, Nancy and Fagan's ring of young crooks. It is by no means a "children's musical" though it is about children. The story is a bit complex, which is what makes it such a winner. It's not overly complicated and dramatic and serious, but brings a bit of complexity and seriousness without losing the humour and the innocence of Oliver.

There were 2 acting nominations for this film. The first was for Lead Actor, for Ron Moody (Fagan). The second was a supporting actor nomination for Jack Wild (Dodger). Again, having grown up with the movie, it seems so funny to me that these 2 were Oscar nominated. But having watched it again today (after several years) I can completely see why. Ron Moody totally lights up the screen in all of his musical numbers, and is great as the not-so-tough crook. As for Jack Wild, he was also great as Dodger. He carried the air of a young child, though not innocent whatsoever, and a bonified crook. He was demanding, and tried hard to impress. He was the perfect choice for Dodger and he played him so well.

Overall I don't have anything negative to say about this movie. It's always been a favourite, and continues still to be. And currently has the top spot on my favourite Best Picture winner's that I've reviewed so far.

Update (1/17/14)
I recently rewatched the movie, and while I still love it, I would not rate it nearly as high as previously. While it formerly had a 82.5/100, I have now adjusted it to be 79.5/100. While the acting of Jack Wild and Ron Moody were great, that of Mark Lester was very weak.


Acting- 8/10     
Directing- 7.5/10     
Screenplay- 7.5/10     
Music – 10/10    
Visuals- 8.5/10     
Entertaining- 7.5/10    
Emotional Connection- 7/10     
Rewatchability- 7/10     
Overall Enjoyment- 7.75/10     
Overall Package- 7.5/10      

Total: 78.25/100

The Broadway Melody

The Broadway Melody, 1929
Directed by Harry Beaumont
Nominated for 3 Oscars, Won 1

The 2nd annual Academy Awards were interesting. It was the only year that there were no official nominees. Only after research by the AMPAs was there an unofficial nominees list composed (based on seeing what films the Academy had evaluated). The Broadway Melody is the 2nd Best Picture winner (some argue the 1st. The 1st Oscars having honoured Best Picture- Production and Best Picture-Unique and Artistic Production, with Wings winning Best Picture- Production, and is listed on Oscar.org as the first winner).

Anyway, I was interested in what this movie would be like. Knowing virtually nothing about it, I was interested to see what a movie from 1929, one of the first all-talkie musicals.

This film was about 2 sisters who have come to New York to perform their act (singing and dancing). The one sister, Hank, is dating (almost engaged) to a man who's in with some music executives for Broadway shows and is a leading singer and dancer in Mr Zenfield's (music executive) show. But after an audition, the executives are only interested in Hanks beautiful sister, Queenie, but Queenie persuades them to take on Hank too. But Hank's boyfriend, Eddie, is falling in love with Queenie. But after Queenie subs in for a woman in very little clothes in one of Eddie's number, she attracts the attention of an older man, someone who Hank and Eddie don't trust.

This movie wasn't all that great. It was cliche and not terribly original, probably even for that time period of 82 years ago. At the same time, it was not bad for a movie that is, 82 years old. The acting was quite good (Bessie Love, who played Hank, had an unofficial nomination) and was a cute, fun film about sisterly bonds, sacrificing for love, and some good music. Funny enough, I didn't think I'd recognize any of it, but I did. One of which was used in Singin' In The Rain.

Overall, I thought it was an okay movie. It wasn't terribly interesting and found myself frequently checking to see how much time is left. But I was impressed in how good it was for it's time. I was expecting a lot less than what I got.

Acting- 7/10 

Directing- 7/10 
Screenplay- 6.5/10 

Visuals- 7/10 

Music- 8/10 

Emotional Connection- 5/10 

Entertainment- 5/10 

Rewatchability- 5/10 

Overall Enjoyment- 5/10 

Overall Package- 6/10       

Total: 61.5/100

Winner Breakdown: Best Director

Best Director:
- Michel Hazanavicius (The Artist)
- Alexander Payne (The Descendants)
- Martin Scorsese (Hugo)
- Woody Allen (Midnight in Paris)
- Terrence Malick (The Tree of Life)


Honestly, this is a pretty straightforward category when it comes to who'll win. This award usually goes right along with the Best Picture winner, so we're looking at first-time nominee Michel Hazanavicius to take home this prize, as he will with Best Picture. I thought Hazanavicius's film was great, and the direction of it was so magnetic. The focus on lighting/shadows, silence vs sound, and just everything about the film was great. Even if it hadn't have been silent, the film still would've been completely captivating, and that's because of Jean Dujardin and Michel Hazanavicius. Hazanavicius won the DGA Award, the Critics Choice Award and several Film Critics awards. However, Martin Scorsese would be the only competition in this category. He won the Golden Globe and National Board of Review. However, Hugo will likely win several technical awards, and Hugo doesn't stand too much of a chance at Best Picture, taking away from the chances at Director. Hazanavicius seems the clear winner here.  

Will Win: Michel Hazanavicius
Could Win: Martin Scorsese
Dark Horse: Woody Allen
Who I Want to Win: Michel Hazanavicius

Gigi

Gigi, 1958
Directed by Vincente Minnelli
Nominated for 9 Oscars, Won 9
Up Against: Auntie Mame, Cat on A Hot Tin Roof, The Defiant Ones, Separate Tables

Gigi is a young girl living in Paris in the year 1900. She lives with her mother (who is too busy with her singing "career" to look after her), and her grandmother, and takes lessons (manners, posture, eating habits, etc) with her Aunt. They are all trying to mold her into the perfect lady. But Gigi is different. She is wild, and silly, and speaks her mind.

On the other hand, there is Gaston Lachaille, a Parisian socialite who dates many women, is extremely rich, and world famous, but finds everything "a bore". He is tired of all the girls being the same, and the city being the same, and everything being the same. He is looking for something new. Gaston is friends with Gigi and her grandmother, and has been for a long time, and loves to play cards with Gigi, talk, and spoil her. But Gigi is starting to grow up, and become a lady, and Gaston realizes she is not a little girl after all... and he may just be in love with her.

This film won all 9 Oscars it was nominated for, making it the movie with the most wins in Oscar history, at that point. It was a well done film indeed, and was a good light-hearted musical. Leslie Caron, who has previously starred in An American in Paris (another BP, and starring alongside Gene Kelly), was great as Gigi. While I found her to be so-so in American (which was her first film), she was fun and wild in this one. While it wasn't Oscar worthy (she wasn't nominated), she pulled off playing a 16-18 year old with ease and was believable.

While the music was fun, and the story was nice, it wasn't a very compelling film, and was just a 'cute' film. Not that I have anything against that. Singin' In The Rain is one of my very favourite movies, and it isn't deep, and is more cute and fun than anything.

The songs, however, were very good. The movies wasn't overloaded with singing (which I liked) and the song were catchy and appropriate for the story (which I like even more). "Thank heaven, for little girls" is still whirling around my head, French accent included.

Overall, I enjoy musicals. Not so much ones from this day and age, but love those from the 50's and 60's. Things like Sound of Music, Oliver!, Singin' In The Rain, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, etc. So I was hoping for something really good out of this one too, and I really did enjoy (though not as much as any of the above listed). Gigi was a very likable character, which reminded me very much of Anne Shirley (Anne of Green Gables), and the others characters were quite fun. Gaston was funny, yet a playboy. Honore was cute and charming, and even her grandmother and Aunt Alicia were funny. The script was well written, and was funny and witty, which I love in a film.

There's not too much else I can say. I enjoyed it, it was a nice film, though probably not something I would pick for Best Picture. But it was still a fun film. And musicals from the 50's and 60's are the best ones.

Acting- 8/10     
Directing- 7.5/10     
Screenplay- 8/10     
Music – 8/10    
Visuals- 8/10     
Entertaining- 7.5/10    
Emotional Connection- 7/10     
Rewatchability- 7/10     
Overall Enjoyment- 7.5/10     
Overall Package- 7/10      

Total: 75.5/100 

Winner Breakdown: Screenplays

Writing (Adapted Screenplay):
- The Descendants
- Hugo
- The Ides of March
- Moneyball
- Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy


This year was very much composed of book adaptations in the best picture category. Of the 9 nominees, 6 are based upon books, though surprisingly only 3 of those made it in (Moneyball, Descendants and Hugo). So far, it looks like the competition will be between the 3 Best Picture nominees. Behind The Descendants we have Alexander Payne and Nat Faxon. Payne previously won an Oscar (his only) for his writing for Sideways. Behind Hugo is John Logan, who hasn't won an Oscar yet, but was previously nominated for Gladiator and The Aviator. And for Moneyball we have Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin. Zaillian has been nominated 4 times and won for Schindler's List, and Sorkin has been nominated twice, winning for his work on last year's The Social Network. (Ides writers both have been nominated for 1 other film, and TTSS are first time nominees). So we're really looking at the BP nominees. But personally, I feel the award will go to Moneyball. Zaillian and Sorkin made a smart baseball film, with some humour, but also with some wit, and passion. It's a well-written script, and may be Moneyball's best shot at anything. It's won lots of Film Critics awards (Toronto, San Diago, etc), and it has the powerhouse's of Zaillian and Sorkin. If anything is to upset this award, it'll be The Descendants, which just won the WGA Award for Best Adapted. Payne has previously won for Sideways, and both films will be duking it out for (possibly) the only awards they have shots at. But I'm going to have to put Moneyball as the winner, just over The Descendants, though I wouldn't be shocked if The Descendants took it.

Will Win: Moneyball
Could Win: The Descendants
Dark Horse: The Ides of March
Who I Want to Win: Moneyball



Writing (Original Screenplay):
- The Artist
- Bridesmaids
- Margin Call
- Midnight in Paris
- A Separation


This category was interesting since there weren't too many Original Screenplay's this year. This is Margin Call's only nomination, and it's not likely to win. The clear winner here is Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris. It won the Golden Globe and the Writers Guild Award. I'd say it's pretty much a lock-in, with Allen previously winning 2 Writing Awards, and being nominated a total of 15 times (just for writing). This one is a pretty clear winner. However, The Artist could make an upset (as could Bridesmaids), but I wouldn't seriously think on it, as it's not at all likely. 




Will Win: Midnight in Paris
Could Win: The Artist
Dark Horse: Bridesmaids 
Who I Want to Win: Midnight in Paris

Winner Breakdown: Best Animated Feature

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

Annie Hall

Annie Hall, 1977
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.

In a way this film reminded me of (500) Days of Summer. Not so much what the film was about, but more how they were both told in quirky, unique ways, and focused on how different they both were (Tom and Summer, and Alvy and Annie). Had this film been told how regular movies are told, with little voice-over narrative, few flashbacks and a definitie plot, this film would've been a lot less charming than it was. Alvy is cooky but you feel for him, and you love his quirks. Annie is erratic, but you come to love and care about her too.

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

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