#oh edit looks like it at least got a screenplay nomination

[orpheuslookingback]

Charles Melton getting snubbed for a nomination is kinda expected but still soooo disappointing it was for sure one of the best performances of the year

[luxicides]

A Look (👀) Back on Don’t Look Up: Politics, Social Media, and Art

So, 2022, huh?

I'd say 2022 has been a pretty good year for film. We got NOPE, Everything Everywhere All At Once, Top Gun: Maverick, X, Bodies x3, et cetera et cetera. The list quite literally goes on.

And that got me thinking about the Oscars, past and present.

It's the big showstopper of awards shows, the inciter of daily fights on Twitter, the one definitive reflection of what the film industry feels...

Well, at least, that's what they're supposed to be. In reality, the Oscars have become a mere watered-down version of what it used to be, a blithe imitator of itself in its heyday. Now, instead of being a respected indicator of the film industry's changing perspectives and visions, it's become a shallow archival of all the big pop culture moments.

Okay, maybe I'm giving it too much flak. Maybe I am being too harsh on it. Maybe I should give them the benefit of the doubt.

But then again, Don't Look Up was nominated for Best Picture and Best Screenplay last year. Sooooooo.....

Alright, alright, I concede. Don't Look Up wasn't all that bad. I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy it - After all, it is a satire, and satires have jokes. Don't Look Up is full of them.

Some of them land.

One really curious thing about this whole discourse around Don't Look Up is how we treat its subject matter - that is, the film's symbolic impending comet that is set to annihilate the entire planet. It doesn't take a rocket scientist (literally!) to deduce what it hardly tries to subtly hint at. The comet is - duh - a representation of global warming and climate change and the inevitable course of destruction humanity is leading ourselves down.

Let me preface this by saying, yes, I agree with Don't Look Up's core message (which is in itself incredibly messy and difficult to untangle, but besides the point). I do think that we as a society (hah) have become dulled to the severity of these very real and very potent issues. We spend so much time online, seeing these horrific events through the partition of a screen that we don't really feel how terrible and important they are. I do think that our governments and institutions are far too concerned with saving face rather than saving its people, which is what they're meant to do. I do think that large tech giants are gaining a dangerous amount of power in our world, and I do think that that is something to be incredibly cautious of.

That all being said, I don't think Don't Look Up was exactly a great depictor of these issues.

Don't Look Up is 2 hours and 25 minutes long. It has a lot to say, and there's a lot it's trying to say. But even with the pretty long runtime, everything feels a little... short. I didn't feel all that absorbed in the story, nor all that invested in the characters and their lives. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that these characters were one of the most boring ones I've seen in a while. And, no, it's not that I can't relate to them. I can understand and empathise with their anger at these systems that have ignored them and slighted their warnings just to preserve their images. I know that feeling. What I don't know are the people at the core of this film.

And there are so many other things that made me ick at the film, like:

the editing, which was actually atrocious

the script, which at times was... questionable

the pacing, which was the main reason why i felt so out of place watching it

et cetera, et cetera

Of course, these are just my opinions. But regardless of what I, a single individual, feel, there are also plenty of film critics and academics (oh, how I hate saying that) who aren't too impressed with the film either. The film has a 55% on Rotten Tomatoes! I'm not saying that Rotten Tomatoes is an all-accurate estimator of a film's objective worth, but I am saying that there is some merit in popular (mostly) reputable opinion.

Okay. All that long spiel. And for what? Let me get into it - I think it's weird that everyone on the Internet seems to be conflating the film's message with its technical worth.

WHO CARES IF A FILM IS "BAD"?

I have watched plenty a "bad" film in my short time here on Earth. I liked the Twilight movies. I watched all of them. Did I think they were a great masterpiece rivalled only by GDT and Fincher and Gerwig themselves? ...Not exactly.

Besides, what even makes a "bad" film? Art is subjective, after all. There is no one definite way to analyse and understand at a film. Similarly, there is no concrete method to determine a film's "worth".

Does "bad" have to do with its technical aspects? The editing, the cinematography, the performances, and such? That isn't exactly the full picture, is it? What about the content? What about what it's trying to say?

As I've said before, Don't Look Up has an incredibly important core message. Its themes are current and pertinent and real - It's not like it is completely fluff. It has a message. It has a point.

Evidently, deeming a film "good" or "bad" is an incredibly perilous task. More often than not, no satisfying answer will present itself. There will always be loopholes with how we view art. Always opinions we haven't yet reconciled with, always sides we haven't considered.

So, we once again arrive at the question - Who cares?

Should we dismiss a movie simply because it's made "poorly"? No, not really, wouldn't that be a disservice to the filmmaker and his intent? Right, right, so, then, should a film's technical qualities impact our opinion of the message? Well, no, because what if it has a good message but a bad execution? We can't let some bad editing or bad directing get in the way of that!

But... Doesn't it?

NOTHING EXISTS IN A VACUUM.

Really. Nothing.

How we interpret a piece of media is affected by how it is presented to us. Obvious, no?

Well, can the same not be said for Don't Look Up?

One of the most basic effects in film editing, the Kuleshov effect, demonstrates this: If you show an audience a shot of an old man, cut to a family, then cut back to the man smiling, he's probably a kind old man. If you replace that shot of a family with a young girl sunbathing, he's a pervert. Gross.

(If you want to see Hitchcock explain this infintely better than I just did, you can watch it here.)

It's one of the oldest tricks in the book. You derive more meaning from sequential shots, things working together, rather than in isolation.

Film in general, really, does not work in isolation. You work as a team, to create a product that is greater than just the sum of its parts. When you make a film, the content and the meaning you want to get across as filmmakers affects the technical decisions you make. And the technical decisions you make then affect how your audience gets the meaning you are putting across.

Film does not work in isolation.

And that's precisely what I find so fascinating about Don't Look Up and the discourse surrounding it - Because so many people seem to view it in isolation.

For me? I couldn't click with Don't Look Up's message. Believe what you want, but I did try my hardest to get behind it. I really did. I wanted to like Jennifer Lawrence's character, I wanted to feel sympathy for Leo DiCap, I wanted to root for these characters.

But the film made it so, so difficult.

There's a lot of punching down - Criticising our generation for taking a global climate crisis and trivialising it into a social media trend. Calling out artists who capitalise on these issues for their own financial gain. And there's a lot of punching up too - The hyperexaggerated (yet still, kind of true) capitalist government that is willing to brush aside the threat of millions of casualties in the name of their own politics. The mega corporations helmed by manipulative CEOs who really only have their own interests in mind.

The film points its finger at everyone, until it's kind of hard to make out just what it wants us to do.

Thomas Flight and Demi Adejuyigbe both have really great reviews on LetterboxD:

[Don't Look Up is] a movie that will only be watched by people who already know the message by heart, while they pat  themselves on the back for “spreading” the message- meanwhile it just looks absurd to anyone who’s actually the target of its message. The important upside here is that unlike Christian Evangelicals Netflix can afford the cast to make it marginally entertaining.  [...] The pain of Don’t Look Up is that it just hits us in the face with something everyone who’s bothering to watch the movie is already frustrated about, and then acts kinda self important because it did. All while doing nothing to actually illuminate real issues. It’s part of the distraction, but imagines itself not to be.

— Thomas Flight

but i can’t help but feel like there’s a “kids these days” element to this movie that feels… pointless. like, okay, kids these days are distracted by other things. let’s say your movie works, and they are all paying attention. what now? is it the problem of the wealthy taking control or the problem of the people? because it seems like the former, but you spend so much time tsk-tsking the latter! i don’t know, man. I have a lot of respect for adam mckay for genuinely trying with this stuff (especially because let’s be honest, subtlety with stuff like this relegates political messaging in film to mid-budget indies and small essays no one will read) but i don’t know that this is it

— Demi Adejuyigbe

A film's objective worth does matter. Its execution does matter. As demonstrated by Kuleshov, nothing exists in isolation. When we talk about Don't Look Up, we talk about its political messaging as well as its technical aspects - Because one is informed by the other. And vice versa.

So there we have it. Our answer. Don't Look Up means well, but doesn't do well. Its meaning is befuddled by its execution, and for us, it is case closed.

Right?

WAIT... WAIT... HOLD ON.

WHO CARES?

LIKE, WHO ACTUALLY CARES?

At the end of the day, does it matter if Don't Look Up's message trumps its objective filmic qualities? Does it matter

...I'm inclined to say: No.

Film is a powerful medium for change. Yes. That is the way with art - The most ancient yet pervasive part in humanity's progress. We have waxed poetry about love, we have captured the brutality of war and sacrifice, we have used art for both good and for bad. All this to say: Art has purpose.

But still, there is a time and there is a place. Earlier, I wrote that film does not exist in a vacuum. I want to revisit that.

We can do this dance of good or no good? for eons, and it will get us nowhere. As a matter of fact, we have been doing this dance. We've been dancing all this while without even stopping to think about why.

Don't Look Up was meant to inspire a conversation. Spark change. Encourage debate.

Art is not made in a vacuum. Art is not meant to be discussed in a vacuum. When we talk about art, we must also talk about its context - Its past, its present, its future. And what all of that means for us. Humanity.

But what we are doing instead, is arguing with each other on Twitter about why it did or didn't deserve the Oscar nomination, going about in silly little trivial circles on whether or not it's objectively a good film or a bad film.

Just as I did before.

In an excellent article, Tony Dutzik writes:

“Dropping the storyline” might provide an opportunity to admit that when it comes to climate change, we are all “riding the blinds” [...], not quite knowing where it is that we’re headed. And it might liberate us to see ourselves and others neither as heroes nor villains, inexorably bound either for victory or disaster, but rather as people called upon to act in ways that create “less suffering” rather than “more suffering” – a decision that provides all of us with infinite opportunities for freedom of choice each and every day. 

— Trapped in the story: “Don’t Look Up” and the limits of climate narrative, Tony Dutzik

Don't Look Up showed us the problem. But now, all we do is talk about how good it was at showing it.

If you're seeing this, thank you for reading all the way through (I hope)! I know this is a really long post, and a far cry from what I normally publish on this blog. But this has been weighing on me ever since I saw Don't Look Up, and I decided to finally make that leap and actually write what I thought.

This is my first experience writing a sort of social commentary thinkpiece thing, so forgive me if I rambled in some parts. If you have any thoughts you would like to share, or even if you disagree wholeheartedly with me, please do feel free to share them in the comments!

Just know I am extremely sensitive to criticism and will breakdown in uncontrollable nervous sweat at the first hint of aggression. Whoops. /hj

But once again, thank you for reading. Hope you have a nice day!

[365days365movies]

February 12, 2021: If Beale Street Could Talk (Review)

This one was tough emotionally...and a very good movie!

Fact of the matter is, this movie was not only topical, but also very well-made and acted. Makes me want to read James Baldwin’s novel one of these days, if I’m honest. 

This film, at its very core, is a film about young love. And it does that VERY well, I gotta say. It captures the emotions and benchmarks of relationships, but is able to effectively balance that with the environment and politics of the times. It’s a downright masterpiece on that front. Oh, and by the way: NO INFIDELITY!!! WHOOOOOOOOOO! Hopefully THAT trend continues. Anyway, lemme get into my full thoughts on this movie, in the Review! Recap is here and here, if you wanna take a look!

Review

Cast and Acting: 9/10

Right off the bat, KiKi Layne and Stephan James have perfect chemistry. I mean it, this might have set my bar for perfect chemistry in film that’s actually consummated. Their past, while largely unseen, carries a lot of weight, and you can feel that every time the interact on the screen. What I’m saying is, they’re cute together, and I ship them hard. Yeah, I just said that, sue me. Here’s the things, though...individually, they’re only OK. Yeah, sorry, neither of them get a big chance to shine alone, and when they do, the film does most of the acting for them. When I say that, I think back to the perfume counter scene. It’s not KiKi’s acting that sells it for me, it’s the environment, the setting, the situation. Sorry to say it...but I kind of get why they weren’t nominated for Best Actress and Actor. NOT THAT THEY AREN’T GOOD. THEY ARE GREAT. But they aren’t really stellar alone, is what I’m saying.

Most of the supporting cast is also fantastic, even if some of them don’t get nearly as much time. Teyonah Parris, whom I’ve been enjoying THOROUGHLY in WandaVision, does a great turn as Ernestine, while Colman Domingo and Michael Beach are great as the fathers, even if their plot line sort of drops off. Even Aunjanue Ellis is good in her brief appearance as Fonny’s mom, and Brian Tyree Henry’s monologue about prison, and Emily Rios’ about rape are...hauntingly good. Ah, but wait...I’m forgetting someone, aren’t I?

REGINA FUCKING KING EVERYBODY. This woman ABSOLUTELY deserved Best Supporting Actress, and was WITHOUT A SINGLE DOUBT the best actor in the film. My Lord, she was amazing, and I’m really happy that she’s finally been able to carve an illustrious career in the 2010s. Seriously, she’s been acting since the ‘90s, and I feel like she’s only come to prominence in the last 10 years or so. Which sucks, because I’ve known about her since WAY before that, and it’s really nice to see her in the spotlight. WHOO!

Plot and Writing: 10/10

Y’know, the plot was a legitimate surprise to me. I guess that, after this month, I’ve been expecting happy endings and all that. But this ending was...bittersweet, and not even really that. Which is by absolutely no means a bad thing, just to be clear. No, this film was a touching diatribe on young love’s intersection with an unfair society, while also serving as a look at racial politics in the past, and serving as a harsh lens on today’s world as well. Barry Jenkins is the one who adapted James Baldwin’s novel into the screenplay, and...yeah, it’s fantastic. Moving, insightful, affecting, hertbreaking, you name it.

Directing and Cinematography: 9/10

Barry Jenkins, man. I was going to watch his other film Moonlight this month, but I’m putting off for another month to make room for some other films. But this film LOOKS gorgeous. There’s too much to go into in terms of how many good shots there are here, but one of these scenes was good enough to win Regina King the Oscar. Which does bring something up, though. HOW DID THIS FILM GET SNUBBED SO HARD

Look, I liked Black Panther as much as the next guy, BUT IT WASN’T BETTER THAN THIS MOVIE. And yet, it got nominated for a Best Picture Oscar, and THIS MOVIE DIDN’T? Not just that, but it didn’t get nominated for Best Director OR Best Cinematography (by James Laxton)? The Oscars are BULLSHIT, full stop.

Production and Art Design: 8/10

But I will say, this film wasn’t as good as Black Panther in Production and Art Design, but that’s because those categories were basically perfect in Black Panther. I tell you, if that movie had NOTHING ELSE going for it (and it did, hello Eric Killmonger), it had the look. But, that said, Beale Street still deserved a nomination at least! I mean, this film looks fantastic, no complaints. Well...one complaint. It really wasn’t very ‘70s to me. It was, sure, but it could’ve passed for other time periods easily. Definitely very good...but not perfect.

Music and Editing: 9/10

Fun fact! Nicholas Britell was brought on to this project after previously working on Moonlight with Barry Jenkins. This score took a lot of tinkering, but was meant to revolve around the ideals of love. In fact, some of the pieces are named after the Greek forms of love. You know, philia, agape, etc.? Neat, right? Anyway, the work shows, as not only did it get nominated for Best Original Score (which it lost to...Black PantherCOMEON), but it’s also quite an impactful score on its own. While it’s nt soundtrack-worth for me, it’s still extremely memorable, and I’d recognize it upon hearing it. So, yeah, nice one, Britell!

90%! And it’s well-deserved.

This was a beautiful movie, and it really did move me. I mean, it’s not like it’s changed my opinions about anything; in fact, it’s really just strengthened them, but it’s still a gorgeous movie. And outside of the sociopolitical folderol, this film has a gorgeous portrait of love that I can’t ignore, and won’t forget for a while. Fantastic.

And as for period romances...let’s take a break, huh? Let’s go for something set while the film was made, but also along the lines of a traditional love story. We are getting close to Valentine’s after all.

February 13, 2021: Before Sunrise (1995)

[stereogeekspodcast]

[Transcript] Season 2, Episode 4. Acting, Direction, Editing, Screenplay Nominations - Academy Awards 2021

The Academy Awards 2021 are here! Who's up for Best Acting, Best Supporting Actor, Direction, Film Editing, and Screenplay? Who do the Stereo Geeks think should win? We have so many thoughts about this year's Oscars, we can't even pick our favourites. Who do you think should win these categories?

(L-r) DANIEL KALUUYA as Chairman Fred Hampton, ASHTON SANDERS as Jimmy Palmer, ALGEE SMITH as Jake Winters, DOMINIQUE THORNE as Judy Harmon and LAKEITH STANFIELD as Bill O���Neal in Warner Bros. Pictures’ “JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH,” a Warner Bros. Pictures release.

Copyright: © 2021 Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. All Rights Reserved

[Continuum by Audionautix plays]

Ron: Welcome to a new Stereo Geeks Special where we continue our coverage of the Oscars 2021. I'm Ron. Mon: And I'm Mon. Ron: Let's talk about the acting categories. Lead role (Male). We have Riz Ahmed for Sound of Metal. Chadwick Boseman, Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom. Anthony Hopkins for The Father. Gary Oldman, Mank. And Steven Yeun, Minari. Your pick?

Mon: Chadwick.

Ron: My pick, as well. I think this is the year for Chadwick.

Mon: Chadwick’s performance in the Ma Rainey film was compelling, outstanding. It's a real shame that he has not been here to bask in the recognition that he's got. He has swept most of the awards in this category. I'm really hoping that the Oscars don't let down his family. He deserves it.

Ron: Chadwick’s performance is a really strong point for the film. It's full of nuance, and really powerful storytelling. And I think the performance Chadwick put in was, in hindsight, made more powerful because of what we know he was actually going through. If you just look at the performance, it does really stand out. There are so many layers to his character, and that can only come out through a powerful acting performance. I feel like Chadwick could have won this category even if it wasn't a posthumous award.

Mon: I think so too. There's a lot of layers to this character, and he really gave it his all. It would have been outstanding irrespective of the year that this film came out, irrespective of the year that this performance was recognized.

Ron: I feel like it's also high time that Chadwick was recognized for his acting.

Mon: I mean, he's been good in everything that he's performed in. The fact that it has to be Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom, it has to be a posthumous recognition, that's kinda sad. But he was always good. The legacy of his acting is gonna continue for a long time.

Ron: Absolutely. Talking about the other performances in this category, there are some hits and misses.

Mon: Yeah. I feel like with Gary Oldman in Mank, it’s probably one that we all expected. It's probably also the least exciting.

Ron: I felt like when I was watching Mank, I was watching Gary Oldman play a different version of his Winston Churchill.

Mon: Right? I felt the same way!

Ron: Okay, so it wasn't just me.

Mon: No, it wasn't, man. That was surprising to me because I feel like Gary Oldman is the kind of person who, when he plays a character, he really adds in so many different layers to it, gives each one a unique take, and this one just felt like, copy-paste.

Ron: Yeah, totally.

Mon: I don't think it helps that Mank, in general, is an underwhelming experience. And with the role, as well, I feel like we’ve seen, not only Gary Oldman do it before, but we've seen this kind of role before. The only thing I'll say is that it's not very obviously Oscar-baity, but it's exactly the kind that the Academy likes.

Ron: I actually think this is very obviously Oscar-baity.

Mon: Oh okay.

Ron: Yeah, totally. This is the exact kind of role that the Oscars love. This difficult man who is larger than life, who inspires and cuts down at the same time, that's exactly what the Oscars love. And that's why I actually hated Mank.

Mon: Yeah.

Ron: Because we have seen this character for aeons, there's nothing new here.

Mon: Yeah, absolutely, it's just change the setting, change the saturation point.

Ron: Absolutely. I would happily have swapped out Gary Oldman for Kingsley Ben-Adir in One Night in Miami.

Mon: That one still hurts me.

Ron: I just don't understand how he’s not in this list.

Mon: He's not in this list at all! That's what annoys me.

Ron: One Night in Miami has not got the noms that it deserves. And it's just driving me crazy.

Mon: The other performance which is definitely Oscar-baity is Anthony Hopkins in The Father.

Ron: Same problem that I had with Gary Oldman. Even in the huge, long career that Anthony Hopkins has had, this is not a good performance!

Mon: Right. There was only one scene where I felt like he'd kind of gone outside his comfort zone. There's this scene where he's meeting his caretaker for the first time, and he's sort of trying to impress her, and there's this natural vivacity that he brings, which I don't think I've seen in Anthony Hopkins, ever. And I love that.

Ron: Yes. Mon: And then it's completely ruined by that last scene. The acting in the last scene is so Oscar-baity. It is so ‘I am doing this so that I can definitely take home the little gold statue’. And it was the one scene that I hated so much because it was so put-on, it was so artificial.

Ron: But I felt like that about the whole movie. I felt, when I was watching this movie, that I was watching Anthony Hopkins.

Mon: Yeah, no, I agree with you on that. I agree with you, completely. And that's a problem because it didn't feel like a performance because it felt like he wasn't doing anything different. And I'm really disappointed because we know this guy can be better.

Ron: This is Anthony Hopkins.

Mon: I know! He puts in his all in a Marvel film. That's how good this guy is, and this film just feels like it's trying too hard and not reaching.

Ron: The play that The Father is based on, the performance was done by Frank Langella. And when I watched this, I was like, oh my god, Frank Langella would have been amazing in this.

Mon: That is so funny considering which role Frank Langella actually did play in the movies that have been nominated in this Academy Awards. Honestly, you could have put in a lot of veteran, white, old actors from Hollywood, they would have played that role the exact same way. Which is why I don't think it deserves a nomination or an award.

Ron: Yeah, agreed. Steven Yeun, Minari.

Mon: I think this was a surprise because a lot of people hadn't seen this film, And he's really known for being in The Walking Dead. You don't expect him to be nominated for the Oscars, but here he is.

Ron: It's such an understated performance. Like throughout the movie I could see myself in him. Which is why I'm really glad that he's got nominated because his Jacob is us.

Mon: Yeah, he's this foolhardy, obstinate kind of guy, but he's just so wistful, and I think I really like that because he's trying so hard, and he really believes in himself and in his dream. And you get all of that in Steven Yeun, just the way he carries himself, just the small little expressions that he makes. He doesn't even have to talk much, it's just him.

Ron: What I really loved about Steven Yeun’s performance was the scene where he is being a ‘dad’. And you know dads, they will be themselves, and then suddenly they will go into dad-mode. Where they’re like, you know what, something has happened and I need to be a ‘dad’ right now. And he is so, so good in that scene. And I was like, oh my god, stop being such a ‘dad’!

Mon: Exactly! Because the dad is putting on the performance of being a ‘dad’, and Steven Yeun is doing an excellent job of being that dad who's trying to be a ‘dad’. It's too good.

Ron: And that's why I'm really happy that he's been nominated because this is what acting is supposed to be.

Mon: It's supposed to be understated but also feel real.

Ron: In any other year, he would have been the top favorite in this category.

Mon: Yeah, I think so too.

Ron: It's just a really good performance.

Mon: Right. And to round it all off is Riz Ahmed from Sound of Metal. This is another very understated performance. There's nothing huge and flashy. It’s really just somebody who is coping with the circumstance that he cannot envisage. And he's really struggling, because his whole life, literally, his whole life, is going to change. It's really hard to rate this performance because it's so natural. It's so effortless. If you haven't seen Riz Ahmed in other stuff, you would think this is just him being him, but there are, of course, like differences to who he probably is as a person.

But I think the recognition of this award really goes to the fact that he put in so much work to make this role look as effortless as it does. He learned how to play the drums, he learned ASL, and both of those, he just does it so naturally in the film. And the performance would have been completely derailed had he not put in that effort of all those months, it would not have been a good performance.

Like when he’s drumming, like the first scene is him drumming, and you can see that it's him. It's not like in the shadows, it's not from the back, it's not like a stunt double. Nope, it's him. And you wouldn't connect with this character if you didn't see him front and center, with those drumsticks, banging on the drums, really like, into that music.

And even with the ASL. It's his language, and that's how you're supposed to feel because that is how the character is going to communicate. And I feel like it's such an important aspect that not only did he learn it, but now he's very keen on people learning how to sign because it is such a valuable language to learn. It was so good. It was so understated. It's hard for me to even say that he actually acted but, I mean we know he did. But’s it’s just so good, so natural.

Ron: I would compare Riz Ahmed’s acting in Sound of Metal to Natalie Portman in Black Swan. That ballet performance and how it made Nina was only possible because she'd done the work of learning ballet. That's the same thing here. The only reason why we believe everything that this character is doing and going through and evolving into is because Riz Ahmed put in all that effort. It comes across as so natural that you don't think you're actually watching an actor; you're watching a person. That's what great acting is.

Again, along with Steven Yeun, any other year, Riz Ahmed definitely would have won this category. But this year, it belongs to Chadwick Boseman. He should 100% get it. What a performance to leave as his legacy.

So, moving on to the ladies. We have Viola Davis from Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom. Andra Day from The United States vs Billie Holiday. Vanessa Kirby, Pieces of a Woman. Frances McDormand from Nomadland. And Carey Mulligan for Promising Young Woman.

This is a slightly harder category I would say. From the other award shows, it seems that Andra Day might be the front runner here. Unfortunately, we couldn't get to see this movie. Apparently The United States vs Billie Holiday is not a good movie. I read some reviews and it seems to be very exploitative, rather than anything else? And it's literally coasting on Andra Day’s performance.

Mon: Apparently, she sang some of the songs in it?

Ron: Yes.

Mon: I'm excited for any newbie to get awards. And when I say newbie, I mean somebody who's getting recognition for the first time at a big award show like this. I would love to have seen her performance just to rate it against these other very powerful performances. Let's see how that turns out.

My personal favorite, of course, is Viola Davis. She has my whole heart. How performance as Ma Rainey was stunning.

Ron: From that opening scene in the tent, you forget that you're watching Viola Davis. Ma Rainey was such a personality, and the way Viola Davis just embodies that. This is a woman who, when she walks into a room, everybody stands aside so she can walk through.

Mon: Yeah. One of the things that I really like about films being on Netflix is that we do have the after-film show or the after-film interviews. And for Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom, they talked about bringing this film to life. It's a play and now it's film, and the research that they did, and they learned about this personality who we hadn’t heard about. And how Viola Davis and the makeup artists and the costume artists, they really tried to embody the way she looked in real life. Because with Ma Rainey, you know she's singing for a long time, it’s sweltering heat, that why she looks very greasy. Her makeup is running, but she's got this power and she doesn't care about the glamour, you know, she's got a voice, she is using that, and that's what's entertaining, and that's what's grasping the entire crowd. Viola Davis and her entire team, they really wanted to capture that, which is what they do. They do such a great job. Ma Rainey doesn't have to look like the quintessential, glamorous, polished artist that we’re so used to seeing, because she's working hard. She's got a job to do. You don't have time for all this stuff, so I really love that. And I'm pointing this out mostly because there was a little bit of backlash because of how Ma Rainey looks in the movie. Ron: Oh really.

Mon: Yeah, there were some people saying, oh, why does she have to look so tired and sweaty. Well, that was kind of the point, so that's why I'm pointing it out. It was a deliberate, intentional effort made by the creators for this film. And Viola Davis does an excellent job of encapsulating that presence and that feeling. I really love how you have this character, based on a real person, of course, but you have this character in an era where Black people really struggled to make their voices heard, get anything that they deserved. She's like the exact opposite. And I love how this film turns the tables on that. And it’s only possible because you have somebody with that presence of Viola Davis. I would love her to win this. I don't know if she will. Maybe somebody newer, like Andra Day, deserves it more. But yeah, I've got my heart set.

Ron: You haven't seen Pieces of a Woman, but I did. I think Vanessa Kirby does the job that she has to in this film. I just think that compared to everybody else on this list, I don't get it. We were talking about how Steven Yeun’s acting in Minari was very understated. Vanessa Kirby does the same thing and Pieces of a Woman but her understatedness is so understated that there is no emotion. And I don't think it's her fault. I think it's because of the direction that she was given as an actor.

Pieces of a Woman was not as good a film as I heard that it was, which was surprising to me. I don't expect histrionics all the time, but most of the time, I was like nothing is happening on the screen, and that just did not make sense to me because the writer of the film based this story on what happened to her. And her husband was actually the director of this film. I feel like they weren't on the same page, or something got lost in translation between screenplay and direction.

I think Kirby did a really good job maybe in the first like 30-35 minutes, and then after that, she was probably told just, you know, hold it back, hold it back, hold the emotion back, and she ended up doing that really well, but the final product ended up being bland. And that might also be because they tried to stuff in other bits into a story that didn't need it. What ended up happening was that her performance was overridden by other elements.

We both feel that Yeri Han from Minari should definitely have been nominated.

Mon: Yeri Han plays the wife character in Minari; she plays Monica. She could have easily been a flat character, the long-suffering wife who just does what her husband wants, who somehow survives for her kids, but she is so much more. You can see this person trying desperately to be the supportive glue of this family. You can see this person trying to strive for her own dreams, for her own ambitions, and keep it together. And it's all because of how well Yeri Han, again in an understated fashion, just carries this character. And it is a shame, a complete and utter shame, that she did not get picked as one of the nominations.

Ron: I found myself comparing Yeri Han and Vanessa Kirby so much when I was watching these two movies, and it really made me wonder what the criteria is for the Oscars to nominate people. Both of these are very understated roles, but Yeri Han the way she emotes an entire dialogue without saying a word. That's what I wanted from Vanessa Kirby. I did not get that. And there were these moments in Minari where I was like, this is how I would react. And that's exactly how she reacted. And I was like, oh man, that's the first time that's ever happened! How does that performance not get nominated. Mon: Yeah, I'm really disappointed.

Ron: I think the problem is that we are very used to the ‘wife’ in films. Yeri Han took that and turned it into a role. And I think part of the reason why Steven Yeun has been nominated, not just on the strength of his own performance, but on the strength of Yeri Han’s. Because had she been terrible, nobody would have noticed what was happening with Steven Yeun. It's the same thing that I see with Killing Eve. The only reason why we keep focusing on how good Jodie Comer is, is because Sandra Oh is brilliant. But she never gets nominated, it's always Jodie Comer. I really, really wanted to love Vanessa Kirby's performance. I read so much about how much work she did. It just didn't come across to me.

So, moving on. Frances McDormand, Nomadland. Understated, but the right kind of understated.

Mon: The thing with Frances McDormand is that she's so effortless and natural in her roles that sometimes you think that's exactly who she is as a person. But no, she's acting, and I love that about these roles that she takes. And especially the one that she plays in Nomadland, I think, had she gone melodramatic or larger than life or the other opposite like super-emotional or something, we would not have believed this character and we would not have enjoyed the journey that we were on with her. It's the fact that she's very put-together, but she's also trying very hard to hold it together, and that comes across throughout in every scene. That's what makes it so powerful. That's what makes it so natural and immersive to watch, and it's no wonder that she's been nominated.

Ron: Yeah, I think if Frances McDormand hadn’t been nominated for Nomadland, that would have been a travesty. Again, talking about Pieces of a Woman, you can see how important direction can be for an actor. Because Frances McDormand’s understatedness could have become super-bland, had she not had the director paving her path. And that's why we get a really, really powerful performance in this film. I mean, she pretty much carries the whole thing. She could have a really good chance of winning this. Mon: Yeah, I think so too. Ron: So on the opposite end of the spectrum, we have Carey Mulligan’s Promising Young Woman. This is a very different kind of performance, just in this category. She feels like this person that you don't want to hang out with for a multitude of reasons. I think we’ve seen Carey Mulligan in quite a few films, so this performance does stand out because it's very different from what she usually does. She's kind of like preppy, and peppy. That's not what you expect. She does a really good job, but there's also like so much tension in this one, which she manages to carry very, very well.

Mon: What I like about this film is that it throws you into the middle of this story. There's no preface, and it's important because the story structure is quite a novelty, and I like that. And because we're thrown into the middle of it, we learn more about her character throughout the film, which makes her performance even more captivating. Why is this person who is young and desirable, and honestly, should have the world at her feet, going around with such a sad frame of mind? Why is she carrying herself in this terribly dejected fashion? Well, we find out.

I would say that this performance isn't as understated as some of the others in both these categories. It definitely has its moment where somebody could have gone completely over the top, but it never does. Because a) the writing doesn't allow for it and, b) the role wouldn't work if we were on either spectrum of super-gleeful or super-emotional. It's really somebody who is carrying a hurt inside her that she cannot fix, and you really feel that.

The funny thing about this film is that you’re left feeling so sad by the end of it, because you really understand this kind of, almost this kind of depression, that this character is facing, and you really feel it through her performance. It's a surprisingly captivating performance despite not being the quintessential Oscar-baity kind of thing. I'm not sure she's gonna win though.

Ron: I wonder whether the Oscars will do something completely different and be like, in light of #MeToo, we're just going to give it to this film.

Mon: I didn’t think of that. It could be.

Ron: Like, it says a lot about why #MeToo even exists. So, who knows? I think this is a very tough category. Let's see what happens.

Mon: Yeah.

Ron: So, moving on to the supporting roles. For the men, we have Sacha Baron Cohen for The Trial of the Chicago Seven. Daniel Kaluuya for Judas and the Black Messiah. Leslie Odom Jr for One Night in Miami. Paul Raci from Sound of Metal. And bizarrely, LaKeith Stanfield for Judas and the Black Messiah, even though he's the lead role.

Mon: Yeah, I'm a bit surprised, as well.

Ron: Apparently, they did put his name forward for the lead role and for some reason the Oscars put him and Daniel Kaluuya in the same category.

Mon: Listen, people who have limited screen time have sometimes been in the lead role category, other people, who are pretty much carrying a film have ended up in the supporting category. I've never understood the Oscars and what the criteria for these things are. It's literally like Tic Tac Toe sometimes. I'm actually really disappointed that both Daniel and LaKeith are in the same category, because they are so, so strong. They really deserve to have been not competing against each other, and definitely should have been frontrunners in their own categories. I mean Kaluuya is brilliant, he's always brilliant.

Ron: He is particularly good as Fred Hampton. I was just like, wow this is insane.

Mon: Like, you feel the emotional core of the burden that he's carrying, but you're also like a little bit inspired, maybe even a little bit scared, by the power of his performance and the power of his stage presence. I feel like he was really passionate about this role, but he doesn't go over the top with it. I'm sure he did a lot of research on Fred Hampton and how he carried himself. But it doesn't come across as this very manufactured or artificial kind of performance. And it definitely doesn't feel like some kind of weird, reverential take on this character. Because sometimes, that's also a problem, especially when you're embodying somebody who was a real personality and a very important personality. Sometimes you feel like you should only look at the good things. No one was perfect. And so, you should always approach those people as human beings first, but also respect the legacy that they've left. And I think he does a good job with that.

Ron: Well the thing is that Daniel Kaluuya actually spent time with Fred Hampton’s wife to find out what his personality was from her perspective. Of course, there were tapes and things that he watched so that he could actually get the physicality of the character, and that's why I think that he is a frontrunner in this category. Because we've seen Daniel Kaluuya in a lot of things and the way he plays this person, you forget that it is Daniel Kaluuya. Like, he's done the kind of research that allows him to become a person without actually showing us that he's acting it.

Mon: Listen, I'm never going to forgive the Academy for ignoring his excellent performance in Widows. He was so good in that film. I don't know why this role made me think of him in Widows, but I think it's that intensity? He's brought a very similar kind of intensity and I'm glad this one has been recognized at least. I really hope it does walk off with the award because, yeah, this is too good.

Ron: Absolutely, I agree with that. LaKeith is the lead in this film. I still can’t understand what the Academy is thinking. He is so good in this performance. He is this tortured young man who is just taking it one day at a time because he has no clue what to do. He gets into one scrape after the other. He thinks he has an out, and it's not.

Mon: His character is between a rock and a hard place, and LaKeith plays that to the tee. Like you can really feel it, his desperation to be normal, his desperation to fit in, his desperation to get out, and you just really feel it.

Ron: The thing is that it's very difficult to play a role like this because a lot of people just think of him as the bad guy. But there are so many layers to even bad guys. And LaKeith does it really well. Like there are times when there are emotions on his face, and I'm just like, he's just told us so much. If he was nominated for this role any other year, he would have won this. But I really feel like it's going to be done Daniel Kaluuya’s year.

Mon: Yeah. I hope so, as compared to most of the others.

Ron: Let’s talk about Paul Raci in Sound of Metal.

Mon: This was a surprise, yeah?

Ron: It was. He has a very understated role. He kind of plays like a mentor, and it's almost easy for you to forget that this is a person acting a role in a film. But then there’s this one scene, which was so quietly done. I can imagine that same scene in movies being full of histrionics, and gestures, loud voices…

Mon: Standing up and waving!

Ron: And banging tables, right?

Mon: Right.

Ron: And Paul Raci just keeps the same tone, and it's like a dagger in your heart. I feel like the power of that scene, coupled with the fact that, up until that point we had seen the kind of person he was, that's the reason why he's in this category. Because the only reason why that scene works is because we spent all this time with him. We've heard his tone of voice, we know how he feels about the main character, about their community, and you know where he's coming from. So yeah, this is a surprise, but now when I think about it, it makes sense.

Mon: Agreed.

Ron: Sacha Baron Cohen in The Trial of the Chicago Seven.

Mon: I know that he did a lot of research on the person that he was playing.

Ron: Okay.

Mon: He was concerned about this character, because we’re talking about somebody who was a real-life personality and when we say personality, we mean a personality. I can see he’s trying. The problem is, I could not see anybody but Sasha Baron Cohen when I was watching the movie. It was Cohen with big hair. And that's all I could see. I could not see him being anybody else. Is it a direction problem, is it just the role? He was not the best thing that film had in it.

Compared to the other roles that we've seen, just in this category, it doesn't even reach like halfway there. And it's not for lack of trying. As I said, there's a lot of effort put into it. I've read that he did a lot of research, he watched the tapes, blah blah blah. He was concerned about it. His concerns were warranted.

Ron: I think that was my problem with this entire film. Everybody felt like they were acting. They were acting, very well, but they were acting. Just as you said, I couldn't get past the fact that I was watching Sacha Baron Cohen.

Mon: And especially when he's doing the stand up. It looks like it's Sacha Baron Cohen doing the stand-up and not Abbie Hoffman. And it's just such a problem.

Ron: It would be an unpleasant shock if he were to win.

Mon: I don't want him to win.

Ron: No.

Rounding off the category is Leslie Odom Jr. in One Night in Miami. Leslie Odom Jr plays Sam Cooke. I really liked his performance. I liked everybody’s performances in this movie. Everybody should have been nominated. This movie he should have been nominated. I’m angry that it wasn't but let's talk about Leslie Odom Jr.

Mon: That voice!

Ron: I know!

Mon: How can you argue when you have a voice like that?

Ron: Oh my gosh. He has such an amazing singing voice. And he uses it so well in this film.

Mon: That scene when he sings that song. We know this song, but still.

Ron: Oh my god.

Mon: And again, credit to the way the film is directed that it hits you so hard when he sings that song.

Ron: The Sam Cooke character that we get in this film, he's kind of bombarded with negativity. He's trying to do things a certain way, his friends don't quite agree with that, and you can understand where they're coming from, but you can also understand where he's coming from. We could have had the table-thumping, the standing up and making a statement. But what you get is the finger-pointing.

Mon: [laughs] And understated finger-pointing. Nobody raises their voices. And that's what I really liked about the performances in general. And, of course, it comes down to the direction, doesn't it? We could have had somebody who, because they're so passionate about their points of view, that they could have raised their voices, they could have been punching each other, hitting each other. There are a few moments like that, but they're also being civil because they are friends. And I think when you have that underlying foundation of the characters, then it changes how you come to that performance. And it really comes across in Odom Jr.

Ron: The other aspect of this film is that these people were not only real but they were pillars of the community. They changed the way America lived and breathed. That can get to your head. The fact that none of the performances were affected by that is testament to the actors. I think any of the actors could have easily been nominated. I'm happy that Leslie Odom Jr did get nominated because his performance relies so heavily on reacting to things around him, and it could have gone terribly wrong in another actor's hands. He manages to keep it together, and it ends up being so memorable. But I still think this category belongs to Daniel Kaluuya. Let's see what happens on the day, but that's what I think.

Mon: Agreed.

Ron: So, let's move on to Supporting Role (Female). We have Maria Bakalova from the sequel for Borat. Glenn Close in Hillbilly Elegy. Olivia Coleman in The Father. Amanda Seyfried in Mank. And Yuh-Jung Youn in Minari. I haven't seen two of the performances in this category so that's not going to help.

Mon: There's been a lot of love for Maria Bakalova. This is a comedic performance. The Oscars aren't huge on comedy, so that would be a surprise. Now with Glenn Close in Hillbilly Elegy, I have not seen this film, I have seen stills. She uglies it up, which means she's gonna win.

Ron: Really, you think so?

Mon: Yeah, absolutely. First of all, she's a veteran actor, she's already been nominated several times, she's a favorite among the Academy-goers. So, I'm just like this category is definitely gone.

Ron: I know the Academy really loves it when ladies ugly-up.

Mon: Yeah, because they don't give actual ugly ladies any roles. [laughs]

Ron: [laughs] Oh god, why is that so true?

Mon: Listen. This category is a tough one. You know why? Because I'm not convinced by most of these.

Ron: Yeah, this is true.

Mon: Olivia Colman? I mean come on, she just won for The Favorite, right? Okay, she's hamming it up. She's acting but it's really. Here, she's not doing much.

Ron: You see, this is my problem with everything to do with The Father. I did not feel like I was watching a person; I was watching Anthony Hopkins. I did not feel like I was watching his daughter; I felt like I was watching Olivia Coleman. How does that get nominated?

Mon: I don't have an answer to that. It's unconvincing.

Ron: And the same thing with Amanda Seyfried. Mank, anyway as a film, we had a lot of issues with it. I think Amanda Seyfried tried to do what she could with the role, but the entire time I was like, I'm watching Amanda Seyfried.

Mon: And also, it’s not something new, this kind of role, this kind of character. It's not something new. I think we just want something refreshing which, for the most part, the other categories have really captured. Seyfried in Mank is just…

Ron: Seyfried in Mank.

Mon: Yeah. I mean, I guess the only performance we’re really rooting for is Yuh-Jung Youn in Minari. Because she's so fun!

Ron: She is so great. I think it helps that the role is quite different. Like, you think of grandmothers in a particular kind of way, and she totally is not.

Mon: And that's the whole point. And that's what I really like because she sort of doubles down on being this unconventional grandmom, because ‘grandmom’ is not a category of humanity. She's a person.

Ron: I love how, when her grandchildren are like, what kind of grandmum are you, you can’t bake, you don't do this, you can’t do that and she's like, why does that make me not a grandmom? She just decides that she's going to be her version of a grandmum and if that means sitting down in front of the television and watching it, that's fine! But everybody just has to deal with it. I loved it! It was just such a natural and fun performance.

So, when things kinda go bad, you're so angry at the world, you're just like, please no, no, no, don't let this happen. She's such a wonderful person! And that's why I think she deserves to win because she got all my emotions going so much. As I said earlier, I am a sucker for a grandmum character, and she's so good. She put in an amazing performance that didn’t feel like a performance. I was like, this is my grandmum.

Mon: You’re right. Absolutely. Because how the grandmum is in the second half of the film as compared to the first half of the film, they're the same person, but you would not feel the impact of the second half, if you hadn't met her and gotten to know her in the first half. And again, that's down to the fact that we had this really powerful, but very natural, performance. It feels authentic, and that's the whole point of these awards, isn't it?

Ron: Yes.

Mon: It's to give it to the best people. Yuh-Jung Youn might just be the person.

Ron: She's our pick, for sure. I feel like Maria Bakalova just might win this.

Mon: Oh wow.

Ron: I think the Academy is trying to do things differently. They want to show that they're not, you know, staid, fuddy-duddies who only give serious films all the awards. So, they might be like, it's a comedy, let's give it to her. And also, there was all that stuff about Rudy Giuliani and stuff like that, which I think might just be a reason for them handing the award over to her.

Mon: Okay, that'd be really interesting to see.

Ron: Yeah. The two acting categories for ladies is really hard this time. I think the male categories are very obvious who the winner is. The ladies, no idea.

Mon: Don't prove us wrong.

Ron: Okay, so we just want to touch on directing and film editing. There is some overlap with the Best Picture category. I'm interested to hear your thoughts.

Mon: Honestly, I am so torn between Emerald Fennell and Chloe Zhao. This is the first year the Academy has given to women nominations for the directing category. Let's just remind you guys that this is the 93rd Academy Award. I think both those films are so accomplished, so different…

Ron: So necessary. Either one of them could win.

Mon: Yeah.

Ron: My concern is that because there are two ladies, they're going to be like, they're in a separate category, and the rest of the guys are in the category of their own.

Mon: And that's the default category, so we're actually going to only choose between the three of them. Yeah, I hope not. Because I feel like Chloe Zhao should get it simply because Nomadland actually deals with a topic that is very popular with American film goers, and she's given it a completely new veneer, which I like. So, maybe she is front runner for it.

Ron: I also feel like Nomadland is definitely very well accomplished. I say this because it's not a very easy film to make. They’re on the move; they’re showing these very different kinds of landscapes. We're also going into these very tight interiors. She managed to balance that out very well, while also giving the performances so much room to breathe.

For me my pick would actually be Nomadland.

Mon: Interesting.

Ron: Because Promising Young Woman, another very accomplished film. I think it has a very familiar narrative structure. There are some shots which, when I thought about later on, I was like, ‘it's interesting that she used that angle’, but Nomadland just feels very different.

Mon: The thing about Promising Young Woman, as excited as I am that it's been nominated for so many categories, especially in the directing category, it feels very commercial

Ron: Yes

Mon: And mainstream. Most of these Academy Award nominations are very artsy very indie, or at least they feel like that. So Promising Young Woman with the peppy vibe and the colors and stuff, I think might be too different for what the Academy really likes to think of as cinematic excellence.

Ron: That's a good point, and that might be a reason why it wins.

Mon: Oh, I hope so.

Ron: Yeah.

Mon: You know who I’m surprised is not on here—even though we're not the biggest fans of the film—The Father, directed by Florian Zeller. I am surprised Florian isn't here, you know why? Because, as I mentioned, cinematically, it has such brilliant technique that I'm surprised the Academy didn't recognize it. I mean one of the problems that we had with it was that it's so slick, which should have shoehorned it into this category, but it didn't.

Ron: But I think that's exactly what would have happened, it would have been shoehorned into this category. Because The Father didn't do anything that we haven't already seen a billion times before. I'm sorry, that's not a unique film at all. I'm glad it didn't get nominated.

Mon: I'm surprised that Minari has been nominated. Like Lee Isaac Chung, I would not have thought that he'd be here.

Ron: Why not? Mon: Well, it’s such a personal narrative. It's just so small.

Ron: Yeah.

Mon: The Academy just love something that is larger than life, even when it's something to do with farming, you know. There's no KKK running after these people, so, like, how did this film even get noticed by the Academy. I'm surprised. I'm surprised it's in any category, but the direction I'm really surprised.

Ron: I'm trying to give the Academy the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they're realizing that they've been kind of in one direction this whole time. So we're getting to see people like Emerald Fennell and Chloe Zhao and Lee Isaac Chung actually get nominated for these amazing accomplishments.

Mon: And these varied films.

Ron: Exactly. I think that Minari  actually works so well because the direction is really good. He keeps it small. He doesn't aim for something too huge. We just follow this family. And that's why the final product is so good.

One thing I've never understood about the Academy, ever since their changed the Best Picture nomination number to 10, I don't know why the director category hasn't followed suit. It doesn't make any sense to me. Having said that, I am so glad that it's Minari, Nomadland and Promising Young Woman that ended up in this category. They deserve it. As far as I'm concerned, this category is between these three. These are the most innovative films in this category.

Mon: Which is exactly why David Fincher for Mank will win.

Ron: Don’t say that.

Mon: I’m sorry but we know that Hollywood loves films about Hollywood; the Academy loves to recognize films about Hollywood. This is a passion project, it's about a very controversial, personal story that many Academy Award board members are going to feel like it resonates with them...

Ron: Because they were there at the same time.

Mon: You're probably not wrong. I don't actually have any hope for anybody else in this category, I'm sorry, it's true.

Ron: But even amongst David Fincher’s work, this is not a good film.

Mon: Yeah, but tell the Academy that.

Ron: It’s so… blah. The shots are so blah. Everything we see in Mank you've seen a million times before.

Mon: I agree with you. It feels like it’s trying to be of the time that it is portraying, but at the same time, it never looks like it. Just putting a black and white filter on your film, and using the same shots that Orson Welles would have used does not make your film innovative and new.

But we just have to resign ourselves to the truth. Fincher is considered an auteur. So, he's likely to win.

Ron: As far as I'm concerned, auteurs are basically people who do the same thing over and over again. And that's what Mank feels like. You know who I would have really loved to see in this category? Regina King. I was watching One Night in Miami and the entire time I was like, “why didn't this get nominated?” It's not just the shots. It's the way she portrayed the story to us. And this is her first time directing a feature film, it doesn't feel like it. Honestly, I feel like this was the year that you should have been nominating all these people. Why is David Fincher here? I just don't think even in David Fincher’s oeuvre, Mank is not his best work.

Mon: Yeah, the only thing is with One Night in Miami, it's technically very brilliant, especially for a first-time director, but it does feel like a first-time director’s work. There is a safety in how it is created.

That being said, at least it doesn't feel like a play, which is what it's based on. But compared to the others which are nominated, I can see why Regina King was overlooked. Though the film really should have made it to the Best Pictures noms, at least.

Ron: So, Another Round by Thomas Vinterberg. See, this is the thing; how has he been nominated for directing, but his movie was not deemed good enough to be nominated for Best Picture? What is the criteria? Honestly, I just don't understand what is happening!

Because when I watch this film, it's actually very uncomfortable to watch because there's so much shakey cam.

Mon: Oh!

Ron: And I was just like, I know you're trying to set the mood that there's a lot of drinking happening here, but it's just making me feel disoriented, so I'm not enjoying this experience. I don't think he was doing anything that different. In my opinion, it is between Minari, Nomadland and Promising Young Woman because those three are the ones that really stand out in this category. And as far as I'm concerned Minari and Nomadland actually do something completely different. They are the innovators. I'm hoping for Chloe Zhao to win because Nomadland really stood out to me.

Mon: Let's quickly go over editing. This is a tough category to really understand from a lay person's point of view.

Ron: Yeah.

Mon: Because when editing is done well, you will not notice it.

Ron: Which is making me question so many entries in this editing category. Because The Father has editing that is so obvious.

Mon: I agree with you on that.

Ron: I was like, oh look, here's a cut. Oh look, here's a camera change. How is this nominated for film editing? That way, again, Nomadland, edited by Chloe Zhao—who did pretty much everything in this film, oh my gosh, how did she do it—has such good editing, because you don't notice it.

Mon: Yeah, you are on this journey with this character. You feel the land that she is traversing, you get to know the characters that she is meeting.

Ron: You feel that claustrophobia in her trailer, and how it differs from everything that’s happening around her. It's just such good editing because you don't notice anything. It's just an experience.

Mon: Yeah, there's like this moment where Frances McDormand’s character is like a few yards away from her nearest neighbor, who's also in a van, and she sees her neighbor put up a flag. And we don't really understand the significance of that flag till a few scenes later when Frances McDormand needs help and she’s knocking on this person’s door, and her neighbor goes, “didn’t you see the sign?”.  You you realize the flag is basically supposed to say do not disturb. And I think that's where editing and direction comes in, because anywhere else you would be told, it would be signposted that yes, this flag is going up because she does not want to be disturbed, go away now. But here it’s backwards, and it's important for us to feel that way because the character may not have known what the flag is about. And we're in her shoes. That's the whole point. And that again addresses why this film has got as many nominations as it has. And why probably it should win.

Ron: Absolutely.

We also have Promising Young Woman here. I think the editing here is pretty commercial, it's not very different. It serves the purpose of narrating the story. So, in that sense, it's pretty technically sound.

Mon: Well, I think there's one scene which has won it the film editing nomination. We can't talk about it but in the hands of any other director, especially a male director, we would have seen that scene in a completely different way.

Ron: I actually think there are two things that have made it, editing-wise, so powerful. And the reason why it's been nominated. And in that scene, I think a lot of directors would have chosen to maybe cut. But here, the director gave her actors so much leeway to play out the scene that the editing, you don't notice it.

Mon: On the basis of just that scene that you just mentioned, I feel like this film should definitely sweep this award. Honestly, the power of that scene really comes across in the use of camera cuts, or the lack thereof.

Ron: Exactly. And that is actually one of the reasons why Promising Young Woman really works, because it knows when not to cut.

Sound of Metal.

Mon: I am truly surprised that it's in the film editing category. Are you?

Ron: I'm glad that it is, I think sound editing, it did a really great job, but I think it's really easy to focus on that aspect of the film, and forget that the actual film editing also makes the story and the sound more important. I'm going to compare it to Another Round where the editing is so jarring. And so obviously edited. I'm glad it's not in this category, but Sound of Metal doesn't do that. It moves the camera away and it cuts at certain points where the audience needs that extra information. I think the way it's edited works for this film, I don't think it's the kind of style that would work for everything else, but because it fits so well with this narrative, I think that's why it's been nominated.

Mon: Yeah, because I think with the film editing, as well as the sound editing, both of them combined, it helps you walk in the shoes of this character, which as you say, is only possible when it's a very personal, individual story like it is with Sound of Metal. I'm kind of glad it's got some technical noms. If nothing else, because we know it's a real long shot for the Best Picture award winner. It could get the technical awards.

What is the Trial of the Chicago 7 doing here?

Ron: I don't know.

Mon: I spent most of that film wondering where the sightlines were.

Ron: Yes.

Mon: Right?

Ron: Yeah.

Mon: There’s this scene where somebody is walking up a flag and the character is looking to the left, but the flag is in the center, and I'm like, “where are you standing?”

Ron: The sightlines weren’t the only problem. We have a chunk of this film taking place in a courtroom, and it felt like I was watching Law and Order. So what is the innovation here? Why has it been nominated?

You know what should have been nominated in both the directing and editing categories? Birds of Prey. Okay, look, we love this movie so we are a bit biased. But Cathy Yan did an amazing job. She should definitely have been in the directing category, and the editing the scene in Gotham PD, come on.

Mon: Well, there are two major reasons why Birds of Prey didn't get any nominations, though, I really feel like it should have. First of all, it's a very comic book-y film, and also structurally, the story is very nonlinear.

Ron: Let us put it out there that Suicide Squad won an Oscar.

Mon: I am currently speechless.

Ron: So, who do you think is going to win this? Honestly, I want Chloe Zhao to get everything.

Mon: Yeah, but I think The Father is going to win.

Ron: I think that would be a mistake.

Mon: It's going to happen.

Ron: So we're going to round off with the screenplay categories. In the adapted section we have the Borat sequel—please don’t make me say the whole name—The Father, Nomadland, One Night in Miami and The The White Tiger.

Mon: We haven't seen the Borat film so we cannot attest to its merits. This is a tough category.

Ron: Ok, so we have two films that are based on plays, The Father and One Night in Miami. I think that we’re both of the same mind that One Night in Miami is definitely superior as an adaptation of a play. The Father feels like a play on film. One Night in Miami feels like a film. So, if it's between those two, it should be One Night in Miami.

Mon: You're going to root for Nomadland, aren't you?

Ron: I am but I have to say, The The White Tiger was a really good adaptation. I thought that was a solid, solid screenplay. I'm actually really annoyed that it didn't get nominated in anything else. As far as I'm concerned, it should have been up for directing, it should have been up for Best Picture, it should have been up for Best Actor. How do these things not happen? I don't understand what the Academy does, really. Like, what is everybody sitting there doing?

Mon: Dude, the fact that a film based in India with Indian actors even got nominated for anything, is like a surprise—in a good way, I guess. It's a film that looks at the poverty and the caste system in India, without actually sensationalizing it or making it completely the norm. There are different kinds of Indians that you will meet in India, as we see in this film. And I'm just surprised that the Academy noticed that.

Ron: You know what irritates me? Slumdog Millionaire won everything, when it was a bad film. And it portrayed India in a really condescending light.

Mon: And considering it was based on a book which was hard-hitting, spoke about the issues that we face in India all the time, but had this sort of fun vibe to it, and Slumdog Millionaire was just an atrocity, as far as I'm concerned.

With The White Tiger, I was very resistant to watching it.

Ron: Me too.

Mon: But yes, while it does portray the abject poverty of sections of society—and it is a little bit scary how people on both sides can treat each other—it also has this updated 21st century mentality that we haven't seen in portrayals of India in Hollywood for a while.

Ron: This was a really good film. I am really irritated that it hasn't got the recognition that it has. I mean, Ava DuVernay was a producer on this, so… But what I loved about The White Tiger was that it didn't coast on the name Ava DuVernay. Everybody else put a lot of work into it.

Mon: And it also didn’t gratuitously show us, you know, the disgusting aspects of India. It also shows you the grandeur that is Delhi and Bangalore, while telling you that yes, there are people living in villages in absolute squalor.

Ron: But what I liked is that doesn't keep throwing that squalor in your face, because people live there. For heaven's sake, you can't just keep saying, “oh my god it's so disgusting”. No, no, this is how people live.

Mon: Respect that.

Ron: Exactly. So I'm irritated, but I really hope that it wins this category.

Mon: Yeah that would be nice, right?

Ron: Yes, I am rooting for Nomadland.

Mon: Why am I not surprised?

Ron: But I would happily let Ramin Bahrani win this for The White Tiger.

So, original screenplay. We have Judas and the Black Messiah, Minari, Promising Young Woman, Sound of Metal and Trial of the Chicago 7. One of these things is not like the others.

Mon: [Laughs]

Ron: I'm sorry, the fact that Aaron Sorkin continues to get recognized and nominated for his writing when he is a bad writer, just drives me up the wall.

Mon: It's sometimes hard to differentiate between entertaining writing, and good writing.

Ron: But is he even entertaining?

Mon: Some people find that banter entertaining.

Is this the subject matter that deserves this kind of banter, this kind of writing? No it doesn't. It requires a deft hand, it requires a respectful hand and we have mentioned this several times and we've talked about this, which is that it does not respect the horrible situation that the people in it were facing.

Ron: It should definitely not win this category.

Mon: It will win this category.

Ron: Oh gosh, your cynicism. I believe that the Academy is going to do things differently.

Mon: I'm a pragmatist and I don't believe that.

Ron: Parasite won last year. Parasite was the best film among all the nominees. There were a lot of other films that should have been nominated, we always are going to be angry about that, but Academy actually recognized how good Parasite was, and it gave it the awards that it deserved. Maybe, maybe, this is the change that we are seeing. And Trial of the Chicago 7, even though it's been nominated to make a certain group of people happy, it won't actually win.

Mon: Well, we will find out.

I think Judas and the Black Messiah has a really good chance here. I think partly because of Daniel Kaluuya’s performance and the fact that Best Picture should kind of belong to it. It just has a really strong story.

Mon: Yeah.

Ron: I know you had issues with the second act; I didn't have that. I feel like it managed to balance these really big, larger than life characters with a story that had you guessing. It was packed full of characters, like, it's very much the opposite of Sound of Metal and Minari which has very small pockets of characters. But Judas and the Black Messiah is much more sweeping, so many people and every single person matters, every single story within the story matters. And cohesively as a whole, the film works because the writing is so strong as well.

Mon: I 100% agree with you on that. I will say that when you Algee Smith men in a role, you give me more of him on screen.

Ron: [Laughing] Ok.

So, Minari.

Mon: I want this one to win.

Ron: Me too.

Mon: Because it's a very simple story. We discussed this when we talked about the film in the Best Picture category, there is a universality to the events of this film that reflects many of our journeys. And I think that's the power of this writing; you can kind of see yourself in different ways. You can see yourself in different characters from the kid to the grandma, right?

And I feel like sometimes the Academy does like these personal stories about the American Dream, which honestly Minari is doing in spades.

Ron: I also feel like the reason why Minari you could win this category is because, you know what I was saying about Pieces of a Woman and how it adds things to make it bigger than it really is. Minari never does that, it’s contained to this one family because even little things can seem big when it's your life and it's people who you love, and that's what a great story, that's what a great writer, does. So yeah, I think it might just win this category as well.

Mon: Well, I think it's funny that you mentioned that things are huge and important when it's somebody that you love, because that ties into Promising Young Woman.

Ron: I mean that entire film is about doing something for somebody that you love, and everything that they felt is amplified because of how you feel about them. But nobody else around you can even imagine it because it doesn't bother them. That person has nothing to do with them.

And I think that's why the writing in this film is quite strong, because it's through the lens of this one character. Of course, the performance that Carey Mulligan puts in does amplify just how terrible she is feeling, just how strong this loss is for her in comparison to how everybody else is actually reacting to it.

And it’s a really strong story because that tension, it’s not just well conveyed on the screen, it had to be there on the page.

It does help that the writing and directing is done by the same person. I think this year we've seen that quite a lot, even with Chloe Zhao, she did the producing, writing, editing, and directing for her film, Nomadland which is a really really accomplished, really powerful, cohesive and memorable product.

Nomadland is not the kind of movie that you and I would watch, and maybe not even enjoy it but this one, my god. And the same thing with Promising Young Woman, she wrote it, directed it, produced it, and you can see the final product.

Mon: It's the ability to translate exactly how you feel on the page to the screen. And I think so often you see that divide because the person who directs a movie, sometimes isn't in sync with the person who wrote it, and that really undercuts important subject matters.

Ron: This is my problem with Pieces of a Woman, and that's why Vanessa Kirby's performance, it's not that good. It just doesn't work because the people around her weren't working together, though I don't know why.

Mon: I'm partial to Promising Young Woman winning as well, because it's a topical issue, and it's well written, it's entertaining in a very scary fashion.

Ron: Exactly. I mean this is a suspense thriller about a topic that a lot of people have had to deal with, but it comes across as a film that is also entertaining, so it's actually a good one for this category.

So finally Sound of Metal.

Mon: This one surprised me.

Rob: The writing for Sound of Metal feels just like a person's story like they're going day by day. That can actually be really hard to write. Again like Minari, this doesn't try too hard, it doesn't go too far, it knows what its aim is, and it stays within that scope. I think the problem with things like The Trial of the Chicago Seven is that the scope was so huge that the final product is, well, it's just not very good, and it doesn't do justice to the characters, or the narrative.

Sound of Metal is exactly the opposite. It takes this one person, his journey, and it just runs with it. And the other thing is that, a lot of films feel like, you know, we shouldn’t be linear because that's cliched or it's been done. But Sound of Metal works so well because of its linear narrative; it doesn't keep going back and forth. You are taking this journey with this person. So yeah, I think it has a pretty good chance as well.

So, I think we want four of these films to win. [laughs] And we don’t care about Aaron Sorkin. I would say the Academy is trying. We have unexpected entries this year in the major categories, which is exciting. The diversity is there. There's room for so much more. But I think one of the biggest problems that the Academy has had this year is by trying to play it safe with certain choices. My hope is that the Academy voters will see the innovation of films like Judas and the Black Messiah, Minari, Promising Young Woman, Nomadland. Sound of Metal and really begin to usher in a whole different way of filmmaking, because we can't be something if we can't see it. We've seen it with Parasite, are we going to see it this year?

Who do you think should win these categories at the Academy Awards 2021? We'd love to hear from you.

You can find us on Twitter @Stereo_Geeks. Or send us an email stereogeekspodcast@gmail.com. We hope you enjoyed this episode. And see you next week!

Mon: The Stereo Geeks logo was created using Canva. The music for our podcast comes courtesy Audionautix.

[Continuum by Audionautix plays]

Transcription by Otter.ai, Ron, and Mon.

[theres-no-paradise]

Too good at Goodbyes

Summary: You volunteer at the BFI Filmfestival in London to gain some experience in the film industry. Which also gave you the opportunity to meet certain actors and maybe a little more evolves around that.

Pairings: Tom Holland x Reader [submit your name: How it works] [Y/N] your Name [Y/F/N) your friends name

Word Count: 2398

Warnings: some swearing

A/N: Yes, I used many tumblr quotes and tried to get inspired by promptsforthestrugglingauthor. I also have no Idea how this fic will develop. I have the main Plot/ beginning and ending written down but I just started to write the actual chapters. I'm pretty anxious about posting so if you like to read more, feedback would be very much appreciated. P.S. I have never worked as a Volunteer at the Filmfest (Always wanted to, though!) so sorry in advance if I  gave wrong expectations! Also I don't know if Tom has attended but just imagine he did. It's Fanfiction. Unfortunately nothing happening on here is real anyway *sobs

EDIT: Ending is quite rushed and I’ll probably rework this in the future. Would be nice if somebody would like to beta read ♥

If you wanna be tagged, send me a msg and I’ll tag you in the future posts :)

[Part 1] [Part 2]

▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄

“Please tell her, that when the sun goes down, I think of her. Please tell her, that I will never forget her voice calling my name. And please let her know that she lives  in my heart and that everywhere I go, I always see her face. Just tell her, I'm sorry about everything that happened and I wish I could turn back time to prevent the things that happened.”

It seemed, as his words were on repeat ever since Y/N had heard them for the first time. Listening to the sad, broken voice made her question her decision she made earlier but she couldn't help it. She needed to move on, needed to get her life back together. A new start, maybe somewhere far away from her current place. Current Situation.

▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄

A few months earlier:

„Go, go, go! We need to get this shit ready until 4PM. Y/N, you're being scheduled to serve the Champagne, Jill, you're down to put out the snacks. Alex, I need you at-“ It was a busy autumn afternoon in Central London. Volunteers, Caterer, Managers and Event-planners were running from one place to another, getting all ready for this years BFI Film-festival. Working usually as a concierge for a well known hotel chain, Y/N has decided that it would look good on her CV  to volunteer at the festival. She has always been interested in the Film and TV Industry, trying to get glimpses of interesting film sets and screenplays. Being a Hobby writer herself, she loved to imagine bringing her self written stories into life. Or at least to other people to read them. Wearing neat, black trousers and an ironed white Shirt, Y/N got ready to balance the trays with the Champagne on them. Her hair was tied back into a ponytail, only a few strands contouring her face. Excitement rose in her stomach as she thought how many people would attend the festival. Especially all the directors and Screenwriters, that had most of her interest. 'Okay, you can do that. You can hold the tray and balance it through the masses of people. Everything will end up all fine' repeating the prayer, to herself Y/N tried to remain calm, practicing the balance of the tray. As a Concierge, she didn't have to do these kind of jobs. Y/N was used to smile and check in people at the front desk of the hotel she worked in, instead of bringing food to the visitors as a waitress. Holding drinks and serving them to people has been a completely new situation and she took a few days off from work, just to be able to be here, at the Festival. Time was passing fast and people were still rushing around the halls, placing booklets, snacks and other information on the tables, that stood everywhere. Y/N shot a look to her colleague Jill, making sure she was at her place, taking care of the finger food and snacks, she was serving. Giving each other a thumbs up, Y/N prepared herself to start the main part of the volunteering. Offering drinks to the visitors.

The air outside was crisp but some last rays of sunshine shone through the cloud cover, indicating the sun to set in only a matter of time. The Filmfest was in full swing, producers, directors, actors and all kind of creators and attendees talking to each other, mostly about the films, that were nominated for awards or about to be released. Y/N had planted a smile onto her face, trying to be nice and friendly to every guest she served. To be honest, Y/N wasn't really a people person. Sitting at home, watching some Netflix or write Fanfiction would've been much better right now, but being an adult meant, having responsibilities and this volunteering definitely had some good future opportunities for her, at least she hoped. It started to get late, Y/N collected empty glasses, brought new fresh poured Champagne and offered it to everyone, who didn't seem to have a drink in hand. So many people were at the Festival. Men and women of every age. Y/N was happy, when she bumped into a group of people her age, offering the champagne from the tray she was holding the whole afternoon. “Fancy some Champagne?”, she would've asked, giving a sweet smile to the guests. One of the guys grinned, his blue eyes shimmering in the bright Theater light above them. “Thank you! Really need a drink”, he said, taking two glasses and giving one to the other guy, standing next to him. Smiling, Y/N turned around to look for other guests, not realizing that a pair of brown eyes started following her.

It was break time for Y/N, and she made herself comfortable in a little extra room, that was especially made for the staff. Jill and Alex followed suit, sitting down and eating their food, they got from the Theater. “Who did you guys got to meet?”, Alex suddenly asked, chewing on his Cheeseburger and waiting for the girls to answer. “Oh well”, Jill started, swallowing her food first. “I stood next to Benedict Cumberbatch and oh my … I just love that guy, okay?” she admitted, having a big bite of her burger after the confession. Y/N sat there, smiling at the blonde girls reaction. “And you?”, Alex asked and shot a look at Y/N. “I didn't really got to talk to people”, Y/N said, staring at her phone and checking if Y/F/N messaged her. “I mean, I saw some very well known actors but I was too shy to say something”, Y/N admitted. Alex nodded and took another bite of his burger. While still chewing, he said: “Well, I had a nice chat with Tom Holland and his friend. Didn't think he'd be the down to earth kind of guy”, Alex admitted and shot another look in Y/N's direction. “Anyway, did you notice that he was staring at you, Y/N?” The girl stopped eating for a second and gave Alex a confused look. It was a short silence, before she asked: “Why would he stare at me?” “Maybe he thinks you're cute?”, Jill suddenly added, winking to Y/N's direction. “Bullshit. Just because I have to be friendly to everyone here, doesn't mean I'm cute. You're making that up. Is this a prank or something?”, Y/N asked, throwing annoyed looks at her colleagues. Jill and Alex gave each other a confused stare before the boy spoke: “Why would we do that? No, I really mean it. I think he stared at you, at least it looked like that”, Alex insisted but Y/N shook her head, ignoring the dark haired guy while eating her chips. As if anybody would stare at her.

People usually did that, when she was wearing clothes, that didn't fit together or when she was having a bad day over all, feeling the strangers throwing looks at her. So why would, all of a sudden, a guy, that was somewhat famous, give her stares? Maybe she had something in her face earlier, so that he couldn't look away or maybe her shirt wasn't tucked into her trousers correctly and he was judging her for the it? Y/N checked her outfit and stood up, marching to the restrooms. She didn't want to hear another word from the other two volunteers, so she put her stuff away, to get ready for work afterwards. 'Why would he stare at me? What is wrong?', Y/N asked herself a couple of times while checking her looks in the mirror. The reflection showed a girl, that didn't seem to be happy at all. The corners of her moth were formed to a straight line. Her eyes looked tired and seemed to show little evidence of dark circles around them. Her shoulders where hanging low, and her overall posture indicated, that she was having a tough time. Being an introvert has had definitely it's downs. She liked to go out and be together with people but that also meant, that it would cost her lot's of energy. Y/N couldn't wait to be done working for tonight, go home and just throw herself into bed, replenish all her energy for the next day. Sometimes, she would just stay home for days, not even talking to people because it was more comfortable. But then again, other days she needed Company and then she'd hang out with Y/F/N, her best friend.   Being stuck in her thoughts, Y/N didn't realize that the latest movie just finished, filling up the halls with people. Just when a woman came into the restroom, Y/N realized that she had to get back to the bar, filling up and serving glasses of champagne. She put on her brightest smile, leaving the restroom with all her strength to finish up the last hours of her shift. 

“Thank you!”, the tall, dark haired man said, taking a glass of champagne, turning around to a group of other actors. Y/N's tray was blank again so she decided to grab empty glasses that were spread around the hall on the high tables. She didn't realize, that someone was following and talking to her, until she felt a hand resting on her elbow. A bit too sudden, she turned around to face the guy from earlier.

“Sorry, didn't mean to startle you. Just wanted to check if you have more champagne with you”, the blue eyed guy said. Y/N recognized him and smiled. “Let me return these glasses and I bring a new bunch”, she offered and turned quickly around to grab more of the bubbly drinks. Walking back to where the guy stopped her, she saw him talking to the other guy he was together earlier with. Trying to be confident, Y/N walked over to them quickly with a small smile on her lips. “Gentlemen, your drinks”, she offered and hold the tray between the two of them. “Thanks”, both said, taking the glasses, smiling at Y/N. She was about to turn around and leave, to serve more of the drinks, but the blue eyed got hold of her arm again. “Are you one of the volunteers here”, he asked, taking a sip of his drink. “Uhm, yeah... Yes I actually got the position because of my friend. She's kinda good with her contacts”, Y/N told the guys, smiling shyly. They were both quite good looking and she did not expect anyone to hold a conversation with her that night at all. It was always just that usual small talk, no real conversations happening. “Oh, is she here?”, now the brown eyed guy asked, looking around the filled hall. “Yes, somewhere. She's probably talking to some well known Directors for her Radioshow”, Y/N explained, getting nods of approval. “Sounds pretty interesting, whats her name?”, the taller guy asked. “Y/F/N”, was the simple answer and she felt jealousy built up in her stomach. Of course people would ask about the well known friend instead of getting to know the cheap volunteer. Suddenly Y/N felt bitter, and about to leave but the two boys kept on talking to her. “Must be super exhausting for you, to be available for everyone here, isn’t it?” “Yeah, it is indeed. But on the other hand I can tell that I volunteered and it probably looks good on my CV as well”, she answered. “I bet it does. What's you'r name?”, the blue-eyed asked, emptying his glass. “Y/N, and who are you guys?”

“I'm Harrison and this is Tom. You might know him though, the new Spiderman?”

Y/N blinked a few times before she caught herself staring at Tom. Was he really Tom Holland, the new Spiderman guy? It felt like a light bulb illuminated insight her head and her eyes widened at the sudden realization. “You really are the Spiderman guy! Oh my god I'm so sorry that I didn't recognize you!”, Y/N said a little too hectic. A little laugh sounded from their lips as Y/N felt her face heat up.

'So maybe Alex wasn’t wrong over all?', she thought, feeling guilty about her reaction earlier. “It's refreshing not being recognized immediately. Are you from here?”, Tom asked, and Y/N nodded. But before she could say where abouts, a voice sounded behind her. “Y/N I need you back here. Can you please come over?”, it was Jennifer, Y/N’s supervisor. With a sad smile, Y/N said her goodbye to the guys and left them quickly, seeing what Jennifer wanted.

Being lost in her thoughts, she didn't realize that the blonde, tall women had a grim expression on her face. “Y/N, I understand that having humour is a good thing and talking to our Guests fun, but please, can you take care everyone else too?  We cant lose these guests just because of you being starstruck and fangirling at certain actors here”, the tall blonde women said, giving the girl a stare down. “Sorry Jennifer. I just kind of went with the flow”, Y/N said, earning a look of anger from her boss. “Then just don't go with the flow. I just need you to do your job. Nor more, not less”.

“Alright, Ma'am” Walking back to the hall, Y/N searched for Tom and Harrison but after a few minutes of walking around, she accepted the fact, that the boys were gone. But at least, she had a little fun tonight, which was nice. ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄

[prettymysticfalls]

Dunkirk

"Dunkirk" was one of the most anticipated movies of 2017 for me. It probably was the most anticipated one. Hence, I had been meaning to watch this movie for months and I was quite curious about it. I was very well aware that this movie was like a war thriller. So, I knew what I was getting myself into and I was very well aware of my expectations before watching it. I wasn’t disappointed because I didn’t expect to see a true war picture filled with full action. I’m sorry for the ones who expected to see total action and combat though. Because they must be very disappointed since almost every single movie criticism sites called this movie an “epic war movie”. There is no gray nuance to this movie. It is black and white. Some love it, some loathe it. So, you either like it, or you dislike it. It is that simple. Did I love this movie? Yes, I did. I really enjoyed watching it. Would I have loathed it if I had high hopes about amount of action? Yes, I would have. There is your cue.

Although there was action, it lacked a lot of action. It was not so moving for that reason. It was kind of slow-paced. However, it felt quite thrilling. I mean, it felt psychological. It is about war trauma and war drama. It focuses on survival rather than waging a war. It is safe to say it is a languid thriller movie. The trailer is kind of misleading because it makes the movie seem like hard boiled, full action-packed! It is not that graphic for a war movie. There is not flying body parts or there are not enormous amount of blood shed that would make sick someone to stomach. In terms of violence and war, it is actually a lenient movie. There is chaos, anxiety, tension, fear, survival instinct, guilt and humanity. It makes you question heroism, cowardice and braveness. Also, It makes you question remorse. There were scenes that made my eyes water. So, it was a sentimental movie for me.

There were lack of great dialogues and memorable lines. There is almost nothing to quote. I understand that the characters didn’t talk much and they were mostly silent because they were horrified. But there should have been epic lines told by characters, even though the movie got its power from its silence.

It is hard to focus on acting skills of every single character. It is like there is no leading character at all. Everyone seems to be leading characters. It seems like the actors’ main purpose to convey fears and struggles of their characters to the audience. I mean, there is no background story of the characters. They never talk about their home, their personal life. They don’t interact enough. They are just allies but they are not friends. There is a scene where a British soldier watches out a French soldier but it is not based on friendship, it is based on humanity because that British soldier is righteous and just. Oh, I have to say it that the Tom Hardy cameo was legendary.

The script kind of felt sloppy. Therefore, the narrative is weak in my opinion. However, I can not tell if the weak one is storyline or storytelling. They should have focused on German troops to make it seem more realistic. I get it that it is told from British troops’ perspective but it was like British troops fought against no one since German planes felt metaphorical, symbolical and imaginative. Personally, I’d like to see the horror factor that Germans caused from point of view of German soldiers. I think, Nolan didn’t show German forces on purpose because he wanted to turn them into a fear factor, just like having a phobia or a fear and trying to get rid of it in order to survive and function healthily but feeling trapped inside instead of doing so. However, German troops aren’t the only thing Nolan didn’t care to show. It also seemed like he ignored French troops and Belgian troops. If he had thought that including one French soldier would have made up for it, it clearly didn’t work. I understand the emphasis on British forces but British forces were allies with French forces and Belgian forces. Also, there was lack of Indian soldiers in British army. So, only making British army visible either makes him look like an ignorant person or makes him look like a stingy person who aimed to cut back from the budget to make profit.

Directing is amazing, so is cinematography. Christopher Nolan amazes with his amazing directing skills by proving how amazing director he is but he fails to amaze when it comes to being an amazing screenwriter. If he had co-written it with someone, this movie could have been much better. Anyway, let's focus on directing and cinematography. The camera angles are exquisite and extraordinary, yet so realistic. It feels like you are right there living it, experiencing it all. The visual effects are refulgent. The film editing is so well done. The production design is brilliant. It is a visual masterpiece. The sound editing and mixing are great thanks to Hans Zimmer's spectacular scores.

The movie is definitely an Oscar material. Not as an original screenplay but as a picture, cinematography, directing, visual effects, scores, sound editing and mixing. Therefore, I expect it to get nominated in 7 categories at least. Although it is a great thriller movie, it is an overrated war movie.

Is Dunkirk good? Yeah, it is. Is Dunkirk great? Yeah, it is. Is Dunkirk epic? No, it isn’t. Is Dunkirk a good war thriller? Yeah, it is. Is Dunkirk a good war movie? Hell, no.

P.S. If you liked reading my review and you have a letterboxd account, feel free to like it and follow me there.

My Review | My Profile

[aclockworkfilmsnob]

Why do you believe Oscars are not that important? Genuinely curious.

Because it's just an awards show that means nothing. Members of the academy already go in with a huge bias towards films about show business in one form or another, it also doesn't help that there's a history of bribery with the films. Mainly though, their decisions almost always mean nothing. Even if you hate everything else about it, you can't deny that The Neon Demon is easily some of the best cinematography of the year. So where's the nomination? And you can argue "If they thought the rest of the movie was terrible, then there's no point in nominating it for anything." Which is stupid logic, but I've heard it before. And it wouldn't make a lick of sense when Suicide Squad was nominated for Best Makeup, and Fifty Shades of Grey was nominated for best original song last year. Some of the other great movies of the year, like Elle, The Nice Guys, and The Witch, also got snubbed in categories they easily deserved. The way I see it, the academy doesn't nominate the best movies of the year, they nominate the best movies that everybody saw. They can't risk giving best cinematography to The Neon Demon or even nominating The Nice Guys (an absolutely excellent comedy) for anything at all, because those movies didn't make any money. No, we have to nominate movies people actually saw, so more people will watch. And you can just call me salty that my favorite movie of the year didn't get the recognition I felt it deserves (I'm not mad that The Neon Demon got snubbed in every other category, I understand why it wouldn't get nominated for anything else, but having excellent cinematography is almost unanimously accepted) but there's more to it. Let's take a look at history for a second. 1998, we had some great films come out. Both The Big Lebowski and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas broke new grounds in the genre of dark comedy, they're excellent films that we celebrate and study to this day. But hey, of course they didn't get any recognition, but that's fair. After all, we got the clearly deserving best picture winner, Saving Private Ryan. A compelling, tragic, thoughtful, and brilliantly made film. Easily one of Spielberg's best, and one of the greatest war films (just films in general) ever made. Oh wait… that didn't win best picture, did it? No… so was it those other two great films I mentioned? Haha no, of course it wasn't. It was Shakespeare in Love. Yep, best picture of 1998, Shakespeare in Love. Oh how that excellent film with its gimmicky premise and overall okay presentation has just become such a staple in film history. Give me a fucking break. 1971, A Clockwork Orange is nominated for best adapted screenplay, best editing, best cinematography, best director, and best picture (not best actor, despite the fact that McDowell knocked it Out of the park) Okay, a classic such as that has to have at least one of those in the bag. I mean come on, best director, Stanley Kubrick? It's an obvious pick. Well that's too bad because The French Connection won every Oscar that Clockwork was nominated for. Every single one. And, it won best actor for Gene Hackman too. Now French Connection is a great film, but in what universe is it better directed, better acted, and just an overall better movie than ACO?? It's not. Also, Dirty Harry got no recognition. I don't know, I think that movie does a few things better than French Connection as well. The Shining got no Oscar recognition whatsoever, in fact none of Kubrick's films have ever won best picture, assuming some of them were even lucky enough to be nominated. The same thing can be said about Alfred Hitchcock. Two of the greatest filmmakers of all time. No love. No best picture awards, for what we clearly consider to be deserving of such an award. And it clearly hasn't ended. Even considering all of that stuff I said about The Neon Demon, The Nice Guys, Elle and The Witch (apparently Swiss Army Man was pretty great too, and got nothing as well) we can look at last year alone to further prove my point. Spotlight won best picture. Do we even talk about Spotlight anymore? It's only been one year and we've just stopped talking about it. We sure as hell still discuss The Revenant and Mad Max Fury Road, but Spotlight… I could be wrong, but I don't see that coming up in any film dissection conversations. Look, the Oscars recognize plenty of deserving talent, but as a whole it's just a corporate awards show that determines nothing. Those little stamps of approval help in selling movie tickets and Blu Ray/on demand sales for a little while and that's it. Only time decides a classic, not an award show.

[yoyo-inspace]

Thoughts on the 89th Academy Awards

A.k.a. I didn’t watch that many movies last year, but I kept a LIST, and now a lot of those on that list are nominated and I’ll do my very best to watch most of them before the Oscars. 

A quick thought if you can’t be bothered to read the long post of me talking about the nominations under the cut: The thing is, with how the Oscars work, movies that a lot of people have seen that are also nominated will likely win a lot. Because the people who vote at the Oscars have never seen everything and people will vote for what they have seen. Sometimes that ends up being something that people thought deserve to win and sometimes not. That’s how these types of voting systems work. 

By which I mean to say that La La Land is going to win a hell of a lot. And I don’t doubt that it doesn’t deserve it (and I really really want to see it), but some people are going to be upset about that, and say it’s more because of the hype than because it deserves it. As I said, I can’t tell the truth of that, since I haven’t seen it yet. I bet there’s going to be some cases of that, but in the Oscars, it’s really common that more than one of the nominees deserve to win equally as much as the rest. It’s the Oscars. I try not to take it that seriously. What can you do.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ it’s like the anime awards 2016 all over again

On a positive note though, what a diverse year in terms of Oscars nominations! Both in front and behind the camera. That’s great. Not fixing the problem, but moving forward. Let’s just hope people keep on celebrating these movies so that even more get made.

Kinda disappointed neither A Monster Calls or Deadpool was nominated for anything, but it is what it is. Deadpool would have been fun though. Biggest surprise is probably that Silence wasn’t nominated for more than it was. But there was a lot of great movies coming out last year. 

But yeah, on the important stuff. Under the cut are almost all of the categories and the few thoughts I have on them as well as predictions and whatever else I come up with. Because I’ve seen so very little. But I’ll try to change that.

First off, I’ll be skipping because Best Documentary Feature, Best Documentary (Short Subject) and Best Short Film (Live Action) because I haven’t anything useful to say on them since I usually don’t keep up with those. But I hope they all do well and I bet they’re great. 

Second, bolded (unless it’s a category title) means I’ve seen it (there are so few, the shame) and cursive means it was on my list I was planning to see. I might end up watching some of the others, but the cursive ones are my priorities because I’ve wanted to see them for a long time. 

BEST PICTURE La La Land Moonlight Manchester by the Sea Arrival Lion Hidden Figures Hacksaw Ridge Hell or High Water Fences

Also known as that one category people actually care about. 

And I haven’t seen a single one. Which kind of makes me sad. But oh well. Hidden Figures, Arrival and La La Land are the ones on the top of my list that I really need to see. Especially Arrival. And I’m really happy there’s a sci-fi movie among the Best Picture nominees. However, I am pretty sure La La Land is going to win this one, judging by what I’ve heard people more invested than me say. I am so glad all of these movies got nominated though, because I’ve heard great things about all of them, and nomination in itself is a great sign. 

BEST DIRECTOR Damien Chazelle – La La Land Barry Jenkins – Moonlight Kenneth Lonergan – Manchester by the Sea Denis Villeneuve – Arrival Mel Gibson – Hacksaw Ridge

Ugh. The thing is, from what I’ve heard, on simply the basis of directing, Mel Gibson did a stellar job here. But I don’t want him to win. Because. Ugh. Mel Gibson. If it happens it happens. They are after all supposed to vote on the direction of the movie, and not Mel Gibson as a person. But you know how it is.

Again, I’m thinking La La Land is going to take this one. I’m holding a torch for Arrival and Fences though, because I’ve heard such good thing about both of them. Not that I haven’t heard good things about La La Land and I’m sure it deserves all those good things, but just that I feel like I need to hold a torch for someone that isn’t the obvious winner. And again, I haven’t seen any of them, so, can’t really say more than that. They were all on my list of movies to see last year though, so hopefully I’ll manage to get around to them before the gala.

BEST ACTRESS Emma Stone – La La Land Natalie Portman – Jackie Isabelle Huppert – Elle Meryl Streep – Florence Foster Jenkins Ruth Negga – Loving

While I’ve heard wonderful things about Ruth Negga in Loving, I think Emma Stone is going take this one. But who knows, Meryl Streep could just descend from the ceiling and sweep it up.

BEST ACTOR Casey Affleck – Manchester by the Sea Denzel Washington – Fences Andrew Garfield – Hacksaw Ridge Ryan Gosling – La La Land Viggo Mortensen – Captain Fantastic

While I would love for Viggo Mortensen to get this, because I have a feeling I’ll really like Captain Fantastic, I don’t think he’s got a chance. From what I’ve heard, Casey Affleck is one that people are saying who is most likely to win. I have issues with Casey Affleck, but I’ll just refer back to my Gibson discussion above. Would be fun if Denzel Washington won, either for this or director. I’ve heard he’s great. I think this is one of those categories that La La Land is a bit less likely to win, but I think it could, just by the name alone, and that most people have seen it. I have also heard really great things about Andrew Garfield in Hacksaw Ridge, plus he was in Silence. So who knows? This is a tough one. 

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS Viola Davis – Fences Michelle Williams – Manchester by the Sea Naomie Harris – Moonlight Nicole Kidman – Lion Octavia Spencer – Hidden Figures

GIVE VIOLA DAVIS AN OSCAR. No okay but I’ve heard stellar things about all of these, but Viola Davis has clearly been at the top of that. Can’t say much about anything else, since I haven’t seen the movies. Really wanna see Hidden Figures though. I’ll get there.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR Mahershala Ali – Moonlight Jeff Bridges – Hell or High Water Dev Patel – Lion Lucas Hedges – Manchester by the Sea Michael Shannon – Nocturnal Animals

I literally have nothing to say about this. I know so very little about these movies. I’ve heard both Michael Shannon’s and Mahershala Ali’s names tossed around a lot. But that’s about it. 

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY Moonlight – Barry Jenkins, Tarell McCraney Arrival – Eric Heisserer Lion – Luke Davies Fences – August Wilson Hidden Figures – Allison Schroeder, Theodore Melfi

Again, I think A Monster Calls was kind of robbed. Oh well. Again, difficult for me to say anything, but I do hope Hidden Figures wins at least SOMETHING. 

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY La La Land – Damien Chazelle Manchester by the Sea – Kenneth Lonergan Hell or High Water – Taylor Sheridan The Lobster – Efthymis Filippou, Yorgos Lanthimos 20th Century Women – Mike Mills

Hey, I have a friend who talked a lot about The Lobster. Fun to see that there. Not a clue what 20th Century Women is, haven’t heard of it. Kinda sad Zootopia isn’t here, or Moana. Or Kubo. But that’s what they usually do to animated films. Probably going to be won by La La Land. 

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY Linus Sandgren – La La Land Bradford Young – Arrival Greig Fraser – Lion James Laxton – Moonlight Rodrigo Prieto – Silence

My guess would be La La Land (original, I know) or Silence. But I honestly have no idea. Arrival I’ve heard great things about (also first African-American to get nominated for Best Cinematography! That’s worth celebrating). 

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE Zootopia Moana Kubo and the Two Strings The Red Turtle My Life as a Zucchini

HEY LOOK IT’S A MOVIE I’VE WATCHED. Moana still isn’t out here, and I missed Kubo while it was out, but those are two movies I really want to see. My guess would be that Moana wins, surely deservedly so, but Zootopia was just so good. I loved it. I am so glad to see Kubo nominated though, since stop-motion really doesn’t get the attention it should, and here we have not one but TWO of them nominated, and even though I have not yet seen Kubo, I’m pretty sure that I’ll love it, if just for the soundtrack (which I have listened to), alone.

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM Tanna – Australia Land of Mine – Denmark Toni Erdmann – Germany The Salesman – Iran A Man Called Ove – Sweden

I’ve actually only heard of two movies on this list, so I was considering skipping it, but I just couldn’t. Because I adore the book A Man Called Ove is based on, and it’s so funny to me that it’s nominated for not one but TWO Oscars. I can’t say much else, other than that out of the two I know, I’m pretty sure Tony Erdmann will win, but I know very little about the other two so I can’t really say that with much conviction. 

BEST ORIGINAL SONG “Audition (The Fools Who Dream)” – La La Land “City of Stars” – La La Land “How Far I’ll Go” – Moana “Can’t Stop the Feeling” – Trolls “The Empty Chair” - Jim: The James Foley Story

As much as I want Moana to win, this is going to go to La La Land. I’ve only heard one of these, and it’s a La La Land song. And from what I’ve heard, Audition is really good as well. Sad that not more Moana songs are on here though. 

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE La La Land – Justin Hurwitz Lion – Dustin O’Halloran and Hauschka Moonlight – Nicholas Britell Jackie – Mica Levi Passengers – Thomas Newman

LA LA LAND IS GOING TO WIN THIS ONE. But honestly, I’d be fine with everything as long as Passengers don’t get close to it. Out of spite. 

BEST FILM EDITING La La Land – Tom Cross Moonlight – Joi McMillon, Nat Sanders Hacksaw Ridge – John Gilbert Arrival – Joe Walker Hell or High Water – Jake Roberts

I’m going to throw out a wild guess here, and say La La Land, but I’ve heard amazing things about Moonlight, and if La La Land picks up nearly everything else, it would be nice to see it win something. Great to see it keep on getting nominated though, as well as Arrival. 

BEST VISUAL EFFECT Deepwater Horizon The Jungle Book Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Doctor Strange Kubo and the Two Strings

A CATEGORY WHERE I’VE SEEN MORE THAN ONE THING. TRULY A MIRACLE. (I am so predictable.)

I am 95% sure that The Jungle Book are going to take this one. It’s really great to see a stop-motion movie nominated for this category, and I don’t think it’s a loss if it doesn’t win, because at least it got acknowledged. Rogue One did some amazing new things with CGI (which I know people like to complain about, but I really can’t say that that was anything else than fantastic what they’ve managed to do and how they’ve developed that technology). But however creative and ground-breaking Rogue One was with a few effects, that was the entirety of The Jungle Book. That entire movie, except for the boy, is a special effect. It’s filmed on a green screen in a studio in Los Angeles, and there were many times I honestly could not tell. And the animals were absolutely fantastic. So yeah, I don’t feel that bad giving this to The Jungle Book. 

BEST COSTUME DESIGN Allied – Joanna Johnston Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them – Colleen Atwood Florence Foster Jenkins – Consolata Boyle Jackie – Madeline Fontaine La La Land – Mary Zophres

I’m just so glad Fantastic Beasts got a nomination, and while I think La La Land will win this one, having a shout-out for the amazing costumes in Fantastic Beasts is very nice. 

BEST MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING Suicide Squad – Alessandro Bertolazzi A Man Called Ove – Love Larson and Eva Con Bahr Star Trek Beyond – S. Anne Carroll and Joel Harlow

Ah yes, the Oscars nominated movie Suicide Squad. Sigh. No but I honestly don’t know with this one. I’d prefer if Suicide Squad doesn’t get it, for simply personal reasons, but I don’t know which of the other two will get it. From what I know the age make up in A Man Called Ove was really great, and I never really thought much about the makeup and hairstyling in Star Trek Beyond, but I don’t think I dare to hope that A Man Called Ove would win this one. But who knows?

BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them – Stuart Craig, James Hambige, Anna Pinnock Hail, Caesar! – Jess Gonchor, Nancy Haigh La La Land – David Wasco, Sandy Reynolds-Wasco Arrival – Patrice Vermette Passengers – Guy Hendrix Dyas

Probably going to be another La La Land win, but the Fantastic Beasts and Arrival nominations have also made me very happy. 

BEST SOUND EDITING Arrival Deepwater Horizon Hacksaw Ridge La La Land Sully

I’m just going to have ‘Probably La La Land’ as my standard answer when I don’t know much about these movies. But Sound Editing and Sound Design sometimes surprises me. 

BEST SOUND MIXING Arrival Hacksaw Ridge La La Land Rogue One: A Star Wars Story 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi

GIVE ROGUE ONE AN OSCAR but also probably La La Land. 

BEST SHORT FILM (ANIMATED) Pearl Pear Cider and Cigarettes Piper Blind Vaysha Borrowed Time

I haven’t actually heard about any of these except for Piper and Borrowed Time, but I’m really curious about the other ones. No idea what will win, but Borrowed Time has been on my to watch list for AGES. I should get around to that. 

[mastcomm]

#OscarsSoWhite Held Up a Mirror. Hollywood Still Can’t Look Away.

“Congratulations to those men.”

A month ago, exactly three seconds after she’d announced a list of Oscar nominees for best director that excluded women, the writer and actress Issa Rae appended those four words, an indictment sheathed in a ribbon of praise: “Congratulations to those men.”

The official announcement and its condemnation, delivered in almost the same breath on a live telecast, say a lot about Hollywood in 2020. The industry is in the clutches of an extremely public identity crisis, in which the fresh, multicultural image it aspires to (Rae, her co-host, John Cho) is undermined by the observable evidence (the list of nominees).

Before #OscarsSoWhite, a social justice campaign that began five years ago last month, the crisis had been contained. The fact that 92 percent of top film directors were men and 86 percent of top films featured white actors in the lead roles — a pattern dating back decades — did not often dominate entertainment news, least of all on Hollywood’s biggest night.

As the former academy president Cheryl Boone Isaacs, one of more than a dozen people who spoke to The Times for this history of the movement, said recently: “That was the industry: You’d scan around the room, and everyone looked the same. But people didn’t get what was going on. Members would say, ‘We’re professionals ­— we just vote for who’s best.’”

On Jan. 15, 2015, the academy awarded all 20 acting nominations to white actors for the first of two consecutive years, inspiring April Reign to create the hashtag #OscarsSoWhite. Reign, then a campaign finance lawyer and pop-culture-obsessed contributor to a loose community of black Twitter users, was hardly a Hollywood power broker.

But her words, coming on the heels of #BlackLivesMatter, erupted like a big bang, creating the conditions for a constellation of social movements — from #WhiteWashedOUT for Asian representation to Time’s Up for gender parity — that intensified media attention on the industry’s treatment of historically marginalized groups.

In the movie business, nothing is feared like bad press, and by 2016 timeworn incentive structures had begun to tilt in favor of increased diversity in front of and behind the camera. Films like “Get Out,” “Black Panther,” “Coco’’ and “Crazy Rich Asians” drove a multicultural gold rush at the box office as well as the Oscars, where a record 13 winners of color took home awards in 2019 alone.

But as this year’s nominees suggest, the old establishment has not been displaced overnight. Only one performer of color — Cynthia Erivo of “Harriet” — was nominated, and female directors of top-rated films, like Greta Gerwig of “Little Women,” Lorene Scafaria of “Hustlers” and Lulu Wang of “The Farewell,” were left out.

And yet it would be inaccurate to say that nothing has changed since that morning five years ago when Reign logged on to Twitter, or that recent developments have been undone. In edited excerpts below, filmmakers, awards-watchers and academy members tell the inside story of how what began as a three-word hashtag forced an insular, $42 billion industry to change course.

‘Fed Up’

At 8:30 a.m. Eastern time, on Jan. 15, 2015, the nominees for the 87th annual Academy Awards were announced live on television from the Beverly Hills headquarters of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

CHERYL BOONE ISAACS (president of the academy, 2013-17) The president gets to see the nominations about an hour and a half early, and as soon as I saw them, my heart sank.

APRIL REIGN (creator of the hashtag #OscarsSoWhite) My kid was upstairs getting ready for school and I was watching in my family room as I got ready for work. It struck me that there were no people of color nominated, so I picked up my phone. “#OscarsSoWhite they asked to touch my hair.” It happened in seconds.

DAWN HUDSON (chief executive of the academy) I had a very good idea what was going to come next.

REIGN I checked my phone at lunch and it was trending around the world: “#OscarsSoWhite they wear Birkenstocks in the wintertime.” “#OscarsSoWhite they have a perfect credit score.”

FRANKLIN LEONARD (founder of the Black List, a platform for unproduced screenplays) Her stroke of genius was that it was so economically put from a language perspective. And because there was basically no counterevidence, it demanded a certain attention.

SPIKE LEE (director, “BlacKkKlansman”) When black Twitter gets on your black ass … ooh, it ain’t no joke.

BARRY JENKINS (director, “Moonlight”) At a certain point, people just get fed up.

AVA DUVERNAY (director, “Selma”) It was a catalyst for a conversation about what had really been a decades-long absence of diversity and inclusion.

LEONARD It was the year after “12 Years a Slave” won. We had been led to believe that something substantive about the culture had changed. But then, just as in the transition from Obama to Trump, it turned out that maybe it hadn’t.

BOONE ISAACS It said a lot not just about the academy, but about America and where its bases of power are.

REIGN It could’ve been a bunch of different things — there were no women in the directors category, there were no visibly disabled people nominated — so #OscarsSoWhite has never just been about race. It’s about the underrepresentation of all marginalized groups.

At the center of the original #OscarsSoWhite debate was “Selma,” DuVernay’s film about Martin Luther King, Jr. and the civil rights movement. Thought to be an early awards favorite, it was ultimately nominated only in the best song and best picture categories, with DuVernay and her star, David Oyelowo, left unrecognized.

LEONARD There was this attempt to say that Ava was just making a pro-black movie that was all fiction, and it was really L.B.J. that led the civil rights movement.

JENKINS I’m sorry, but the idea that “Selma” wasn’t an artfully made film was bull.

DUVERNAY I knew that I wouldn’t get director. But I really felt strongly that David would get actor. That really startled me and disappointed me.

In a “Brutally Honest” Oscar ballot published by The Hollywood Reporter in February, an anonymous Oscar voter called the decision by the cast of “Selma” to express support for #BlackLivesMatter at the film’s New York premiere “offensive.”

LEONARD There was this pushback like, “How dare these people speak up so aggressively.” It was the #AllLivesMatter response, but for movies.

DUVERNAY Studio people had been whispering to me, “You shouldn’t have done that.” But I would do it all again. If you cannot be respectful of our alignment with that cause, with that protest, with that rallying cry, then there was nothing that I wanted from you anyway.

‘A Shifting Tide’

On Jan. 14, 2016, all 20 Oscar nominations in the acting categories went to white performers for the second year in a row, elevating the stature of #OscarsSoWhite. (The next morning, a front-page headline in The Los Angeles Times asked: “Where’s the Diversity?”) At an emergency meeting a week later, Hudson, Boone Isaacs and the academy’s board of governors approved ambitious targets for a membership initiative known as A2020, aiming to double the number of women and ethnically underrepresented members in four years.

REIGN One time you could call a fluke, two times feels like a pattern.

BOONE ISAACS We had already been working toward increasing diversity and inclusion, but we went from first to fourth gear.

HUDSON A crisis happens, and it becomes a catalyst for accelerated change.

BOONE ISAACS The statistics showed that our membership was 94 percent white and 77 percent male. People would say to me that it wasn’t on purpose, and I would ask them: Are you sure?

LEE Cheryl Boone Isaacs really made it her mission to open things up so that the voting body looked more like America.

LEONARD It gave me a little bit of hope.

Later that month, The Hollywood Reporter published letters from academy members who opposed the changes. The new rules, these members said, implied that “all of us are racists,” were “capitulating to political correctness,” and “lessened” the academy’s value as “a measuring stick for excellence,” among other objections.

BOONE ISAACS I do have my share of hate mail for ruining the organization.

RUTH CARTER (costume designer, “Selma” and “Black Panther”) They were afraid of one drop of black blood.

REGINALD HUDLIN (film director and producer, 2016 Academy Awards ceremony) That kind of stuff is encouraging to me. If you don’t hear from those people, you’re not making a difference.

DENNIS RICE (member of the academy’s public relations branch) I think we have to create an environment that supports diversity within our industry, but I’m color- and gender-blind when it comes to recognizing our art. You should look purely and objectively at the artistic accomplishment.

BOONE ISAACS Are you kidding me? We all have biases. You just don’t see it if it doesn’t affect you.

HUDSON We needed to make sure the membership represented a wide swath of the community, and that it was looking at a wide swath of films.

LEONARD I think what happened with the academy forced conversations among decision makers across the industry. What are we doing here? Why are we making the decisions that we’re making? And oh, if we continue to make the decisions that we’re making, we will be called out about it.

Last year, the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative at the University of Southern California reported a 13 percent increase in the number of top films with people of color in a lead role since the year #OscarsSoWhite began.

PETER RAMSEY (one of three directors of “Spiderman: Into the Spider-Verse”) You could see the tide shifting a little from the same few recognizable, white stars to movies that were in tune with younger and more diverse sensibilities.

LEONARD All of this corresponds with a generation of filmmakers — Barry, Ryan [Coogler], Ava, Dee [Rees], Jordan [Peele] — who came up in the industry over the last 10, 15 years and knew that they had to be that much better to have the same chance that their white male peers would have.

RAMSEY The animation world has always been really homogeneous, but I’ve seen more and more people of color and women come to prominence. If you look at the slates of places like Pixar and Sony and Netflix, that stuff is translating to real change.

JENKINS It wasn’t about promoting diversity for diversity’s sake, it was about correcting a blind spot — the artists of merit have always been there.

On Feb. 28, 2016, the Oscar host Chris Rock delivered a litany of jokes about the academy’s lack of diversity on its own stage. But one bit, in which small Asian children portrayed “dedicated, accurate and hardworking” accountants, sparked outrage. A representative for Rock said he was unavailable to speak for this article.

REIGN I don’t think that went as well as they’d hoped.

LEONARD It was in poor taste. We can’t demand respect for a community that we’re in if we’re not willing to afford that same respect to other communities who have their own struggles.

HUDSON I don’t think Chris meant to offend, but it wasn’t in any way appropriate.

HUDLIN I trusted Chris to do what he does — I wasn’t there to supervise or manage him. But I was caught off-guard. The last thing I would ever want is to offend anyone. The only thing you can do is say that you’re sincerely sorry.

‘Feast or Famine’

On Feb. 26, 2017, the night of the first Oscars of the A2020 era, more than 20 people of color were in contention, including seven in the acting categories and Jenkins for “Moonlight.” The winners included Jenkins (as a screenwriter) and Mahershala Ali, for “Moonlight,” and Viola Davis for “Fences.” After a stunning mishap in which the award was erroneously given to “La La Land,” “Moonlight” also won best picture.

REIGN 2017 felt different.

RAMSEY The door was widening.

JENKINS I don’t know if the numbers were shifting things, but I do think perspectives were broadening. #OscarsSoWhite had put the fact that so many people were being overlooked under a microscope. If “Moonlight” had come out three years earlier, I’m not sure how many people would have picked up that screener.

LEONARD On the one hand, maybe the new members changed the trajectory. But on the other hand, maybe, like “12 Years a Slave,” it was just that much better than everything else.

CARTER It didn’t feel like it was the black vote or the diversity vote, it felt like it was the right vote.

At the 2018 Oscars, four people of color were nominated in the acting categories. Peele, nominated three times for “Get Out,” won for original screenplay. In 2019, Ramsey, Carter and Lee were among a record-breaking seven African-American winners at a single ceremony.

RAMSEY It was 2019 when things seemed to really be maturing. The feeling I had was, “Oh, I think this is real.” It felt solid.

LEE The one thing I regret is that there’s not a picture of us all together holding our Oscars. Because it was bananas. It was crazy up in there.

JENKINS I was getting a glass of Champagne, and I looked up at the monitor and I think Hannah [Beachler, production designer for “Black Panther” and “Moonlight”] was onstage. I was like “Oh [expletive] — has anybody white won an Oscar yet?”

CARTER It felt amazing to be there with Spike and to be able to thank him from the stage for giving me my start [on “School Daze” in 1988]. Later, I was just a few rows back while he was getting his.

LEE If it were not for April Reign’s hashtag and Cheryl Boone Isaacs being president — the work of two sisters — I would not have an Oscar.

REIGN I don’t believe in having one good night and then declaring, “Everything is great.” The pendulum swings back and forth, as we’ve seen.

This year’s nominations include just one actor of color (Cynthia Erivo), and eight of the nine best picture nominees feature overwhelmingly white casts. (Bong Joon Ho’s “Parasite” is the exception.) Still, the academy is on track to reach its diversity targets by this summer, according to a spokeswoman. In total, it has grown by more than 3,000 new members since 2016, a nearly 50 percent increase.

CARTER The 2020 nominations are shameful. I love Scarlett Johansson [nominated for both “Marriage Story” and “Jojo Rabbit”]. If she had played two very different characters in the same film the way that Lupita Nyong’o did in “Us,” might that have been deemed worthy of a nomination?

LEE After last year’s ceremony, I said, “It ain’t gonna be like this next year!” It’s always feast or famine with us.

DUVERNAY The majority of that voting body has not changed. It’s still 84 percent white and 68 percent male. From a voting perspective, even doubling the number of women and people of color doesn’t really tip the scales.

REIGN If you look at the demographics of this country or the demographics of moviegoers, we’re nowhere near true representation.

LEONARD You could have a year when literally every nominee is of color and that would still not mean that the systemic problems that exist in the industry have somehow evaporated overnight — any more than Obama being elected president means that we’ve solved the problem of racism.

REIGN We have to start way before the awards conversation. What kind of stories are getting greenlit? How are the characters described?

JENKINS I think we have to allow that the academy can have divergent tastes every year while still keeping the volume up and pointing things out. How can you have six Asian films that have received five or more nominations, and not one of them has ever been honored in the acting category? We just have to keep the conversation going and keep making movies.

LEE This thing’s not gonna turn around overnight. It’s been a battle from the beginning: Hattie McDaniel, Sidney Poitier. And why should we think that struggle is not a part of our existence?

BOONE ISAACS There’s always yin and yang, there’s always push and pull — always. But I am a big believer that you stay on point, you stay on goal, and you keep moving.

RAMSEY There’s too many other ways to get entertainment now than the tiny number of movies that get official academy recognition each year. #OscarsSoWhite is an alarm bell. It’s saying, “Keep up with us, or we’re going to leave you behind.”

from WordPress https://mastcomm.com/oscarssowhite-held-up-a-mirror-hollywood-still-cant-look-away/

[twentyfoursevenfilm]

2019 Academy Award Predictions

Another year, another tumultuous awards season down. This one has been particularly fraught, even before you throw in the Academy’s own controversies and back-stepping. There’s no such thing as a weak year for movies, but I would have to argue that this has been a particularly weak year for awards movies. I think we’ll all look back and marvel at the near shutouts of films like First Man, Eighth Grade, A Quiet Place, Boy Erased, Leave No Trace and of course, A Simple Favor’s costume design. What were people thinking, and why isn’t the greatest film achievement of the year, A Star Is Born, failing so spectacularly? But that’s a conversation for another day. This is what we have and this is where we are. In any case, Oscar Sunday is still my favorite day of the year. 

Best Picture

Black Panther

BlacKkKlansman

Bohemian Rhapsody

The Favourite

Green Book

Roma

A Star Is Born

Vice

Here we go. We will look back and admit this was a weak year for Best Picture. It's just the truth. A Star is Born or BlackkKlansman should be winning. Green Book or Roma will win. Last year, Best Picture was a crazy three-way race between Shape of Water, Get Out, and Three Billboards. Wildly different films representing wildly different ideas about the industry. All that hand wringing and in retrospect, it was obvious. The Shape of Water was safe and pretty, and that's why it won. Guillermo is so, so respected and people LOVED seeing him win. While Green Book defied expectations and won the PGA (on a preferential ballot), it lost the WGA, which it should have won easily. It's momentum has slowed considerably in the past few weeks. For Best Picture in the expanded era you have to look for which movie has momentum that people hate the least. You can't win if there is ANY sort of controversy. That's Roma. It's respectable. A lot of the general conventions have been thrown out this year. No one cares that it didn't get a SAG ensemble nod, or that no foreign film has ever won Best Picture, or the Netflix factor. It just seems unstoppable at this point because there's simply no other viable option. BlackkKlansman hit everywhere it needed to without losing momentum like A Star is Born. But it hasn't won anything. Absolutely nothing. They'll give it Adapted Screenplay and be done with it. Last year I took a risk and I'm not going to do it again. Remember, miracles don't happen with 90% of the vote in. BUT....Bohemian Rhapsody. People love that movie. That's your wildcard Doomsday scenario. This year is that crazy. 

Final Prediction: Roma 

Could be: Green Book

Could ACTUALLY be: Bohemian Rhapsody

Best Director

Spike Lee, BlacKkKlansman

Paweł Pawlikowski, Cold War

Yorgos Lanthimos, The Favourite

Alfonso Cuarón, Roma

Adam McKay, Vice

Cuarón. There's no way he doesn't win. He has everything he needs and no competition that even comes close, especially if they give Adapted Screenplay to Spike Lee. 

Final Prediction: Alfonso Cuarón 

Actor in a Leading Role

Christian Bale, Vice

Bradley Cooper, A Star Is Born

Willem Dafoe, At Eternity's Gate

Rami Malek, Bohemian Rhapsody

Viggo Mortensen, Green Book

Oh how the tides have turned on this one. For months it was Christian Bale's to lose and by the time the Globes came around he seemed unstoppable. But then the SAG happened...and then BAFTA. And now...yeah. What's fascinating is that this is the SAME EXACT thing that happened with Michael Keaton and Eddie Redmayne in 2015. Keaton the veteran, the favorite. Won the Comedy Globe. And then young Ed swooped in and stole it all away. And now Rami Malek is doing the same. I can only explain it this way: 1) People love Queen 2) People love Freddie Mercury 3) People think it's a "safe" way of rewarding the film without rewarding Bryan Singer 4) People love flashy obvious performances and 5) People love Rami Malek. Ever since he burst onto the scene in Mr. Robot people have been awed by his humble genius. All I can say is poor Bradley Cooper. 

Final Prediction: Rami Malek

Actress in a Leading Role

Yalitza Aparicio, Roma

Glenn Close, The Wife

Olivia Colman, The Favourite

Lady Gaga, A Star Is Born

Melissa McCarthy, Can You Ever Forgive Me?

One thing I like to say about the Oscars is that they are eerily similar to presidential elections. And one thing we all know about those: miracles don't happen when 90% of percents are in. They just don't. As much as pundits may want to lobby for 11th hour winner Olivia Coleman, I just can't see it. Sure, she's a hoot. Sure, she won the BAFTA. But Glenn Close won the Oscar the moment she gave that Globes speech. She was there to win. I don't care if nobody cares about The Wife outside of a Delta flight. She's winning. Her narrative is too strong. I think Close as an actress is more beloved than Coleman's performance in The Favourite. It's like the opposite of what's happening with Bradley Cooper. (4 time nominee, hasn't won, admired, but people are obsessed with Malek's performance so they don't care). I like to think Gaga will have her chance one day. This is a situation in which the film itself, and the nomination, are validation enough. She succeeded here. 

Final Prediction: Glenn Close

Actor in a Supporting Role

Mahershala Ali, Green Book

Adam Driver, BlacKkKlansman

Sam Elliott, A Star Is Born

Richard E. Grant, Can You Ever Forgive Me?

Sam Rockwell, Vice

Category Fraud. Why aren't more people calling this out?? This is a lead in a supporting category and it is supremely annoying. But Mahershala Ali is like the new Christoph Waltz or Sterling K Brown of yore. People see him and want to throw awards at him. End of story. He's wonderful in Green Book. But he's a co-lead! Of course he's going to win here! He's competing against people with 10 minutes of screen time! Although I can't say I have a strong argument for who deserves this more. Rockwell certainly does not. Adam Driver should win for something where he has a flashier role. Richard E Grant is the Laurie Metcalf of 2019. And Sam Elliot is...Sam Elliot? If Ali wasn't here or wasn't a co-lead, or if Elliot had more screen time, he'd be winning this handily. But he doesn't have an overdue narrative nearly as compelling as Close's. 

Final Prediction: Mahershala Ali

Actress in a Supporting Role

Amy Adams, Vice

Marina de Tavira, Roma

Regina King, If Beale Street Could Talk

Emma Stone, The Favourite

Rachel Weisz, The Favourite

This is one of the wildest Supporting Actress races in years. It's so odd. Regina King won Globe and Critic's Choice. She wasn't nominated at BAFTA or SAG. BAFTA went to Rachel Weisz, a British person in a British movie. SAG went to Emily Blunt for A Quiet Place (which I actually think makes sense: Weisz and Stone split, no one cares about Robbie, and when you put Blunt's performance against Adam's, there's no contest which is more impressive and integral to the film). Blunt wasn't even nominated for the Oscar. The contest here, oddly, is between Weisz and King. But despite the BAFTA win I don't think Weisz is strong enough. Some votes will still split, she's a previous winner, and Regina King is just SO well liked. Jerry Maguire, come on. Despite the near-face plant of Beale Street, King is still undeniably strong here. But I wouldn't call it a lock. There could be an almost Mark Rylance Situation here. Maybe. The other wild outcome here is a Roma sweep that brings Marina de Tavria along with it, but that seems even more unlikely. Weird year this one.  

Final prediction: Regina King

Cinematography

Cold War

The Favourite

Never Look Away

Roma

A Star Is Born

Roma. There's no way this isn't Roma. It's an easy place to reward it. It's in black and white. It's lovely and respectable. A director has never won for cinematography but I don’t see that getting in Cuarón’s way. Cold War is a dark horse shot by a branch favorite but I can’t see voters denying Roma this win.

Final Prediction: Roma 

Film Editing 

BlacKkKlansman

Bohemian Rhapsody

The Favourite

Green Book

Vice

This is low key a terrible lineup. Nothing like we expected and only half of what we wanted. So. Best Editing often translates to Most Editing, in which case Vice takes it. But do they really like Vice that much, you have to ask? It got 8 nominations, but this still seems shaky to me. You could make an argument for BlackkKlansman, but there's no solid evidence to support it. People have certainly been...talking about Bohemian Rhapsody's editing. It could win for Live Aid alone, honestly. Every year the Oscars have surprising, odd wins and this could be one. It could come down to which film people like more. This is one of the three toughest categories for me this year and something tells me it’s going to be Bohemian Rhapsody. There have to be a lot of voters who were turned off by Vice’s hit you over the head with it again and again flashy editing.

Final Prediction: Bohemian Rhapsody 

Animated Feature Film

Incredibles 2

Isle of Dogs

Mirai

Ralph Breaks The Internet

Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse

Spider-man: Into the Spiderverse has won virtually every precursor. And it's Spiderman. Disney always wins here but I don't the the Academy members are going to deny the artistic achievement of Spiderverse. Not for The Incredibles 2. 

Final Prediction: Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse

Foreign Film

Capernaum

Cold War

Never Looks Away

Roma

Shoplifters

Is this even a question? Roma. I know there are some brave pundits out there predicting a Cold War upset but with voting open to the entire Academy...this has to be one of the biggest locks of the night. Side note, this will be Mexico’s first win for Foreign Language, which is awesome. Poland can have it back next year. 

 Final Prediction: Roma

Documentary Feature

Free Solo

Hale County This Morning, This Evening

Minding the Gap

Of Fathers and Sons

RBG

Free Solo. You can make an argument for RBG but...one has IMAX showings and the other is on CNN. Free Solo just has the X Factor here. It's showy. National Geographic campaigned very well and it won the BAFTA. There’s such a strong narrative element to the film that puts it over the top as well. It’s not a collection of footage but a film in every sense of the word. 

Final Prediction: Free Solo 

Adapted Screenplay 

The Ballad Of Buster Scruggs

BlacKkKlansman

Can You Ever Forgive Me?

If Beale Street Could Talk

A Star Is Born

Can You Ever Forgive Me? won the WGA, but there's no way that's going to happen here. This is a nice and easy way to award Spike Lee, just like last year with Jordan Peele in Original. This is your "We promise, we DO kind of like you" award. It's the consolation prize for a film that has no chance at Best Picture. There's a case for Barry Jenkins, but he won so recently for Moonlight, and with Spike losing every single director award to Cuarón, this is his to lose. 

Final Prediction: BlackkKlansman

Original Screenplay

The Favourite

First Reformed

Green Book

Roma

Vice

Unlike Adapted, often a glorified consolation prize, Original Screenplay is held to a greater standard and surprisingly, they often get this one right. Wins here tend to go to films too kooky, creative, or just flat out cool to win Best Picture. Get Out, Manchester by the Sea, Her, etc. This year we're looking at a race between Green Book and The Favourite. Precursors here, like for so many others, have been largely unhelpful. Green Book losing the WGA to Eighth Grade (not even nominated for the Oscar), may finally signify a slowdown of a race that's been marred with controversy. But also people just really like Eighth Grade. The Favourite, not eligible at WGA, fits the bill as the MOST original screenplay. Like I said, they often get this right. While there's a chance Green Book prevails here, The Favourite does have 10 nominations and this is an obvious place to reward it. 

Final Prediction: The Favourite

Best Score

Black Panther

BlacKkKlansman

If Beale Street Could Talk

Isle of Dogs

Mary Poppins Returns

If only First Man were here, this would be so easy. Justin Hurwitz, past Academy darling was totally robbed here. One of the biggest head scratchers of the nominations. We're left with a confusing bunch. People love the Beale Street score. But Black Panther and BlackkKlansman are Best Picture nominees. And something tells me Mary Poppins Returns actually has a shot? This is one of the hardest ones for me. I kind of want to go Poppins because it's a musical. People associate it with music. It's fun and pleasing. I could see it as a classic Oscar night surprise. Or am I crazy? Is it going to be Beale Street and I'm just majorly overthinking it? Or is it Black Panther? It is an easy place to reward it so people will pick it? This one is SO hard. No matter what I pick I feel like I'm going to be wrong. I feel like in any other year you could pick Desplat and have a 50% chance of being right but somehow I don't think that's the case here. I have to pick something...

Final Prediction: Black Panther

Original Song

"All The Stars," Black Panther

"I'll Fight," RBG

"The Place Where Lost Things Go," Mary Poppins Returns

"Shallow," A Star Is Born

"When A Cowboy Trades His Spurs For Wings," The Ballad Of Buster Scruggs

SHALLOW for the love of God at least A Star is Born will win SOMETHING. I'm not falling for this last minute All The Stars paranoia. 

Final Prediction: Shallow

Documentary Short Subject

Black Sheep

End Game

Lifeboat

A Night at The Garden

Period. End of Sentence.

Last year I put so much work into researching the shorts, I watched most of them, and still I missed 2 of the 3. They're just so hard to predict. Especially this one. You're guessing what subject matter 8,000 people are going to find most compelling and/or not be sick of. Now we have Netflix to contend with. If a short is on Netflix more people will watch it, so it's more likely to win. Mostly. Didn't happen last year (Heaven is a Traffic Jam on the 405 won on the title alone). They have 2 this year. Period. End of Sentence has a chance, it's a lighter one. But subject matter wise, Black Sheep is the most relevant. Good title too. 

Final Prediction: Black Sheep

Animated Short Film

Animal Behaviour

Bao

Late Afternoon

One Small Step

Weekends

Bao. Go Pixar or go home. At least in a year without Kobe. 

Final Prediction: Bao

Live-Action Short Film

Detainment

Fauve

Marguerite

Mother

Skin

From what I've seen it's Marguerite or Skin. Let's go Marguerite because it's slightly less depressing? 

Final Prediction: Marguerite

Makeup and Hairstyling

Border

Mary Queen of Scots

Vice

I almost feel like going rogue on this one and choosing Mary, Queen of Scots. I know Vice is the odds on favorite because of the prosthetics but it's just so similar to Darkest Hour winning last year. Compared to Mary, Queen of Scots that had a LOT of obvious makeup. But the movie is so weak comparatively. There are always weird surprises at the Oscars in categories like this and I just have a feeling this could be it. Also, Suicide Squad won here a few years ago, so we know they like Margot Robbie. Ha. But Vice seems so obvious. They both won at the guild. I'm really torn. Ok, since I'm taking a few risks elsewhere, I'll play this one safe. Vice. Final Prediction: Vice

Costume Design

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs

Black Panther

The Favourite

Mary Poppins Returns

Mary Queen of Scots

This is a tough one too. Like Production Design, we're looking at Black Panther vs. The Favourite. The smart move would probably be to split them and have a 50/50 chance of getting one right. I really want to go all in for The Favourite though. But I would argue Black Panther has a better shot here than it does in Production Design. The costumes are definitely memorable. But The Favourite is period, which they always love. And The Favourite has so many nods. And Sandy Powell has had 14 nominations! 

Final Prediction: The Favourite

Production Design

Black Panther

The Favourite

First Man

Mary Poppins Returns

Roma

This is Black Panther vs. The Favourite. A lot of people think Black Panther, considering that “the house was already there” argument against the latter. However, the first thing that comes to mind with The Favourite is the interiors. You see the actors, the costumes, the production design all in one image. And most people saw Black Panther almost a year ago—is the production design the element that’s really going to stick in their mind? It’s also a bit of a snobby category and I can’t see them going Marvel on this one.

Final Prediction: The Favourite

Visual Effects  

Avengers: Infinity War

Christopher Robin

First Man

Ready Player One

Solo: A Star Wars Story

I felt so sure this was Avengers or bust but I'm having 11th hour doubts. Marvel never wins here! I just have a feeling it could be Ready Player One. That movie is ALL effects. And it's Spielberg.  It's a bit risky, but I can see voters thinking, oh year Ready Player One, pretty good, lots of effects. Maybe Black Panther is enough Marvel for them to award. First Man is a space movie with practical effects. They love that. But Gravity and Interstellar are both so grandiose compared to First Man. And it was so DOA I'm not sure I can see it. 

Final Prediction: Ready Player One 

Sound Editing

Black Panther

Bohemian Rhapsody

First Man

A Quiet Place

Roma

If First Man had been better received, these categories would be easy. (I will be saying this more than once.) In any case, there's no way I'm going Bohemian Rhapsody here. I know predicting a split is tricky. A lone Sound Editing nominee win is even more rare. But with the field open to everyone, I'm going out on a bit of a limb and picking A Quiet Place. It's a movie about sound, and everyone knows that. It was nominated at PGA, WGA, Blunt won at SAG--it's a popular movie. It won for Sound+Foley at the MPSE. This is by no means a sure thing, but I can see it. I will stay loyal to this movie until the end. 

Final Prediction: A Quiet Place

Sound Mixing

Black Panther

Bohemian Rhapsody

First Man

A Star Is Born

Roma

They love musicals here. Should be A Star is Born but whatever. It's going to be Bohemian Rhapsody. It did really well at the guild and it's been an unstoppable force all season, despite Film Twitter's best efforts. 

Final Prediction: Bohemian Rhapsody 

[moviemavengal]

The Oscars are my Superbowl and I throw a big party every year.  I follow the race for the entire year, reading especially Awards Daily to keep informed how the race is shaping up.  At my party, people fill out ballots and I run a contest (excluding me because that wouldn’t be fair.)  The one with the most right gets 2 DVD’s of movies nominated.  This year I’m giving Hell or High Water and Manchester By The Sea, as many movies are still in theaters.  The biggest loser also gets a prize – a giftcard to our local cinema with my admonishment – “Go see a movie already!”  I’m pretty proud that my son won his college Oscar party pool four years running with my giving him the skinny.  So here’s your rundown so you can win, if you have a party tonight.  For details down to the technical awards, again, check out Awards Daily because they track all the previous awards and the guilds leading up to the big night.

Best Picture is easy.  It’s La La Land all the way.  There are nine nominees this year, and really 2016’s crop of movies was an embarrassment of riches.  It was simply a great movie year.  La La Land garnered a record matching 14 nominations, the same as All About Eve and Titanic.  It’s not a question of will it win, but rather how many Oscars it will win.  Being a musical, it’s got those categories sown up.  If you want to know why there are only nine nominees rather than the allowed ten, it’s the complicated preferential ballot system that the Academy uses.  It’s Byzantine in it’s complexity, and if they stick with it, it’s unlikely there will ever be a full 10, only 8 or nine as we’ve had since they instituted the new rules.

Best Director is also Damien Chazelle for La La Land.  He won the Director’s Guild and just about every other award possible through the awards season.  He’s a proven commodity because everyone also loved his first film Whiplash.

Best Actress is Emma Stone for La La Land.  She won the SAG and many other awards along her way to tonight’s big win.  She is the heart and soul of La La Land.  It’s her story.  This category I had issues as to who won the five nomination spots.  I love Meryl Streep, and I admit I haven’t seen Florence Foster Jenkins, but really?  A record 20th nomination for her rather than a spot for Amy Adams for Arrival?  Or Annette Bening for 20th Century Women?  I am pleased that Ruth Negga got a nomination for the wonderful Loving.  The problem is there are only 5 spots.  Viola Davis got a Tony as lead actress for the play Fences, but they put her in the supporting category for the Oscars.  I love Emma Stone, and I’ll be pleased to see her come home with an Oscar tonight.

As I mentioned, Viola Davis is a LOCK for Supporting Actress for Fences.  You can take that one to the bank.  As The Daily Beast put it, Just Give Viola Davis the Damn Oscar Already.  Can you believe she doesn’t have one yet?  When she starts with that snot crying, it’s over.

Supporting Actor is likely the wonderful Mahershala Ali in Moonlight.  Oh man, I loved his performance as the tender father figure drug dealer Juan.  That swimming lesson scene!

ouse

He probably sealed the deal with his moving speech at the SAG Awards – “I am a Muslim.”  He was also in the Best Picture nominated Hidden Figures and now I realize just how many wonderful supporting roles he’s done, like in House of Cards.

  Best Actor is the nail biter of the night.  Casey Affleck gave a career best performance as a man shattered by grief in Manchester By The Sea, but he’s been dogged by the scandal of the settlement he made in a sexual harassment case on another film.  Denzel Washington was a powerhouse in Fences, but he already has two Oscars.  They’ve split the awards this season.  Casey got the Golden Globe, but Denzel surprised with the SAG Award.  This one could easily go either way.  I’m betting on Casey Affleck.  Scandal didn’t shut out Roman Polanksi with Academy voters, so I’m betting he still gets it.

Adapted Screenplay I think is also where Moonlight gets some love.  Director Barry Jenkins took Tarell McCraney’s very personal play, and added experiences from his own childhoodto the movie script.  I just listened this weekend to an incredible interview with both of them on Fresh Air, and I highly recommend you listen.  They grew up blocks from each other, and went to the same elementary school, but did not know each other as children.  They both had mothers who were addicted to crack cocaine.

Original Screenplay is Kenneth Lonnergan for Manchester By The Sea.  I think this is where the Academy voters reward the other films, rather than giving everything to La La Land.

Editing:  La La Land

Documentary Feature: O.J.: Made in America  – Can an 8 hour mini-series be considered a film?  I guess so, because it’s won everywhere else.  I’ve watched about half of it and it is like reliving that time all over again for me.

Cinematography: La La Land

Animated Feature: Zootopia.  Kubo with Two Strings could upset, but I think the diversity message of Zootopia will particularly resonate with Academy voters.

Costume Design: Jackie.  The costumes were just stunning, but Fantastic Beasts may pull ahead here, as fantasy films usually have an edge in this category.

Makeup and Hair: Star Trek

Visual Effects: The Jungle Book

Production Design: Arrival  I loved the look of this movie, and I hope it gets at least one Oscar here in this category.

Musical Score – La La Land  Duh.

Best Song – I’m wavering on this one.  La La Land has two nominations, and City of Stars probably will win, but maybe the Hamilton love sweeps Lin an Oscar for How Far I’ll Go in Moana, which I watched last night.  I give it to City Of Stars, and I’m glad Lin is set to perform his song tonight at the ceremony!

Animated Short: Piper  You can buy all the nominated shorts for $5.99 to watch on Google Play which I did on Friday night.  Piper is the best, and it’s Pixar, but I really liked the fascinating Pear Cider and Cigarettes.

Foreign Language Feature: The Salesman  Whether it’s actually  the best of the lot, I have no idea as I’ve not had a chance to see any of them, but with the director being blocked from attending through the EO Muslim Ban, I think voters will send a political message by giving this one the win.

The other categories, I’m just guessing.  Sound Mixing and Editing I never know what they are exactly, to be honest.  Maybe Sound Editing to La La Land, and Mixing to Hackshaw Ridge as war movies tend to win with their complex soundscapes.

Check out this Awards Daily post for a full rundown of the odds for each category.

BEVERLY HILLS, CA – JANUARY 08: Actor Sunny Pawar attends the 74th Annual Golden Globe Awards at The Beverly Hilton Hotel on January 8, 2017 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Frazer Harrison/Getty Images)

I can’t wait to see this little guy on the Red Carpet in a few hours!  He’s been the star of the moment with his thumbs up pose.

  No Guts No Glory – Oscar Predictions The Oscars are my Superbowl and I throw a big party every year.  I follow the race for the entire year, reading especially…