Category Archives: Historical

“8 Mile” Movie Review

*Insert some unoriginal joke about Mom’s spaghetti somewhere in here* This hip-hop focused drama was originally released in theaters worldwide on November 8th, 2002, having been pushed back from a previous summer opening. It went on to gross over $242 million at the worldwide box office against a $41million budget and set a record for the biggest R-rated opening weekend at the time. The film managed to garner some very positive reviews both from critics and the rap community, even winning an Oscar. It also made over $40 million in DVD sales the first day of its release, a record for an R-rated  film at the time. Directed and produced by Curtis Hanson, the screenplay by Scott Silver is loosely based on the life of its main star. Numerous other filmmakers were in the running for the director’s chair, including Quentin Tarantino who had to turn it down to finish Kill Bill. Much of the rap battles, the centerpieces of the entire film, were auditioned for by various local artists and were given an improvised, one-take only opportunity. There was a bit of controversy when rap producer Buckwild claimed that one of the scenes used an instrumental of his song “Time’s Up” without his approval. Set in 1995 in Detroit, Marshall Mathers A.K.A. Eminem stars as Jimmy Smith Jr., an unhappy blue-collar worker struggling to provide for himself and his family. He harbors a strong passion for hip-hop music, participating in various underground rap battles under the stage name “B-Rabbit.” As he tries to win back respect after a humiliating defeat, he also attempts to look at his world beyond just his dreams. I’ve been a big fan of Eminem’s music for a long time now. Not just because it’s good music, but also because many of his songs are genuinely inspiring and motivational to me. Hell, even if his newer stuff doesn’t measure up to his first few albums, they’re still a lot better to listen to than most contemporary rap artists. Aside from his hilarious one-scene cameo in The Interview, I had always been curious what his leading role in this film would be like. I also adored Curtis Hanson’s film L.A. Confidential, and while this was a sharp departure for him, it still made me curious to see what he could do. And while 8 Mile is definitely rough around the edges, it’s still a very compelling drama with a surprising amount of insight. While yes, the rap battles themselves are gripping and fun to watch, they’re not really the point of the film. Rather, Hanson and screenwriter Scott Silver are far more interested in using them to contextualize the old and decaying city of Detroit. There are numerous empty houses lined up in entire neighborhoods where people go to party and the characters struggle to get jobs better than on the factory line. One of the areas where it falters is that 8 Mile, named after the titular highway separating demographics, can get a little didactic about these issues. There’s even one character who constantly goes on diatribes about the lack of economic opportunities for citizens there. All of this is well and good, but I feel like we didn’t necessarily need this. Eminem might not want to be a big movie star, but it’s impossible to see anyone else playing B-Rabbit. Yes, the character is based on him, but he inhabits such a hidden energy and repressed anger at his social circumstances that we can’t help but root for him. And when the battles in the final act finally come into play, he absolutely explodes in a fury of brilliance. By his side for much of the film is Mekhi Phifer as Future, B-Rabbit’s best friend and host of the rap battles. He maintains an unwavering optimism for his buddy’s talent and artistry, in spite of the problems they face on the daily. The late Brittany Murphy also makes an impression as Alex Latourno, B-Rabbit’s love interest. Although she sometimes feels more like a sketch of a person than an actual individual, she does good work as a woman who sees the potential in the protagonist’s abilities. Michael Shannon and Anthony Mackie also have effective small roles as men Jimmy has to overcome while D’Angelo Wilson, Evan Jones, and Omar Benson Miller chip in as his enthusiastic best friends. The one weak link is Kim Basinger as Jimmy’s alcoholic mother. She felt really miscast in her role, and wasn’t really convincing in her own struggles. Meanwhile, for a studio movie from the early 2000’s, 8 Mile‘s technical aspects are surprisingly down in the dirt and gritty. The cinematography by Rodrigo Prieto, who later shot Silence and Brokeback Mountain, has a dark aesthetic to it. Most of the scenes are shot in a handheld, cinéma vérité style without much flare or fancy movement. The naturalistic lighting and focus create some organically beautiful shots, such as an abandoned house burning down in the middle of the night. The added fact that all of the film was shot on location in Detroit creates a certain level of authenticity and honesty that’s rare in films. It matches up perfectly with Jay Rabinowitz, which somehow feels wise in the amount of shots shown in each scene. Although a number of scenes take place at night, it’s still easy to tell what’s going on. The rap battles near the end of the film are perfectly cut together, especially considering the fact that each one was done in just one take. As could be expected, Eminem also produced and curated the music soundtrack for the film. The vast majority of tracks are essentially instrumental backings from various songs of his, such as “8 Mile Road.” But there a re couple of more obscure songs, mostly by local artists from Detroit. The centerpiece of it all is obviously “Lose Yourself,” which became the artists first song to reach the top spot on the Billboard. With a very consistent beat of pianos, drums, and guitar, the lyrics are a fiery call to chase one’s dreams. He apparently wrote the song’s music and lyrics in between takes during filming. It ultimately went on to become the first hip-hop song to win the Academy Award for Best Original Song, which Eminem ironically slept through. 8 Mile is a familiar yet gritty drama about the trials of achieving one’s dreams. Although there’s nothing particularly revolutionary about the film, it has enough conviction to earn a spot of memorability thanks to Curtis Hanson’s direction. And not only does Eminem surprise with a great lead performance, but also gave us one of the best songs ever written for a feature film.

Advertisements

“The Curse of La Llorona” Movie Review

How exciting! This is my first ever review for a film I saw at a festival! I wish it were a better film, but hey I won’t complain too much. This supernatural horror thriller had its world premiere at the 2019 South By Southwest Film Festival. It is currently scheduled to be widely released in theaters on April 19th, 2019, by Warner Bros. and New Line Cinema. Made for the budget $35 million, given the studio’s track record the last couple years, it should have little problem earning it all back by the end of its theatrical run. But whether its middling critical reception can improve with general audiences remains to be seen. Produced by James Wan and Gary Dauberman, this movie marks the feature-length debut of director Michael Chaves, who previously helmed a number of short films. The screenplay was written by partners Tobias Iaconis and Mikki Daughtry under the original title The Children. Wan and CO. were apparently so impressed by Chaves’ work on the film that they immediately hired him to take over the next Conjuring film, which is supposedly slated to begin production later this year. Set in Los Angeles in 1973, Linda Cardellini stars as Anna Tate-Garcia, a social worker and widow. She’s called to check in on the status of a single mother Patricia Alvarez, played by Patricia Velásquez, who claims to be protecting her two boys from La Llorona, a ghost in Latin American folklore. Also known as the Weeping Woman, the story goes that a young Mexican woman drowned her children in a river after discovering her husband’s infidelity and then drowned herself out of extreme guilt, cursed to wade through the waters for eternity. Now, Anna becomes convinced that La Llorona is coming after her family next and enlists the help of a disillusioned priest, played by Raymond Cruz, to stop the evil spirit. Let’s get this out of the way before going any further: The Curse of La Llorona is the newest film in The Conjuring Universe. While such rumors had persisted for a while, it was always marketed as its own standalone horror flick. I don’t really consider this to be a spoiler because the connection to the other films is extremely lowkey, but take it as you will. To be perfectly honest, I don’t really have that much familiarity with this franchise, other than hearing a lot of praise from horror fans. I enjoyed what Wan did with the first Saw movie, and I like how he’s giving opportunities to newer filmmakers in the genre like Chaves or David F. Sandberg. Being my first experience at a film festival, there was a unique sort of anticipation I had for this film. And while The Curse of La Llorona has its share of fun moments, it just can’t quite rise high enough to separate itself from the crowded deluge of ghost movies. I have no doubt that Michael Chaves has a great career in the genre ahead of him, and he certainly shows some great skill behind the camera. But the issue is that the script he’s working with is so rote that it often feels like he’s fighting off what begs to be a jump-scare fest and dumb character decisions. At the very least, it could have honestly used an overhaul by another writer to make it a lot better. Furthermore, similar to The Cloverfield Paradox last year, I don’t feel like this had to be connected to The Conjuring at all. It’s a very fleeting moment shown in the latter half that doesn’t bear any actual relevance to the plot itself. I understand the desire for brand recognition to increase box office potential, but this could have easily written that crossover out entirely and no one would be the wiser. Linda Cardellini’s built a pretty sweet resume over the last few years with roles in films like Green Book and the underrated A Simple Favor. For her first stab at the horror genre, she does a pretty great job as Anna and exudes a certain vulnerability and strength in a frightened mother. Jaynee-Lynne Kinchen and Roman Christou play both of Anna’s children, Samantha and Chris, respectively. While horror films are often prone to terrible child actors, these two showed a decent range with what they were given. Patricia Velásquez is also pretty good as the petrified mother in Anna’s case while Breaking Bad‘s Raymond Cruz delivers some goods as a man of faith who may be the family’s best hope of survival. While they both did well with the material, their limited screen-time and development makes it hard to become invested in them. Cruz particularly feels underutilized and only really becomes important in the second half, and at that point he feels more like an archetype than an actual character. As continues to be tradition with New Line’s horror films, The Curse of La Llorona has some pretty polished and inspired moments from behind the camera. Wan’s regular cinematographer Don Burgess captures much of the action in darkness, often switching between tight Steadicam and handheld scenes. After a somewhat uneven prologue, the opening scene sees a single shot follow Anna and her children rushing around the house to get ready for school, setting the atmosphere. There are also a number of admittedly impressive bits where a shot seems like it’s following the titular ghost in one area, only for her to come back in the same shot. But the editing by Peter Gvozdas is pretty inconsistent and at times frustrating. While not necessarily choppy, it does feel in favor of creating jump scares with different shots following another. It can be clever sometimes in how it shows imagery, such as highlighting table cloths to imply that La Llorona is there. But the film is already wrestling with a meager script and editing it in such a ham-fisted way felt detrimental. Despite what the tone this review may make you think, I had a decent time with it. This is certainly a leap ahead of other horror movies like Wish Upon and The Bye Bye Man, but it still feels weighed down because of its obligation to the Conjuring Universe. Definitely a better viewing experience with a huge crowd, The Curse of La Llorona is a fleetingly scary flick that muddles a truly terrifying legend in favor of franchise connections. If for nothing else, this film shows that Michael Chaves clearly has a lot of talent and should enjoy a healthy career in Hollywood. His and Wan’s hearts are in the right place, but it just doesn’t make enough effort to distinguish itself from the genre. You’re most likely going to leave the theater having a fun time with all of the other patrons, but won’t remember much of it come the next day. But hey, it was super fun to watch at South By Southwest, so it’s great for that memory.

“Boogie Nights” Movie Review

If the porn industry was anything like what this movie depicted, I can’t even imagine how much more chaotic Hollywood proper must have been at the time. This ensemble drama initially premiered at the 1997 Toronto International Film Festival, where it tied with L.A. Confidential for the Metro Media Award. It was later released in two theaters by New Line Cinema on October 10th, 1997, and gradually expanded in the ensuing weeks. It managed to gross around $43.1 million against a $15 million budget, with nearly half of that coming from foreign markets. It also received some of the best reviews from that year and earned several awards and nominations, including three Academy Award nominations. Written and directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, the film was inspired by a mockumentary short he made in high school called The Dirk Diggler Story. Several of the director’s first choices for roles had to turn it down for various reasons, and blindly cast for others. He also frequently butted heads with producer Michael De Luca during post-production, specifically over the epic runtime and original desire for an NC-17 rating. And according to most parties, the director got into nasty clashes with one of its stars throughout filming, and they were caught in the middle. Set in Los Angeles in 1977, Mark Wahlberg stars as Eddie Adams, a young high school dropout working as a nightclub dishwasher. one night, he meets legendary pornographic filmmaker Jack Horner, played by Burt Reynolds, and successfully auditions for one of his new projects. Over the next few years, we witness his meteoric rise as a star in the industry, as well as the lives of other production crew members during the so-called “Golden Age” of Porn. Paul Thomas Anderson is obviously a beloved auteur of cinema, with many films on his resume that cinephiles everywhere dissect each day. Whether it’s a sprawling epic like Magnolia or a lofty drama like Phantom Thread, his unique style is always present. There Will Be Blood and Punch-Drunk Love remain my favorites of his, but I can still appreciate how cinephiles may adore his other works more. For whatever reason, his first three films have managed to consistently avoid my grasp for quite some time. His sophomore effort, in particular, constantly came and left Netflix or Amazon Prime before I could decide to watch it. Well, I finally sat down and watched it last year, and have seen it again in the context of my New Year’s Cinematic Resolution. And I gotta say, Boogie Nights may just be the director’s most accessible film to date- which, admittedly, isn’t saying very much. But let’s make something abundantly clear right now: This film is not really just about porn. While there is considerable nudity, sex, and ungodly amounts of cocaine on-screen, PTA couldn’t be less interested in this sort of exploitation. He seems far more intent on exploring both the art form of something like this industry, the effects fame has on the characters, and their sexuality. At 2 hours and 35 minutes, Anderson doesn’t waste a whole lot of time on fat, developing each individual character and seamlessly weaving them into the overall narrative. And as the film starts diving into the 1980s, it manages to move into some seriously dark territory with surprising ease. Think if Robert Altman and Martin Scorsese did a collaboration together, and that’s about what Boogie Nights looks like. Prior to this film, Mark Wahlberg was the frontman for Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch, but his role as Eddie/Dirk rightly established him as a bankable star. This might be my favorite performance of his, as he convincingly gives off the impression of a pathetic man desperate to find something big to latch onto. Julianne Moore is also noteworthy as Amber Waves, one of Dirk’s most frequent porn co-stars. While she is beautiful, behind all the makeup is a woman with so much of her personal life in shambles. The film also features a very impressive and sprawling ensemble cast, most of whom integrate into the narrative well. These include Philip Seymour Hoffman, Don Cheadle, Luiz Guzman, Thomas Jane, Philip Baker Hall, and John C. Reilly. However, none of them quite live up to the late great Burt Reynolds’ supporting performance as Jack Horner. Although he and Anderson consistently clashed on set, it’s hard to imagine anyone else playing the part. Despite the exploitative nature of the industry he works in, he takes his craft very seriously and does his best to treat his cast and crew as equals. In fact, at one point he refuses to start shooting on video tape by proclaiming, “I’m a filmmaker. And that’s why I will NEVER make a film on tape.” Meanwhile, the technical aspects of Boogie Nights show that Anderson has no problem flaunting his influences while still trying to make it his own. This was the second of numerous collaborations the director had with cinematographer Robert Elswit and it was a great step forward for both of their careers. The camera is almost always roving around each scene, trying to capture as much action as possible. It makes use of a number of big zooms and whip pans to draw attention from one part of the ensemble to the next. The most impressive bout was a 3 minute-long shot following a character inside a chaotic New Year’s Eve party. It should also be noted that the editing by Dylan Tichenor, who also collaborated with Anderson on later projects, is very riveting and just as fast as the cinematography. It often blends new shots in with movements like the aforementioned whip pan, among others. There are a handful of montages that fuse together different parts of the narrative, such as Dirk Diggler’s meteoric rise to porn stardom. It also cuts between different scenes to help build tension, especially one sequence in the third act when petty much all of the characters are in a rut. There is a brief musical score here provided by Michael Penn, whose career afterward has been hit or miss. There’s really only one big memorable track, a four-and-a-half minute piece that has all the whimsy of a circus show and melancholy of a tragedy. With its contrasting strings and whistles, that arguably sums up the movie’s tone pretty effectively. The actual soundtrack itself is composed of various disco and rock songs from the 1970s, curated mostly by the director himself. They’re all extremely appropriate in finding the carefree feel and the excess of the era. Boogie Nights is a uniquely entertaining and frank look at the world of exploitation. Despite its somewhat touchy subject matter, I still profess that this is one of Paul Thomas Anderson’s most accessible films to date. This can also serve as a good template for how to make an ensemble picture right, a feat which seems really hard to pull off.

“Monty Python’s Life of Brian” Movie Review

Not going to lie, after watching this movie, I’m genuinely considering changing my name to Biggus Dickus just for laughs. This historical comedy film was originally released in U.S. theaters on August 17th, 1979, followed by a U.K release 3 months later. While it grossed over 5 times its $4 million budget and became one of the year’s highest grossing films, its religious themes courted massive controversy in major countries and was banned for years in places like Ireland and Norway. It also led to a highly anticipated and publicized T.V. interview between two of the stars, conservative radio host Malcolm Muggeridge, and Mervyn Stockwood the Bishop of Southwark. Despite all of this, it generally received positive reviews from most publications, and has been retroactively named one of the funniest films ever made. Directed by Terry Jones, this marks the third feature-length effort of the Monty Python comedy group, after The Holy Grail. Days before production was originally supposed to begin, the studio EMI Films backed out due to being scared by the controversial script. Eventually former Beatles member George Harrison created his own production company, HandMade Films, and funded the project in its entirety. Set in Roman-occupied Judea during biblical times, Graham Chapman stars as Brian Cohen, a young Jewish man born on the same day and vicinity as Jesus Christ. Through a series of ridiculous circumstances, including getting involved with Pontius Pilate, he becomes mistaken for a prophet by the locals. Without much choice at all and little clue for how to advance, he takes on the persona of a reluctant Messiah for wary travelers and a radical anti-Roman political organization. I’ve been a really huge fan of the Monty Python troupe for quite some time now. To this day, 1975’s Monty Python and the Holy Grail still remains my favorite comedy film of all time, and one I quote on a daily basis. I also think that their sketch comedy show, The Flying Circus, is a template for all sketchy comedy today, even if some of their humor hasn’t aged all that well. But for some reason, I had not yet seen their follow-up feature or their later effort, the sketch film The Meaning of Life. And since it was finally made available on Netflix the past few months, I figured this would be as good a time as any to review it and include it as part of my New Year’s resolution. In the end, I ultimately prefer Holy Grail to this film, but I still recognize that Monty Python’s Life of Brian is just as hilarious and witty as I would expect from these comedians. I will say that I think this film is ultimately more focused and brainier than I normally find the troupe to be. Holy Grail was a lot broader with different areas or themes to explore such as politics, death, and what actually qualifies as bravery, but more often than not felt like a series of sewn-together sketches that were too high-budgeted for the show. Life of Brian on the other hand, tries to take on a more coherent look at religious attitudes from different groups (Rather than organized religion itself) as well as the hypocrisy of left-wing organizations in Europe during the 1970’s. That being said, there is still some humor that just doesn’t hold up very well by today’s standards. The very first scene in the entire film involves brief but wholly unnecessary blackface for one of the actors. Not only that, but there are a handful of somewhat transphobic gags throughout the film, some definitely more noticeable than others. But if you’re able to get past that, (And again, most of it is pretty brief) the second half of this movie is pure gold. The 6 members of the Monty Python troupe all return here, each playing various characters from scene to scene. Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Michael Palin, Terry Jones, Terry Gilliam, and Eric Idle all inhabit each character they play with surprising ease and versatility. Chapman is mostly resigned to playing Brian, and he’s a far cry from his role as King Arthur. Easily confused and hopelessly romantic, he wants nothing to do with any of his followers and brilliantly stumbles from one place to the next. Pailn and Cleese also regularly impress with the amount they do. For Cleese, his turn as the leader of a fractious anti-Roman group who talks more than he acts has incredible deadpan delivery and timing in every written line. Palin also deserves attention for his turn as the Roman politician Pontius Pilate, whose unexpected speech impediment and higher-pitched voice makes for one truly side-splitting scene when he berates a group of centurions. Meanwhile, with a higher budget than they’ve previously worked with, the technical aspects of Monty Python’s Life of Brian manage to impress regularly. The second feature-length film shot by Peter Biziou, there are many grand, sweeping shots meant to imitate biblical epics of previous decades. The frequent use of zooms and pans also help to reveal ridiculous little details in numerous scenes, such as various anachronisms. Everything is well-lit so that the reactions of various actors to certain situations can be captured- and more often than not, they’re resisting the urge to burst out laughing. It matches up well with the editing by Julian Doyle, who would go on to collaborate extensively with Terry Gilliam. For most of the scenes, there are few cuts, drawing out the irony and sarcasm of their absolutely savage lines. This is particularly great considering a number of scenes were cut at nearly the last minute. And like much of the troupe’s work, there are a couple of animated sequences edited in here and there, allowing even more absurd humor to come in. In his first (And most notable) film credit, Geoffrey Burgon composes and conducts the instrumental film score. Many of the tracks consist of sweeping strings and brass, befitting of a Charlton Heston epic from the Golden Age of Hollywood. But as usual, the soundtrack’s biggest draw are a handful of silly songs written and performed by the core 6 comedians themselves. This includes a fantastic opening song that parodies James Bond songs with glorious vocals and orchestration. The most popular one, though, is “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life,” performed by Eric Idle at the end. It’s simple in composition and rather uplifting in tone; no wonder it’s the most requested funeral song in Britain. Like most of the troupe’s work, this might just be too silly for some viewers out there to enjoy. I know a handful of people who don’t like Holy Grail or The Flying Circus at all because they’re so weird and unusual. I do think they’ll have a better chance of getting into this film because it is ultimately more focused. As long as they can move passed some of the outdated gags. Monty Python’s Life of Brian is a scathingly funny satire of biblical proportions. Although Holy Grail is still my favorite that they’ve created, there’s little denying the Monty Python’s accomplishment here. And despite its controversy, it proves to be supremely hilarious and insightful into religious attitudes. Any film that can manage to get banned from Ireland AND Norway is automatically worth turning heads.

Final 2019 Oscar Predictions

After nearly a whole year’s worth of screw-ups, terrible announcements, last-minute changes, and other controversial matters, the 91st Academy Awards are finally upon us. And as was with last year, I managed to see nearly all of the major contenders from last year in preparation for this one night. While there are more frontrunners this year than previous expected, I still have some thoughts about who I think will win in all 24 categories (Which will THANKFULLY be all aired live) as well as who I think better deserves it. Also like last year, I took the liberty of including some films I really thought deserved a nod in a category that were ultimately snubbed. And remember, regardless of how it turns out or if we even like it, the ceremony airs this Sunday, February 24th.

Best Picture

Will Win: Roma

Could Win: Green Book

Should Win: Roma

Should Have Been Nominated: If Beale Street Could Talk

 

Best Director

Will Win: Alfonso Cuarón for Roma

Could Win: Spike Lee for BlacKKKlansman

Should Win: Alfonso Cuarón for Roma

Should Have Been Nominated: Marielle Heller for Can You Ever Forgive Me?

 

Best Actor

Will Win: Rami Malek in Bohemian Rhapsody

Could Win: Christian Bale in Vice

Should Win: Bradley Cooper in A Star is Born

Should Have Been Nominated: Joaquin Phoenix in You Were Never Really Here

 

Best Actress

Will Win: Glenn Close in The Wife

Could Win: Olivia Coleman in The Favourite

Should Win: Olivia Coleman in The Favourite

Should Have Been Nominated: Viola Davis in Widows

 

Best Supporting Actor

Will Win: Sam Elliot in A Star is Born

Could Win: Mahershala Ali in Green Book

Should Win: Sam Elliot in A Star is Born

Should Have Been Nominated: Michael B. Jordan in Black Panther

 

Best Supporting Actress

Will Win: Regina King in If Beale Street Could Talk

Could Win: Rachel Weisz in The Favourite

Should Win: Regina King in If Beale Street Could Talk

Should Have Been Nominated: Tilda Swinton in Suspiria

 

Best Original Screenplay

Will Win: The Favourite

Could Win: Green Book

Should Win: Roma

Should Have Been Nominated: Sorry to Bother You

 

Best Adapted Screenplay

Will Win: BlacKKKlansman

Could Win: A Star is Born

Should Win: BlacKKKlansman

Should Have Been Nominated: Widows

 

Best Animated Feature Film

Will Win: Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

Could Win: Incredibles 2

Should Win: Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

Should Have Been Nominated: Teen Titans Go! to the Movies

 

Best Foreign-Language Film

Will Win: Roma (Mexico)

Could Win: Cold War (Poland)

Should Win: Roma (Mexico)

Should Have Been Nominated: Border (Sweden)

 

Best Documentary- Feature

Will Win: Free Solo

Could Win: Minding the Gap

Should Win: RBG

Should Have Been Nominated: Won’t You Be My Neighbor?

 

Best Documentary- Short Subject

Will Win: A Night at the Garden

Could Win: Period. End of a Sentence

Should Win: A Night at the Garden

Should Have Been Nominated: Zion

 

Best Live-Action Short Film

Will Win: Fauve

Could Win: Detainment

Should Win: Fauve

Should Have Been Nominated: One Cambodian Family Please For My Pleasure

 

Best Animated Short

Will Win: Bao

Could Win: Late Afternoon

Should Win: Bao

Should Have Been Nominated: The Ostrich Politic

 

Best Original Score

Will Win: Black Panther by Ludwig Göransson

Could Win: If Beale Street Could Talk by Nicholas Britell

Should Win: Black Panther by Ludwig Göransson

Should Have Been Nominated: First Man by Justin Hurwitz

 

Best Original Song

Will Win: “Shallow” from A Star is Born

Could Win: “All the Stars” from Black Panther

Should Win: “Shallow” from A Star is Born

Should Have Been Nominated: “Hearts Beat Loud” from Hearts Beat Loud

 

Best Visual Effects

Will Win: First Man

Could Win: Ready Player One

Should Win: First Man

Should Have Been Nominated: Mission: Impossible- Fallout

 

Best Cinematography

Will Win: Roma

Could Win: A Star is Born

Should Win: Roma

Should Have Been Nominated: Widows

 

Best Costume Design

Will Win: Black Panther

Could Win: The Favourite

Should Win: The Favourite

Should Have Been Nominated: Paddington 2

 

Best Makeup and Hairstyle

Will Win: Vice

Could Win: Border

Should Win: Vice

Should Have Been Nominated: Suspiria

 

Best Production Design

 

Will Win: The Favourite

Could Win: Black Panther

Should Win: First Man

Should Have Been Nominated: Annihilation

 

Best Film Editing

Will Win: Vice

Could Win: Bohemian Rhapsody

Should Win: BlacKKKlansman

Should Have Been Nominated: Hereditary

 

Best Sound Mixing

Will Win: A Star is Born

Could Win: Bohemian Rhapsody

Should Win: Roma

Should Have Been Nominated: Mission: Impossible- Fallout

 

Best Sound Editing

Will Win: Roma

Could Win: A Quiet Place

Should Win: Roma

Should Have Been Nominated: Mission: Impossible- Fallout

 

Do you have thoughts or predictions of your own? What films do you think will, could, or should win in each category? What are some that you feel got snubbed by the Oscars? Be sure to leave a Comment on it below, and if you like what you see here, be sure to Like this post and Follow my Blog for similar film-centric content.

“Throne of Blood” Movie Review

Aaanndd, we’re back with my New Year’s Resolution, ladies and gentlemen. Same rules from last year apply here, (Check out my Letterboxd account if you want more details) and I decided to start with something really daring. This black-and-white samurai drama was originally released in Japan on January 15th, 1957, and was a major commercial success for Toho Studios. It didn’t arrive in the United States until November of 1961, where it enjoyed similar acclaim to the filmmaker’s other works. It later found even more success when, in 2014, the Criterion Collection added it to their library and made a brand new restoration on home video. Co-written and directed by Akira Kurosawa, the film is a very loose adaptation of the play Macbeth by William Shakespeare, one of several the Japanese auteur made in his lifetime. He waited a few years to go forward with it until after Orson Welles made his own cinematic interpretation of The Bard’s story, and was only initially attached as a producer. There was something of a hurdle when the crew attempted to build the castle set on the slope of Mount Fuji and had to enlist troops at a nearby Marine Corps base to help build it from the ground up. Set in feudal Japan, the film follows a samurai warrior and commander named Taketoki Washizu, played by Toshirō Mifune. He and his close friend Miki Yoshiteru, played by Akira Kobo, encounter a spirit in a thick forest who prophesizes their respective futures and rewards. When the first part comes true, Washizu’s scheming wife Lady Asaji, played by Isuzu Yamada, urges him to murder their liege lord and take his place. The two subsequently become gradually insane and drunk with power as the consequences for their actions begin unraveling. Confession time: This is the first feature-length Akira Kurosawa film that I’ve both watched and finished all the way through! As a devoted cinephile, I understand that saying this is a downright travesty; to some, it might even be treasonous. But for whatever reason, for the longest time, I was unable to get my hands on any of his films, especially his supposed masterpiece Seven Samurai. But I was finally able to get the Criterion DVD for this particular film over the holiday season, and thought it would make a great addition to my 2019 New Year’s resolution. I have read that Throne of Blood is not as impressive as the director’s other works. But in my opinion, this is one of the best adaptations of Shakespeare’s work that I have seen in cinematic form yet. Like Kenneth Branagh, Kurosawa has a deep understanding of the story that many other directors seem to miss. By taking the barebones story of a traitorous and power-hungry noble and applying it to the world of Medieval Japan, Macbeth no longer becomes beholden to the barrier of language. What makes Throne of Blood so fascinating to watch is that it ultimately doesn’t need the extravagant poetry and monologues that Shakespeare puts in his works to get to the point or themes of the story. We still have staples such as the sorcerer, Lady Macbeth, et. al., but the new setting makes it feel so unique and memorable. In one of just 16 feature films films they worked on together, Toshirō Mifune is incredible as Washizu. It’s so easy to see why the director constantly wanted to work with him, as he full commits to playing a man slowly losing his grip on reality. This performance is especially impressive during his scenes in the last act of the movie, when his sanity just completely collapses. Opposite him is Isuzu Yamada as his wife Asaji, who’s arguably even more ruthless and cunning than he is. Her small and seemingly quiet demeanor are a perfect cover for a cutthroat and callous woman who simply wants as much power in the land as possible, no matter who suffers. Also, Akira Kobo does great work as Washizu’s former friend turned-enemy Miki, who apparently is inspired by Banquo. While he initially does have decent intentions, as soon as its clear he’s a threat to his old comrade, all bets are off. As far as technical aspects go, Throne of Blood sees Kurosawa taking full command of his voice and surroundings once more. It sees him working with many of his regular collaborators, including Asakazu Nakai for the cinematography. There are many static wide shots and sweeping landscapes used in the film, which creates an incredible use of negative space. Kurosawa also edited the film himself, provide a healthy amount of variety for shots in scenes. For example, a sudden zoom-in or a character in a room will suddenly be intercut with close-ups and the like. But I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least mention Yoshirô Muraki’s incredible production and costume design. It’s so amazing that the Castle of Spider’s Web was made from scratch as it looks so authentic and real. Not to mention that numerous extras were used to film large battle scenes and, of course, the fog. It adds such a brilliant atmosphere to the film as a whole, and frequently is used to throw audiences off from reality. Masaru Satô composed and conducted the instrumental film score, and it’s highly dynamic and unconventional. Rather than give a straightforward melody to serve as the backbone for the whole soundtrack, Satô uses sparse tracks in an attempt to capture what’s going on inside Washizu’s headspace. With the possible exception of the opening title track, nearly every single piece is cacophonous and chaotic. There’s a consistent percussive sound beating around violently, as well as high notes from wooden flutes to create something truly baffling but memorable. I think if for nothing else, this film would be a great introduction into classic Japanese cinema for more mainstream audiences. Yes, it’s black-and-white and subtitled, (With two different versions on the Criterion DVD) something that can turn some people off. But it’s surprisingly accessible in its narrative and style. Not to mention, it has one of the most jaw-dropping final scenes I’ve watched in quite some time. Throne of Blood is an extremely thematic and riveting tale of power and tragedy. Not only does it so expertly adapt one of Shakespeare’s mot revered plays while retaining its spirit, but it’s arguably the perfect launching pint for my exploration of Akira Kurosawa. I’m mighty hungry to see his other adaptations of The Bard, and the rest of his filmography in general.

Image result for throne of blood poster

“If Beale Street Could Talk” Movie Review

When in doubt, the love we share with one another will be more than enough to carry us through our trials. Hopefully. This romantic drama initially had its premiere at the 2018 Toronto International Film Festival, where it won first runner-up for the Grolsch People’s Choice Award. Originally scheduled for release on November 30th, Annapurna Pictures instead pushed it back to a limited engagement starting on December 14th, with a fully expanded roll-out on Christmas Day. It has thus far grossed over $8.3 million at the box office against a budget of $12 million, pushing ahead as one of the holiday’s biggest specialty successes. Written and directed by Barry Jenkins, the film is adapted from the novel of the same name by James Baldwin. He apparently wrote the screenplay during a summer trip in Europe before his Oscar-winning drama Moonlight, but only moved ahead once he secured the rights. The author’s famously protective estate granted him permission on account of his personal outreach to them. Set in 1970s Harlem, the story follows two young African-American adults named Clementine “Tish” Rivers and Alonso “Fonny” Hunt, played respectively by Kiki Layne and Stephan James. As the two begin falling in love, Fonny is falsely accused of raping a Puerto Rican woman and thrown into jail. Also during this time, Tish learns that she has become pregnant with their baby, and she and her family scramble to prove Fonny’s innocence before the child is born. I loved, loved, loved Barry Jenkins’ previous film Moonlight when it came out in 2016. I more or less consider it to be a flawless film in virtually every department of filmmaking you can think of. It so brilliantly and emphatically explored the lives of characters whom we don’t get to see often portrayed on-screen in an unflinching manner. And ever since the mother of all Oscar ceremony screw-ups, I’ve been eagerly awaiting whatever he would cook up next. Although I haven’t read the eponymous book, I’ve read excerpts from some of James Baldwin’s essays and watched his famous 1968 argument on The Dick Cavett Show. It’s clear that he has a very clear-eyed, informed, yet empathetic view of race relations in America that match up perfectly to the director’s sensibilities. And it absolutely works because, while it may not quite be as good as his previous film, If Beale Street Could Talk is still a masterful examination of genuine relationships. I have no doubt that Jenkins has a deep and abiding respect for the author and his work, as this feels like a labor of love from the very first frame. What’s particularly impressive is that he’s able to use this 1970s-set story as a way to examine the relevant issues that many African-Americans face today. From racist cops to workplace discrimination, sexism, and prison reform, If Beale Street Could Talk feels like has a lot to say, and is more verbal about it than Moonlight was about masculinity and homophobia. But between the cracks in the fundamental unfairness of life, he’s still able to find true romance and happiness in the smaller moments. Whether it’s a rainy night inside Fonny’s old apartment or when the couple finally finds a new place to move in together, we’re given several moments to breathe. It’s also funnier than Moonlight, as a number of characters find unique humor in certain situations. And quite frankly, without these elements, I think I’d feel overwhelmed. Kiki Layne is as much of a discovery as Yalitza Aparicio in Roma, and I mean that in the best way possible. She is incredible at internalizing a lot of pent-up anger and fear and sadness by the discrimination she and her loved ones face on a regular basis, and the way she finally releases it is devastating. Opposite her is Stephan James, who’s equally impressive and tender as Fonny. With a level of vulnerability and emotional sincerity not often given to male leads in romance dramas, we feel his struggle behind bars and in other moments where the two spend time in one another’s arms. They are a perfect on-screen match, creating a believable and tragic romance where we’re rooting for them the whole way. There are numerous supporting players who do great work such as Michael Beach, Coleman Domingo, Teyonah Parris, Aunjanue Ellis, Finn Wittrock, Pedro Pascal, Diego Luna, and an unexpected dramatic turn from Dave Franco. But I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the performances of Regina King or Brian Tyree Henry. I haven’t seen King in much, but her role as Tish’s loving and determined mother is so affecting, especially in a scene where she tries on a wig. Henry, meanwhile, has been having one hell of a year and his single-scene appearance was so refreshing and energetic. While laughing with Fonny over beer and cigarettes, he has a powerful monologue about the psychological toll that prison took on him, as it does for many other young men. He may have only one scene in the entire movie, but that moment still resonated throughout the rest of the film. And as you might expect, If Beale Street Could Talk finds Barry Jenkins continuing to hone his technical craft like a master. Cinematographer James Laxton moves away from the more elliptical, cinéma vérité approach of Moonlight in favor of something much more formal and precise. The movements in shots is very controlled and confident, and the amazing color palette helps the world of Harlem seem even more alive. There are numerous close-up shots that evoke the work of Jonathan Demme as we get a view inside the characters’ headspace. It matches up perfectly with the editing by Nat Sanders and Joi McMillon. The story bounces between different points in the story, often using certain side-stories to better contextualize what’s going on. It also features historical black-and-white photos in between segments, allowing the film to feel like a real event that might have happened over 40 years ago. The director’s collaborator Nicholas Britell once again provides the musical score, and it’s just as beautiful as the rest of the film. Like their effort together, the score is visceral and brilliant, while not always remaining conventional. It uses instrumentation such as smooth piano and trumpets to evoke music that gives the setting character and life. Strings swell in and out of different songs just as love and hope comes and goes for the protagonists. None of the tracks are really manipulative or aggressively sad or happy. Instead, it’s all seamlessly woven together to create a jazzy, oddly soothing sound that is definitely worth picking up. Much like Moonlight, it’s easy enough for me to see why a lot of people won’t want to watch it. A number of people I know have told me that it looked “too painful to watch” for them. But those who do give it a chance might be surprise by how gentle and empathetic the film actually is with its sensitive subject matter. While it may have issues of general pacing and cohesion, If Beale Street Could Talk is a moving and dynamic love story that never forgets the real world. Barry Jenkins is a true auteur of American cinema and we’re lucky to have him tell us these stories of unconditional love. I absolutely cannot wait to see what else he has in store in the years to come, and the newfound perspective he give audiences.