In 1941, Orson Welles and his troop of theater actors, who had never worked on a movie before, released what has been held as the crowning achievement in filmmaking, “Citizen Kane.” Sight & Sound magazine would release a list of the best films ever made every ten years, and “Citizen Kane” held the number one spot on that list for several decades until 2012 when Alfred Hitchcock’s “Vertigo” overtook it.
Interestingly enough, when “Citizen Kane” was initially released, most people in Hollywood and filmmaking loathed the movie. Mostly because it went against the traditional style of cinema and the fact that it was created by people who had never held a camera before. When it won the only Academy Award it received for Best Screenplay, the majority of the auditorium was filled with boos and hatred. That’s how much people hated “Citizen Kane.”
It wasn’t until the 1960s that people started to reanalyze the film and began to see it in a different light. That’s the thing about films which break from traditions: They’re usually despised when they come out, but are reanalyzed and appreciated many years later.
I feel the reason “Citizen Kane” is often described as the greatest film ever made is because of how bold and grandiose it wanted to be. Whether that was because of acting, storytelling, cinematography, score and so on, the film always tries to hit the highest note possible. There are so many wonderful shots, especially early on where we see this gigantic yet empty mansion, and it makes you wonder just how much work and effort was put into creating it, all for someone to abandon and forget about it.
That is more-or-less the life and story of the main character, Charles Foster Kane (played by Orson Welles). He worked for so much, trying to become a man that not only others could be proud of but one he could also be proud of. The problem was that nothing was ever good enough. No matter how much he achieved and accumulated, he could never achieve respect for himself. This led him to down a path where everyone who ever loved him would abandon him, leaving him a shell of man, only wanting what he had lost.
Perhaps the reason this film was so hated in 1941 was not because it tried new things, but because the subject material hit way too close to home. It is often said that “Citizen Kane” is based off of the life of William Randolph Hearst, who at the time was still an active member of society and had a large affect on the world. To see such a man who has so much power be shown as a megalomanic who will never be satisfied, especially when he’s still alive, is going to make people angry.
“Citizen Kane” has had such a big impact on society that it is now often used to describe many things. The graphic novel “Watchmen” is often described as the “Citizen Kane” of comic books and I recently used it as a way to describe “Godzilla.”
But what exactly does that mean?
When we say that “Shadow Of The Colossus” is the “Citizen Kane” of video games, what does that entail? What sort of affect is that supposed to leave on us?
I believe the best answer to this question is time and appreciation. When “Godzilla” was released in 1954, it received significant success, both critically and financially, but my guess is that most people did not say it was a work of art.
Now, sixty years later, people have had time to see the impact that this film has had on society. What it has changed and given us over that time. We’ve seen the evolution of giant monster movies from simple and direct ways to show creatures destroying cities turn into tales of folly of man and our attempts to right the wrongs that we have brought on helpless lives.
All thanks to the film which brought on this change, “Godzilla.”
It is not just that a film is well-made and can please a wide range of audiences, but that it has had an impact on both the medium and society. To look at the long term effect and realize that the film is still as good as it was upon the initial release. Time has not only given meaning to core of the work, but also has not aged at all.
“Citizen Kane” remains as poignant, honest and hard-hitting as it was in 1941, which is a testament to how in tune the filmmakers were with humanity. That is what it means to be like “Citizen Kane.” That it transcends being just another movie, video game, novel or comic book and becomes art.
Welcome to a new series entitled “On Second Thought.” In this series, I will be taking a second look at a film I have previously reviewed and analyzing how my thoughts and feelings on this particular film has changed over time.
I’m using this mostly to demonstrate the biggest flaw within movie reviews: While a critic can give an accurate representation of how the film made them feel at the time, it doesn’t take into account how they might feel about it in the future. Opinions and feelings change over time just as much as a person can change. A film which someone once loved could suddenly become unbearable and irritating, or vice versa.
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had second thoughts on a film. Where a new thought or feeling is produced, and suddenly that changes the entire outlook of the film. Some of the notable ones in the past have been “The Treasure Of The Sierra Madre” and “Rear Window” both of which I didn’t care for upon my initial viewing but grew to adore them over time.
While I believe this is a problem within film criticism, it is also something that I believe everyone can relate to. We’ve all had second thoughts about events in our lives, or have grown to love something which we once hated. Forgiveness and admiration can be powerful forces when put together.
I hope this series helps to show just that. Let’s start off with something that has become quite successful lately and has garnered much praise, “Frozen.”
In my initial review of the film, I talked about how I loved the design and look of the film and thought Elsa was a wonderfully developed character. Yet, I was turned off by the film’s lack of imagination and creativity, something which the two previous Disney animated films, “Tangled” and “Wreck-It Ralph” had in abundance.
“I think the reason I’m disappointed in “Frozen” is due to its lack of imagination and creativity, something that the previous Disney films had plenty of,” I wrote. “Here is this unique and interesting premise of a queen who accidently freezes her kingdom and its up to her sister to save everyone, and I feel like little came from it. The way in which Elsa uses her ice powers can be fun its own right, but its not enough to save the film.”
In the end, I gave “Frozen” a C-.
I realize now that this grade was way too harsh and undeserving for such a beautiful movie.
While I still feel like it took a while for the film to get interesting, once the entire kingdom knew about Elsa’s powers, suddenly the film got intense and exciting. There are rivals from opposing kingdoms who want Elsa hunted down, while Anna just wants to save her sister. She says that it is for the kingdom, but we all know that the love for her sister comes above all else.
Perhaps the reason I was so hard on the film in the first place was because the relationship between Elsa and Anna wasn’t as strong as I thought it could have been. The two spend a little time as a kid, Elsa nearly kills Anna but is saved and has her memory wiped of Elsa’s powers, and then the two spend the next ten years of their lives hardly ever seeing one another.
I do believe this is a problem, especially the mind wiping part. Wouldn’t it have been more interesting if Anna knew about Elsa’s powers but had to keep it secret from every one else? That way, in moments where Elsa needed comforting, Anna could have been there for and made the pain of near death go away.
However, I feel like I was only observing it from Anna’s perspective. Most of what she recalled about Elsa were implanted memories. For Elsa, her memories of Anna were real. It was clear those were some of the best moments of her childhood, before she had to be put in solitude. Kind of a Charles Foster Kane moment, if you will.
When you look at it like that, suddenly the lengths that Elsa goes to near the end make it all the more powerful. She is doing everything to get back to that moment of happiness, but nearly repeats it again because she is so absorbed in the past.
So even though I think their relationship could have been stronger, it is much deeper and more complex than I gave it credit for.
I also hardly touched on the musical numbers in “Frozen.” Most of them I found to be rather forgettable, apart from two. I have a hard time remember any of the lyrics or tunes to the songs, other than “Do You Want To Build A Snowman?” and “Let It Go.”
“Do You Want To Build A Snowman?” serves as the emotional relationship between Anna and Elsa for the opening of the film, and shows just how much love Anna has for her sister even after all that has happened. Years pass, but Anna never gives up on her. All punctuated by Anna’s final line, repeating the title and giving us a great shot of Elsa and Anna, back-to-back, but separated.
“Let It Go,” on the other hand has become a huge sensation. Not only has it just won the Oscar for Best Original Song, but there are parodies of it everywhere, along with different styles of music set to the lyrics.
It honestly was the highlight of the film, served as a wonderful transformation in Elsa’s character, had the best visuals of the whole movie and was extremely catchy. I’ve had the song stuck in my head since Adele Dazeem sang it at the Oscars and I have no problem with that.
The last thing I’d like to mention about my initial review was how it was unfair of me to constantly compare “Frozen” to films like “Tangled” and “Wreck-It Ralph.” A film deserves to stand or fall on its own merits, without being compared to any other works and “Frozen” is no exception.
It felt like my initial review wanted to talk about how “Frozen” was a watered down “Tangled.” Now I see that the two try entirely different things and have vastly different approaches to their presentation. “Tangled” wanted to tell a tale similar to many of the classic Disney princess films, like “Beauty And The Beast” meets “Aladdin.” “Frozen,” on the other hand, may have had princesses, but wanted to tell a story of the love within family, something that has been rarely touched upon in Disney films.
It seems like Disney is in the process of starting up its second Renaissance Era. The first “Disney Renaissance” began with “Beauty And The Beast” which took their animated features in a whole new direction, which eventually gave us films like “The Little Mermaid” and “The Lion King.”
“Frozen” just might be the beginning of a new Renaissance Era, especially if you include “Saving Mr. Banks” and the upcoming “Maleficent” film. All three of these films have something in common: They take classic tropes and story that is inherently Disney, but they take a new spin on. “Frozen” is about the bond between sisters. “Saving Mr. Banks” gave us a depiction of Walt Disney, but were not afraid to show his darker and more brash side, as we seem him swear, smoke and drink. While we don’t know much about “Maleficent” I think we can assume the plot is going to be that of “Sleeping Beauty” but rather told from the villain’s perspective.
That’s what this new Renaissance is putting above all else: perspective. Who is telling the story makes a huge difference. When you look at “Frozen” as a film about Anna, you get my initial review. If you see it more as Elsa’s tale, or even better as both Elsa and Anna’s story, then it comes out looking much better.
Not only is “Frozen” beautiful, hilarious and catchy, but it has incredibly well written character and a wonderful relationship between the two leads. It is not the best, but for what it was, it gives some touching moments that will melt any heart.
Another year of the Academy Awards has come and gone. This year, the big winners were “Gravity” winning seven Oscars, including Best Director for Alfonso Cuaron and Best Cinematography, while “12 Years A Slave” also came up big, with Lupita Nyong’o winning Best Supporting Actress and the coveted Best Picture Award.
The biggest surprise for me was “Dallas Buyers Club” winning two acting awards, specifically Jared Leto for Best Supporting Actor and Matthew McConaughey for Best Actor. At this time, I have not bought into the McConaughey-craze yet. He just hasn’t gotten my attention yet. I’ve enjoyed Leto’s ability to create characters with such emotion, so that award comes as no surprise to me.
Overall, I believe that I predicted the majority of the winners, with the few exceptions being “The Great Gatsby” walking away with two awards for Costume Design and Production Design.
Yet, I felt like I walked away from this years awards with something more than just learning the winners. These Academy Awards had some wonderful moments, but at the same time was bogged down by some very incompetent moments. Some will remember it for Ellen’s photograph becoming huge on social media, while others will think of how pointless and unfunny it was for Ellen to order pizza.
Here are what I felt were some of the highlights and low lights.
The Good: I felt the best part of the awards for 2014 was the acceptance speeches. Not once did anyone get interrupted by the orchestra telling them to speed it up, and the majority of the speeches were memorable and heartfelt. Everyone got to say how they really felt about winning these awards, and got to thank everyone they felt like thanking. Even if it meant that the show ran longer than usual, these speeches were touching and added a lot to the impact of winning an Oscar.
My favorite speeches were Robert Lopez and Kristen Andersen-Lopez’s duet of thanking all of their loved ones for winning Best Original Song, “Let It Go” from “Frozen” and Matthew McConaughey’s speech on those who have changed his life for winning Best Actor.
Both of the Lopez’s were in perfect sync that each time they exchanged lines, it felt like they were planning yet another musical number in their head. While McConaughey gave words of advice that can used by anyone to better enhance their own lives, especially the part of looking up to someone, looking to love someone and looking to chase someone.
Honorable mention goes out to Jared Leto for giving a very descriptive and loving depiction of his mother and the impact she has had on his life.
The Bad: The worst part of this years awards was most certainly the presenters. Many of them came off as unprepared, unintelligent and just made a fool of themselves. The teleprompter must have been broken or something, because many of the presenters fumbled over their own lines and some didn’t seem to understand what they were saying.
These included Will Smith presenting the award for Best Picture, when the only work he did this year was “After Earth” which was nominated for several Razzies, with Smith even winning won for Worst Supporting Actor.
Seriously, why did Will Smith present the biggest award of the night?
Another unfortunate one was Kim Novak. Let’s put aside the fact that she had way too much botox and plastic surgery. She rambled, mumbled and probably didn’t know where she was. It was hilarious to watch, but I don’t think that was what the Academy was going for.
But the real zinger of them all was John Travolta, who completely and utterly butchered Idina Menzel’s name when she came up to sing “Let It Go.” The closest approximation to what Travolta said was “Adele Dazeem.”
I mean no disrespect when I say this, but did John Travolta have a stroke when he said her name? Because that wasn’t even close.
He will never be able to live that down now. That’s why I mean by the presenters being unbelievably incompetent this year. Whether it was because of going way off-script, being unprepared or somewhere in between, most of them did a terrible job.
The weird: The strangest part of the night was Ellen Degeneras as the host. I honestly don’t know how to feel about how she did.
Keep in my, I think Ellen is generally a funny person. Able to come up with jokes and comedic possibilities on the seem and a fun loving person who wants to be friendly to everyone is wonderful. For whatever reason, she was having an incredibly off night with the Oscars.
Many of the jokes missed their mark and just weren’t that funny. There was a lot more of the host this year than in previous Academy Awards, so that meant Ellen had to come up with more material. This would probably explain why she ordered pizza, which was awkward and went on for much longer than it needed to.
Now, Ellen did have a few genuinely funny moments, specifically with taking the picture that had a plethora of celebrities and her interaction with some stars, mostly Jonah Hill. Overall, it came across like Ellen didn’t know where to go with some of her jokes, like she was hesitant to say most of them.
With how much he was in the show, I felt like Kevin Spacey would have been a better host than Ellen. He rolled with the punches and came up with some of the best jokes of the night with split second thinking. At least he didn’t have to borrow Pharrell’s giant Arby’s hat to ask for tips.
If I could describe Ellen’s performance as host in one word, it would “awkward.” This would be fine if it felt like that was what Ellen was going for, but I don’t think she was. If you’ve seen her talk show or even watched “Finding Nemo” then you know her style of comedy is very energetic and upbeat, not awkwardly funny like this. At times it worked, but it mostly came off as strange and out of place.
Overall, I enjoyed this years Academy Awards for the same reason I usually enjoy them: To see Hollywood celebrate the best it created over the past year. Sometimes there was an occasional joke that made me laugh, but most fell flat. It was wonderful to see the winners finally get all the time they needed to give their speeches, but I wish we didn’t have to sit through so many bad presenters first.
Hopefully the Academy will realize the things it needs to correct and be better prepared for next year. There is always room for improvement.
A few years ago, Sandra Bullock won her first Best Actress Academy Award for her performance in “The Blind Side.” The problem though is that most people say it wasn’t specifically for that performance. Rather, for her entire body of work.
That Sandra Bullock had never really given a “bad” performance in her entire career. The movies she is in might suck, but she is never the reason it sucks. So, even though “The Blind Side” may not be her best performance, they gave her the Oscar as a way to celebrate her career.
Something about that doesn’t sit right with me.
When you think of the Academy Awards, what comes to mind? Other than Hollywood glorifying themselves and making a big deal over their own egos, I mean.
I believe that the purpose of the Oscars is to celebrate and congratulate the best that cinema had to offer over the past year. To give the people who truly deserve recognition a chance to shine. It is because of this belief that I feel an Academy Award should always go to whoever is the best in their category.
Now, in that category in which Sandra won her Best Actress, the other nominees included Carey Mulligan from “An Education,” Helen Mirren from “The Last Station,” Gabourey Sidibe from “Precious” and Meryl Streep from “Julie & Julia.” Though I’m glad to see Meryl not win the award again, I do feel that there were more worthy candidates to win that award, particularly Gabourey.
I don’t think it is fair to give the award to Sandra simply because she had a much bigger body of work than some of the other contenders and they wanted to celebrate that career. Unless it is the Lifetime Achievement Award, an Oscar should stand for one solitary performance, not a career.
This isn’t something limited to just Sandra either. This has happened multiple times with other actors or actresses, in particular John Wayne for his performance as Rooster Cogburn in “True Grit” or Martin Scorsese for directing “The Departed.” For both Wayne and Scorsese, I would say that neither of those are their best work.
The awards for both of them was the Academy’s way of saying, “Hey, sorry about all of those times we didn’t give the award and recognition you deserved. We hope this makes up for it.”
Something isn't quite right here.
Maybe it would be better and more beneficial to hand out honorary Oscars. Something given to actors, directors and filmmakers years after the film came out and has become a huge hit and is seen as one of the quintessential pieces of filmmaking, but something we didn’t see when the film came out. That way, Stanley Kubrick could have gotten Best Director for “2001: A Space Odyssey” instead of Carol Reed for “Oliver!” Kind of like a Hall of Fame for the Academy Awards.
This could also mean that truly great actors and actresses can get the praise they deserve, while we still honor and congratulate the best that film had to offer over the last year. Instead of giving Bruce Dern the Best Actor award for this year, simply because he is old and may never get this chance again, give Dern an honorary Oscar celebrating his entire career and then give the Best Actor to the one who did give the best performance.
After all, the Academy certainly isn’t against changing the way they do their voting. Just a few years ago, they upped the number of Best Picture nominees from five to ten. So to make a change like this shouldn’t be too far out of line.
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that people like Sandra Bullock, Bruce Dern and John Wayne don’t deserve to be nominated for their respective awards. What I am saying is that I would like to see the Academy judge a nominee not by their entire body of work, but instead on the single performance they are nominated for.
Oscar Sunday is nearly upon us, and it seems like this year has been one of the closer races for many awards. In previous years, there have always been stand out candidates, especially for Best Picture, who always end up winning. That was the case for the two previous Best Picture winners, “Argo” and “The Artist” even if I didn’t feel “Argo” was the best film of 2012.
This year though, I honestly don’t think there are many clear cut winners. My view might be a bit off though, because this is one of the first years in a long time where I’ve seen nearly all the candidates before the awards. Granted, I didn’t see everything, specifically “Philomena” and “Dallas Buyers Club” but that’s not going to stop me from giving my opinion on who I feel will win tomorrow night.
Each award will be presented with who I want to win, who should win and who will win. In some cases, each of the three may be the same candidate, but that is by pure coincidence. I will always be skipping some awards, particularly the Documentaries and Shorts, because I haven’t seen any of them, so they would just be blind guesses. I’d have a better chance of picking the winner if I threw a dart at the choices lined up while blindfolded.
With that out of the way, here are my picks for the 2014 Academy Awards.
Best Cinematography:
Who I want to win: “Gravity”
Who should win: “Gravity”
Who will win: “Gravity”
You’re going to see a lot of “Gravity” in these picks, because it was honestly the most impressive and innovative film to come out in 2013. Inventing all new technologies to make your film happen is one thing, but to make your film feel like it is in outer space takes a little bit more. I predict “Gravity” to sweep in every technical award that it is nominated for, though I don’t think it will be as lucky once we get to the bigger awards.
Best Costume Design:
Who I want to win: “The Great Gatsby”
Who should win: “12 Years A Slave”
Who will win: “American Hustle”
Each of these films were able to transport me back to their own time periods, so each one deserves the award. “The Great Gatsby” was flashy and vibrant, so that is the one I want to see win. Films that only get one nomination of any kind don’t usually win. “12 Years A Slave” was impressive in how it was able to capture the era, and costume design was one of those aspects. However, it seems like the hype of “12 Years A Slave” is beginning to die out, so my pick goes to “American Hustle” because most of the voters get a kick out of the 1960s and 1970s.
Best Editing:
Who I want to win: “Captain Phillips”
Who should win: “12 Years A Slave”
Who will win: “12 Years A Slave”
As I previously mentioned, the voters seem to be getting over how great “12 Years A Slave” was. If the Oscars were a month ago, I garuntee you that it would have nearly swept the Academy Awards. Now, it has been too long since the film came out. It is nearly out of their memory, so it is going to be overlooked. This is going to cost “12 Years A Slave” some big awards, but one of those is not going to be editing. Far too many scenes that were enhanced by editing and framing of shots, it was the most impressive in that category. I would say “Gravity” except that had very little editing, with many continuous shots.
I would like for “Captain Phillips” to win, but I don’t see it winning any awards.
Best Makeup:
Who I want to win: “Dallas Buyers Club”
Who should win: “Dallas Buyers Club”
Who will win: “Dallas Buyers Club”
It is up against “Bad Grandpa” and “The Lone Ranger,” both of which were critical flops and “The Lone Ranger” is even nominated for several Razzies (the opposite of the Oscars, covering the worst films of the year). That is going to effect who gets this award.
Best Original Score:
Who I want to win: “Gravity”
Who should win: “The Book Thief”
Who will win: “The Book Thief”
“The Book Thief”’s score was done by John Williams. As in the guy who brought you “Star Wars”, Indiana Jones, “Jaws,” “Jurassic Park” and has been nominated for more Academy Awards than Meryl Streep. This one is going to John.
Best Original Song:
Who I want to win: “Let It Go” from “Frozen”
Who should win: “Happy” from “Despicable Me 2”
Who will win: “Let It Go” from “Frozen”
“Happy” is now a hit radio song that everyone and their mother has heard. It is a truly great song that I’m glad to listen to. However, I feel that not only the song should be looked at, but also how it is used in the movie. In “Despicable Me 2,” it was kind of a throw away moment and we only get to hear a bit of the overall song. In “Frozen,” “Let It Go” was this beautiful ballad that was the highlight of the film, with stunning visuals and a good toe-tapping moment. I feel that will give “Let It Go” the victory.
Best Production Design:
Who I want to win: “her”
Who should win: “Gravity”
Who will win: “American Hustle”
I really wish that “her” had a better chance at winning more awards. Alas, there are far too many choices to go with, and “her” is more of the obscure choice for voters. As such, I don’t see “her” winning here. It will probably end up being “American Hustle” for much the same reason it will win Costume Design, the voters love being transported to that era and feeling it they are apart of an era of time that isn’t looked at fondly.
Best Sound Editing & Sound Mixing:
Who I want to win: “Gravity”
Who should win: “Gravity”
Who will win: “Gravity”
Like I said, I predict “Gravity” to sweep the technical awards, even if the mixing in this case is a bit muffled due to taking place in space. Hey, that just makes it all the more impressive and captivating. To be so powerful and emotional, yet so quite and reserved. The sound compliments to the imagery in this case, and for that, it deserves to win the award.
Best Visual Effects:
Who I want to win: “Gravity”
Who should win: “Gravity”
Who will win: “Gravity”
This one is a no-brainer. It is the most visually stunning film of the year.
Best Original Screenplay:
Who I want to win: “her”
Who should win: “her”
Who will win: “her”
This is the one award that I feel “her” has locked up. It is one thing to transport you back in time, but is something entirely different (and far more interesting) to take you to a realistic future. To do so with colorful characters and a wonderful setting makes it all the more fascinating to watch.
Best Adapted Screenplay:
Who I want to win: “The Wolf Of Wall Street”
Who should win: “The Wolf Of Wall Street”
Who will win: “12 Years A Slave”
It would be amazing to see “The Wolf Of Wall Street” win the award, because it was genuinely funny and insane to watch. Unfortunately, as far as adapting the source material, I’ve heard the film is extremely unfaithful, so I think that will move people away from this award. I think more will be impressed by “12 Years A Slave” which has taken so long to get an adaptation and has been faithfully portrayed on the screen.
It’s all about faithfulness when it comes to this award.
Best Animated Feature:
Who I want to win: “Frozen”
Who should win: “The Wind Rises”
Who will win: “The Wind Rises”
This one is a toss-up between “Frozen” and “The Wind Rises.” On one hand, you have Disney with a beautiful animated film, going back to the Disney roots while updating them. This film has also supposedly been in the works for nine years. On the other hand, you have Hayao Miyazaki’s “supposed” last film with “The Wind Rises.”
I say supposed, because Miyazaki has become the Brett Favre of the filmmaking world: Always announcing his retirement, unsure if he will ever make a film again, only to come back a year later and come out of retirement. This is seriously the third time Miyazaki has announced this, and he has yet to stay true to his statement.
That might effect whether he gets the award, but since he is starting to get up there in age, he might mean it this time.
Best Directing:
Who I want to win: Alfonso Cuaron for “Gravity”
Who should win: Steve McQueen for “12 Years A Slave”
Who will win: Alfonso Cuaron for “Gravity”
If Steve McQueen were to win Best Director, he would be the first African American to win the award. To win such an award for the most brutally honest depiction of slavery ever put to film would be stunning to see.
Yet, I can’t help but feel like Alfonso Cuaron will get the award. “Gravity” was so impressive, so mind-blowingly beautiful that it deserves everything that it is nominated for. Cuaron has become one of the greatest filmmakers of our time, with works like “Children Of Men” and “Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban” (my pick for the best of the Harry Potter films), Cuaron has shown that he can handle a wide range of stories and make them all visual spectacles. I feel that will give Cuaron the award.
Best Supporting Actress:
Who I want to win: Jennifer Lawrence in “American Hustle”
Who should win: Lupita Nyong’o in “12 Years A Slave”
Who will win: Lupita Nyong’o in “12 Years A Slave”
I would like to see Jennifer Lawrence win two of the top actress awards in two years, especially since I felt that she was the best actress in “American Hustle.” Any time she was on screen, she was a laugh riot and brought some new life in certain scenes.
Since Lawrence did win last year for “Silver Linings Playbook” I think the Academy won’t give it to her. Instead, they’ll go with the safe pick of Lupita. Getting whipped like she did in “12 Years A Slave” just might be clincher.
Best Supporting Actor:
Who I want to win: Michael Fassbender in “12 Years A Slave”
Who should win: Barkhad Abdi in “Captain Phillips”
Who will win: Jared Leto in “Dallas Buyers Club”
While Fassbender’s popularity has spiked in the last few years, I don’t think people see him as a truly great actor, which is a real shame. The man can pull off so many different yet diverse characters and each of them with such a great passion.
Abdi was wonderfully intimidating and I would really like to see more awards for “Captain Phillips” (due to the lack of Tom Hanks being nominated for best actor).
The awards already given seem to indicate that Jared Leto is the way to go. Like Lupita, he is a safe bet and to be able to pull of being both a man and woman is quite a talent. I think he’ll get the award.
Best Actress:
Who I want to win: Cate Blanchett in “Blue Jasmine”
Who should win: Cate Blanchett in “Blue Jasmine”
Who will win: Cate Blanchett in “Blue Jasmine”
This is the biggest no-brainer of the Academy Awards this year. Blanchett carried “Blue Jasmine” and made that film worth watching. Every award has been given to her already for this performance, so she deserves this one too.
Let’s just hope they don’t give it Meryl again, because I still don’t think she deserved it the last time it was given to her. For crying out loud, give some other actresses a shot at the award.
Best Actor:
Who I want to win: Leonardo DiCaprio in “The Wolf Of Wall Street”
Who should win: Chiwetel Ejiofor in “12 Years A Slave”
Who will win: Chiwetel Ejiofor in “12 Years A Slave”
I wish that Leo would get his first Best Actor Oscar for his performance in “The Wolf Of Wall Street” because he carried that movie. He also did something incredibly hard to pull off and made an unlikable douchebag into a character that you wanted to see and care about. However, I feel that, if we are going by the best solo performance of all five, then I have to give it to Chiwetel. It all came together in that final climatic moment, where his performance can be summed up in one look.
I also feel this is worth mentioning. In the past, certain acting Oscars have been given to actors because the Academy is giving them a break. Whether because they’ve never gotten the award before and it is more about their body of work over one performance (Sandra Bullock and John Wayne) or because the actor is about to die (Christopher Plummer), the Academy feels they deserve the award over all other contenders. I feel this is not the way to go about it, as these awards deserve to go to whoever gave the best standout performance. So I don’t think Bruce Dern deserves this award because he is old or Leo deserves it because he’s never gotten it before. I think Chiwetel deserves it because he gave the standout performance of these five actors. That is what matters when it comes to the Oscars.
Best Picture:
Who I want to win: “her”
Who should win: “12 Years A Slave”
Who will win: “Gravity”
This is one of the most competitive Best Picture awards I can ever think of. So many worthy candidates fighting for the Oscar. Some of the possible winners include “12 Years A Slave,” “American Hustle” and “Gravity.”
I would be eternally happy if “her” ended up winning the award, as that was my pick for the best film of 2013. However, this is the outside and bizarre pick. People certainly liked it, but I feel more people liked “Gravity,” both of which are science fiction. So people will probably overlook “her.”
“American Hustle” seems to winning many acting nods at other award shows, but not much else. I think this one has a better chance than most of the other nominees, but it still doesn’t match up to others.
“Captain Phillips,” “Philomena,” “Nebraska” and “The Wolf of Wall Street” are just happy to be there. They are certainly best picture material, but they don’t have enough to bring home Best Picture.
I know nothing about “Dallas Buyers Club” so I won’t comment on that. Let’s just say I would be extremely surprised if this won Best Picture.
That brings it down to “12 Years A Slave” and “Gravity” which were both impressive, but in very different ways. “12 Years A Slave” just may become one of the greatest films of all time for its depiction of slavery and how brutally honest and graphic it was. While “Gravity” is a technical marvel, maybe even being the “2001: A Space Odyssey” of the 21st century.
In the end, it will come down to what the voters were more impressed by: “Gravity”’s technology or “12 Years A Slave”’s honesty.
I would like to think that “12 Years A Slave” will win out since human emotions and stories of one of the hardest times in American history prevail over flashy and good-looking films. But, as I’ve previously mentioned, the voters are forgetting about “12 Years A Slave.” Even though both films were released around the same time, people were more blown away by “Gravity” for being able to make something like space terrifying yet exciting.
So, in the end, I feel “Gravity” will walk away with the Best Picture Oscar. It is hard to describe exactly what makes me pick it over “12 Years A Slave” but it is something that I feel in my gut. You never know exactly what the Academy is going to pick, but you can make educated guesses based on what has won in the past. Considering what has won the award in years past, “Gravity” fits more in line with those winners than “12 Years A Slave” does. Maybe that’s why I believe it will win.
