Best Pictures Part II

I, Grace Michaud, for the first time have seen all nine Best Picture nominees for this year's Academy Awards. I finished my list yesterday with Hugo and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Unlike last Saturday where we watched four films, this day was the big one: we watched five.

First on our list is Hugo in 3D. Where do I start? For one, this movie was marketed all wrong. Not only did it feature a cheesy-radio-worthy song (a no-no if you want your movie to be taken seriously), it was advertised as a children's movie. Fair enough, but kids don't know who in the world Martin Scorsese is. Because of how it was portrayed, I was totally turned off by it and was peeved that this film received the nod for Best Picture (as well as earning the most nominations with 13 I believe). I met the author of the book, Brian Selznick, back in third grade but never read The Invention of Hugo Cabret. I was expecting it to be terrible and overrated but I found myself enjoying it! The 3D was really good which I was also surprised about (I don't know why I go see 3D movies, I keep thinking: "Hey maybe they did a good job this time," only to wish I had my 13 bucks back). The characters looked crystal clear and the colors popped during the film scenes. Now I thought this movie would be about clockwork and solving some mystery. It was actually an ode to old cinema. I know right? Wouldn't think that looking at the poster or trailer. It really was about a nostalgic old man dreaming about the glory days of his films pre-World War I. That's where the movie is flawed. It doesn't have a direct plot, only a moral. You don't know how the characters really get to that moral and if they really went on an adventure (unless you count getting chased by Sacha Baron Cohen in literally every other scene). All the same it didn't bother me as much because I loved the music (which should have been used in the trailer instead of folk-y acoustic guitars) and the CGI didn't look as fake as I expected. That probably was because of the 3D. The dialogue was super cheesy though (say dreams one more time, I dare you) so it will not be taking that award. Hugo, I hope, doesn't take home a lot of awards because I honestly can name the better movie in each category that it is nominated for. Hey, a lot of films with the most nominations didn't take home any.

Oh The Help! I love, love, love this movie. This was my third time seeing it but first time seeing it after I finished the book. I love this movie because it is so satisfying. It takes a not-so-new plot and makes the issue of civil rights its own. Civil rights and cruelty is not in your face, rather for the viewer to decide. You see these people as people, not because of color... despite the movie being just about that. Each character is her own (and I say she because let's face it, the women in this movie dominate over every scarce male performance). No one is one-sided, as we see in most films. We see two sides: the good, the bad, and the dark, in each character. Jessica Chastain's character, Celia Foote, may be a blonde bimbo, but we see she's not as happy as she looks. Even our main villain, Hilly Holbrook isn't so bad. She's actually a really good mother. She is played by Bryce Dallas Howard (Ron Howard's daughter) and she so so so deserved a nod, more so (I hate to say it) than Jessica Chastain. She's evil at times, and you believe it. And when her world crashes on top of her, you feel it. That's why I feel I loved it so much, every character seems real to me as if I know them personally. And when you just want one of the maids to tell off her boss, she listens to you and does, leaving you to nod your head in approval. Could The Help win? No. I'm saying this because 94% of the Academy is made up of old white men and something tells me they're not too keen on a movie full of women. If only there was a category for Best Ensemble, because The Help could win in a landslide, and yes, I'm looking at you Bridesmaids.

We now come to my least favorite film: Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close. I knew that a lot of people believed it did not deserve a nomination, but I ignored the criticism and watched with an open mind. My mind quickly shut. The main character, Oscar, is so annoying to the point you want to yell at him, but you know there has to be something wrong with him so you patiently watch. Turns out there is nothing wrong with him. He's just not likable at all. The actor tried too hard to sound deep and he was the same character during the narration and his actual dialogue.He carries around this tambourine to calm him when he gets nervous, but it has the opposite effect on the audience. Tom Hanks (the Tom Hanks who is flawless in every movie ever except for this one) didn't do it for me. I honestly did not believe the relationship between the two. Despite what the trailer may say, there is no story. It's just a film about a boy who is really upset at random times because his father is dead. I can see why it's nominated. It's ten years after 9/11 and this film is about Oscar's dad dying in the World Trade Center. It had to be nominated for sentimental reasons. Best Supporting actor Max von Sydow wasn't all that great either. He didn't speak but you could so tell he was overacting with his expressions it annoyed me to no end. Sandra Bullock looked like she didn't want to be in the film, nor did John Goodman. At the end of the film you see so many holes and you come out of there wondering if there was any point to what you just watched. It's just a witnessing of a mental breakdown of a boy. And that is all there is to say.

The Artist. It's going to win. And it should. It says something if you are completely mesmerize by a movie that doesn't even mutter one word. It is totally different from all the other nominees. That includes Hugo. While Hugo may have been an "ode" to films ten years before The Artist, then The Artist puts that ode to shame. Hugo tributes old films with new film technology, like 3D. The Artist pays tribute to silent films by actually being a silent film and copying almost everything from them, including the opening cards. There is not one modern thing in it, yet if feels like a modern movie. Jean Dujardin, who I'm hoping will win Best Actor, is so so so so so charming and lovable you just want to hug him when everything goes up in...smoke (you have to see the movie to get the humor in this). I'm really interested to see how they went in writing this. Even when everyone is mouthing dialogue, do you still have to write it down? Is the script different? Do I have to wait for the DVD to find this out? Anyway the music doesn't always fit with the movie, but it fits with the times. It has a perfect late 1920s to early 30s feel which I love. Berenice Bejo is perfect in the movie as well because she acts just how I pictures a movie star during this time period would act: peppy, humble, and for lack of creative adjective here, charming once again. How many times can I say charming in one movie review? A lot apparently. A lot. Short story short: Is going to win tonight, and it deserves it.

AND FINALLY WE COME TO MY FAVORITE OF ONE OF THEM ALL.

Corey Stoll as Hemingway

How I loved Midnight in Paris. If the gorgeous opening shots of Paris don't draw you in, at least the music does right? The colors are like from a painting. They're soft but bright at the same time and make everything look romantic and just plain wonderful. And being a nerd, I get excited every time the Fitzgeralds and Hemingway pop up. Hemingway is played exactly as you think he would be in real life, always with the deep monologues all while looking devilishly handsome, as well as drinking and challenging people to fights. Have I mentioned that I love every actor in this movie? I even ended liking Rachel McAdams in this movie even if her character was unlikable, just because of the banter between her fiancee Gil (Own Wilson) and her parents. Besides it all coming out of a perfect dream, I love the story too. It's one I can relate to. The character's deal with the belief that the present is in ruins and that the past was a better time. For Gil, that "Golden Age" was Paris in the 1920s (and this I do not disagree with Gil, although there are a lot of downsides we are not going to discuss). The girl he ends up falling in love with, even though the 1920s is her present she believes that Paris in the 1890s was the true "Golden Age." So no matter how awful and bland the present looks, everyone feels the same way. Even in the past. Why I also love this movie besides  the originality of it all (it better win Best Original Screenplay because the movie is like a visual short story) is because of the time I watched it. The first time I watched it was Christmas Eve around the time I was reading Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises. In the novel the character's basically do the same thing as the character's in the film do: they drink, they dance, and they wonder from place to place. Ugh. Perfection. And everyone who's seen me and my Great Gatsby bag know why I loved when F. Scott Fitzgerald popped up. To make it ten times better my favorite person ever Tom Hiddleston portrays him! There is no one better in my mind! No one!

Every scene with you in it my friend...

While I would love for Midnight in Paris to win, I know it won't. In my mind though, it's my favorite. And that means a lot, since I adored The Artist. 

Well I have seen all ten and reel accomplished! Sure my neck hurt and I ate so much movie junk but it was worth it! Now I can feel all accomplished around the time of the awards! So here are my favorites in order of well...favorites:

1.) Midnight in Paris

2.) The Artist 

3.) War Horse

4.) The Help

5.) The Descendants

6.) Hugo

7.) Money Ball

8.) The Tree of Life

9.) Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close

In between movies, a staff member would come in for trivia and hand out free prizes. I got this XL thermal The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo for correcting answering Wings as being the last silent film to win Best Picture.

It is a great lazy Sunday shirt.

 

AND TO MAKE IT ALL THE MORE BETTER, CHECK OUT THE AWESOME POSTER I GOT:

This is going right next to that ugly Eli Manning fat head in the basement...

 You know what's interesting about these films? Four of the nine take place around the same time, that being 1914-1931. The Artist, Hugo, War Horse, and Midnight in Paris all deal with the 20s or the Great War in some way or the other. Hugo and Midnight in Paris are set in Paris, The Artist is technically a French film, and War Horse and one point is in France. So what's with so many movies dealing with France in the 20s? Some weird coincidence? Or has that time period been so overlooked, what with the Great Depression and World War II that it was finally time to showcase the turning point occuring during this time period? I mean if you think about it, World War I opened a lot of people's eyes about the horrors of war. It produced some of the finest American authors (HI HEMINGWAY!). Before World War I people glorified war. And because of the harsh realization of dulce et decorum est, it hit people harder. I personally find post- World War I themes fascinating: What do you do after a life changing event? Your view on the world has now been cruelly morphed...and now things are supposedly back to normal. As a person, however, you are not. So what do you do? It's a great theme that's so refreshing from repression and prejudice, themes that are so overused in high school English. And now when I learn more about this, these movies come out. That Easy A quote is starting to look so true right about now...

"The literature you read in  class always seems to have a strong  connection  with  whatever  angsty  adolescent drama  is  being recounted."    

Also interesting! A lot of the actors in the nominated films also appear in the other nominated films.

Viola Davis (The Help, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close)
John Goodman (The Artist, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close)
Tom Hiddleston (Midnight in Paris, War Horse)
Brad Pitt (Money Ball, The Tree of Life)
Jessica Chastain (The Help, The Tree of Life)