by Sam Juliano
The Oscar nominations were announced on Thursday morning, and true to form there were some outrageous snubs courtesy of the Director’s branch, that again have us questioning the legitimacy and worth of an annual spectacle that has little to do with the art of film, and much to do with politics and timing. While some of us always have fun in discussing the various possibilities and inherent drama, none one in our fraternity has ever believed the awards were worth remembering even days after the late February telecast. It has always been a guilty pleasure, but this year with the snub of Kathryn Bigelow – who may well have achieved the best directing of any other person this past year for the film Zero Dark Thirty – the voters have embarrassed themselves and have attracted scathing editorials in the news sections of papers from both the left and right. A further snub of Argo’s Ben Affleck (who was touted for weeks as a “lock” by prognosticators) had many others crying foul, and the dubious nomination of director David O. Russell of Silver Linings Playbook has many convinced that studio mogul Harvey Weinstein had once again wined and dined voters to win political support for the films his company produced. Likewise, some acting omissions and the complete shut out of some worthy films made the 2012 award listing as predictably lacking, even with the deserved naming of a number of worthy pictures and artists. Dennis Polifroni and I may well do our annual talk for the site in the coming weeks, where we will elaborate on our complaints. In any case, AMPAS did make some excellent choices – heck, every awards groups gets some of it right annually – by showering attention on the foreign made Amour by Michael Haneke in five categories including Picture, Director and Actress (Emmanuelle Riva) and by handing 11 nominations to Ang Lee’s The Life of Pi, 8 to Les Misérables, 6 to Zero Dark Thirty and 12 to Lincoln. I have not reached the stage of Oscar nihilism that some at this site have approached (one where even alluded to it is a sacrilege) but let’s just say I am not pleased with so much of this annual sideshow.
The Golden Globes, however reversed some of the Oscar slights by naming Argo Best Picture and Ben Affleck Best Director. The nights BIG winner was Les Miserables winning Best Comedy/Musical, Best Actor in a Comedy/Musical, Hugh Jackman and Best Supporting Actress Anne Hathaway. The total of 3 was tops for the evening! Needless to say I was smiling as these awards were announced! Daniel-Day Lewis and Jessica Chastain for Drama leads, while Jennifer Lawrence won in comedy/musical lead. Christoph Waltz won Best Supporting Actor for Django Unchained and Quentin Tarantino was a surprise winner for Best Screenplay for the same film. Michael Danna’s lovely score for The Life of Pi was a deserved winner in the music category.
Unusually mild weather for January in the northeast has giving most of us the chance to conserve on heat bills, but we sure better not count our chickens just yet. At least our very good friends Jaimie Grijalba and Tony d’Ambra are enjoying summer Down Under, though some scorching heat is making things more than uncomfortable. Looks like Atlanta Falcons, San Francisco 49ers, and Baltimore Raven fans are on Cloud Nine this week with their respective teams’ advance to the Final Four in the NFL playoffs.
A candle remains lit for Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut, the new school in Monroe, and for the valiant principal Dawn Hochsprung, her courageous staff colleagues and the 20 angels who left us on that fateful Friday in mid-December.
Lucille and I saw two new releases this past week, though we also saw one repeat and I managed the first few installments at home of the stupendous The Story of Film by Belfast critic Mark Cousins. I plan to proceed with vigour in the coming days to get through this remarkable series. We saw:
Quartet **** (Saturday night) Paris Theater
56 Up **** (Friday night) IFC Film Center
QUARTET is a far “happier” old age exploration that what we saw in Amour, but apples and oranges here. Dustin Hoffmann’s feature film debut is actually a charming film about a late life re-union of a music team who strut their stuff in a magnificent English rural estate, belting out some celebrated operatic arias in an effort to rekindle the old magic. Maggie Smith, Tom Courtenay, Michael Gambon, Billy Connolly, and Pauline Collins are all wonderful in a film of irresistible nostalgic shadings and the beauty of opera and classical music.
Michael Apted’s latest installment in his landmark series that follows British citizens from children to adults and through middle age is 56 UP, and again his exploration of these 14 people is fascinating and revelatory, with a narrative arc to seems to focus on what really matters most. Apted’s labor of love swings back and forth to the earlier footage to establish perspective and metamorphosis.
Last week’s links are re-posted. I was watching the Golden Globes during the time I would have completed updates:
There is a fabulous new site trailer from Tony d’Ambra up at FilmsNoir.net: http://filmsnoir.net/articles/new-filmsnoir-net-trailer.html
Judy Geater is leading up at Movie Classics with her superlative review of Vincente Minelli’s “Meet Me in St. Louis”: http://movieclassics.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/meet-me-in-st-louis-vincente-minnelli-1944/
Jon Warner’s fantastic ‘Re-cap of 2012’ is leading up at Films Worth Watching: http://filmsworthwatching.blogspot.com/2013/01/my-recap-of-2012-old-releases.html
John Greco’s lead post is the enthralling Twenty Four Frames’ 3rd Annual 10 Best Classic Films Watched during 2012: http://twentyfourframes.wordpress.com/2013/01/04/24-frames-3rd-annual-10-best-classic-films-watched-for-the-first-time/
Sachin Gandhi has posted a spectacular ‘Best Films of 2012’ post at Scribblings and Ramblings: http://likhna.blogspot.com/2012/12/best-films-of-2012.html
At Speaking From The Heart Laurie Buchanan offers up an incomparable look in the ‘rear view mirror’: http://holessence.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/a-glimpse-in-the-rearview-mirror/
Richard R.D. Finch offers up a wonderful year-end post at that northern California mecca for cineastes: http://themovieprojector.blogspot.com/2012/12/yearend-odds-and-ends.html
Roderick Heath has posted his brilliantly comprehensive “Confessions of a Film Freak,” which sizes up the year, at Ferdy-on Films: http://www.ferdyonfilms.com/2013/confessions-of-a-film-freak-2012/17230/
David Schleicher has a terrific review up on “Zero Dark Thirty” at The Schleicher Spin: http://theschleicherspin.com/2013/01/06/no-ruth-my-love-in-zero-dark-thirty/
Pat Perry speaks eloquently about the ‘unspeakable tragedy’ at Doodad Kind of Town: http://doodadkindoftown.blogspot.com/2012/12/this-is-not-post-i-had-planned.html
Samuel Wilson has crafted a terrific essay on Sergio Corbucci’s spaghetti western “Companeros” at Mondo 70: http://mondo70.blogspot.com/2013/01/sergio-corbuccis-companeros-vamos-matar.html
At Vermillion and One Nights Murderous Ink has posted a spectacular piece on “Evangelion After Fukushima” (Part 2): http://vermillionandonenights.blogspot.com/2012/12/evangelion-after-fukushima-part-2.html
At Lost It at the Movies Movie Man Joel Bocko offers up a splendid screen capo display of “Leap of Faith”: http://thedancingimage.blogspot.com/2012/12/leap-of-faith.html#more
Shubhajit Lahiri has penned an extraordinary capsule on Rivette’s “Celine et Julie Goes Boating” at Cinemascope: http://cliched-monologues.blogspot.com/2013/01/celine-and-julie-go-boating-1974.html
Fimmaker Jeffrey Goodman has several updates at The Last Lullaby, including his latest a splendid quartet of capsules that includes “The Breaking Point,” “Senna” and “The Edge of the World”: http://cliched-monologues.blogspot.com/2012/12/beau-travail-1999.html
David Schleicher has written a creative essay on Jacques Audiard’s “Rust and Bone” at The Schleicher Spin: http://theschleicherspin.com/2012/12/23/evolutionary-melodrama-and-triumph-of-the-human-spirit-in-rust-and-bone/
Richard R.D. Finch is leading up with his spectacular comedy countdown essay on “Sullivan’s Travels” at The Movie Projector: http://themovieprojector.blogspot.com/2012/12/sullivans-travels-1942.html
Ed Howard’s magnificent review of Jean Rollin’s “Fascination” is leading up at Only the Cinema: http://seul-le-cinema.blogspot.com/2012/12/fascination.html
Craig Kennedy has posted one of his greatest interviews ever at Living in Cinema, with Samantha Barks, the lovely young actress who plays Eponine in “Les Miserables”: http://livingincinema.com/2012/12/20/samantha-barks-flies-the-flag-for-eponine-in-les-miserables/
At Overlook’s Corridor Jaimie Grijalba continues his intricate study of Chilean cinema: http://overlookhotelfilm.wordpress.com/2012/12/23/chilean-cinema-2012-16-stefan-vs-kramer-2012/
Terrill Welch’s fabulous new post “Reef Bay Morning Experienced – West Coast Seascape Oil Painting” leads up at the Creativepotager’s blog: http://creativepotager.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/4163/
Weeping Sam’s latest post at The Listening Ear is a terrific combined piece comparing similar aspects in “Lincoln” and “Django Unchained”: http://listeningear.blogspot.com/2013/01/lincoln-django-unchained.html
At The Blue Vial Drew McIntosh is leading up with a superb screen cap presentation of Otto Preminger’s “Whirlpool”: http://thebluevial.blogspot.com/2012/12/whirlpool.html
At Patricia’s Wisdom the ever-spirited proprietor offers up “10 Steps to Finding Your Happy Place-My Gift to You”: http://patriciaswisdom.com/2012/12/10-steps-to-finding-your-happy-place-my-gift-to-you/
At Radiator Heaven J.D. La France offers up a fantastic essay on “On the Road”: http://rheaven.blogspot.com/2013/01/on-road.html
Dean Treadway’s new post “Cinema Gallery: 30 Scenes of Loneliness” is essential for all passionate film lovers. It’s over at Filmicability: http://filmicability.blogspot.com/2012/11/blog-post_6.html
Click on names for archives
Writers/Founders
Wonders in the Dark 
Thanks Sam for the mention.
Oscars are a spectacle allright, and they get far more attention than any other film awards. But, that said, I guess its worthwhile to take Oscar nominations as well as winners with spoonfools of salt – first of all, unlike the stature associated with the Oscars, they are in essence a popular award as opposed to a critical appreciation for great art. They have honoured some good films over the years, but the number of oversights and omissions far outnumber the former. And moreover, the populism apart, as you rightly noted, political affiliation of the voters, too, play an underlying but important role. As for Golden Globe, they are even more populist in my opinion. I’m not saying that that’s necessarily a bad thing (Oscars anyway never associate highbrow connotations with themselves vis-a-vis, say, Cannes or Berlin) – just that, we shouldn’t take them as seriously as we generally do.
Anyway, here’s what I managed to watched in the meantime:
– Robert Redford’s Quiz Show – a decent film alright, but not as great as it tends to be made out to be
– Stefan Uher’s brilliant The Sun in a Net – though a Czech New Wave film, in spirit & style it was, in my opinion, closer to the French Nouvelle Vague
– Dassin’s final film in the US before being blacklisted by HUAC, Thieves’ Highway – again, a decent noir & social drama, but certainly no comparison for Night & the City, The Naked City, or even Rififi
– Tarantino’s delirious & thoroughly enjoyable Western Django Unchained
– Resnais’ renowned & delightfully confounding arthouse classic, Last Year at Marienbad
– The Japanese New Wave product (though, of course, that’s debatable), Kwaidan
Shubhajit—
The Oscars do indeed get more worldwide attention than any other awards, and though they deserve little respect as a lighthouse for cinematic art, they are still seen by some worldwide as the most weighty of the awards groups. In obituaries the first thing you always read is “Oscar-winning actor” or “she was an Oscar in 1955 for such and such a film.” Ironically, most movie lovers well know what they are all about. You frame the Oscars (and the Globes) quite accurately here! I am with you on QUIZ SHOW, which is decent enough, but overrated. I haven’t seen Uher’s film, wow! You watched some great films there with LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD and KWAIDAN, and Dassin’s film is exceptional, even if under as you note those other masterpieces. Thrilled to hear you loved DJANGO UNCHAINED, which for me is Tarantino’s most deliriously entertaining film. Thanks as always my friend for the fabulous comment! Have a great week!
Yes, the usual tedium of The Unimportance of Being Oscar.
Good morning Sam and all at WITD –
Yes the annual Oscar nominations were a mix of surprises and unbelievable snubs. I haven’t see ZERO DARK THIRTY as yet, but I cannot imagine that the BEAST OF THE SOUTHERN WILDS director could have accomplished anything more impressive than what Katherine Bigelow is capable of,even on an off day. Rachel Weisz and Jack Black were at the top of my “unforgivable snubs” list. But this is nothing new,right?
We enjoyed wathing the Globes last night – and I MUCH prefer Tina Fey and Amy Poehler to Ricky Gervais as hosts. I never take these awards too seriously, but did find Jodie Foster’s speech very moving. I was happly to see the TV wind for GIRLS, but I mostly wanted someone to take Lena Dunham under their wing for some instructions on good posture, how to walk in high heels and how to elegantly lift her long skirt while climbing stairs to the podium.
Anyway, was a slow film week here. I re-watched two previously seen films – the HBO film MRS. HARRIS with Annette Bening and Ben Kingsley and LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE. My only new film was COMPLIANCE which was tense and well acted, but COME ON!!! Are people really that stupid? I know it was based on true events, but good grief, who would follow phoned-in instructions to strip seach an employee (much less the rest of it.)
Oh and I also got my Best of 2012 list posted. Based on my comments here last week, I think you may be surprised….
And yes, people really are that stupid, Pat. How else does one explain the popularity of reality TV?
Pat, did you think that it was probably an insult to Foster to give her that award at age 50? I mean they give it to guys when they’re in their 60’s and 70’s. It’s already a well-known fact of the industry that it throws women away once they reach a certain age, and this award at this time seems to compound that tendency. You could tell Foster had a chip on her shoulder too, as she probably should have.
Jon, Foster herself noted that she’s been working since something like age 3, so she’s probably put in as many years already as those elders. She’s probably entitled to show that chip anyway for any number of reasons.
Jon and Samuel, you both make excellent points. I think Foster did get the award because she’s already put in so many years in the business. But, yes, I did think to myself that 50 was awful young for a lifetime achievement award. Then again, both Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg have, I believe, won AFI Lifetime Achievement awards, in both cases several years ago and while in their 50s or younger. So it happens.
Pat—
You certainly are right on the money there with the sizing up of the Oscar noms! Yep, Benh Zeitlin most assuredly did NOT out-dirent Kathryn Bigelow, and that’s the understatement of the year. I am also with you on Black and Weitz, both of whom were excellent! In any case I am pretty certainly you will really like ZERO DARK THIRTY! I know some newspapers this morning were suggesting that Jodie Foster’s speech was “bizarre” but like you I got it and was very moved! I also liked COMPLIANCE, but had the very same questions you did!!! Ha! Absolutely. These people were beyond clueless! I also have always found LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE charming. I took a quick look at your excellent Awards discussing at DOODAD, and will be back there to comment my friend! Have a great week and many thanks as always!
I did laugh at the Globes last night giving another award to Maggie Smith, who it seems only has to give a withering glance and speak one line a year and she gets an award. I love her, but it’s the same schtick she’s done for decades.
Amen! I was stunned to see on some award nomination slates for THE BEST EXOTIC MARIGOLD HOTEL – hers was the least interesting performance in the film. And I love her too, but not everything she does is award-worthy.
One geriatric no doubt also in line for a gong is sourpuss Judi Dench, another tedious stalwart of the new genre of one foot in the grave angst movie. If we must have such movies why not hook up with the likes of Jane Fonda who still manages to be hot wrinkles and all – her cameos in Sorkin’s The Newsroom are among the better bits of this uneven entry. As for the arrows and sling-shot from the likes of Maurizio and Fake Dennis, I am a boomer intending to be around for a few more decades…
As for the arrows and sling-shot from the likes of Maurizio and Fake Dennis, I am a boomer intending to be around for a few more decades…
hahahaha Tony! You and me both!!!!
We were thinking of you last night Sam when Hathaway, Jackman and ‘Les Mis’ won Golden Globes. Must say even with the silliness of award shows, I would never have figured Tarantino to beat Kushner for screenplay. But it does appear that Americans love Lincoln far more than foreigners. Understandable.
That Seahawks-Falcons game was somethin!
Frank—
I must say that was strange giving Tarantino the Best Screenplay award, especially over Kushner, who writing is what really drove LINCOLN. The Oscars of course will go with the LINCOLN screenwriter. Still, I love DJANGO UNCHAINED. True what you say about Americans connected with LINCOLN, while others do not to that level. Yep, that football game was really something. 49ers-Falcons next week with be a real classic! We were cheering for LES MIS last night!!! Melanie was really thrilled.
Thanks as always my friend!
Sam, the new Academy rules have made Best Director a musical chairs game, with snubs guaranteed for up to half the directors of Best Picture nominees. Under normal circumstances factors other than aesthetic ones have influenced nominations, but now these factors seem more flagrant, with two directors possibly punished for political incorrectness of some kind. How the nominators resisted their impulse to reward actors-turned-directors this year may be a deeper mystery. But a shortlist without The Master considered for picture or director can’t be taken seriously anyway.
Saw Zero Dark Thirty and reviewed it: compelling but not necessarily indelible, though I wouldn’t complain if Chastain wins the Oscar. The bigger point it wants to make is getting lost in the controversy over the portrayal of torture, but it’s a tricky film, making the hunt for bin Laden personal in order to question whether it really was too personal. Call it a kind of masterpiece of disciplined ambivalence.
Lots of Pre-Codes to catch up with while Loretta Young is TCM’s star of the month. Rowland V. Lee’s The Ruling Voice is a Warner Bros. gangster film from 1931 yet already archaic in its melodrama in the year of Public Enemy, though noteworthy as an early instance of equating gangsterdom with big business. The Flood/Nugent Life Begins is a flamboyant and ultimately ironic ensemble of expectant mothers with Glenda Farrell the standout despite Young’s top billing. Ray Enright’s Play-Girl stars Winnie Lightner but Young dominates as a shopgirl who loves but mistrusts yet eventually emulates a gambler. In Thornton Freeland’s They Call It Sin she’s passed from David Manners to George Brent with an interval under Louis Calhern’s caddish influence, while Una Merkel strives mightily to steal the picture as a dancing eccentric. Nothing really great here but all have their moments.
Sam, the new Academy rules have made Best Director a musical chairs game, with snubs guaranteed for up to half the directors of Best Picture nominees.
Yep, excellent point there Samuel. And similarly, I would agree that the political impact has been more flagrant in recent years, with the two snubs for Bigelow and Affleck shocking for many, especially in Bigelow’s case. And yes it does indeed seem like voters are turned off by “actors-turned-directors!” I wasn’t the biggest fan of THE MASTER, but still agree with your position on the Oscar snub for this critically-praised film, even if three of the actors were nominated. Your analysis on ZERO DARK THIRTY (one of the best films of the year) is fair enough. Too much wa sread into the torture sequence. I agree Jeesica Chastain was superlative as was William Godenberg’s editing. You have me pretty much drawing a black on that quartet of pre-coders, though in retrospect I did see PLAY-GIRL, and liked it well enough. Loretta Young is a fine subject for TCM to tackle. I will definitely be taking a close look at your ZERO DARK THIRTY review. Thanks as always my friend. Have a great week!
Sam,
Well there’s lots of things to talk about regarding awards at this time of year if one so chooses. Lord knows I’m not the biggest proponent of the Oscar, yet I posted some thoughts of mine at my site last week and I thought there were some pleasant developments regarding nominations….such as Amour getting so much “love”. It’s great it got a Best Picture nomination and director nomination. Emmanuelle Riva also was a wonderful addition to the list. I haven’t seen it yet but I was really pleased with these developments. Additionally a film like Lincoln, which just about everyone admires and respects deserves to have as many noms as it got. If we start looking at the Director nominations though, you can really see under the old rules, which 5 films would have made the cut.
Lincoln
Amour
Silver Linings Playbook
Life of Pi
Beasts of the Southern Wild
Under the old rules, it would appear that ZD30 would have been left out completely, as well as Bigelow of course. The real crime in all of this is Beasts, which is a huge piece of tripe. It’s a complete insult that the film and the girl actress is getting this attention. It’s a crime Wallis got a best actress nomination ahead of someone like Rachel Weisz. I’m sorry, that girl’s performance is not really any different that any decent child actor. I see better acting at my house day in and day out from my kids actually. Beasts is where our ire should be directed, not against the well-acted Silver Linings. I agree that David O Russell should not be nominated, but this is more an indication it seems of the 5 films that are really in the hunt, perhaps.
I was very happy for Jennifer Lawrence and Jessica Chastain last night. I think they do wonderful work and are two of our brightest talents. Although I might place my money on Riva for the Oscar at this point.
Last week saw The Well-Digger’s Daughter. It was a charming little film and I enjoyed it. I also loved The Burmese Harp and will do a write-up of that soon.
I also caught Holy Motors at the Kalamazoo Film Society. In general I did like the film, although it wasn’t as good as I was expecting. I think several sequences are inspired…..the simulated sex scene, the murder scene, the deathbed, the melodrama/musical. But other scenes didn’t work for me…..the beggar (a throwaway scene if you ask me), the beauty and the beast (ham-fisted and overwrought), and the monkey family (which I thought was stupidly funny but more stupid than funny). Overall it’s an interesting but uneven film.
Thanks for the wonderful package I got in the mail! This will keep me busy over the next couple weeks! Thanks so much my friend.
Jon—
I definitely will be checking in at FILMS WORTH WATCHING to respond to your “Oscar thoughts” post. And yes I know you are not th ebiggest fan of the awards, but will usually watch the show. I’m about on the same page with you, and have always enjoyed trying to figure out what direction the voters will be heading. As you know I am completely with you on BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD, a film that curiously has no fans at this site, but generally is quite well revered by critics and audiences. I was shocked to see Zeitlin get nominated ober Bigelow, Affleck, Hooper and Tarantino. I like that comment about “seeing better acting in your house everyday!” Ha! Like you I am progressively thinking that Riva may win the Best Actress prize, and the support for Lawrence and Chastain could split. Most of the predictors -though a few have now switched to Riva- are still saying Lawrence will win. Can’t wait to see your piece on THE BURMESE HARP, one of my favorite Japanese films. Your views on HOLY MOTORS are shared by others at the site! Nice round-up! Another packet is on it’s way!! Have agreat week my friend! Many thanks as always!
Hello Sam and everyone!!
Well, I must disagree, while I do think that the Oscars nominations are meh, I do think there are some interesting parts and that they are far better than those made in the last year, specially with the inclusion of the greatest film of the year, Amour, with nominations in many of the principal awards, something that is unheard of for the “quaint and safeplaying” Academy. Also, the snub of Bigelow couldn’t make me any more indiferent, while the snub for Affleck does infuriate me. I do think that Russell was in the run for best director since the early predictions, it is Zeinl and Haneke who bumped those out.
Oscars talk beside, I watched a bit of what I could see of the Golden Globes and applauded the win of Argo and Amour in their categories, I also had the bad news that the government lease wasn’t possible so I’ll have to work on my own for that feature length film.
Anyway, the films I saw this week:
– The Box (2009, Richard Kelly) ***** A masterpiece of science fiction and conspiracy, something that moves beyond what we see, a world and reasons completely constructed beyond what the minimal plot tell us about this couple that is given a moral choice, and chooses badly. Acted in a superb manner, with a great cinematography and shootings style, great framing, this is a movie that I watched with my family and my mom loved it! I didn’t expect that! I still think of its repercusions and overall structure, and can’t wait for the next Richard Kelly film.
– Django (1966, Sergio Corbucci) **** In preparation for my watching of Django Unchained (which opens this week in Chile) I watched this spaguetti western that shares more than its title with. It’s an entertaining and bloody western, even if it is a bit thin on its plot elements. It has that amazing machine gun and an incredible array of quirky and impressive characters. Its music is amazing and all the moments are classics of the spaguetti western tropes, it’s one of those that I’ve enjoyed the most.
– L’Inferno (1911, Francesco Bertolini, Adolfo Padovan, Giuseppe de Liguoro) ***1/2 An impressive “First feature film” that still suffers from what in that time was known as “filmed theatre” that makes this a bit less interesting than what it would’ve been, still it’s impressive for the time, specially the special effects and the makeup for the demons and the film effects, how this was done in 1911 and looks more natural and better than any Transformers film is just impressive in itself.
– Tales of Terror: Haunted Apartments (2005, Akio Yoshida) ***1/2 A japanese horror film that was a spin-off of a TV series that showcased famous horror stories, this one is filmed in a similar style but with a bigger scope and more time to tell its story, a dad and daughter have to move to a new apartment, but this one is different, it has sinister rules and a dark secret behind it, regarding the death of one of the people who lived there, a girl the same age of our protagonist. Creepy in some parts but made with poor visuals, this one it’s a mixed bag that I would recommend only to fans of the genre.
– The World of Arrietty (2010, Hiromasa Yonebayashi) **** An impressive animation from Ghibli that mixes the beautiful visuals of the grandeur spectacle of the giantism of the vision from its protagonists mixed with a story about moving forward, personal family story and overall emotion, and while that last part of the film may be the weakest, it’s still an amazing film to watch just because of how the visuals work in the inner world of the borrowers, and the final 45 minutes or so are exciting and always welcomed.
– Miracle of Flight (1974, Terry Gilliam) **** I had to watch a short to vote in the category for 1974 so I decided to go with something I knew I’d love, so I decided for Terry Gilliam and one of his first solo ventures in the animation realm, and while this reminds you a lot of Monty Python style, it’s still its own thing: original and funny.
– Les Misérables (2012, Tom Hooper) *** Wow. How is this movie being liked? They all sing not good at all (Except a few few few exceptions) the movie is a dramatic mess for anyone who hasn’t seen the musical or read the book before (I guess I shouldn’t have watched it if not, but what the hell??), it’s ugly in its framing style, the only thing that saves it from the pits is that it has an impressive art direction and visual style, but that isn’t as impresive as the best work of the year in that field. And the ending… why is this musical liked if it has that awful dull boring ending?
– Silver Linings Playbook (2012, David O. Russell) ***1/2 I watched this and I didn’t found it awful… nor great, just an ok film with some good performances and a drama that can keep you going until it ends, even if it drags a bit here and there, I wouldn’t take out a second of its existence. It can show you that Jennifer Lawrence can start playing adult roles and get out of the teenywhinny bullshit like the Hunger Games series forever. This is a good demo reel, let’s look forward.
– The War Game (1965, Peter Watkins) **** I shall ellaborate on this one soon.
Thanks Sam, have a good week!
Jaimie, I must say you have me perplexed with the statement that Affleck’s snub “infuriates” you, while Bigelow’s leaves you “indifferent.” ZERO DARK THIRTY is a far better film than ARGO, and Bigelow’s direction could well be the most accomplished in any film this year, a position that just about every critics group out there has made over the past months. But fair enough. If this is your position I respect it. As far as your trashing of LES MISERABLES, I don’t think you liked or would have liked the sourse material in the first place. Music professionals and theeatre people have lauded the singing from Hathaway, Jackman, Barks and Redmayne, so I am not sure where you are coming from on the ‘bad singing’ angle. It sounds more like a ‘bad music’ criticism, and that is really a matter of taste, and usually -in this case- a matter of whether one tolerates opera. I have made my case for this film and my long held enthusiasm for the novel and Broadway show, and am delighted that many have come to the same conclusions, including Allan, who e mailed me yesterday with a **** reaction, and even Maurizio, who I had thought would hate it. Lucille and my kids are huge fans and want to keep seeing it over and over. The final sequence that you seem to hate most of all was emotionally cathartic. But again fair enough, we have different tastes at this stage in the game. The “ugly” framing you mention was intentional and in tune with Hugo’s novel. PLAYBOOK to me was mediocre; KI love THE BOX and DJANGO, and do like ARIETTY and THE WAR GAME!! Thanks as always for the great round-up my friend. Have a great week!
I don’t think that Zero Dark Thirty is better than Argo in any capacity, besides, according to RT (the critics agregator) ZDT stands at 93% while Argo at 96%, I’m not counting these as fact, especially since I find outrageous any kind of agregator rating to begin with, but I must say that Argo has a more positive reaction than ZDT, au contraire to what you think. I think my principal issue is that both films are takes on the americana myth of heroes, fights, wars and all, but Argo has a wider space for you to breathe when you are thinking about viewing the things from both sides (as much as certain critics are trying to say that this wasn’t reality… Jeez, it’s a movie, even though it’s based on real events, we know it’s a lie), I mean, we have a space and time to criticize what we see done by the american part of the characters, specially the issues regarding the hostages that are still trapped in the embassy, and we have a time to say that what they are doing is wrong… in Zero Dark Thirty there is no such space, either you are pro killing Bin Laden or the movie is just not for you, and I think that there’s a directorial fault right there in a way how the pacing of Affleck’s film made it possible for reflections like that, while the Bigelow film was just too much and at the end if you’re just against what’s being done, you just don’t care at the end, no matter how “well done” it is. Here’s what I commented on JAFB’s negative review of the film:
“While I think that the film itself is very faulty because of the issues of warfare as spectacle and the hunt and killing of Bin Laden as a worthy thing to do, I also think that it’s very well done and it has some interesting moments, specially regarding the bombings inside the USA compounds.
Nevertheless, I can’t actually think of a real reason as to why people are praising it so highly, besides the fact of:
FUCK YEAHHH AMERICA, WE KILLED BIN LADEN BIATCCHHHH”
On Les Miz, I do like classic music and certain musicals, I’ve heard many of the musical’s original songs, and they are beautiful and they have a tight vocal chord thing that is just beautiful… the way in which they were sung it’s not beautiful at all, and if you’re going to have a musical with meh singers, you might as well not make a musical, that’s my opinion. I loved the music, not the singers.
Jaimie, I am referring to the CRITICS, not the random opinions of RT. I also go to RT when I am looking for ‘general concensus’ and have quoted it, but MC is where you get the CRITICS’ reactions. You need to go to META CRITIC where ZERO DARK THIRTY stands at a staggering 95%, a number that is virtually unheard of at that place.
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/zero-dark-thirty/critic-reviews
It has an incredible 24 ‘100’ ratings, and has been named Best Film of the year by the New York Film Critics Circle, the Boston Society, the National Board of Review and many other groups, far more than ARGO, which did receive an 86 on MC. You can bet your house that ZDT will do far better with the MURIELS next month as well.
As far as all the “rahrahrah” American stuff you are talking about I am floored. First of all, Bigelow has received heat from the right AND left for her visualization of AMERICAN torture!!!! I am a left wing liberal Democrat for my entire life, and did not approach this film as a chronicle of Bin Laden’s eventual demise, but rather as a far more complex study of the prospective events and machinations that led up to it. To imply in any way that I reacted to this brilliantly orchestrated film from the vantage point of a gung ho American could NOT be further from the truth.
ARGO is nothing more than a stylistic appetizer for what we get in ZERO.
As far as the singing in LES MISERABLES we’ll just have to politely agree to disagree. Hathaway was a stupendous Fantine, Jackman sang Valjean beautifully, and several others performed quite impressively. I have attended three performances of the show on stage, and have been at opera houses for many years. The singing in the film LES MIS is solid all around.
Well, I think that Metacritic agregates every review from all the places, newspapers and official things, I still think that the “Top Critics” section of RT is more reasonable and still gives ZDT 90% and Argo a 95%.
I would never dare to deny your political views, I know them and I respect them, and I even agree with you many many times, but I’m just saying that what you describe you “did not approach this film as a chronicle of Bin Laden’s eventual demise, but rather as a far more complex study of the prospective events and machinations that led up to it”, and to that I say… it still doesn’t interest me, I still don’t think Bin Laden shouldn’t have been killed, and from an international perspective this movie is going to find a lot of trouble to even make it more interesting.
I’ve heard reports of people seeing the movie in USA (now that it opened wide) cheering and applauding during the last part of it, and yelling hurrahs as Bin Laden gets killed, as if this were another Act of Valor movie. You might see it this way, and I respect it, but you have to admit that the way it’s constructed it gives way for it to be interpreted in many other ways that are not morally correct.
And I never even mentioned torture, since I’m sick of the stuff and well, in a way, I’m expecting torture from the Americas.
Bin Laden was directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans on 9-11. A few are friends of friends, and one is my sister-in-law’s uncle, who was a window washer on the fateful day in the South Tower. If some people react with glee and vindication at the murder of a man who well-deserved to die the way he did, I can’t at all fault them, even if I am ever-critical of much of our own government’s policy. The film is a procedural thriller about obsession and in the end it illustrates just how far America was willing to bring this mass murderer to justice. Bigelow and screen writer Mark Boal are asking the viewers if the operation, moral implications and all were worth the definitive investment.
As far as the critics’ assessments, the ‘Top Critic’ section of RT is not in the same league as MC. And as I saw the proof was in the pudding with the numerous ‘Best Film of 2012’ awards the film won from many of the groups including New York. That does NOT mean to suggest that you or anyone should blindly follow, but only to respond to the original contention that ARGO was better received critically, a point that is untrue.
But I know you have agreed with me many times, and vice-versa. This disagreement is no big deal.
In any case it is easy enough to see that the film poses that torture is far less effective (if it is even effective at all) than resilience.
And I will add here that I am a big fan of ARGO. I love the film, and am not trying to diminish it in any way, regardless of how this discussion has come down.
“I think my principal issue is that both films are takes on the americana myth of heroes, fights, wars and all, but Argo has a wider space for you to breathe when you are thinking about viewing the things from both sides (as much as certain critics are trying to say that this wasn’t reality… Jeez, it’s a movie, even though it’s based on real events, we know it’s a lie)”
Wider space to breathe? What does that mean exactly.
If your possibly saying that Argo is more open to showing an opposite viewpoint then I think your wrong. Affleck’s movie actually shows every Muslim as some menacing threat to the American diplomats. It’s actually more rah rah than Zero Dark Thirty overall, while also poking fun at Canadians to boot. ZDT shows one chiefly dominant viewpoint (Maya’s) because the film is equally about obsession and detrimental determination. You basically missed a huge theme of the film…
“while the Bigelow film was just too much and at the end if you’re just against what’s being done, you just don’t care at the end, no matter how “well done” it is.”
Can’t make sense of this, but I’ll take a stab… I’m guessing you might be saying that Bigelow is not offering up any type of ambiguity at the end. That she’s clearly in favor of the death of Bin Laden which offends you. Yet if her motivation was to show his death and have the audience cheer approvingly, why is the execution basically off camera?? Unlike Argo’s pathetic made up formulaic Hollywood ending (major mistep in an otherwise good picture), ZDT doesn’t actually give the viewer emotional satisfaction in cinematic terms regarding the conclusion. It actually pulls away from showing a typical ending… where we would see the bad guy get taken down in graphic detail while John Williams-like strings soar triumphantly. Bigelow never succumbs to that type of mawkish overreach. In actuality, most people who dislike ZDT are saying the opposite of what your possibly mentioning here, that the film doesn’t take a side and unequivocally should (preferably whatever their own political persuasion happens to be).
“but I’m just saying that what you describe you “did not approach this film as a chronicle of Bin Laden’s eventual demise, but rather as a far more complex study of the prospective events and machinations that led up to it”, and to that I say… it still doesn’t interest me, I still don’t think Bin Laden shouldn’t have been killed, and from an international perspective this movie is going to find a lot of trouble to even make it more interesting.”
Ignoring the last half of your last sentence which also doesn’t make any actual sense, your basically saying that you dislike the movie because Bin Laden sees his demise in it. Fair enough… just honestly state that you are in no position to judge this film fairly since the story is one your predisposed to dislike regardless of it’s point of view. It sounds like, regardless of the film’s possible stance, that Bin Laden gets killed so you refuse to look past that fact in any way. Again perfectly fine, but don’t then tell people (Sam) who have seen the film with more open mindedness that your take is anything other than predetermined disdain and apathetic flights of fancy. Just state clearly that… you don’t believe countries should assassinate individuals thus I can’t watch this film in any context other than my personal bias. That is perfectly fine. I’m sure many people would rather not see this film for that very same reason. Just don’t misinterpret the theme so clearly based on such enmity.
“I’ve heard reports of people seeing the movie in USA (now that it opened wide) cheering and applauding during the last part of it, and yelling hurrahs as Bin Laden gets killed, as if this were another Act of Valor movie.”
I live in America and I watch the news every night. Not once have I seen this mentioned anywhere. Yes Bob Clark said he witnessed such an occurrence, but nowhere else have I heard that reported. Even so…It would be like thrashing Kubrick’s Clockwork Orange because kids imitated Alex after that film. Mis-interpetations of movies like your own are always bound to happen. Does not mean that the film is endorsing or condoning a particular response.
“I would never dare to deny your political views, I know them and I respect them, and I even agree with you many many times, but I’m just saying that what you describe you “did not approach this film as a chronicle of Bin Laden’s eventual demise, but rather as a far more complex study of the prospective events and machinations that led up to it”, and to that I say… it still doesn’t interest me, I still don’t think Bin Laden shouldn’t have been killed, and from an international perspective this movie is going to find a lot of trouble to even make it more interesting.”
Yeah what this sounds like Jaime is that you’re against the notion of even creating ANY film which would examine the procedural and manhunt aspects of killing Bin Laden. You are against the concept from the get go. As Maurizio said, you shouldn’t be trying compare it to other films…you shouldn’t be judging content in this film, you should be focused on concept only and arguing for/against the existence of said film.
In many ways the real dilemma Bigelow is confronted with by making ZDT is that the event is too fresh and current for certain audiences. People can’t divorce themselves from the content to review the film. Clouzot faced the same ire with Le Corbeau, Melvile with Army Of Shadows. Both those pictures were misread and attacked by some audiences as well. As time goes by, content/context can be appreciate with less bias and more level-headedness. I have no doubt that much of the nonsense being hurled at ZDT will dissipate when the history/events depicted can be watched with more time removed. Once that proper distance comes into play, most viewers will then plainly see that the film is not pro-torture or gung-ho about the war on terror.
Rather than push Jaime into a corner, perhaps there should be more effort given to understanding his perspective. There are historical and cultural factors at work here, as well as the personal. Look at the history of the US in Latin America for a start. If anything, we should be questioning the statements of his critics. From a high horse Maurizio says Jaime has misinterpreted the film, and Jon lectures him on film criticism with the specious argument that he should not be comparing films.
I answered in detail the things you bring up here. But I know that’s not your true aim in terms of commenting. I’m regretting even giving you the satisfaction of responding. And since this is a film blog the last time I checked, I was merely arguing why the movie was being so egregiously misread.
No worries Maurizio, I haven’t read your reply :).
Yeah if he’s against the concept from the get go, then you should argue from a conceptual basis…..not “Argo is better than ZD30 because…” As an example…..If I hated Les Mis (which I don’t) and said something like well Lincoln is just a far better film in every way. And then it came out later in the argument that I loathed Musicals as a concept, wouldn’t you just throw out everything I was just saying in my comparison? I can’t fairly evaluate content of said film if the concept of said film I despise in the first place……..we all know objective viewing is nearly impossible, but being averse to a concept in the first place makes it even harder.
Oh and Tony we all know that Maurizio says constantly that people have misread films…..happens to me every week. 😉 Where were you a few weeks ago when I was misinterpreting The Conformist? (no offense Maurizio, I’m just having fun).
I continue to plug away Sam…
Amour ****1/2
Bernie ***1/2
Zero Dark Thirty *****
Silver Lining Playbook ***
Like almost everyone else on this site (other than Jon) I don’t see what the big deal is when it comes to SLP. It’s like deja-vu oscar bait, the 2012 edition. A nice trifecta of mediocrity with PI (I know you don’t agree, so please don’t yell at me) and Beasts when it comes to Best Picture nominations. I guess you must be on vacation Sam. I always assume this when you see less films in a week than days….
I will be the lone hold-out then on on SLP….I mean it wasn’t a masterpiece by any stretch, but I liked the acting. And in a year that was already weak to begin with (I am continually disappointed by films of late….this week was Holy Motors) I just plain enjoyed myself while watching SLP.
By the way, I don’t think any of you are that far off from my rating for SLP….Maurizio, we’re within a star of being the same.
I do agree with you on Holy Motors (though you seem to like that one more than me overall). And two films I saw this week make my general impression of 2012 much more positive.
Holy Motors was OK with some good stuff, but nothing that’s going to stick with me.
Maurizio, I expected that great rating from you on ZERO DARK THIRTY, a film so brilliantly-crafted that it’s hard to fight anything to criticize. And the same for AMOUR, which I also figured would land some strong praise from you on. I’ve read some of your specific on AMOUR in your superb e mail commentary, and I thought the end of the year would enhance your overall perception of the last twelve months. So yet another site member sets aside SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK! Ha! Warms my heart. As far as your proposed ‘trifecta of mediocrity’ I do meet you two-thirds of the way, only dissenting on THE LIFE OF PI, which I have as my #2 film of the year. Ha! Nice quip there about vacation. Well, as I stated on a previous thread, I plan to engineer moderation over the coming year in regards to movie-going in theaters. I plan on being far more selective. Have a great week my friend!
I’m still not sure how I feel about ZDT myself. But I will say that I was absolutely disgusted with some of the responses it was getting as I sat in the theater. There was lots of easy laughter during things like the frat boy CIA agent torturing a suspect at a black site, or Jessica Chastain point-blankly saying to a Seal Team guy that she would rather just drop a bomb on the Bin Laden compound, where she knows children are living. I’ve never been that ashamed of an audience before, and though I don’t want it to affect my judgement of the film itself, I do feel that it tries to prompt a little bit of that at times, with the casual vibe it has with these CIA interrogators.
I don’t think it tries to prompt those kinds of feelings at all. Jason Clarke’s character is not some frat boy sociopath getting off on torture. In fact his ambivalence towards his job is obvious. And Maya’s reaction at the end of the film is telling. It comes across as a hollow victory in many ways. All those years of obsessive hunting leave her shaken and seemingly empty. Yeah she got the job done, but at what cost? It’s clear that she has no life and has put everything aside to accomplish something that won’t make her very happy anyway. In many ways ZDT reminds me of a war/combat Zodiac. The quest to get at the truth and all it’s collateral damage is something that can never be truly resolved. I felt that the whole movie had a kind of ambivalence towards the war on terror. Yeah we get back at those that attacked us, but it just becomes a revolving cycle of violence… year after year… decade after decade… that leaves everyone changed and not for the better.
And while I was also somewhat annoyed that the movie seems to suggest that enhanced interrogation made the first Islamist give up some vital information (which most people in the know deny), the movie does also show another prisoner clearly lying under the same duress (seemingly pointing out that torture does not work under most circumstances). It should also be mentioned that ZDT is basically a procedural that minutely details all the complicated parts/intelligence that lead to the eventual attack on Bin Laden’s compound. It’s not like they waterboarded some guy and then went out the next day and got their prized jihadist. This accumulation of information took years. Some of the complaint on this film by pundits is like most political discussions these days in America… simplistic and knee-jerk. Yeah there was one aspect of the film that didn’t jive completely with my beliefs and which most governmental figures mention as not factual, but never did I feel for a second that Bigelow was condoning torture or saying it was some positive necessity for Americans to partake in. Anyone who says that watched a different movie.
And as for annoying people in a theater, I know all about that. It seems like consideration for others is at an all time low. In the last two or three years, I’ve heard more people get shushed than the rest of my moviegoing life combined. Not sure why, but it has become a growing aspect/downside of seeing a film in public.
She doesn’t condone outright, but she doesn’t really judge it either. The closest the film comes is that bit where Jason Clarke feeds ice cream to some cute caged monkeys while caged human beings are suffering in the background– nice to know he has his priorities straight. I’m sure that the matter-of-fact way that torture is portrayed in the movie is meant to let the viewer decide for themselves how they feel about it, react to it like an ink-blot (hell, I’m willing to assume that the monkey scene is in there for just the same reason, a contrast of moral scale), but it’s the casual way that the characters treat it themselves that strikes me as even more shocking. And though torture may produce unreliable information in the film, it never produces anything dangerous, like the whole doctor-on-the-inside subplot.
The only real note of ambivalence I see in Clarke’s role is the way he exits the black sites to go back stateside, and honestly there’s a big ambiguity to that for the parting warnings he gives Chastain– you don’t want to be the last one in Iraq holding a dog collar. Is he too wrung through by what he’s done to keep doing it (I notice there’s never any complaints of what they’re being ordered to do– quite the contrary, there’s veiled complaints of how they’re no longer allowed to process prisoners in the same way once Obama’s in office, the killjoy), or is he covering his ass? Too bad about his monkeys, though. Like I said, I still don’t really know how I feel about the film in general, but on the whole I don’t know if I can say I got anything here that I didn’t get from watching “Homeland” already, right down to the crazy Chicken Little agent, though with everything toned down just a wee bit. Suffice to say, I prefer the crazy version of crazy instead of the sane one.
As for the audience reaction thing, I just feel queasy hearing stuff like that in response to something about actual human beings. I’ll feel perfectly fine if when I see “Django Unchained” I wind up hearing cheers and laughter as Klansmen and southern gentry get blasted away in righteous gunfire, because it’s all a damn Spaghetti Western. And I quite like hearing audiences engaged when I see any of my favorite sci-fi or superhero fantasies. If anything, I’d prefer some kind of boistrous response than deadly silence, which thankfully I only sit through when the movie is as boring to me as it is to the rest of the theater.
Can I ask something more on SLP? Everyone here is down on that film except for me. What’s the issue with it? Were you expecting something from it that it didn’t deliver for you? I haven’t heard anything around here other than it’s mediocre and no big deal.
Jon, I can’t speak for everyone else, but for me it was lightweight and ultimately forgettable. A sure sign with me that a film has “resonated” would be if I were thinking of it days later. This slick, dysfunctional drama has so real intellectual heft, and never really probed under teh surface. Jennider Lawrence was very good, but I never bought Cooper or Smirking Bob deNiro in it. For me it was strictly low-brow stuff.
After having seen The Fighter and SLP, I’ve realized I don’t care for David O. Russell’s stuff in general. This has to do with my perception of how he seems to rationalize and portray dysfunctional relationships and psychological issues. It would take an essay to expound on that, however. I don’t dismiss his films entirely — I thought the fight scenes in The Fighter were great the way they were staged and shot. Certain individual performances in both films I love — Amy Adams (Fighter) and Lawrence (SLP) come to mind. Somehow I find Russell’s work as overly simplistic or superficial and the effect for me is that he glorifies bad behavior in a way. I often get the feeling he’s saying, “Look ma, I’m directing/acting/whatever!” or that there’s too much ego dominating his stuff.
Superlative response here from Pierre! I must say I completely agree with its implications.
Jon, check your e mail when you get a chance.
Your reasons Sam make sense based your reactions and thanks for elaborating. Of course Metacritic, which you often site, has it scored very well, higher than or equal to 3 films in your top 10….Django, Impossible, and Les Mis. Obviously this means nothing though.
The mental health issues and dealing with loss and struggling to cope for these characters really resonated with me. I don’t think it ever became a “message” sort of film, but these people had problems I related to. I really enjoyed the acting and the characters, and felt like I identified with several aspects throughout.
Additionally, the film could probably be categorized in the romance (or romantic comedy) category and also the feel-good category. I won’t lie….it was romantic, it was melancolic and funny, and it made me feel good which I think was the intention of the film.
As far as resonating…..what resonated for me was the people (the acting and characters). I didn’t label this film as masterpiece, but I thought it was very solid.
What I mean to say is, I don’t think the film is inherently lightweight or low-brow. It will depend on perhaps where you’re at in life and the circumstances in which you find yourself. I found it charming and moving in an understated, lovable-loser kind of way.
Pierre……to a degree I agree with you on Russell. He has focused on this topic of dysfunction of late….however I HATED The Fighter, but liked SLP. In fact the fight scenes in The Fighter I thought were the WORST thing about it. Additionally, I don’t think Russell deserves much credit for SLP at all. It’s an actors movie and the script wasn’t even his.
What I mean about Russell not deserving much credit, is that I don’t feel he’s been consistent enough for me to really praise him. In the movies of his I liked, my take-away is always the actors.
But Jon, Russell adapted the SLP screenplay himself from a novel, and he most likely was attracted to the novel in the first place because it fit into his way of looking at things.
Yes Pierre, adapted…but not original. I’m referring to the fact that it’s not an original script that he wrote. The framework was already there.
Great epic post (fake) Dennis Polifroni lol. Next time can you break down best sound mixing and live action short film.
LOL Maurizio!!!!!
Sam –
“…Dennis Polifroni and I may well do our annual talk for the site in the coming weeks, where we will elaborate on our complaints.”
yes, Yes, YES! We’re counting on it! It was so much fun watching the film clip of you two last year!
I’m typing to at 3:30pm you from Crystal Lake where it’s warmed up to 23-degrees from a very cold 10 this morning. We haven’t conserved on our heating bills just yet…
I want to see QUARTET. I love Maggie Smith! And of course Billy Connolly has got to add a certain amount of “spice” to the ingredients being stirred by Dustin Hoffman.
– Laurie
Laurie— I am hoping we can get the interview done over the next two weeks or so. The Oscars are scheduled for February 24. Looks like you are having it colder than we are at this time. 10 to 23 are chilly numbers, and I can quite understand why conservation hasn’t entered the picture yet. UGH. You will love QUARTET! I’d wager the house on it! Have a great week my friend!
Sam, looking forward to your Oscars video with Dennis if you do it again. I saw ‘Les Miserables’ over the weekend and left a comment under your review of it – anyway, I did quite enjoy it but didn’t love it as much as you did, maybe partly because unfortunately I was sitting right under a speaker which distorted the sound somewhat, and must admit I did find the heavy use of close-ups rather offputting.
I also saw another film at the cinema this weekend, the French 2011 film ‘Tu seras mon fils’ (You will be my son) directed by Gilles Legrand, which I loved – it’s a dark family drama with some thriller elements about a vineyard owner who takes against his own son and starts trying to disinherit him in favour of the son of his steward (supposed to be partly based on the story of the Prodigal Son.) I don’t think this was ever released in the US but anyway I really liked it – trying to watch a lot of French films this year.
At home I watched a pre-Code aviation drama, ‘Night Flight’ (Clarence Brown, 1933), which I found slightly disappointing given its amazing star-studded cast, but John and Lionel Barrymore are both great in it – I have just reviewed this one. Also saw a 1941 romantic comedy, from Clarence Brown again, ‘Come Live With Me’, which stars James Stewart and Hedy Lamarr – a bit patchy, but I found it very watchable and thought Stewart and Lamarr worked well together. Wishing a good week to you and all.
Judy—
There are tentative plans to move forward with the Oscar video over the coming weeks. Thanks for the kind words. I will check out your comment under the LES MISERABLES review! Thank you! Yes, I would think the close proximity to the speaker did cause some sound distortion. As far as the excessive use of close-ups in the film (a point as you know I discussed in my review) it would seem to come down to taste. While I didn’t think that every last close-up was effective, I though the approach brought some intensity and intimacy into the equation. Still I know several others who thought it over-used. You have me quite intrigued with TO SERAS MON FILS, and I’ll certainly be watching out for it. It has not yet opened here. I will be checking out your review of NIGHT FLIGHT, a film I haven’t yet seen. Any film that features John and Lionel Barrymore must be seen. Same with COME LIVE WITH ME. Have a great week Judy. Many thanks as always!
We woke up to a heavy frost and extreme cold and sunshine, turned to snow in the afternoon as it warmed up with an unusual pink fog sunset. The snow has stopped – but the heat is running nearly non-stop.
The big event of the day was the huge cedar tree being felled down the bluff with precision to be a nursery log for the forest regrowth. It was an amazing performance the the direction was superb and dramatic. When it first starts to go it is in such slow motion – all those years of being still…then it is in huge free fall and what a crash. What a ballet.
I do not have TV and do not watch the Award shows or football. Though as we painted the dining room we listened to the Sea Hawks valiant attempt to giving us at least one winning team 🙂 Alas not yet, but we did jump up and down for a great game to listen too and enjoy.
I am waiting for your good words about films before I decide what I like best and heard some friends really pan Les Mis, which of course I loved and would love to see again, Lincoln I saw 2 times and Argo once – I liked it very much.
Amazingly I did see Downton Abby Season 3 ep 1 & 2 this weekend on my computer and a great documentary on the estate that is being used in the series. I do so love these kinds of stories and Maggie Smith is always a winner with me.
I did see 4 films this past week – along with several documentaries, which I enjoy so much. HUGO was finally up on my Netflix cue and I think I will watch it again. It was delightful and I enjoyed it very much. Lightened my spirits.
French Film – The HEDGEHOG terrific and just a wonderful thoughtful expression of a young girls thinking – and what a talented little girl in the part
My favorite was RUNNING WITH SCISSORS which I am happy to say I knew it was not a comedy before watching and a memoir…but so many of the nasty reviewers thought it was supposed to be a comedy. What is up with that?
I watched one more film and can not remember what it was? It was apparently not memorable.
Waiting for you list of tops…those will be my winners too.
Wow Patricia, sounds like un unenviable cold spell with unwanted snow to boot. The weather has been strange as of late, and it’s seems certain areas of the country are getting hit hard. The Chicago area by all accounts is one. I bet you had mixed feelings about the toppling of the cedar, though you wax lyrical in describing it’s demise. The Seahawks nearly did it! They came back from a big first half deficit and would have hung on if not for a freak time out call in the waning seconds by the Seattle coach, one that allowed a second attempt after the initial miss. The Seahawks has a great season! As far as the Awards shows, I can’t really say you are missing very much! Ha! I know you have seen several of the essential films, and some multiple times. I know LES MIS has it’s share of detractors, but the clear majority have been most impressed with the singing and transcribed beauty of the score. I was delighted to hear you were (are) a huge fan! RUNNING WITH SCISSORS does not indeed deserve the comedy label. There are a number of elements running tghrough that film. Still need to see THE HEDGEHOG! Great to hear you enjoyed it. And I have always been a Maggie Smith fan myself for decades! Have a great week my friend. Many thanks as always!
Dennis Polifroni and I may well do our annual talk for the site in the coming weeks, where we will elaborate on our complaints.
I hope so, Sam, as I’ve enjoyed your previous videos, especially last year’s. Regarding the Oscars, I wish everybody would just chill out and either enjoy them as kitsch or simply ignore them. The Oscars are an industry phenomenon, with lots of technicians, publicity people and money people involved in the voting, so we should know what to expect. Their choices have always been hit and miss, so please don’t blame it on the baby boomers. Among the more glaring snubs was, of course, John Hawkes for The Sessions.
You can count me as a fan of Beasts of the Southern Wild. I think its approach is novel and poetic though the end result, clearly a first effort, is uneven. I think Academy voters, many of them rather old, were charmed by the little girl. It is a stretch to think the film’s director beat out Bigelow and others, but I also think the Academy is sensitive to complaints about lack of diversity in its choices.
However, Jon, I don’t believe the director nominees give us a clear picture of what the top 5 film nominees would be as the directors branch regularly throws a curve ball in its choices and includes 1 or 2 directors, often a non-American or talented independent filmmaker, at the expense of a more predictable choice.
Regarding Zero Dark 30, I liked it a lot and admire the quality filmmaking. But it didn’t grab me in the way The Hurt Locker did, which had a more compelling emotional element. The screenwriter is a journalist and I think the film has a certain impartiality to it. I think the end sequence at the compound is disturbing as I don’t agree with the US government’s choice to go in and kill bin Laden – no matter how many people’s deaths he is responsible for. I think the filmmakers intent is for audiences to make up their own minds about the morality of it, which is why one sees a broad array of reactions not to mention moral criticism from both ends of the spectrum.
I’m not so sure I believe what I said either, however there’s something like every Best Picture winner since 1989 has also had the director of its film nominated for Best Director. I was going off of that.
Pierre—
Despite my ‘covering all bases’ as far as the Oscars are concerned, I maintain the annual interest, the awards party, and the assessment of the awards from a political perspective. The self-proclaimed “art” lovers out there who pompously abhor the awards and do not want even any discussion of them to transpire (and I am NOT referring here to my very good friend Maurizio Roca) will not change the world, and are free to stay clear, but I find it harmless fun, especially since most won’t remember what film and actors won two years ago after the fact. As I stated to others here I completely agree that the director’s branch throws out curve balls each and every year. As far as Bin Laden, we are not in agreement there, as taking a pass on the opportunity would hypothetically be risking more innocent lives at the hands of that madman. I say this as an absolute bleeding heart Democrat left wing liberal, who has opposed the death penalty for my entire life. There was no other way as far as I see it. I understand what you are saying there about THE HURT LOCKER connecting more on an emotional level and don’t dispute it. I found ZERO was more intrinsically visceral, and as you know unflinching in it’s narrative arc.
I completely agree with you on John Hawkes getting left out of the Best Actor shortlist. He really hit the mark with his moving performance. You are not along with your positive regard for BEASTS. It seems all the people on this earth, including myself who don’t care for the film, are in residence here at WitD, myself included. I won’t deny there is a poetry there, and young Ms. Wallis is hard to ignore. I still feel that Bigelow deserved the nomination over Zeitlin, a fact that wasn’t lost on the Director’s Guild and on the endless critics’ groups who did go with Bigelow as their top Director. But as you note, there was nothing pat this year, and that will make the awards more exciting than usual.
Thanks as ever my friend. Have a great week, and we will speak soon!
Yes, — I agree that it’s captivating to view the Oscars as a cultural and political phenomenon — for fun. No one group every gets it “right” (and besides, what is right?) Dismissing them out of hand makes no sense to me.
I’d have subsittuted Bigelow for the Beasts director — he’d be more appropriate as “best first time director.” But this is an example of how we should take these awards with a grain of salt. I plan to watch ZD30 again as I was high on pain pills the first time I saw it.
Hi Sam and everyone! The Bigalow snub by the Oscars seems shocking. Admittedly, I still need to catch this film. I was glad to see ARGO receive some credit with the Globes for whatever that is worth. Anyway, hope all have a great week!
Watched the following…
Django Unchained (****1/2) Uniquely Tarantino (which can be considered good or bad). Brutally violent, hilariously offbeat, witty, intelligent script with some fine performances thrown in. Excellent tribute to Sergio Leone and the Italian westerns of the 1970’s.
The Impossible(****1/2) Emotionally moving story with a strong performance from Naomi Watts and a possibly even more powerful performance from young Tom Holland.
Not Fade Away (***1/2) I probablt like this film more than most. I thought David Chase produced an intensely drawn look of a young musician searching for rock ‘n roll dreams. The lead character, perfectly play by John Magaro, is not always likable but he’s passionate about his music. Like thousands of other bands that began in the wake of the 1960’s British Invasion this group lacked the drive, the breaks and possibly the talent to make it to the big time. They fight, break-up, reunite and eventually split for good with Magro’s character leaving New Jersey, with his girlfriend , for some California dreamin’. The music is spot on, thanks to Steve Van Zandt. Overall, the film is an affecting look at dreams and aspirations fading away.
The Incredible Shrinking Man (****1/2) Fantastic 50’s science fiction film that just gets better with age. Special effects, though primitive by today’s standards, are effective. The effects of a radioactive mist, physically shrinks our hero but his spirit and soul remain large. Along with “Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” the best of 50’s sci-fi!
Topkapi (****) Entertaining caper film from Jules Dassin. Not up to the standards of his earlier film, RIFIFI, but still has a smart script, a fantastic performance from Peter Ustinov and the heist sequence keeps you on edge.
Posse From Hell (***) the first nine minutes of this little seen film come off like Quentin Tarantino was behind the camera as we watch four men come riding into town, including Vic Morrow and Lee Van Cleef, and take over. They kill the sheriff and some town folks before leaving, taking a young woman with them whom they rape along the way. The rest of the film settles into a more standard Audie Murphy B western mode. Its filled with a pleasant cast and some decent action. But those first minutes are surprisingly well done.
Manpower (***1/2) Fairly standard Warner Brothers melodrama with Eddie Robinson, George Raft and Marlene Dietrich in a love triangle. A good supporting cast, consisting of Alan Hale, Ward Bond, Frank McHugh and Barton McLane. An entertaining script and Walsh’s crisp direction make for an entertaining, if unexceptional film.
Bad Teacher(*) Bad script, bad jokes, bad performances, bad movie, bad idea, just plain bad, bad ,bad!
John—
Bigelow’s snub is laughable, but as others have mentioned (Pierre above as one) the Academy has their own agenda, and the director’s branch are prone annually to throw out the curves. But for all their lamentale political machinations, the Academy can never win. Had they chose Affleck, Bigelow and Hooper as expected they would be attacked for being predictable and having no creativity; now that they go the creative route, they are attacked for NOT being predictable.
Looks like we are pretty much on the same page with DJANGO UNCHAINED and THE IMPOSSIBLE, both of which have landed in my top 10 of the year. I do certainly agree with you on young British actor Tom Holland, who I would say is my top supporting actor performance of the year! You make a very eloquent case there for NOT FADE AWAY, which I will definitely see again when it gets to DVD. I am also close to where you are on TOPKAPI and THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN, and for much the same reasons. Don’t remember MANPOWER, but I had mixed feelings about POSSE FROM HELL. Yep BAD TEACHER is real bad! Ha!
What a spectacular dizzying week you had there viewing John!!!! Thanks as always my friend!!!
Thanks for the link, as always.
As you already know, Nagisa Oshima died yesterday. I won’t repeat his achievement and his impact not only on Japanese cinema but also on world cinema here. He was the most vocal member of Japanese cultural front, the least patient crusader against inequality, indifference and injustice and the most eccentric artist with passions. R.I.P.
Last Sunday, I saw HOBBIT, HFR version. Umm, it does look like cheap HDTV. As for the production itself, it is typical Peter Jackson’s world. Enjoyable, well-made, grandiose and extravagant. I would prefer more natural look though.
MI
MI—
I am indeed aware of Oshima’s passing, and am deeply saddened by the news. His achievement does not need repeatring, that is certain, but I will add that a half dozen of his films have made a profound impression on me, and his status as a trailblazer of the Japanese New Wave is irrefutable. These are the big six for me:
The Ceremony
Boy
In the Realm of the Senses
Double Suicide
Death by Hanging
Diary of a Shinjuku Thief
But there are several others of course, and Oshima is as you note a master stylist of world cinema, whose films yield more and more on repeat viewings. A major, major loss for the film and artistic community. R.I.P.
I am pretty much in agreement with you on THE HOBBIT. For me it’s not quite on the level of the preceeding LOTR films, but it’s better than the delirious Peter Jackson haters would have you believe. It’s poison to some when a person makes money. What that has to do with ‘art’ is beyond me. Apparently the entire world wants to see this film, and we can expect teh same for the next two installments. Thanks as every my very good friend!
Sam, a bit late in commenting but thanks for the wonderful mention.
Yes, the Academy nominations have some glaring gaps. I know you didn’t like THE MASTER much but I really feel PTA deserved a nod for that. But then again, he never got a DGA nod and the film was passed over by the Producers Guild so I did think he would be ignored. I do think the AMPAS members mixed up Direction with Cinematography when it came to BEASTS…and as for SILVER LININGS, I have yet to
see it. The film seems to be the one most people around me have seen & loved. So some of the average ratings by a few people here is reassuring.
Thanks very much for stopping in Sachin! You are never late here I assure you. Most cineastes do think P.T. Anderson well-deserved a nomination, and thjis is yet another slight that made this year’s nominations hugely problematic. It’s true though, that Anderson was snubbed by the DGA as well, which signals that the film didn’t connect with the majority. Same with the PGA snub. Ha, good point about the “mix up” with BEASTS! SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK has many fans for sure, but a good number of the detractors seem to be converging here at WitD. I’d be most interested in hearing what you think. Thanks again my friend. Have a great week!
Yikes Sam! My week got away on me yet again. With four new paintings and one of them very large completed so far in January I beg for understanding in regards to my tardiness. We have seen three films worth mentioning:
HAPPY PEOPLE: A year in the Taiga (2011) directed by Dmitry Vasyukov and Werner Herzog and narrated by Herzog. I loved this film because there are so many elements that reflect the life of my own grandfather in rural north central British Columbia Canada. The documentary takes us into the lives of professional fur trappers living in Bakhtia, the heart of the Siberian Taiga river. The film has a quality that is usual for Herzog though the actual filming is stunning and unique which I am guessing has something to do with the direction of Dmitry Vasyukov though I don’t know for sure as I have not read anything about the making of the film or this director.
SIDEWALLS (2011) directed by Gustavo Taretto. Though this movie is characterized as a clever romantic comedy this is NOT what I feel the film is about. Rather, it is a clever depiction about how urban architectural design and internet social networking merge to create the most insidious isolation humans have ever experienced. This Argentine film is funny, smart and clever but it also has a worrying reality that we is worth pausing to consider.
BRIDE FLIGHT (2008) directed by Ben Sombogaart. If someone is answers the question about if they are in a relationship with another with the answer “it is complicated” this would be the best description for this film. A romantic drama it most certainly is but it is also more than this. There is a genuine appreciation for how intertwined our lives through the course of living actually become. Though the past and present jumping back and forth of the movie may defy a ping-pong champion to keep pace, I loved the story and its intricate storytelling. I also deeply enjoyed the cinematography of the most gorgeous New Zealand.
Terrill—-
Be rest assured that you are never late here, and that your continued appearances remain for me one of the joys of online communication. I know well your plate is more than full, and your latest works are testament to your endless fount of creativity. Your latest capsule reviews here are further proof that if you weren’t so talented an artist, your next calling would be as a film reviewer, a fact that is really hardly surprising to me! You peel away the gauze and offer some telling dissection from an artist as well as a socilogical standpoint, and you’ve made me most interested in the last two film, neither of which I have yet seen to this point. I will do some research now, but BRIDE FLIGHT really has me intrigued. As far as HAPPY PEOPLE I must say I agree with you lock, stock and barrel, and to boot it was another chance to listen to Herzog’s incomparable cut English German accent! Wonderful film. Thanks again my friend! Have a great week!
Sam, thanks so much for the great mention and apologies for the late reply.
I couldn’t agree more with you about Bigelow’s accomplishment in ZERO DARK THIRTY. I too found it to be incredibly complex, ambitious, and accomplished from a directorial standpoint. It’s the one film I saw this past week but was quite happy to run it down.
Here’s to an awesome week, Sam. Thanks so much for all that you do!
You are never late here Jeffrey, and as always I am deeply appreciative for your remarkable staying power at this site for so long a time. You are a true friend. I did figure you would connect in a very big way with Bigelow’s accomplishment as a fellow director of hers, and as an admirer of audacious and visceral cinema. I thought William Goldenberg’s editing in that film was absolutely astounding as well. I agree that any week that features that film is a week that requires nothing more! Ha! What an unforgivable snub by the director’s branch of the Academy!
Thanks again my friend!
Hi there, just became alert to your blog through Google,
and found that it is really informative. I am going to watch out for brussels.
I will be grateful if you continue this in future.
A lot of people will be benefited from your writing.
Cheers!
[…] – about a month later the movie was reviewed on one of my favorite reads the blog WONDERS IN THE DARK. The movie was open and showing in New York City and the surrounding […]