I feel like I've been doing a lot better as of late with keeping up with this thing. I think now that I'm close to 2000 I'm rushing to finish it so I can catch up with 2012 and beyond which I've got all the films for and have a better understanding of the Oscar race from those years and feel I can maybe give a better review. I think I'm just really excited about getting out of the 2000s eventually. Almost there!
2001 Best Picture
A Beautiful Mind
I never liked this choice by the Academy for a Best Picture win. I just never really thought it was as good as a lot of people made it out to be. To me, it's a formulaic Serious Subject film that glosses over the heavy issues in favor of Hollywood pap that aims to please, manipulate, and ultimately win awards. Kudos to Ron Howard for taking on a big film about paranoid schizophrenia and mental illness. It's definitely something that needs to be more talked about in today's society and bringing it into the public arena in the format of a big budget film makes it more palatable to talk about. It allows the discussion to happen in the public which is a great thing even if the film itself isn't the greatest representation. That is the main positive for me about A Beautiful Mind. Unfortunately, it's also a dishonest portrayal of John Nash's life and makes schizophrenia seem cute and frivolous at times. Howard and his people explained that it wasn't meant to be a literal interpretation of Nash's life but that is a specious argument. It turns an interesting and compelling narrative into something easily swallowed by the general public. Are we to believe that through sheer determinism and willpower that Nash can suppress his mental illness enough to be a functional and respected member of society? No! Because it does take medication and counseling and support of many people to deal with the illness. This is the type of film that panders to an audience that doesn't want to be challenged, only wanting neatly wrapped up feel good stories that don't make them think about the world and the people around them. To me, it's the worst kind of Oscar movie. It wastes a few good actors with insipid characters, deviates from the truth, and gives us a mediocre look into a great mind. It makes me angry when this shit continually wins, especially when there are better contenders among the rest of the group.
Gosford Park
Full discretion I was looking forward to this film for the longest time. I knew this was a Robert Altman film and that it would be very involved. I loved the English countryside manor setting with an ensemble cast idea because I just knew it would be pretty entertaining. There were two Best Supporting Actress nominees so surely the acting was superb and I would kick myself for missing out on this film for so long. Unfortunately, only some of that is true. It is entertaining, but I'm not kicking myself and the nominated acting was less than stellar. But it was entertaining indeed and that's important. While the acting was Oscar worthy, they weren't bad either. They accomplished what was meant of them in their roles and that's fine. The film itself is slyly humorous. There were a lot of instances where I laughed but wasn't sure if I was supposed to but then didn't care because whatever it was was legit funny. I liked that it didn't really take itself so serious but didn't do it in a juvenile way or in a lame wink at the audience type way. It was chock full of interesting characters and it built the intrigue of the murder and knowing more about the guests quite well. The film actually reminded me often of The West Wing and other material from Aaron Sorkin with it's rapid fire, witty dialogue and fast pace and weaving of characters. It's no surprise then that this film essentially led to Downton Abbey, which was supposed to be a spin-off before merely being inspired by the film. These sorts of whodunit type films are inherently watchable usually. You always want to know what happens next and who did what because of what crazy reason. That's part of what makes Gosford Park entertaining is that you start watching and get sucked in even when it's focusing on the less intriguing moments. It might not have the grand, stands the test of time quality that other Oscar winners and nominees have but it does have the quality of just being a good film that's easy and fun to watch if you're in the mood.
In the Bedroom
Before this project, I had never really heard of this film and had no idea what it was even about. Now that I have watched it, I wish I would have seen it earlier. This is the kind of film that I love and I mean love. I am drawn to bleak, darker, sad, but realistic, gritty, highly unglamorous stories where the ending might be ambiguous, the characters might be relatable but not necessarily likable, and the whole thing feels real. In the Bedroom is in that same mold of what I like. It's very much a film about grief and how it affects us and how we deal with it. Spacek and Wilkinson play an older couple whose son is killed by a jealous ex of his lover and they deal with the killer being out and about in their small Maine town when he's released on bond. That's the quick synopsis that doesn't do the film any justice but it was so totally engrossing for me. Just so raw, real, and natural. It was like watching a surgery with a large open wound from above and seeing how the doctor was able to close it up. The direction (from first time director Todd Field) is superb. It's unobtrusive like we're peering into the lives of this family and witnessing things meant to stay behind closed doors. The performances are all low key and quiet but have such power behind them. I love how realistic they are and how they make the grief seem so natural and not a Hollywood construct of what someone thinks looks good on screen. Even the location, while beautiful and picturesque, stays out of the limelight while the camera, story, and director focus on family. The ending of the film is somewhat controversial. Even as it was heading to it's eventual and evident climax, I was telling Wilkinson's character no, no, no don't do it, it's not worth it! If you've seen it, you'll understand what I mean. The ending offers up a sort of fantasy for families who have dealt with similar tragedies. I think the ending fits well within the narrative and doesn't offer up any type of closure. That works because revenge doesn't always feel good or right or help heal the deep wounds left by a tragedy. In the Bedroom presents this ending as is without neatly wrapping anything up, staying true to it's premise of being realistic. The end is truly powerful because we don't know what's going to happen next. It seems Wilkinson's character might have done what he did out of a sense of duty to the family but I'm not sure he feels good about it. Spacek's character gets up and goes to make coffee, seemingly fine with what happened and moving on. It gives you a ton to think about and sticks with you long after it's over. I'm still thinking about it a day later. What does revenge do for grief? It doesn't bring back a loved one. It causes more problems and still leaves you feeling unfulfilled. It's a hypnotic film that I highly recommend.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
Ah, so it begins! I had a sort of quandary with this trilogy: how do I watch these films? Do I start with the first as is natural or do I go back in time as I do each year and write about them that way? I thought about it for a bit and decided to just watch them in order even if it meant writing about them in advance. With that issue solved, let's get to the trilogy! I'll say that FotR is my favorite of the three and just feels like a complete film to me and easily stands alone. The second one suffers from, well, being the middle one and continuing a story on both ends. And the third has about 84 endings. But Fellowship is easily the best and I think the most fun. Maybe that has to do with it introducing all the characters and concepts that will play out for the following 9 hours or so. I like that at it's core, it's a tale about friendship and watching Frodo and Samwise make their journey is what watching movies is all about. It's the most lighthearted of the three and utilizes a lot of comedy in place of the action we get in the later installments. The scale is epic and the world is just amazing to behold. Peter Jackson went all out and just completely mashed it out of the park. Every character is spot on and the music is probably my favorite part. All of it is so memorable and fun to listen to. I'm not sure how much really needs to be said about The Lord of the Rings really. If someone hasn't watched this and is over the age of like 10, then I don't even want to associate with those people. Those people are the absolute worst. Like those that take pride in never seeing Star Wars. Ugh. If I had my way, I'd probably give this one the Oscar as to represent the trilogy instead of the third, but I understand why that was done. This one is just supremely watchable from start to finish.
Moulin Rouge!
So this is what caused the Academy to give Chicago the win in 2002. This film got them all jazzed up about musicals again and it didn't get to reap the reward of that monumental task. This was my first time watching it and all I knew going in was that I like Baz Luhrman movies and I hated that Lady Marmalade song that played incessantly when it came out. From the very beginning, Moulin Rouge! is inventive with a nice play on the 20th Century Fox opening logo, setting the tone for the rest of the film. I was hooked in the first 10 minutes. It's a strong beginning that reminded me of a Terry Gilliam film with the myriad of colors and strange characters. That's one of the things I do love about this film is just how great it looks and that's something that can be said of all the Luhrman movies. The art direction is killer and deservedly won an Oscar for the efforts. It makes Moulin Rouge! come to life and is so vibrant and ostentatious and glitzy that it's nice to just sit back in awe of it all. The high point for me, as in every Luhrman movie, is the music. I enjoy the mix of genres and the old and new pop music because it injects a much needed breath of fresh air into a static film genre or turns conventions on it's head. Just because it's set around 1900 doesn't mean it's inappropriate to include Smells Like Teen Spirit in a flashy mash-up dance number. I find it bold and most of all thrilling. Ewan McGregor does a great job as the leading man and I find him to be extremely likable in everything he does which certainly helps here. I do think that the film sags a little in the middle during the romantic parts between McGregor and Kidman. Maybe if there were different musical choices to spice it up it wouldn't feel like it drags. The ending is as equally strong as the beginning with a touching stage number that is sure to get some of you weepy. It's a shame that this film set up a movie like Chicago for the big reward and didn't get take home the top prize itself. Amazingly, this was the first live action musical since (by my calculations) 1979 nominated for Best Picture. I'd say this was a worthy nomination.
I'm just not a fan of the winner this year. Okay yeah, once we knew LotR wasn't going to win it was no threat at all. There was a lot of hype for Moulin Rouge! and I know it was a front runner. For some reason A Beautiful Mind won out and I don't know why because I would have voted for every other film nominated including Gosford Park which was such a letdown to me. Knowing that LotR already won in 2003, my winner is easily In the Bedroom which blew me away. Such a great movie that needs way more publicity. If it had won maybe smaller, more independent films would have flourished.
Oscar Winner: A Beautiful Mind
My Winner: In the Bedroom
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
Moulin Rouge!
Gosford Park
A Beautiful Mind
No comments:
Post a Comment