Best Picture 2017

This was the only real race of the big awards. It distilled itself down to being between Three Billboards and The Shape of Water. My guess is/was Three Billboards just because it seemed like the kind of film that the Academy would reward. I'm editing this after the ceremony (though I didn't publish yet, but whatever) to say that yeah, The Shape of Water won and it was just a very minor surprise to me but it makes sense. The Academy absolutely adored Guillermo del Toro for whatever reason. I know lots of actors and crew people want to work with him because of his passion and because he's a nice dude, so that's probably the most likely reason why.

2017 Best Picture

The Shape of Water

Yep, this is the film where the mute lady fucks a fish man, so spoiler alert. And yeah, this one is just as weird as it sounds. Which I feel really shows just how much love Guillermo del Toro has within the Academy and the Hollywood community. Reading up on the film and all the actors were praising the chance to get to work with him with Octavia Spencer saying she would play a table if he asked her to. So without del Toro being attached to this film, it's not getting anywhere near the unbelievable 13 Oscar nominations it received. The story hearkens back to the monster films of the 50s and 60s which is where del Toro got the idea because he had always wanted to see the monster and the female love interest actually fall in love. It's a pretty neat idea and it feels like one that only del Toro could pull off and make into a film that everyone loves instead of some niche genre movie that gets a midnight run or something. The film is buoyed by it's incredible acting. It did get three acting nominations but Michael Stuhlbarg (in three Best Picture films this year! First since John C. Reilly in 2002) and Michael Shannon were equally as awesome. The set design and colors are all a pleasure to look at and a hallmark of del Toro films. The score will probably end up winning an Oscar, and it's good, just not my favorite of the year. There's a lot of individual things to really like about this film and they all come together to create something pretty unique. It does get weird, so your ability to tolerate the weirdness is what will decide if this is in the running for the win like it is right now before the ceremony. The story has been described as magical and fairy tale like and it certainly dips into the melodramatic with it's nostalgic feel. There's even an old timey dance number that could, maybe should, feel out of place but seems to work in the context of the film. I think it's better going in knowing this is a fantasy film that deals with a sense of belonging and being wanted that makes for a better watch than thinking it's pure Oscar bait or something. It's definitely strange but once you get past that woman-fish man love story, it can be a rewarding film to enjoy. Absolutely an interesting choice for the Academy to love so much.

Call Me By Your Name

I will admit I'm writing this a couple days after watching it because I just got burnt out writing so many reviews in such a short amount of time trying to get everything in before the Oscar ceremony. So I'll just get right into it then. This film popped up very early on in the awards season, actually before the awards season, really. It was doing the festival circuit and there were a lot of people calling this a Best Picture contender and singling out Timothee Chalamet and Armie Hammer for awards love. The film (and Chalamet) had a lot of zealous fans on the internet and it just picked up steam from there once the critics at large got to see it as well. Usually a film that gets a lot of hype early on fades by the time the big films start dropping so it was actually nice to see this have the staying power that it did. And that's probably because it's a very well made film with some very great acting and written by the incomparable (and now Oscar winner for this film) James Ivory of the Merchant-Ivory team. There was always a bit of controversy surrounding this film because of its subject matter but when you actually watch it, it feels more like the projections of people who haven't seen it or just want to ding it from the get go. The story is about a 17-year old kid (Chalamet) who is intrigued by his father's new research assistant (Hammer) who is 24-year old grad student, though Hammer looks much older which may contribute to the issue. He's a kid trying to figure himself out and becomes sexually interested with Hammer and it becomes this sort of summer fling in 1983 rural Italy. The controversy was always that it's an adult having a sexual relationship with a child and seducing him to have his way with. But I think if you actually watch the film, you'll see Chalamet is the one who pushes Hammer to mess around because Chalamet wants to explore his sexuality and is interested in Hammer overall. Sure, the subject can be a little unsettling at times but it never feels exploitative or pushing a pro go after kids message or anything absurd like that. It's a little coming of age story where a kid figures out who he is as a person and that includes sexually. He also loses his virginity to a local Italian girl first and they go at it often, so it's not strictly a gay thing. That's why I think if you actually watch it, you see there is something deeper than just an adult and a kid having a romantic relationship. Plus, the consent in Italy then was 14, so this wasn't even illegal. But anyway, I hate to get bogged down with the stupid sex angle. The film looks great, it has great music from Sufjan Stevens who I remember back in like 2004 when he put out Illinoise. He's an indie darling and I liked some of his work way back then so it's weird to think he would be up for an Oscar and should have won over the actual winners. The acting is really good as I said earlier and I would have liked to see more Michael Stuhlbarg love. My issue with the film is that it can be a bit laborious. It's a little too slow paced at first even though that fits Chalamet's character. I was very surprised that I liked this one as much as I did, though. Just from what I heard with the constant praise and then the controversy, I thought it might have been oversold, but it was quite enjoyable and it feels like a film that will eventually make a Sight & Sound film poll in a few more years. I have always wanted more films like this in the Best Picture race than the obvious Oscar bait or some comic book movie.

Darkest Hour

This is the old school, throwback nominee for the year. This film would be at home in most other years because it covers what the old members of the Academy love: a historical biopic of sorts about a British legend from World War II. Just ticks all the boxes that gets the Academy going, or used to anyway. And really, it's pretty standard stuff. We follow Winston Churchill after he is made Prime Minister and has to deal with the war going on and people in power who don't think he's qualified enough to lead. He has to deal with the Dunkirk situation and some people want him to capitulate with Germany to bring about peace. He realizes he has to stand up to the Nazis and fascism and fight for his country. It's entertaining stuff and I'll never tire of watching historical biopics like this, especially about war. Nothing really fancy about the film, it's just a straightforward telling of that bit of history. Gary Oldman will most likely win an Oscar for portraying Churchill but let's agree that the makeup and prosthetics do a lot of the heavy lifting. The visuals are fine and everything is done well, it's just that this is a film where it's really hard to get excited by it. We've seen all of this done before and this one didn't blow me away or anything. There was even a really goofy scene where Churchill goes down into the subway where regular British folk are and asks them what they think and it kinda bolsters him and is just so cheesy and obviously never happened in real life. I feel bad that I can't be effusive in praising this film but it is what it is. It at least makes a good companion piece with Dunkirk this year.

Dunkirk

Wow, this is an intense film! When this film dropped during the summer, it was the first obvious Best Picture player. Once it came out and everyone loved it, it was a no brainer that this would be one of the films to beat come Oscar night. I think if it had come out later, it would have been more of a contender since often times it's about who has the most momentum going in to the voting period. But the film itself is utterly amazing. This is a writer/director who is at the top of his craft and delivers something extraordinarily watchable every time. I love the fact that this film isn't reliant on dialogue. The images and sounds speak for themselves and give us this intense, compelling story without unnecessary exposition or scenes getting in the way. That is this film's greatest strength and achievement, being a high quality film that eschews all the extraneous talking and lets the picture speak for itself. Obviously, that means the sound is incredible and one of the main stars of the film. The sound adds to the realism and adds to the intensity and tension of the film. I like the fact that Nolan also used mostly unknown actors. I fell that allows you to put yourself in their shoes and become more emotionally involved instead of it being a showcase for some famous actor. The big names in this were subdued and that helped add to the film instead of detracting from it's tone. This was the only Best Picture film without an acting nomination and it seems to make sense for Christopher Nolan films. It's more about the spectacle and story than the acting, though that's always usually very good, too. There were some absurd criticisms about the film like the lack of female characters and the lack of minorities. I can understand the lack of minorities being a thing because there were Indians and Black French soldiers, but I'm not sure that would have worked in the story Dunkirk was telling here. The female criticism is just one of the dumbest things I've ever heard and takes it too far. Not every film needs an abundance of female characters especially if they don't serve a purpose other than to placate some terrible critic. Anyway, this is just an all around solid film. I can excuse the lack of gore because the tension and struggle to survive more than makes up for a lack of blood. It's kinda weird how this film wasn't really mentioned much in the immediate lead up to the nominations, because this is probably one of the strongest films of the whole lot. It will certainly be in the running for my vote.

Get Out

I was very excited to see this because it came out without any Oscar hype and just took everyone by surprise. Critics and audiences loved it and it's one of those rare early year releases that factored into the Oscars. It's also a huge accomplishment by a black director and writer, Jordan Peele, the first to go over the $100 million mark for his debut. He's also only the second African-American to get a Best Director nomination in the history of the Oscars, which is quite sad. It's obvious that the new changes of including more minorities and younger Academy members is paying off with some really inspired choices for the different categories, including here for Best Picture. There have only been a handful of horror films ever nominated in this category and here comes a horror film that's about racism that the Academy, and everyone else, just loved. I don't know if this gets nominated a couple years ago, honestly. There are a lot more and better articles out there that dive into the meaning of the film but my interpretation is one of cultural appropriation, marginalization, silencing of blacks, and of course pure racism. This film shows all that in an often humorous but shocking way for the audience. The absurdity of thinking you are hip for using black vernacular or saying you'd vote for Obama a third time without actually trying to connect to the human being you're talking to, instead trying to focus all the attention on you for being woke or cool with minorities is ridiculous. And Peele shows that here, along with white people trying to speak for blacks about what racism is or isn't without letting them explain. You see that all the time with the talking head news programs of old white guys and blonde hair bimbos debating why a black person shouldn't be offended by some nonsense or other. We marginalize and silence the black community by not even allowing them to talk about what they think and feel and then get angry at Black Lives Matter movements as if they're unnecessary. The film gets these topics out in the open and I'm glad this discussion is taking place in part because of films like this one. The film and story itself is pretty great for the first hour and a half or so. The interracial couple meeting the white family is uncomfortable. Daniel Kaluuya does a great job in being the conduit for the audience of trying to figure out what the hell is going on with this weird family. I like the mysterious element of the story because I was engaged the entire time trying to figure out where the story was going. The acting of the others is suitably creepy when needed and Catherine Keener and Bradley Whitford are great in their roles. Even the Sunken Place is done well enough to be outright scary and twisted. My issue with the film is really just the ending. It devolves into a revenge porn fantasy bit that seems more in tune with your average horror film. I wish that Peele would have elevated the ending into something less gratuitous but I guess you have to ask where else could he have gone with the ending? It's satisfying for the audience but I do think it could have been better done. I also think that we are going to look back on this film in 10 years and be amazed and happy that it was included in the Best Picture lineup.

Lady Bird

I have really enjoyed Greta Gerwig's acting and writing in her previous work. She always comes across as likeable and quirky and just seems like an overall good person. While this isn't exactly an autobiographical story about Gerwig, it is based on her experiences growing up and I feel like you can see that in the character of Lady Bird a little bit. What stands out the most about this film is the writing. It's beyond good because it actually depicts a real teenage girl and her mother. The girl isn't some old person's version of what they think a kid is like and isn't a super polished professional writer's version of a teenager, either. Gerwig presents us with a girl who is very much an awkward teenager, albeit very quirky and who thinks she knows everything. Gerwig doesn't cram one liner's or melodramatic scenes down our throat, she lets the story unfold naturally and let's Lady Bird be a young woman on her own terms. Her first romance is kinda cheesy but in the teenagers are stupid and think they are in love after five minutes kind of cheesy. But the romance doesn't feel manufactured and it ends in a believable way. She then moves on to the idiot bad boy type who doesn't really care about her. Though I do wish she would have felt more anger towards him when she ended that one. She also ditches her best friend to try and hang with the cool girl and lies to that girl about where she's from. It's all the basics of a coming of age story but it's just done in a more intelligent way. Things don't feel forced for the sake of the script and not everything works out perfectly. The best part about the film is the mother-daughter relationship. Saoirse Ronan is great but Laurie Metcalf as the mom is brilliant. Their relationship just feels real because Metcalf doesn't try to be a cool mom and isn't some walking cliche, she is just a hard working mother trying to make money for her family and to send her daughter to college. She's a hard ass at times but is also very warm and loving. She may be too critical but to me she was just a realist who addresses issues with truth and saying what she feels. Their relationship is what makes the film work because it is so authentic. Lady Bird still thinks she knows everything but does love her mom and sees the sacrifices she makes even if she may not be as grateful because she can be so self absorbed. Families have their issues and it isn't always so black and white. But the story is heartwarming without having to shove it in our faces or give us musical cues on when to feel sad or happy. I dunno, I just really thought the writing in this film is incredible and while Gerwig getting a Directing nomination is pretty awesome, too, the standout is her writing. This is just a really sweet coming of age film that I would love to see more like this.

Phantom Thread

I'm not entirely unconvinced this isn't actually a very dark comedy. I'm not even trying to be funny by saying that, I legit feel you could call this a comedy. I laughed way too much at what feels like it should be a very serious film. There are a ton of these serious moments where the atmosphere is punctured by the slightest comedic elements, at least to me. It can be in the way Daniel Day-Lewis says fuck off, or in how he bristles at how Vicky Krieps noisily pours tea or scrapes her toast, or in how she talks back to Day-Lewis, or any number of serious moments that seem to actually belie their serious tone. Phantom Thread is indeed an exquisite film. It's beautiful to look at and perfectly composed with a gorgeous, ever present score. The scene composition and production design are top notch and something to be expected in a Paul Thomas Anderson film, especially it being a period piece about a fashion designer. He is a brilliant director and each new film of his is appointment viewing and this one is no different. The whole film is like an American take on a European style film that is perfectly executed. That's my favorite thing about PTA films, is that everything in them is done with such great detail and care that the effort translates to the screen and we get a much more fulfilling film because of the costumes and the mise en scene and music. Everything comes together in his productions to make fantastic film after fantastic film. Even though I doubt this was made to have comedic undertones and it sounds like a big critical complaint from me, it's not. I recognize what he did with the film, I'm just seeing something else that makes the film a little better to me. I mean, Day-Lewis' character is named Reynolds Woodcock! Apparently DDL gave his character that name as a joke and it made PTA bust out laughing really hard so they kept it in the script. That's why it feels like there is a little more to this film than just straightforward drama. For what could possibly be DDL's last performance (though he retired back in the 90s, too), this would be a good one to go out on. He is his usual brilliant self, while Krieps ably goes toe to toe with him and Lesley Manville adds another good performance to the film. I have seen articles talking about this film being about toxic masculinity and all these sort of controversial things and I don't get any of that in this film. Maybe because I'm not actively looking for a reason to dislike it or discredit, I dunno. Hell, even Jennifer Lawrence said she turned it off after three minutes because who wants to watch a guy be a dick to women when this film is far, far from being that. Absurd she would even say that as a respected actress. I say go into it knowing that this is a PTA and DDL film and that it's going to be a master class in filmmaking. This film was also sort of a surprise come nomination day because it came out so late and didn't make many precursor awards at all and then garnered a deserving Best Picture, Director, Actor, Supporting Actress, Score, and Costume Design nomination. There was thinking that it wouldn't get any Oscar love because it came out so late, but it obviously had some fans and I'm glad it is sitting in this category, especially since they snubbed The Master a few years ago in the same way. I think this is a film that will grow in appreciation and esteem in the years to come and we will look back at it being included as a smart move by the Academy. And I didn't even mention the relationship DDL has with Krieps in this film, which is something so intriguing. The two love each other but have their very wide differences and the two can be at odds until they realize they need each other. Their relationship is truly fascinating stuff not to mention she poisons him so that he becomes sick and needs her to take care of him and only she will allow herself to take care of him as he gets better. And he knows she poisons him and seems to get off on her caring for him because he has some deep seeded mommy issues. Like I said, this is an intriguing film that has a lot more to offer than just fashion designer is a dick to women sometimes. Go watch it for yourself.

The Post

As I have mentioned after watching All The President's Men, I fucking love investigative journalism drama films. That one was a masterpiece and I mentioned how Spotlight, a film that has only grown in how much I love it since I saw it, is just as worthy of the title. This film is also a good candidate for an all day marathon session of investigative journalism on film. I would love to watch all three back to back to back because that is like a literal Oscar dream. I have read and seen tons of articles about how this is lackluster Spielberg and isn't Oscar worthy and all that stuff, but I fully enjoyed this film. The story is great and co-written by the guy who wrote Spotlight! If that's not synergy then I don't know what is. But the story isn't the problem with this film because you can't really screw up a story about The Pentagon Papers and how it came to get published. My beef is that this film has the Spielberg sheen. I don't mean that in any kind of good way. When you watch All the President's Men, you see those fluorescent lights illuminating everything in the newsroom. Compare that to this film and the newsroom has that manufactured, fake sheen of post production tinkering. The newsrooms are the exact same fucking places! Tom Hanks is Ben Bradlee who is played by Jason Robards in the other film. Why does the 1976 film have a better visual style than a flipping Steven Spielberg film?! This one is just bogged down in his slick style. It needs a more realistic showing of the newsroom and offices to actually do anything for me. I don't mean to be pedantic at all but the shadowy, dark nature of the film just doesn't help. There's an abundance of great acting and great scenes but I wish another director had done this film. I get that Spielberg rushed the film because of the parallel with the bullshit Trump administration that only gets worse with each passing day, but as good as this film is, it deserves a director who doesn't see it as mere nostalgia. I actually really like this film because of the will to print the controversial. It's a great history lesson that has great actors and leaves you wanting a less Spielbergian approach. So many wasted performances confirm that it should have been done by someone else. I like the film but it's not a contender this year.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

This is your possible winner, along with The Shape of Water, and it's been doing well at the precursor awards. There is a lot of manufactured controversy about this film that always seems to plague whoever the front runner is and it's equally as stupid. There are those who think this isn't harsh enough on racists and racism. There are those who feel it is Crash-like in it's depiction of racism and the arc that the racist cop has in becoming a redemptive, changed man. It's all really stupid and I long for when we can stop getting fake upset about trivial things like this. Hell, even 12 Years a Slave got accused of not being harsh enough about racism and inequality and all that! So, let's look at the film as a film and not some profound statement on race. It's about a woman who is fed up with the police not investigating her daughter's rape and murder so she pays for three billboards to call them out. Frances McDormand is that mother and she is royally pissed off. She's hurting and she wants this act to spur the police into action to figure out who killed her daughter. The police are a bunch of incompetent idiots, however, who would rather attack her for calling them out. It's a small town, so she has to deal with the other townsfolk not liking her action but she's a tough old broad and doesn't care what they think. She's angry and she's trying to make things happen that can help solve her daughter's murder and that includes firebombing the police station when she gets ultimately fed up. She gets help from an unlikely source in a fired, racist cop who hated her and had a change of heart when the Chief, who killed himself, wrote him a letter saying he could be a great cop if he wants and if he stopped being such an asshole. That's the kick in the butt he needed to try and be a better person, which doesn't feel unearned at all. A guy he respects kills himself but takes the time to write and tell him to stop being such an idiot and he realizes he needs to change. How is that controversial? Anyway, the film is by Martin McDonagh who excels at these sort of dark comedy type films with In Bruges and Seven Psychopaths. He's going to riff on sensitive subjects and be mostly unapologetic about it. But it never seems insulting or offensive. I don't know how anyone could be offended by this film. One of the things I really hated about his film was Abbie Cornish as Woody Harrelson's wife. Why does she have a British/Australian accent? I feel like if she couldn't even attempt a Southern/local accent why bother casting her? It didn't make sense when everyone else tried an accent but her. If this does end up winning, I'll be completely fine with it. I don't think there's a film this year that really makes me rapturous about it winning. If this wins, awesome! If another film wins, ehhhh okay. I do have a preference for the couple I would like, The Shape of Water not being in that group but I guess we will see in a couple hours who wins. I like this film and think McDonagh is great. The film has great acting throughout and I really like the score, too. The controversy surrounding it is just one of those stupid campaign things and doesn't need to be taken seriously. This is definitely one of the better flicks of the year.



This is a hell of a Best Picture group. I honestly think that in a couple years' time, we will look back on this year and marvel at how right they got it and how amazing some of these choices are in hindsight. There are two clear bottom films in this group and that's Darkest Hour and The Post. Both are the old school Oscar bait films that in the past would have swept up in the Oscars but in today's world look old and antiquated. Not sure the Churchill biopic should have been included at all and The Post would have been better if it wasn't rushed by Spielberg to parallel the current political climate. It would have been better in someone else's hands, really. Then I would have your Oscar winner, The Shape of Water, next. I like the film fine but it just doesn't scream Best Picture winner to me. I think it's fun and has a lot of great elements but it doesn't gel into a complete film, if that makes sense. Nothing against del Toro who is a genius and is incredibly smart and well spoken and passionate about film in general. I saw him on a documentary talking about older directors and he was so passionate about their work and what it meant to him and he broke them down intelligently and was fascinating to listen to him talk about film. But I just don't see a winner there. Then we start getting into the hard part. I think Call Me By Your Name will be one of those films that lands on a Top 500 Best Films Ever type of list that publications put out from time to time. That's how that film feels to me. I enjoyed it a lot more than I anticipated and the acting is really good. Lady Bird is a really wonderful coming of age film with some really great acting. The acting and writing are what elevate the film over the others. It's a strong film that deserves to be here. Get Out is a pretty awesome story in that it actually made it to the Oscars and got a ton of love from everyone. I would love for more films like this to reach the promised land and I think we will going forward, especially after Moonlight winning last year. But as long as long as they are smart, well crafted films and not just because it has black actors or is directed by a minority. Then it just feels like when Selma got in with only a Best Song nomination besides BP. Three Billboards would be next. I thought that this might actually win the whole thing but it seemed to fade at the last moment. I like the characters it creates and it's a very darkly humorous look at what's going on in today's world. Really good stuff. The top two for me is so hard. I like both of these films immensely and I'm sure whichever one I watched most recently would be the one I want to win Best Picture. But both are brilliant and superb films for different reasons but also really the same reasons. One is a war film that is light on dialogue and lets the sights and sounds tell the story, while the other is a character driven look at a couple who thrive on some sadomasochistic feelings and have a very different yet connected relationship. Both are crafted by two dudes at the top of their game when it comes to creating a film. And both encompass much more than just simply directing. They write and help edit and make sure the music fits and that the picture quality is amazing and that the scenes look gorgeous and that the acting is top notch and I could go on and on. I don't know which I want to win more but I do know that I wish Phantom Thread had shown us more about Alma and Cyril and been maybe a bit longer in that regard. And Dunkirk is bloodless which seems like a minor misstep. So I dunno, Dunkirk for now! That might change tomorrow, though. A really great year for Best Picture and I hope 2018 is just as strong!

Oscar Winner: The Shape of Water
My Winner:  Dunkirk
Phantom Thread
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Get Out
Lady Bird
Call Me By Your Name
The Shape of Water
The Post
Darkest Hour