Catchup Reviews
Lady Bird
I'm still struggling to fully articulate my thoughts on Lady Bird. It was definitely a good film, I enjoyed it a lot. But I'm also not blown away by it the way a lot of other people seem to be. Saoirse Ronan and Laurie Metcalf were both fantastic in their roles, their mother-daughter relationship providing the emotional core and (the closest thing to) the central narrative thread of the film: both nominations are deserved. As you may have guessed from that slight parenthetical jab, this film is a little loose narratively. Its main plotline is Lady Bird's desire to go to a good university despite the derision and scepticism of her mother and other authorities such as the school. However, this doesn't really take much precedence and stays very much as a background element. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, and I don't think it's the problem I have with the film. But when I reached the end credits, I did feel ever so slightly underwhelmed, just a touch, and I'm just not sure what it is. This film is hilarious, heartfelt, relatable, very entertaining and has some great performances, so why am I not as infatuated with it as others have been? This may just simply be a case of classic overhyping, since the Letterboxd community has been going wild over this film over the last few months, and I was getting pretty excited to see it. It's happened before, and it's one of the many problems I have with the annoyingly late release dates of the Oscar contenders over here, but alas, c'est la vie. By the way, just so there's no confusion, this is in no way a bad film, far from it, and I'm definitely not condemning any part of it, I just think I might need to give it a rewatch to truly work out how much I like it. But don't think it's leaving here without a good score.
8/10, High Recommendation
The Shape of Water
Furries, rejoice! Guillermo del Toro has made bestiality not only popular, but socially acceptable, at last. There's a side of me (an admittedly quite childish side) that finds it inherently amusing that a film that is, let's face it, about a woman wanting to fuck the creature from the black lagoon, has become a critical darling with thirteen Oscar nominations: just one less than the record held by La La Land and All About Eve. In its defence though, there's a lot more to this film than just fishy fornication. For one thing, it does a surprisingly good job of essentially normalising the interspecies love. None of the characters really question it and the behaviour of the creature is close enough to human, with enough chemistry and humanity, that it pretty much gets away with it. Of course, combined with the time period and a couple of other moments between side characters in the film, as well as the notion of the creature being taken from some jungle in South America, there is a clear parallel here with interracial relationships that thankfully isn't distracting and slips quite nicely into the background to be examined after. The film itself isn't mind-blowingly good or anything, but it is a very well made and enjoyable film that does nearly everything you'd want out of it (sadly absent is the hardcore sex scene we all clearly wanted, but there is instead an amusing discussion of Captain Nemo's retractable penis). Maybe the most disturbing thing about the film is its inspiring of a new dildo based on the creature. Not only that, but apparently they sold out. Make of that what you will.
8/10, Medium Recommendation
EDIT: It's finally dawned on me why the creature is so familiar. It's almost identical to the Mirelurk Kings from Fallout
Phantom Thread
Call me a peasant or a noob or a poseur or whatever snobbish title you give to the people who don't have the apparent mental capacity to process high art like you do, but I just do not get this film, or the hype around it. One of the slightly more perplexing cinema experiences of recent memory, I was left waiting for some kind of plot point or conflict or anything to actually give the 'story' some kind of purpose, and it never came. Recently, I've been noticing and attempting to define something in storytelling which I have dubbed 'the point' of the story. It's difficult to describe fully, but it's probably closest to the dramatic question, specifically on an overarching, macro scale. The closest thing Phantom Thread has to a point is the relationship between Alma and Woodcock, but not only is it a mess that doesn't really go anywhere, it feels like there should be some bigger point to it all that their relationship would somehow play into and change the outcome of, but it never happened, and I was left at the credits wondering what the point of the last two hours really was. The best way I can see for them to improve it would be with Woodcock's clothing company. A lot of focus is put into it and it's a central element, yet has really nothing to do with anything: the business could be changed to anything else and not much would really change. The dress being made for that princess's wedding? That went absolutely nowhere. Where was the resolution? Daniel Day-Lewis was good in his role, I suppose, although Woodcock did start to feel to me like a posh British version of Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory more than anything else as the plot went on, which soured my experience somewhat. Maybe I'm wrong. I do seem to be the only person who did not like this film. Maybe I really just don't 'get' this film and there's something magical here that everyone else has found. Fine. I'll just add it to the pile along with All About Eve and Raging Bull.
5/10, Medium Recommendation
And now, on to the Oscars themselves!
Results
Best Production Design
Despite my love for Blade Runner 2049's design, I have no real qualms with The Shape of Water winning this one. I quite like the aquamarine-ish colour scheme and grading (which for some reason keeps reminding me of those avocado-coloured baths that used to be around when I was younger) and there was a lot of care taken towards capturing the aesthetic of the 50's that really gives the film a bit of visual flair.
Best Animated Feature
Had a bit of a look at previous winners: of the seventeen winners of best animated feature, twelve of them were Disney. Now I'll admit, it wasn't quite the monopoly I was expecting: there's even years where a Disney/Pixar film loses to another studio. Even still, Disney or Pixar have been on a winning streak since 2012 and really anyone who thought Coco wasn't going to win this award, especially against the likes of Boss Baby and Ferdinand, was smoking something. To be fair, The Breadwinner I've heard is pretty good, but again, it's up against Pixar. There was just no hope. Still haven't seen Coco, just by the by. But I'll get to it eventually, don't worry.
Best Visual Effects
Blade Runner 2049 was once again victorious, and deservingly so. In my previous post I said how I was pretty much satisfied with all the choices, and that still absolutely stands, although my additional love for Blade Runner in all its forms (and 2049 is definitley growing on me more and more every time I think about it) makes me particularly satisfied with this win. It's also worth pointing out that the other nominees on this list are well established, well-performing franchises, whilst Blade Runner was a little riskier and a little artsier, and especially considering its underperformance at the box office, is at risk of being labelled as some kind of failed experiment by the studio. It's in our best interest to encourage more films, especially more sequels and reboots, to be like 2049 rather than something like the 2016 Ghostbusters, and this means reassuring studios that 2049 was not a failure. It may be small, but maybe 2049's Oscars might just help contribute to that reassurance. I don't know, sometimes I like to be optimistic.
Best Sound Editing/Mixing
I just don't get it. The same films got nominated, the same film won both, why are these separate categories? At uni we are learning all about post-production processes and in a month or so's time will be embarking on this ourselves, and I promise you, they may be different steps but sound mixing is a part of sound editing. And even if not, what's the point in splitting it into two separate Oscar categories. This would be like splitting best film editing into editing and colour grading, and even then that's a more understandable split than sound editing and mixing. I'm just slightly baffled. Oh, and congrats Dunkirk.
Best Cinematography
At last, the promised day has come. Mr Roger Deakins, the man behind the camera of: Skyfall, Fargo, Sicario, The Shawshank Redemption, No Country for Old Men, Prisoners, O Brother, Where art Thou? and several others, has finally won his long overdue Oscar for cinematography. And what a film to win it for. Blade Runner 2049's cinematography is orgasmically good. Every shot in that film (a film that's nearly three hours) is masterfully composed and executed, and as a burgeoning cinematographer myself, just looking at this film was a kind of inspirational bliss. Far and away, this was the most deserving win of the year and I'd say the best thing to come out of this awards season. What more can I say?
Best Supporting Actor
Sam Rockwell got it, and quite deservingly. My opinion on this category hasn't really changed since last time, and I haven't really got much else to add without repeating myself. So.....yeah. Move along.
Best Supporting Actress
I can't comment on Mudbound, but all the other nominations here seemed perfectly valid picks, and Allison Janney definitely impressed with her performance in I, Tonya. While I finally have a chance to talk about this film, it's definitely worth a watch. It's a lot of fun and the acting is truly superb, Margot Robbie in particular really made this film her own, with Janney providing an excellent antagonist as Tonya's cold-hearted mother. It's a bit of a shame that the film hasn't received much more recognition besides this one win, but hey, means it did better than Lady Bird.
Best Actor
It kinda annoys me still that this works: just throwing together an Oscar bait period piece with the specific intent of getting a revered actor an Oscar. To be fair, Gary Oldman is a longstanding favourite actor of mine and many others, who has done so many fantastic roles over the year, that if this is what it takes to finally get him his little statuette, then I suppose it's a necessary evil.
Best Actress
Frances McDormand was the winner here, no surprises, although the rest of the nominated performances were all very deserving upon finally seeing them. Well, maybe not Streep. I'm glad that The Post didn't get any Oscars whatsoever this year, foiling its literal only purpose in life other than to give Spielberg something to do. To the deep depths of obscurity with ye! May you only return as an obscure answer in a pub quiz in twenty years time.
Best Directing
This does slightly scupper my theory from a couple years ago about best directing being essentially runner-up to Best Picture. Guillermo del Toro won, and not that he isn't deserving or anything, but personally, at least, I wanted Nolan to win this one for Dunkirk. Set aside the fact that Nolan still hasn't won an Oscar despite making some of the best films of the last two decades and being nominated five times, I feel the complexity and ambition of Dunkirk, especially with its non-linear parallel plotlines, lack of a single central protagonist and ability to strip off the layers of war to get to the survivalist heart of the story, executed as perfectly as it is, is the sign of an incredibly talented director, and one who definitely deserves an Oscar. But then, this leads us nicely to our one controversy of the night...
Best Picture
...or at least, my personal controversy. I haven't seen too much on the internet in outcry over The Shape of Water winning, although every friend I've discussed it with at uni has agreed with me. Look, it's not that The Shape of Water is a bad film. I mean, just look at the review at the top of the post; I like it. It's a good film. But that's it. It's just good. It's not really that special, it's not had any major impact, it's certainly not even close to the best film of 2017 (although how often are the best picture winners the true best of the year?). It just seems like an odd pick: nearly every other film on the list seems more deserving. Well, ok, not The Post, Darkest Hour or Phantom Thread. But all the others were. Having seen a few more of the best picture candidates, I ponder once more which of them I would have picked, and I'm still not sure. My literal favourite of the bunch is still Dunkirk, at least until I get around to rewatching it, but I don't think any of the others really come close to usurping it. Thinking more from the Academy's shoes, I'd most likely have gone for Three Billboards, which I'd also say is my next favourite of the roster. Well, at the end of the day, all I can say is it's a good thing I didn't place any bets on the winner like I was considering, because I certainly wouldn't have guessed this.
And there we have it, the end of the Oscars for another year. The blog will unfortunately be returning to its hibernation for the next few months while I continue with other projects. My book Chrysalis, annoyingly, is not much closer to completion, as it got slightly dogpiled by my uni coursework, which is particularly heavy this year, but work on the book and other projects such as last year's short Dead Tired will continue once my coursework starts to wind down, and there will be undoubtedly some kind of new content available in the summer, including potentially a new post (besides the regular summer updates, that is). Thank you all for reading, and happy viewings. I'm going to bed...
No comments:
Post a Comment