This post could also be titled “One of Todd’s Biggest Pet Peeves with Other Moviegoers”.
Allow me to explain. Over the past year, we’ve seen a number of pictures based on historical events, some more recent and some much older. Quite a few are Best Picture nominees. Argo, centered on events during the Iranian Hostage crisis in 1979. Lincoln, focusing on the passage of the 13th amendment. Zero Dark Thirty, about the manhunt and raid to kill Osama Bin Laden. Even Django Unchained, which isn’t a true story but has self-appointed historians talking about its realism or non-realism during the slavery era in which it takes place.
There were biopics like Hitchcock, with Anthony Hopkins as the great director. And Hyde Park on Hudson, casting Bill Murray as President Franklin D. Roosevelt. This year, we’ll see Naomi Watts in a Princess Diana biopic. Also The Butler, about a White House caretaker who served eight Presidents.
Inevitably, these kinds of pictures serve as fodder for followers of those times to harp and complain about “historical inaccuracies”. This picking apart is often used as a convenient crutch to explain why one doesn’t care for a particular title: “I didn’t like Zero Dark Thirty because I don’t think that’s how detainees were tortured” or “They were certain politicians just as important to the 13th amendment in Lincoln that weren’t talked about”.
And, yes, this serves as one of my biggest pet peeves with other film fans. Why? I’ll explain my position. It’s pretty simple. It’s these three words. Read carefully: It’s a movie.
It’s. A. Movie.
Even movies based on historical events are not meant to be documentaries. Why? Because those are called documentaries.
Let me repeat: Documentaries are supposed to be historically accurate. This is not required of movies.
Again: It’s. A. Movie.
To me, movies are meant to be judged on how well you liked it or not. How entertained you were. How thrilled you were. How funny it is. How moved you were. And so on and so forth.
The biggest examples with this pet peeve of mine occur when political opinion interferes with a movie watcher’s experience. Oliver Stone’s Nixon is a perfect example. Those on the right felt it was far too harsh on the President. Those on the left felt it didn’t hit the President hard enough. My opinion? Nixon is a terrific picture about a man whose demons get the best of him at the highest levels of power. It’s a fascinating portrait of someone who has the power to do nearly anything, but goes too far in pursuit of that power for small and unnecessary reasons.
Here’s the important thing: do I think everything in Nixon happened in “real life”? Of course not. Did the film change my personal opinion of Mr. Nixon? Not it did not. Why?
Because… It’s. A Movie. It’s Oliver Stone’s take on the Nixon presidency. And filmmakers have a right to make movies signifying… well, whatever the heck they want.
Films such as Michael Mann’s The Insider, about the cigarette companies misleading the public as to health risks, were criticized for some inaccuracies. In my mind, The Insider is one of the best films of the last 20 years. I could care less whether certain events happened in a particular order, etc…
I could go on and on. You get the idea. I respect everyone’s opinions when it comes to movies. What I don’t quite respect is being so nitpicky when it comes to pictures based on actual events. That’s not what movies are all about. Not to me, at least.
Rocky Balboa and Lando Calrissian as New York City cops battling the bad guy from Blade Runner!?!?!
Yep, it’s a movie and quite possibly one you haven’t heard of or seen. It’s 1981’s Nighthawks, a gritty crime thriller that is one of the best pictures of Sly Stallone’s career.
Stallone and Billy Dee Williams are tracking an international terrorist with dastardly plans, played by Rutger Hauer. Why this film didn’t connect with audiences in beyond me. Stallone was certainly popular at the time, but Nighthawks earned just $19 million upon release.
For fans of the action and crime movies genre, this is well worth seeking out. Especially if you only know Mr. Stallone as Rocky and Rambo.
As you faithful readers have seen throughout the week, I’ve written several blog posts predicting what I believe will win in the feature film categories at this Sunday’s Oscars.
If you’re filling out your own Oscar picks, I felt it would be convenient to post all my predictions in one place. So, from me to you, Todd’s Final Oscar Predictions:
Best Picture: Argo
Best Director: Ang Lee, Life of Pi
Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis, Lincoln
Best Actress: Jennifer Lawrence, Silver Linings Playbook
Best Supporting Actor: Tommy Lee Jones, Lincoln
Best Supporting Actress: Anne Hathaway, Les Miserables
Best Foreign Language Film: Amour
Best Adapted Screenplay: Argo
Best Original Screenplay: Django Unchained
Best Animated Feature: Wreck-It Ralph
Best Cinematography: Life of Pi
Best Costume Design: Anna Karenina
Best Editing: Argo
Best Makeup and Hairstyling: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
Best Original Score: Life of Pi
Best Original Song: “Skyfall” from Skyfall
Best Production Design: Anna Karenina
Best Sound Editing: Skyfall
Best Sound Mixing: Skyfall
Best Visual Effects: Life of Pi
So there you have it! My predictions give Life of Pi the most wins at four, with Argo and Skyfall picking up three and Anna Karenina and Lincoln with two.
I am also predicting the James Bond tribute will be totally awesome!
1990’s Darkman holds the interesting distinction of being one of the best comic book movies not actually based on a comic book. 2000’s Unbreakable, directed by M. Night Shyamalan and starring Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson, is another contender for that award.
Here’s the back story: director Sam Raimi was a celebrated cult filmmaker in the 1980s best known for the Evil Dead series. When the director was unable to get the rights to adapt famous comic book characters Batman or The Shadow, he moved on to Plan B and created his own superhero. That hero is Darkman, played by Liam Neeson. His girlfriend is played by Frances McDormand. And the main bad guys are played by Colin Friels as a ruthless billionare and Larry Drake from the TV series “L.A. Law” and the cult 1992 horror flick Dr. Giggles, as a crazy mob boss.
Watching Darkman now, you’ll swear it’s based on a comic book and that’s a testament to Raimi’s ability to transform a well-known genre into original material. It’s no masterpiece and certainly isn’t on the level of a Dark Knight or X-Men 2, but it works well on its own terms. It’s considerably more violent than similar genre titles and it definitely earns its R rating.
Darkman was a financial success in 1990, earning a solid $48 million dollars. There were even direct-to-video sequels made, albeit without the involement of Raimi or Neeson. Ironically, its success contributed to Raimi later being able to direct a “real” comic book movie… three of them actually when he was behind the camera for the Tobey Maguire Spider-Man trilogy. Raimi’s latest work, Oz the Great and Powerful, opens March 8th.
For genre fans who have not see Darkman, I found it to be a lot of fun and it’s well worth checking out.
Well, my friends, we have arrived at my FINAL Oscar Winner Predictions for the two FINAL categories I’ve yet to predict and they’re the big ones: Best Picture and Best Director. I made an editorial decision to combine these together because explaining my pick on each race go hand-in-hand.
Additionally, these two categories have historically matched up. Explanation: of the 85 titles that have won Best Picture in Academy history, 62 of those film’s directors won Best Director. From a more recent historical perspective, the last 25 Best Picture winners have seen their directors honored 21 times. That’s 84% of the time over the last quarter century, math fans!
Based on those numbers, it would stand to reason that whomever wins Best Director will see their movie win Best Picture, right?
… Not so fast. 2012 has been anything but typical, especially in the Best Director category. When the nominations were announced a few weeks ago, the five nominees sent shock waves through Hollywood and with Oscar prognosticators, such as yours truly.
Why? While Steven Spielberg (Lincoln), Ang Lee (Life of Pi), and David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook) were not surprising, the inclusion of Benh Zietlin for Beasts of the Southern Wild was. To a lesser degree, so was Michael Haneke for Amour.
But, it wasn’t necessarily who was nominated, but who wasn’t that confounded everyone. Especially in the case of Ben Affleck, who was seen as a surefire nominee for Argo. And while not totally surefire, it was widely expected that Kathryn Bigelow would be nominated for her work in Zero Dark Thirty.
Since the nominations came out, Affleck has pretty much won everything else, including the Director’s Guild of America Award and the Golden Globe. Argo itself has been cleaning up, winning Best Ensemble at the SAG Awards and winning Best Picture at the Golden Globes and Critic’s Choice Awards.
Let me put it to you this way: if Affleck had been nominated for Best Director, I would pick him to win. Yet he’s not. This leaves Spielberg, Lee, Russell, Zietlin, and Haneke. Let’s cross off Zietlin and Haneke right now. They don’t really stand a chance.
So we’re left with Spielberg, Lee, and Russell. And this is a truly difficult pick among the three. Spielberg is obviously one of the biggest directors of all time (probably the biggest) and he’s won Best Director twice, in 1993 for Schindler’s List and in 1998 for Saving Private Ryan. Lee is also a past winner for 2005’s Brokeback Mountain. Russell has yet to win, but he’s a critically acclaimed auteur with credits such as Three Kings and The Fighter. It could come down to current momentum of the pictures they directed. Lincoln has seemed to be losing it; Silver Linings Playbook has seemed to be gaining it. This would make it more likely that Mr. Russell wins than Mr. Spielberg. I’m not sure if I buy this argument, however. Silver Linings Playbook is one of the films with major momentum at the right time, but it may be seen as more of an actors showcase than a directorial achievement. And Lincoln could certainly have enough good will to propel Spielberg to the win. At the end of the day, however, it doesn’t matter when it comes to my final prediction. Life of Pi is a dark horse candidate to win Best Picture, but I believe the Director category will recognize its significance for what Ang Lee was able to accomplish. With Affleck out of the race, it is a three person competition and any one of them could win. A pick must be made and, for the reasons given, I will go with:
Best Director Prediction: Ang Lee, Life of Pi
Which brings us to Best Picture and its nine nominees.
First things first: Amour, Beasts of the Southern Wild, and Django Unchained are not going to win. Period.
We have two titles that at one time seemed strong contenders: Les Miserables and Zero Dark Thirty. Since that time, neither has won any significant precursors and their buzz has faded greatly. Neither Les Mis or Zero Dark will win Best Picture.
This creates a legitimate race between four titles: Argo, Life of Pi, Lincoln, and Silver Linings Playbook. Let’s look at each:
Argo, upon its release in October, immediately vaulted to the top of the list for Best Picture contenders. It was critically acclaimed and was a huge box office success. It ended up losing some momentum when Lincoln, Les Mis, Zero Dark Thirty, Life of Pi, and Silver Linings came out after it. Then a strange thing happened. Some of the movies ended up losing their momentum. The film won the Golden Globe for Best Drama and the Critic’s Choice Award for Best Picture, as well as the SAG Award for Best Ensemble. Affleck started winning all the Best Director awards at other ceremonies, even though Oscar snubbed him.
Life of Pi was also a critical and commercial from very well-respected director Ang Lee. Fans of the novel were nervous that it would be a tough one to adapt for the screen, but it ended up being a success. This is indeed a movie where those who love it really love it.
Lincoln was a front runner for the award since the moment it was announced to start filming. Spielberg + Day-Lewis + Lincoln? I mean, come on! It also earned great reviews and terrific box office. However, other than Day-Lewis winning Actor constantly, the film itself has under performed big time at precursor awards shows. Still, that doesn’t mean the Academy wouldn’t honor it.
Silver Linings Playbook is the hot movie of the moment. Keep in mind that voting for the Oscars ended just on Tuesday. So whatever is carrying the momentum now could be the victor. The film is the first picture in 31 years to see four performers nominated in all four acting categories. Like Life of Pi, those who love it love it. Like the other three likely winners, it also received fantastic reviews and audiences loved it.
So where does that leave us? Well, it leaves me with having to make a prediction and this is one of the most competitive and unpredictable Best Picture races in history. It really is. Of the four titles that I believe have a shot, I put Life of Pi fourth, even though I’m predicting Ang Lee will win Best Director.
The absence of Lincoln winning any well-known precursors has to say something, right? While a Day-Lewis victory is near certain and I’m predicting Tommy Lee Jones will win Supporting Actor (something I’m much less certain of), I am not predicting Lincoln wins Best Picture.
This leaves Argo and Silver Linings Playbook, the two movies with the right buzz at the right time. If Argo were to win, it would only the fourth time in 85 years that a movie won and its director wasn’t even nominated. It would be only the second time that’s happened in (get this) 81 years. That historical fact alone should be enough to warrant against picking Argo for the win.
However, 2012 has been a strange year for nominations and I will predict the strangeness continues. While Silver Linings Playbook has a solid shot, my FINAL prediction is:
Best Picture Prediction: Argo
And there you have it! My FINAL predictions in all feature film related categories are officially complete. I will certainly have a post late Sunday or Monday with my reaction to what went down. Enjoy the Oscars on Sunday, my friends! I know I will.
The 2012 crop of Best Actor nominees is definitely one of the strongest fields of contenders we’ve had in quite some time. In a lesser field, we likely would have seen such nominees as John Hawkes in The Sessions. Or Richard Gere in what’s said to be a career-best performance in Arbitrage. Or Jamie Foxx in Django Unchained. Or Suraj Sharma in Life of Pi. Perhaps Jake Gyllenhall for his fine work in End of Watch. None were nominated.
In a different field of nominees, Denzel Washington’s astonishing performance in Flight might win. He’s nominated and won’t win.
In a different field of nominees, Joaquin Phoenix’s brilliant work in The Master might win. He’s nominated and won’t win.
In a different field of nominees, Hugh Jackman might win for what is considered the best role so far in his career for Les Miserables. He’s nominated and won’t win.
In a different field of nominees, the momentum of Silver Linings Playbook might cause Bradley Cooper to be recognized for his work, which is equally as great as his co-star Jennifer Lawrence, who may very well win. He’s nominated and won’t win.
That’s because this field of nominees includes Daniel Day-Lewis as Lincoln. No need to go into much explanation here. He’s won pretty much every major precursor that exists, including the Golden Globe, SAG, and Critics Choice Award.
If Day-Lewis does not win for Steven Spielberg’s film, it would constitute one of the biggest upsets in Oscar history.
But, you see, Daniel Day-Lewis is nominated. And he will win. And he will become the first performer ever to win the Best Actor award three times.
With two new releases opening this weekend that no one seems overly enthusiastic about, it appears that it will be a rather quiet weekend at the box office financially. That doesn’t make the competition any less interesting. As I see it, there are four films that have legitimate shots at taking the #1 spot.
For the newcomers, we start with the action drama Snitch starring The Rock. Early reviews have actually been fairly decent and the lead has certainly had his share of hits. A lot of those of those moneymakers have been kids films and also Fast Five, a continuation of that franchise that would have made bank with or without The Rock’s involvement. The picture has been well-publicized and it may not hurt that the actor has gained exposure lately in the WWE, but I’m skeptical. This doesn’t seem like a movie to rush out and go see in the theater. Anything above $15 million would probably be a pleasant surprise for the studio. I don’t see it happening, but ya never know. It could surprise and open at the top.
It’s the weekend’s other new release that represents the biggest question mark for me: the PG-13 supernatural horror flick Dark Skies, starring Keri Russell. These types of pictures have a very recent history of grossing far more in their openings weekends than anticipated. It’s happened twice just in 2013 with Texas Chainsaw 3D and Mama. I believe there are differences with Skies. While Chainsaw has a brand name and Mama majorly appealed to a female audience, neither is likely to apply here. I actually think the film’s trailer is decent, however. Dark Skies has the potential to open much bigger than my estimate… like, much bigger. It could be #1. And to show you just how uncertain I am about this one, I wouldn’t be shocked if it opened quite a bit lower. This one’s a mystery.
Last weekend, we saw four movies open and now we’ll see how they hold up in their second go-rounds. The President’s Day weekend champ A Good Day to Die Hard actually opened a bit below most expectations (including mine). Its harsh reviews may have hindered its potential. Audiences actually seemed to like it well enough (it earned a B+ CinemaScore grade). The fifth John McClane could drop 50% or more, but I’m not so sure it’ll fall that far. It also could be #1 for the second week in a row.
The romantic drama Safe Haven exceeded most expectations (though it opened right around my estimate). This movie’s problem could be that it seemed tailor-made for Valentine’s Day weekend. It could experience a hefty drop.
The animated Escape from Planet Earth performed quite well and blew past my prediction. I actually expect this to have the smallest drop of any of the returning contenders.
Then there’s Beautiful Creatures, which I won’t even bother to make a projection on since it seems very unlikely to stay in the top six. It bombed at the box office and should continue to fade.
Finally, this brings us to Melissa McCarthy’s Identity Thief, now entering its third weekend. I have underestimated this film from the start. It opened way bigger two weeks than I thought and in its second weekend, it didn’t dropped as far as I figured. If Snitch and Dark Skies do not break out of the pack and Die Hard doesn’t surprise with a smaller than expected drop, there is a possibility that Thief will return to the top spot over the weekend. And that, my friends, is precisely what I’m predicting will occur.
Here are my predictions for this weekend’s box office:
1. Identity Thief
Predicted Gross: $14.9 million (representing a drop of 37%)
2. A Good Day to Die Hard
Predicted Gross: $14.1 million (representing a drop of 43%)
3. Snitch
Predicted Gross: $13.3 million
4. Escape from Planet Earth
Predicted Gross: $11.1 million (representing a drop of 30%)
5. Dark Skies
Predicted Gross: $10.6 million
6. Safe Haven
Predicted Gross: $10.1 million (representing a drop of 53%)
As always, expect updates throughout the weekend and final numbers with my analysis on Sunday!
When we think of movies based on the “sweet science”, we likely think of Rocky Balboa, Apollo Creed, Ivan Drago, Mick, Adrian, Uncle Paulie, and Clubber Lang in the six-film Rocky saga.
Or perhaps very dramatic titles such as Martin Scorsese’s Raging Bull, Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby, and Ron Howard’s Cinderella Man. There’s also biopics such as Michael Mann’s Ali and Norman Jewison’s The Hurricane. Most recently, we’ve seen Mark Wahlberg and Christian Bale in David O. Russell’s The Fighter. We even had robots boxing in Real Steel, with Hugh Jackman.
The sport of boxing has given us some great cinematic moments. And here’s two more that go in the more comedic direction that weren’t widely seen and are definitely worth a look, especially for fans of the ring.
First, 1992’s Diggstown, directed by Michael Ritchie. Starring James Woods (you know, the guy the high school is named after on “Family Guy”), Lou Gossett Jr., Bruce Dern, and Heather Graham, the film centers on a con artist who bets on an aging fighter to get him out of a jam. In the summer of ’92, Diggstown came and went from theaters, earning a paltry $4.8 million. It’s worth seeking out though and is a lot of fun.
Second, we have 1996’s The Great White Hype, from director Reginald Hudlin. This comedy centers on a very Don King-like promoter (played wonderfully by Samuel L. Jackson) who realizes the only way to make money on his fights is find a Caucasian fighter to challenge the world champion (Damon Wayans). Featuring a solid supporting cast that includes Jeff Goldblum, Peter Berg, Cheech Marin, Jon Lovitz, and Jamie Foxx (in an early role), The Great White Hype is a smartly written and often hilarious picture. Like Diggstown, it didn’t have any box office impact, grossing only $8 million. It’s a heck of a good time, though.
These two titles represent a lighter take on the boxing movie and both work well. Laughing during a boxing movie doesn’t happen often, but you will here. Unless you count that ridiculous robot who flirts with Uncle Paulie in Rocky IV.
The Best Actress category for this year’s Academy Awards, airing Sunday, is indeed a competitive one. The race has actually made some history by nominating its youngest actress ever, 9 year-old Quevenzhane Wallis for Beasts of the Southern Wild, as well as its oldest, 85 year-old Emmanuelle Riva for Amour.
Neither seems very likely to take home the gold and neither does Naomi Watts for her work in The Impossible. For quite a while now, this race seems to be a strong competition between Jessica Chastain in Zero Dark Thirty and Jennifer Lawrence in Silver Linings Playbook.
Let’s take a look at some of the major Oscar precursors and who they honored. While the British awards (the BAFTA’s) honored Riva and the New York Film Critics honored Rachel Weisz for The Deep Blue Sea (she’s not nominated here), the rest of the story shows an even split among Chastain and Lawrence. The Critics Choice Awards and the National Board of Review went with Chastain. The SAG awards and L.A. Film Critics honored Lawrence. The biggest Academy precursor, the Golden Globes, has two separate categories: one for Drama and one for Musical/Comedy. The winners? Chastain and Lawrence, respectively.
While Wallis and Watts’s chances are next to none, the potential for a spoiler could be Riva. However, I’ll stick with my assertion that this is pretty much a two-woman competition. Both have a great shot at winning. They’re both relatively new to the scene, but both Chastain and Lawrence are recent past nominees. Lawrence was nominated for Actress in 2010 for Winter’s Bone. Chastain picked up a Supporting Actress nomination in 2011 for The Help.
It’s a close call for a prediction, but at the end of the day, I’ll go with momentum. Zero Dark Thirty has lost momentum. Director Kathryn Bigelow was surprisingly snubbed. Meanwhile, Silver Linings Playbook is the first picture in 31 years where four performances were nominated in the four acting categories. The film has become a huge financial success, crossing the $100 million dollar mark just today. Audiences love it. Critics love it. And it doesn’t hurt Lawrence’s chances that she’s been on an amazing roll lately. In 2012, besides her lauded role here, she also starred in one of the year’s mega blockbusters, The Hunger Games.
Add all that up and I’m predicting Jennifer Lawrence will win Best Actress on Sunday night.
Two corporate lackeys, bored with their existence and frustrated and angry with their relationships with females, form a pact to romance a woman at the same time and then dump her. They want to do this as a way to exact revenge on all the women they believe have wronged them in the past. Their plan grows even more demented when they decide to find the most vulnerable girl possible and they pick an insecure deaf coworker.
This is the plot to 1997’s independent film In the Company of Men, directed by Neil LaBute and adapted from his play. If the movie sounds controversial and un-PC, it is. It’s also terrific. Men explores the complexities of men’s attitudes about women in a way very few pictures have before or since. This is not the kind of relationship drama a major studio would touch.
In the Company of Men was a critical darling that found a niche audience. Aaron Eckhart (most known now as Harvey Dent in The Dark Knight) plays Chad, one of the co-conspirators. It’s a career best performance from the actor. He should have been nominated for an Oscar. The solid cast includes Matt Malloy as his coworker Howard and Stacy Edwards as Christine, the victim of their sick prank.
The film ends up going in unexpected directions. It’s driven by dialogue and only dialogue and you’ll be on the edge of your seat. In the Company of Men is well worth seeking out if you’re looking for a challenging and thought-provoking experience. I highly recommend it.
All My Life... I Wanted To Be A Blogster 