The Oscars are less than two weeks away. A friend of mine astutely pointed out that this year, it's more likely the average moviegoer has seen the leading Best Documentary nominee (March of the Penguins) than any of the actual Best Picture nominees.
It's strange, but true. I have yet to have a year where I've seen all five of the Oscar nominated films, but I can usually count on having caught two or three. But this year -- zilch. Zero. None. Until yesterday. A couple friends joined me in a quest to mildly "culture ourselves" by going to see Capote.
As we bought our tickets, we were informed that the admission was good for a double feature. (Wow! Who does those anymore? How nifty!) We could stay on and see Good Night and Good Luck -- not coincidentally one of the other Oscar nominated films. So we did, and now I'm back up to my usual two-out-of-five.
The bottom line is, I don't think that either film is truly deserving of the honor.
Capote has a brilliant performance from Philip Seymour Hoffman, and capable work from Catherine Keener and Chris Cooper. The direction of it is solid. Unfortunately, it's all in service of a pretty boring story. I expect to get some sort of emotion out of an "Oscar nominated" film. What the emotion is, I don't particularly care. The film can provoke rage, tears, excitement, laughter, whatever. But I figure if it's such a great movie, it ought to make me feel something.
But the only scene in the entire film that elicited anything but a yawn from me was a scene in which Capote reads an excerpt from the book In Cold Blood. I presume the excerpt is an accurate transcription of the actual book, and so little real credit can go to the writer of the film beyond his selection of it. It made me want to go read the book, actually.
Still, I don't know what I'm supposed to make of this movie, or what I'm supposed to be debating in my mind. Is it the tragedy of an author whose greatest work burned him out forever? If so, I think I need to see more of him before his decline. Is it supposed to be the story of how he was affected by the killers he wrote about it? If so, then there needed to be more scenes in the film that revealed his true thoughts and feelings about them; all we get are moments where he's concealing things from other characters.
If Philip Seymour Hoffman were to win Best Actor for the film, it might not be undeserved. But the film itself gets a D+ from me.
So, on to Good Night and Good Luck. The film was certainly "important." An accounting of the McCarthy hearings and the way Murrows challenged the senator's inquisition is a worthy endeavor. I think these events should basically be American Civics 101, and I'm sorry to admit I did not know as much about this piece of history as I think I should have. (Though I was not completely ignorant going in.)
Again, many strong performances from strong actors. David Strathairn is perfect. Jeff Daniels, Robert Downey Jr., and Frank Langella are all welcome to see. Even George Clooney didn't annoy me as much as he often does. The writing does a very excellent job of capturing the feeling of the early 1950s; it's a quality "period piece."
But once again, I'm missing the emotion. I was at least not bored watching this film, but I also felt like the stakes were not being conveyed strongly enough. Especially considering the stakes of the real life events. The movie shows us some of the consequences of Murrows trying to take down McCarthy, but for whatever reasons, I just didn't feel their impact. Ultimately, the movie feels like that "Civics Lesson" I mentioned, performed by actors, but not dramatized. The movie educates, but it does not entertain.
Because I think the subject of the education is an important one (certainly it's important to me), I'll see my way through to give the film a B-. But while that's an "above average" grade, it's still a long way from "Oscar nomination" material in my book. I think it snuck in the back door for being topical and apropos, not by being ultimately good.
Of course, we all know it's a foregone conclusion Brokeback Mountain is gonna win the award anyway.
5 comments:
What is the best film you have seen this year?
Do you think anything out there this year is Oscar worthy?
This is only the second year ever that I can remember that I have seen all of the best picture nominated films.
I more or less agree with your opinion of Capote. Okay, so I might give it a C, but your complaints are warranted. It is a very slow-moving movie and oftentimes the drama is lacking, leaving one feeling bored. That said, Philip Seymour Hoffman put in an amazing performance and totally captured Truman Capote, so I think he deserves the best actor award that he will win.
I think you were a bit harsh on Good Night and Good Luck, though I might only give it a B on your letter grade scale (maybe B+). As you said, any movie where Clooney doesn't annoy me is worth something and I thought it was a great story and that the actors did well in conveying how important it was to get the truth out and how dire the consequences might be. My complaint is that the movie was a bit scattered, never focusing too much on one thing or character, and the focus on the forbidden romance between the two co-workers just added nothing (in fact, it was included only because the woman Patricia Clarkson's played was a scrip consultant). Still, this movie is on the borderline of Oscar-worthy. I mean, if Master and Commander can get a nomination, this film certainly should.
Brokeback Mountain will win best picture and it deserves to. It's clearly the best of the five nominees and it is indeed a really great movie. That said, I think Match Point and The Squid and The Whale were snubbed in terms of nominations (and I loved Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang, but it isn't the type of films that generally gets Oscar mentions).
And I totally didn't realize the Marche de L'empereur was March of the Penguins, which is interesting because while I've seen 3 of the 5 nominated documentaries, that isn't one of them. It'll probably win, though, as cool as I thought Enron was and as much talk as Murderball has gotten.
If you really care about my Oscar predictions, they can be found in the comments of this post.
the best film I saw last year was Serenity ;-) or maybe Kung Fu Hustle. but those types of movies are never really considered for awards (well, maybe like an MTV award or something...)
the mole
Kosmo -- I'd have to say the movie that packed the strongest emotional punch for me was Serenity. And lest you think it's TOTALLY ludicrous that the Academy would ever acknowledge such a film, Sigourney Weaver did receive a Best Actress Oscar nomination for Aliens. So it's only MOSTLY ludicrous to expect the Oscars to look that way.
So, accepting that hell would freeze over first, I'd have to turn to Wallace & Gromit as the best movie of 2005. Beauty and the Beast got a nomination for Best Picture in 1992, so it's not impossible for a "children's movie" (or an animated movie) to get the nod when it's of sufficient quality. I'd also agree with David that Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang was outstanding. At the very least, it should have been looked at for a Best Screenplay award.
Putting ALL of those films aside and focusing only on the sort of film the Academy might truly, reasonably be expected to pay attention to, I'd pick Match Point. Perhaps if I'd seen a few more of the "Oscar bait" films, I'd be able to come up with one or two others. But as it is, Match Point, all the way.
David --
Impressive dissertation there! I appreciate the thoughts, and pretty much agree.
It's between Brokeback and Crash for Best Picture and I think the Mountain will win.
While they didn't win... both genre films, Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark, both garnered nominations for Best Picture (though you must admit that Raiders had tough competition from On Golden Pond, Reds and eventual winner Chariots of Fire.)
Without looking it up... anyone know the fifth nominated film of 1981? I sure didn't.
Post a Comment