2017 Oscars

Welcome to my 2017 Oscar blog!  I joined the 2000's and bought an Amazon firestick so I can watch most movies shortly after they come out.  As a result, my Oscar posts will be quite a bit more relevant.

Here we go.  I am rating this years films in the order I watch them; no other reason.

HIDDEN FIGURES:

This film chronicles the three African American women who were instrumental in helping NASA launch the first astronaut into orbit.  All three women were brilliant and performed many of the hardest calculations that NASA needed to perform.  As this story takes place in the 60's, they were portrayed as the smartest people in the room, but couldn't share the same coffee pot or restroom as everyone else.

All three actresses, Taraji P Henson, Octavia Spencer, and Janelle Monae were fantastic.  Their portrayal of these women who faced discrimination while performing some of the most important tasks in American history was perfect.  You feel the absolute victory when the bathrooms are desegragated, the coffee pots are shared, the rockets launch, etc.  Kevin Costner's character was excellent as well.  He played the part of the supervisor who watched the discrimination negatively impact the success of the NASA program.  As he watched it, he changed it to ensure that each member of the program was performing to their potential instead of focusing on whether or not things were separate or equal; depending on their perspective.

The adapted screenplay was excellent.  The performances were excellent.  This film was good in all aspects.  This may be a serious contender (having not seen the other nominees yet).

Overall rating 4/5

MANCHESTER BY THE SEA

I watched this film last night and I went to bed thinking about it and woke up thinking about it.  At some points in the film, I felt it was brilliant.  At others, I thought it was poor.  I'm not sure which one will win out at the end but I definitely was impacted by the film.

Without going into too much detail, Casey Affleck's character (Lee) was introduced as a character we don't really like.  He is a maintenence man making minimum wage somewhere near the coast in New England.  The film's first turn is when his brother dies from congestive heart failure, and he is placed as a guardian of his brother's 16 year old son.  The mother was a drunk who the father divorced and they do not contact anymore so the only viable candidate for guardianship is Lee.

My first major issue with the film is that we are introduced to Lee with no frame of reference as to a possible reason that he is such a horrendous person.  So I formed an opinion of him and had to shift my opinion totally about halfway through the film when we learn of a traumatic even that causes him to behave and act as ignorantly as he does.  I think the film would be better served to introduce this traumatic event earlier in the film before we form an opinion aboout Lee.  The trauma really serves as a starting point to the narrative and I think a stricter linear approach would have been beneficial.

Another issue that I had with the film occurs in the first of the final two scenes; a scene where Lee encounters his wife who tries to open up and start a conversation about their shared trauma (not that the director was concerned with her point of view- she merely acts a catalyst to gain insight into Lee). This scene clearly shows the theme of the movie: there are some things you just can't get over.  This scene bothered me on quite a few levels.  First, I thought the camera angles were off.  They showed the majority of the scene from behind his ex-wife.  This focus on Lee disproportionately focused on his respone to the exact same event (the trauma occurred during their marriage and caused their divorce) while ignoring the trauma it caused to her.  We clearly see Lee is broken while not being concerned with the damage caused to his ex-wife who was equally devestated by the event.  What the director chooses to pay attention to is Lee's refusal to have anything to do with her.  The camera finally ends up focusing on the two of them but even that angle is shown to highlight Lee's escape from the conversation while his ex-wife was overcome with emotion.  I thought the scene could have been filmed in a different way that would have showed the tragedy of the shared experience and their individual reaction to it.  To reinforce this idea, this is the last scene we see the ex-wife in.  We are left with the image of her unraveling and never find get any closure or any idea of what happens to her.

In the next major scene, the film reaches its pinnacle.  Lee confesses to his brother's son "I can't beat it."  His acknowlegement that he is broken is the film's high point.  We see firsthand that he can't be fixed and he knows it.  He is limping through life and doing his best to just maintain.  As enlightening and explanatory that this scene is, his emotional opening up doesn't jive with his absolute shutting down when confronted by his ex-wife just a scene or two before.  His nephew didn't really want to hear this baring of the soul while his ex-wife was begging for it.  It didn't make sense to me.

As many major issues as I had with this film, there were some strengths as well.  Casey Affleck's performance was oscar worthy and I find it hard to envision him not winning.  I didn't care for the way the film was presented but he was absolutely perfect as the flawed protaginist.

Another piece of the film that worked very well was the score.  The music to this film was excellent as well.  I'm not a music major by any means but the gothic choral music highlighted the sadness and despair shown in these characters.

I am going to rewatch this film to see if it works better the second time through.  I don't think this a serious contender but with some shifts in focus, it could have been.

Overall rating 3/5

LA LA LAND

I watched LA LA LAND last night and it amounted to about what I expected.  It was primarily a romance movie with some excellent music.  The show tunes were catchy and nice but the real musical weight was provided by the jazz ensembles that Ryan Gosling played in as an aspiring jazz musician. His character, Sebastian, falls in love with Emma Stone's character, Mia.  From there we see what happens to them as they are faced with career advancements for both.

Emma Stone is one of my favorite actresses.  She is excellent in everything she is in and she shines here as well; her acting talent is on full display here.  She is an aspiring actress who goes to auditions and we see her run the gamut of emotions and situations on cue.

The negative to the movie is that there isn't much to the plot.  Boy meets girl, they fall in love, problems ensue, etc.  It is a simple love story with very little innovation.  It makes up for its unoriginality in performance and production as both are top rate.

Overall, this movie will be enjoyable for everyone.  It is a musical but it is not overdone by any means.  There is much more dialouge than singing; especially the second half of the movie.  The themes are universal and the ending is good.  In short, I would recommend everyone see it regardless of whether or not you like musicals or not.

Overall Rating 3.5/5.

MOONLIGHT

I watched this a day after watching La La Land and in contrast, you couldn't find two more polar opposite films.  Set in the Miami hood, this coming of age story about the son of a single mom who was a serious addict was not a feel good story at all.  It showed the protagonist at three points in his life, a young boy, a high schooler, and then at about 25 years of age when he reconnects with a high school friend.  This film illustrates perfectly the effects of being raised in an unnurturing, non-loving environment.

The cinematography and score were adequate, the acting good but not great (with the exception of the high school version of the boy- I thought he was excellent), the directing was good. What stood out was the script that created some very memorable scenes; especially in the high school section of the movie.  They were as disturbing as they were memorable and you really feel enpathy and sympathy for the protagonist in these moments.

I thought the adult section drug a little bit as the last 45 minutes or so were almost like a stand-alone play with the majority of the scene taking place in a diner for about 30 minutes straight.  The last scene was moving as well but not nearly as emotional as the high school scenes.  by the way, did anyone else think it was 50 cent?  I totally did and am still convinced I am being punked.  The guys look exactly alike.

After watching this win the best picture award, I'm convinced that this year's class of films is the weakest I have seen in memory.

Sidenote:  I think Marshala Ali was excellent in this but I think his work in Hidden Figures combined with this is what won him the award.  He was excellent in both and also is an acting stud in House of Cards.  Go Remy Danton!

Overall rating 3/5.

Hacksaw Ridge

I watched this film with my son who was way more excited to see it than I was.  I am absolutely not a fan of Mel Gibson and this did nothing to change my mind.  This film was way overstated and treated the audience as if A) they had never seen a war film before, B) they were not aware that war was dangerous or that people died, C) people who went to war often left loved ones behind and then came back as changed men, and D) they were not smart enough to figure any of these things out on their own.  I was bored through thre majority of the cliches and overusage of strewn body parts and slow motion to theorhetically heighten the drama.  I felt like a 9th grader in a intro to filmmaking class who was seeing a "How to Make Your Movie Dramatic" video to take and use on my first ever film attempt.

As much as I hated the basic unintelligent way that the film was made, I did appreciate the script and story.  In a capable director's hands, this was a serious oscar contender.  Unfortunately, after Mel Gibson ruined it, it was a throw in nominee based on the script and Andrew Garfield's performance. Andrew Garfield's performance was good; although I thought the overproduction and repetitive dramtic devices subtracted from it as the film wore on.

The film itself was 2 hours and 15 minutes long but that was because we saw 30% of the war scenes in slow motion.  Had we only seen 2 or 3 body parts lying on ther ground instead of the seemingly endless stream Gibson chose to show us, this film could have been shortened down to about an hour and 45 minutes.

In short, I don't even think you need to watch this one.  Read a synopsis online as the story is impressive and the man Garfield played was a true war hero.

Overall rating 1/ 5

ARRIVAL

This film inspired me to think more than any other film of this year's class (by a long shot- not even close).  Without giving anything away, the suggestion made at the end of the film was a question that made me stop and consider for a long time which way I would choose.  I loved that aspect of it.  I though it was brilliant.

The rest of the film served as a vehicle to arrive at the big question at the end.  Amy Adams plays a
speech expert who is called in when Aliens arrive on our planet.  Jeremy Renner is a scientific expert who works alongside to try and establish communication with the aliens.  As they learn theor language, they realize they are learning a whole new way to view spoace, time, and everything we know.  As their knowledge of this alien speech increases, so does their ability to process the world around them.  This leads to the big reveal at the end of the film.

Both Renner and Adams are excellent as always.  The screemplay was excellent as well- especially the ending.  Everything else was good as well.

This will probably be the most memorable film for me from this year by a long shot.  I loved the ending reveal and the premise it raised.  Everyone should see this film just for the ending.  While it does fall in the science fiction genre, it isn't over the top by any means and it serves a vehicle to arrive at the ending premise.

Overall Rating 4.5/5

HELL OR HIGH WATER

As I stated earlier, in my review of Moonlight, I think this was the weakest class we have seen in a long time.  I would have to go back and look to see when I thought we have had this weak of a class.  This film, in my opinion, had no reason to be among the nominees.  The script was average, the acting was OK- and by OK, I mean Jeff Bridges was awesome but he is awesome everytime he hits the screen).  The score, set design, etc. were all good but nothing stood out to me as Oscar worthy.  The basic premise is that two brothers rob banks so that the straight (before he robbed banks) borther can get out of debt and will his recently deceased mom's property to his estranged sons who live with their mom.  The just out of prison for bank robbery brother sacrifices himself so his "good" brother can get away.  Nothing new here; nothing out of the ordinary.  In my opinion, this film was very pedestrian.

Overall rating 2/5

FENCES

This August Wilson play adapted to the big screen was acted out on the stage by mostly the same cast as the film.  Their familiarity with the material was evident as they looked like they had done this time and time again and were totally comfortable doing so.  Denzel Washington's character never stopped talking and at one point in the film, he had a 13 page monologue that he had to memorize.  He was excellent playing a father who is mean, ornery, and miserable and has so many faults that you become unsympathetic to his character by the end of the film.  Mr. Wilson tricks us into believing that he is a hard-working everyman to start with.  By the end of the film, we realize that his wife, played brilliantly by Viola Davis, is the only hero in this film.  My sympathy toward Denzel's charactor was gone as I watched his wife pick up the pieces of the wreckage he left and make the family's life as smooth as it could be given the situation.

Overall, this play adated to the screen felt just that way: most of the film was set either in the backyard or the kitchen of the home, there was almost no discernable "action".  The entire film was based on the dialogue between characters.  I am conflicted about this film.  I don;t think adapting it to the big screen hurt or helped it.  I think it felt like I was watching a play on TV instead of a movie based on a play.  It was good but not good enough to beat Arrival or Hidden Figures in my book.

Overall rating 3/5

AND THE LAST ONE:

Lion

OK.  This film was a true feel good story and may have been the best film of the bunch.  The basic plot was that a 5 year old boy from a third-world, perennially poor part of India gets separated ffrom his brother and gets lost.  He is adopted by a middle class family in Australia who raise, him, allow him to be college-educated and excape the poverty he would have been stuck in if he remained in India,

He eventually uses Google Earth to find out where his hometown was and returns to find his family. It was a very well made film with excellent acting and a great story.  The scenes where the boy reunites with his Mom (both in the film and the real world shots they show during the credits) are truly moving.

It is truly a story of irony as he would have never used a computer if he didn't get lost and adopted to a better country.  If you put yourself in the true mothers shoes, how would you feel missing your son grow upbut knowing his life would be truly better because he grew up soemwhere else?  A great premise that made you think.  And it was a good film in all areas.

Overall rating 4/5.

AND THE OSCAR GOES TO:  "Arrival" in my opinion.  Although, this year's class was WEAK overall.  Not one film has stunned me as in years past.  I'm a little disappointed to be honest.  that being said, I think Arrival's mental questions were enough to carry it to the top.  Hidden Figures or Lion would be my second choice.  Moonlight (which won the Oscar) was good as well but the ending scene killed it in my opinion.  I hope next year is better....