Last Post About the Oscars: They Suck (This Year)

Oh, Academy. You could provide us with some amazing set pieces but this year, you couldn't give us a great show. Too much nostalgia can't cover a lack of charm. Not to mention, some undeserving winners.

I can't be too angry about some of the winners tonight; I knew already that there was no way that "Black Swan" could trump "The King's Speech." But really, David Fincher still remains Oscarless? Worst of all, was the loss of "Exit Through the Gift Shop." I have a feeling that the Academy was too afraid of the chaos Banksy would've caused if he won. But now, we will never know what could've happened. I bet Banksy wouldn't have revealed his true identity, but whatever he would've planned would have probably made the entire show. And it also would've been much more entertaining than once again, having to hear someone yell about bankers being criminals. Seriously Hollywood, thanks for telling me something I haven't heard a million times in the past three years.

While James Franco and Anne Hathaway are always entertaining and pretty to look at, for some reason, their chemistry just didn't seem to work. I think it was less a reflection on their work and more a reflection on poor writing. Although, Franco didn't seem totally there. Though, I would say they had a few enjoyable planned sketches. However, their onstage chemistry just did not cut it.

The highlights of the show were the small, spontaneous moments. One of them was Melissa Leo dropping the f-bomb, apparently the first time in Oscar history. The other great spontaneous moment was Kirk Douglas's prolonged stay on stage. It might have to do with the fact that the man is almost 100 years old and he suffered a stroke, but there was something ridiculously endearing about it. He seemed more enthusiastic to be there than anyone else. He basically had to be dragged off the stage. Kirk Douglas, please come back to the Oscars anytime you'd like.

Perhaps the funniest planned moment of the night was the auto-tuned music video. It seemed a little more like something that would be on the MTV Movie Awards rather than the Academy Awards, but it was executed in such a way that it came off as actually funny rather than just trying to appeal to a younger audience.

There was truly one thing though that made the Oscars slightly more bearable this year, and it's a little more serious. It was those montages. Now, usually the overlong tributes drive me crazy (and yes, some of them were still very unnecessary this year). This year though, some of them were constructed in a truly amazing way. The final montage of the Best Picture winners is probably the best the Academy has ever done. Setting the final speech of "The King's Speech" to perfectly match up with clips from every Best Picture nominee was truly extraordinary. The montage was a reminder of the magic that forms when a truly great piece of filmmaking is assembled.

Even though I disagreed with the big winner this year, the montage reminded me why these movies were especially selected as Best Picture nominees: they each displayed something unique, uplifting, or maddening that could be found nowhere else in cinema this year. As Spielberg put it, the winner could go along with movies like "On the Waterfront" and the losers will go along with movies like "The Grapes of Wrath." Neither seem like bad places to be.

Find the complete list of winners here.

Note: I just had to make Luke Matheny the main picture for this article. That is probably the best Jewfro in Hollywood.

Also, I unfortunately can't post that great montage. And I also can't find the Kirk Douglas clip. Thanks a lot, US copyright laws...

The Oscars: Who Will Win

Best Picture: The King's Speech

For a good portion of 2010, "The Social Network" seemed like the definite frontrunner. Along with sweeping every early award, it was a critic and audience darling. That's a rare find. Then suddenly, a little indie presented as a classic Best Picture came along and a truly interesting Oscar race was born. While there could be a slim chance of a "Social Network" upset, the royalty-ladden "The King's Speech," which took home the Producers Guild Award, will be this year's Best Picture winner.

Best Director: David Fincher (The Social Network)

Common sense might put Tom Hooper as winner here. He did win the Directors Guild Award, and his debut work on "The King's Speech" was so impressive that it might as well have been the work of an old pro. Yet, this year will be the rare year where the Picture and Director prize go to two separate films. This will be the year that David Fincher finally picks up his Best Director statue for his dark yet incredibly absorbing take on the tale of the creation of Facebook. Maybe now I can finally forgive the Academy for not nominating him for "Se7en" or "Fight Club."

Best Actor: Colin Firth (The King's Speech)

At this point, there's really no room for an upset. Colin Firth's moving and inspiring portrayal of the troubled King of England will finally earn this Brit his long deserved Best Actor Oscar.

Best Actress: Natalie Portman (Black Swan)

There is a small chance that Annette Bening could pull a surprise win here after a series of snubs. Though it looks more likely that once again she'll lose out to a younger actress (Hilary Swank beat her twice). Natalie Portman's devastating performance as a young woman going through a psychological breakdown will earn her her first Oscar.

Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale (The Fighter)

Seriously, does this prediction even need justification? Bale's spot-on method acting as a crack addict and his climb to redemption are the kind of qualities the Academy always loves. Not to mention, he's got quite a few precursor awards. And the man actually deserves this honor. Shockingly, this is Bale's first Oscar nomination ever. It definitely won't be his last nomination, or win, ever though.

Best Supporting Actress: Melissa Leo (The Fighter)

There is a big chance that Hailee Steinfeld's stellar work in "True Grit" could make her one of the youngest Oscar winners ever. Though this year, with SAG on her side, and a snub in the past ("Frozen River"), Leo looks like the likely winner for her unforgettable performance as Mickey Warde's controlling, yet loving, mother. Honestly though, the Academy should've just given her a joint nomination with every single of the crazy sisters.

Best Original Screenplay: David Seidler (The King's Speech)

This is a tough one. "Inception" took the WGA award, though the Academy's lack of love for Christopher Nolan could be an obstacle here. "The Kids Are All Right" could score this for being funny, warm, and socially groundbreaking. Even the smart character work of "The Fighter" has a nice chance here. Though in the end, it looks most likely that the Academy will also crown its Best Picture winner with the best writing. For making the past seem so alive and entertaining, Seidler deserves a little recognition.

Best Adapted Screenplay: Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network)

No contest. Aaron Sorkin took the story of Facebook and made it both accessible and entertaining. It has already produced some of the most memorable movie quotes of the young, new decade ("If you guys were the inventors of Facebook, you would have invented Facebook."). One could argue that the real reason that Sorkin is destined to win is that his screenplay has swept the precursors. That may be true. Though actually, anyone who can make an ending somehow comparable to Rosebud in "Citizen Kane" deserves any Oscar imaginable.

The Other Categories:

Best Documentary: Exit Through the Gift Shop

Best Animated Film: Toy Story 3

Best Foreign Language Film: Biutiful

Editing: The Social Network

Cinematography: Black Swan

Score: The Social Network

Song: "If I Rise"

Art Direction: The King's Speech

Costume Design: The King's Speech

Sound Editing: Inception

Sound Mixing: Inception

Visual Effects: Inception

Score: The Social Network

Makeup: The Wolfman

The Oscars: Who Should Win

In the coming weeks, you'll find out who I think will be taking home the golden statues on February 27. But I would like to do something more important right now. Here now is who would be taking home all the Oscars if I could cast a ballot.

Best Picture: Black Swan

To some, "Black Swan" may seem like the most atypical Best Picture nomination out there. Yet, few other movies could fit the category so perfectly. After all, its story of being obsessed and enveloped into the process of making art mirrors the entire filmmaking process itself. The reason I really want "Black Swan" to win is that even three months after viewing it, I still have no idea what it is. And that makes it all the better. It's exhilarating, weird, and sometimes even hard to watch and despite all that, it will never leave my head. It reminded me of watching something like "A Clockwork Orange" and "The Deer Hunter" for the first time: like those films, certain images from "Black Swan" will forever be engraved into my memory. It might be rare for us to ever see a movie about psychological deterioration this real, and this good, ever again.

Best Director: Darren Aronofsky

Because shouldn't the Best Picture also have the best director? "Black Swan" represents a crossroads in Aronofsky's career. It is a mixture of the distorted reality of "Pi" and "Requiem for a Dream" and the hyper-realism of "The Wrestler." All of this perfectly formed a view of reality through a damaged psychological mind. Aronofsky is truly a genius at using the camera to put the audience into a certain state of mind and never lets them leave it, even after the end credits have rolled. He succeeds not only at creating a new world and a set of emotions, but letting the viewer live in them and be haunted by them. He may not win the Oscar this year, but if he continues to make movies as good as "Black Swan," the trophy will one day soon be his.

Best Actor: James Franco/Colin Firth

This was a difficult one. Firth is the frontrunner here, and he has earned his praise by being able to bring so much compassion, warmth, and humor to what could've been a stale performance. He is also a year overd

e for the award (he should've won for "A Single Man"). Yet Firth's brilliance this year did not stand as strong as James Franco's riveting performance in "127 Hours." Really, what other actor could pull off

a performance that involves them being stuck in a canyon, by themself, for 90 minutes? "127 Hours" was a one man show in the truest sense and if Franco had messed up this performance, this movie would never have worked. He didn't and alas, "127 Hours" was more than just a great movie: it was a transformative, gut-wrenching experience. Mr. Franco, between earning all those PhDs please, don't stop acting.

Best Actress: Natalie Portman

Sometimes, in order for an actor to truly show off their abilities, they must play that role

no one ever thought they could pull off, and then pull it off. That emotional girl from "Garden State" has transformed into a disturbed young woman, trying to break free from the chains holding her down. With this role, Portman proved herself an actress who will do literally anything to achieve perfection. Yes, that even includes brutalizing her own body. In the end, her eventual transformation and descent into madness doesn't feel forced or over-the-top; it just feels so sad and real. Aronofsky made "Black Swan" a visual marvel, and Portman became the big, twisted heart in its center.

Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale

Because who the hell else would I choose? Bale didn't just steal every scene he was in in "The Fighter," he makes every other character in the movie totally insignificant. Bale's method acting is comparable to De Niro in his prime. Bale is so good that he is constantly trying to find new ways to act; as he acts with every inch of his body. Even when he isn't front and center of ac certain scene, he still manages to steal it. For a character who suffers from a serious crack addiction, Bale brings an unexpected quality to the film, something missing from most films of this subject matter: joy. I could probably use this entire blog space to talk about Bale's performance, but some things are better off left unsaid.

Best Supporting Actress: Hailee Steinfeld

You'd have to be a pretty talented fourteen-year-old to hold your own against the likes of Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon, but Hailee Steinfeld managed to do it. Rather than being some annoying teenage girl, she was instead poised and wise, outshining all of her superiors. In just one role, she has proved herself mature enough to do anything, even firing a rifle. In a world where teen idols include Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus, Steinfeld is a nice breath of fresh air.

Best Original Screenplay: The Kids Are All Right

I desperately want to say that my choice is "Inception." However, that would likely be just because I wish Christopher Nolan was nominated for Best Director. Also, "Black Swan" was criminally snubbed in this category. So instead, I'm going with that comedy I can't get enough of: "The Kids Are All Right." Lisa Cholodenko and Stuart Blumberg's screenplay found a sense of humor deriving from character, rather than gags and forgettable one-liners. The whole thing has a quality of honesty that is missing from most movies made nowadays. Most importantly, it handled its subject matter with such truth and delicacy. No message was being shoved down our throats, this was simply a movie about a lesbian couple, and a dysfunctional family. In order to make something acceptable, it is best to show how similar, rather than how different, it is from our regular lives.

Best Adapted Screenplay: The Social Network

It takes a lot to be compared to "Citizen Kane" without sounding hyperbolic.

Of course, Aaron Sorkin was able to somehow make this a reality. For

a film about a bunch of court cases, it has a quality of fast-paced humor and entertainment missing from most films based on true stories nowadays. Despite the fact that a lot of this story may be fictionalized, it still managed to capture a moment. That moment is the moment when the internet suddenly became the new driving force of our lives. And then in the end, it made Mark Zuckerberg both a raging anti-hero and a tragic figure, someone to admire and even pity at the same time. Aaron Sorkin, you are the glue that held this fine piece of filmmaking together.

Why The King's Speech Could Win Best Picture (and Why it Shouldn't)

Just when we thought we had a definite frontrunner, everything suddenly turned around. "The Social Network," likely suffering from a case of peaking too early, has been dethroned by "The King's Speech."

Last night, director of "The King's Speech" Tom Hooper took home the Directors Guild Award to add to the film's Producer's Guild Award. It is rare for a film to win those two awards and then not win big at the Oscars. Nothing is definite just yet, but "The King's Speech" has certainly become a new force to be reckoned with.

Now, this might mean nothing. "Brokeback Mountain" took both the Director and Producer awards and famously lost to "Crash." Usually though, this is a sign that "The King's Speech" is a frontrunner.

Before I begin ranting and raving, I would like to clarify something. I in absolutely no way hated "The King's Speech." I thought it was a fantastic film. The directing and acting are phenomenal, the story is inspirational, and most importantly, boring subject matter (English aristocracy) was made timely and interesting. These are all factors that make "The King's Speech" worthy of Oscar nominations. However, it doesn't necessarily make it a winner.

The media likes to manufacture Oscar races, and this year it has become "The Social Network" vs. "The King's Speech." I'm going to throw "Black Swan" into this because it was my favorite movie of the year and this is my blog so I can do whatever I want.

Anyway, the main race between "The Social Network" and "The King's Speech" represents a race that seems to happen every year: the hip, young film that represents something new and filmmaking, and the safe movie with a classic Hollywood story anyone can fall in love with. "The Social Network" is the story of young nerds turning the internet into what it is today. Meanwhile, "The King's Speech" has everything most people associate with Oscar movies nowadays: Nazis, war, and overcoming disabilities.

I admired the ability of "The King's Speech" to have all these elements yet not seem to be begging for awards. Yet, it still feels slightly like the Oscar movie we see every year. It has that uplifting ending about overcoming adversity. Compare that to "The Social Network," which ended more on a loose thread than a moment of absolute clarity.

And that could be the reason it has begun to lead the pack. Not because it is simply a good choice, but a safe choice. Nobody truly hated "The King's Speech" so who would throw a giant fit if it won? "The Social Network" was also universally loved, yet it contains some things that would probably drive an older voter crazy. The central conflict in the film is the battle of new money vs. old money; the young and ambitious vs. the old and privileged. Quite ironic, for the fact that "The King's Speech" has much less Hollywood royalty behind it than "The Social Network" does.

When will the day come when voters get some chutzpah and vote for something they wouldn't normally vote for? They have a few times in recent years. The best example I could think of is when "No Country for Old Men" beat "Atonement." Even the recent "Slumdog Millionaire" which seemed like an atypical choice, ends with a poor boy overcoming poverty and finding the love of his life. Maybe the whole reason is that the typical human reaction of being afraid of what is new. Even "Citizen Kane" didn't win Best Picture.

Or, if they want to, the Academy could be even more daring and pick "Black Swan" as Best Picture. If there's any movie more ambiguous than "The Social Network," it's "Black Swan." Who doesn't love a good movie about a character changing? Even if it is for the worse. Maybe they could come even more out of left field and give "Toy Story 3" the prize. Or how about "127 Hours?" When is the next time we will ever see a film about a guy trying to cut off his arm for 90 minutes?

"The King's Speech" is a great movie that has resonated with audiences and critics alike, a rare feat these days. If it takes home the Best Picture prize, it would not be a crime against humanity (like many other past winners have been), but it just wouldn't be very exciting. I'm sure that picking a Best Picture winner is a challenging and even painful process. One must pick a film that is representative of that year, one that is relevant today and will be relevant 20 years down the road as well. Who knows what will happen to "The King's Speech" by then. All I know is that the movies that challenge us the most, the ones that make us ask questions, the ones that dare to try something new, are the ones that are never forgotten.

The Great Mistakes

Here are some of the worst decisions the Academy has made:

1941: How Green was My Valley (over Citizen Kane)

1964: My Fair Lady (over Dr. Strangelove)

1968: Oliver! (over un-nominated Once Upon a Time in the West, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and Rosemary's Baby)

1976: Rocky (over Taxi Driver and Network)

1979: Kramer vs. Kramer (over Apocalypse Now)

1980: Ordinary People (over Raging Bull)

1990: Dances with Wolves (over Goodfellas)

1994: Forrest Gump (over Pulp Fiction)

1996: The English Patient (over Fargo)

1998: Shakespeare in Love (over Saving Private Ryan)

2009: The Hurt Locker (over Inglourious Basterds)

Oscars '10: The Snubs

With every set of Oscar nominations comes a set of even more ridiculous snubs. Even with another year of ten best picture nominations, there were still plenty of egregious snubs to go around.

On this day, the day the Oscar nominations are announced, I would like to recognize not those were selected, but those who strangely missed the mark. Not everyone can make the cut, but these people and films certainly deserved to:

Andrew Garfield (The Social Network)

This one seemed like a sure thing. The man who is destined to be Spider-Man broke out this year and brought the pathos to "The Social Network." With Zuckerberg being mainly emotionally cold, Garfield made Eduardo a character impossible not to connect with. Every emotion he injects into the film, he also injects into the audience. Then when his character turns from nice to angry in the film's dramatic climax, the transformation is so believable that it makes the already devastating conclusion even worse. "The Social Network" might've been about Mark Zuckerberg, but it's hard to believe there ever would've been a great story without Eduardo Saverin and Garfield's performance.

Chloe Moretz (Kick-Ass)

There should have been room for two teenage actresses who could use a weapon in this year's Oscars. So many have praised Hailee Steinfeld, but forget the almost similar performance given by Chloe Moretz as Hit-Girl in "Kick-Ass." She managed to act lightyears more mature than her superiors while always maintaing child-like innocence. She showed off the kind of creepy excitement a typical tween might have over Robert Pattinson while slicing off limbs and dropping the c-bomb. Fourteen-year-olds don't typically steal the show in a film, but Moretz did enough so that it was at times hard to remember that the movie is called "Kick-Ass" and not "Hit-Girl."

Christopher Nolan (Inception)

Seriously, what does Christopher Nolan have to do to get a Best Director nomination? Is turning a confusing, mind-f***ing idea into both a work of art and a $300 million grossing summer blockbuster not enough? How about changing the rules of physics? Or how about returning blockbusters to their original state in which they began in the 1970s? The Best Screenplay nomination for "Inception" can be disputed, but few would argue if Nolan finally got his long deserved Best Director nod.

Leonardo DiCaprio (Shutter Island)

To this day, people have trouble taking DiCaprio's performances seriously. The common excuse is his youthful looks make it hard for him to seem mature. If anyone still argues this, they obviously haven't watched "Shutter Island" yet. DiCaprio went from good actor with some talent to great actor with soul. He was so smoothly able to handle the massive transformation of his character without loosing the ambiguity. Then there is the way he delivers that final line, "which would be worse, to live as a monster or to die as a good man" which is delivered in a way that is so heartbreaking that it could almost produce tears. With maybe a few more films, DiCaprio can truly become Scorsese's new De Niro.

Danny Boyle (127 Hours)

Over directing usually isn't an admiral trait in a director. Unless of course your name is Danny Boyle. Boyle made a story about one man in one location epic enough to be engaging for its entire running time. He injects every frame of this film with so much life. Everything from a drop of water to the desert sand seem to be living, breathing, interacting characters. That's how you make a movie about a man stuck in a hole. Boyle, like a great director, realizes this essential fact: a good film is about what it's about; a great film is about how it's about.

Golden Globes '11: Predictions

Over the past year, my thinking on the Golden Globes has drastically changed. Mainly, it's come to my attention that they really don't matter. The HFPA (Hollywood Foreign Press Association) doesn't vote for the Oscars. Mainly though, it's impossible to find relevance in some of these nominations. Really, how can someone be respected who nominates "Alice in Wonderland," "Red," and "The Tourist" for Best Comedy/Musical? There is so much wrong with this that I don't even want to get into it right now.

Beyond that, the Golden Globes hold an inexplicable amount of importance in society. Because of that (and for Ricky Gervais), I will give you my predictions for the Golden Globes.

Now, predicting the Globes are slightly different from most other awards. Mainly, predicting the Globes involves examining a few strange possibilities (which actor is more foreign, which actor is named Johnny Depp).

Based on this tiresome and infuriating process, these are the winners you should bank on (movie categories only):

Best Drama: The Social Network

Best Comedy/Musical: The Kids Are All Right

Best Director: David Fincher (The Social Network)

Best Actor (Drama): Colin Firth (The King's Speech)

Best Actress (Drama): Natalie Portman (Black Swan)

Best Actor (Comedy): Johnny Depp (Alice in Wonderland)

Best Actress (Comedy): Annette Benning (The Kids Are All Right)

Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale (The Fighter)

Best Supporting Actress: Amy Adams (The Fighter)

Best Screenplay: Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network)

Best Animated Film: Toy Story 3

Best Foreign Film: Biutiful

Movie Review: Blue Valentine

If there ever was such an honor, "Blue Valentine" would win the award for most depressing film of 2010. This honor is not meant to put down any of the achievements of the film, but rather a heads up that this is not a film about the world's happiest marriage.

"Blue Valentine" has two settings and two time periods: rural Pennsylvania and New York City, past and present. In present day, married couple Dean (Ryan Gosling) and Cindy (Michelle Williams) are on the verge of a breakdown. Cindy no longer feels any affection for her husband, and Dean remains in an aloof, child-like state. The marriage between Dean and Cindy is the ultimate portrait of disappointment.

In flashbacks, the story behind Cindy and Dean's love is revealed, as the audience slowly finds out that at one point, there really was love to be had in this marriage.

The story of a couple falling in love and becoming bored and suppressed with age is a story that has been portrayed on the silver screen over and over again. "Blue Valentine" does manage to be saved from being one big cliche. Unlike other films about broken marriages like "American Beauty," "Blue Valentine" is as much about the joy of love as it is about the pain. Most films about marriage portray how a marriage can fall apart. Few also show how they are built.

The flashbacks in "Blue Valentine" are certainly the most effective part of the film. Not only do they build backstory, they also build emotion. The contrast between the clear, digitally shot present day and the shaky hand-held filming of the flashbacks show misery becoming clearer and clearer. The flashbacks are marked by youthful innocence, and the present day is marked by sad awareness in older age.

"Blue Valentine" would not be the same without its two outstanding lead performances. The two actors play the parts perfectly in both old age and youth. Despite his image, Gosling is not afraid to get dirty in order to play his role perfectly. Throughout the film, he looks less like Ryan Gosling and more like Nicolas Cage in "Raising Arizona." With his scruffy looked and muffled voice, he is almost unrecognizable.

His female counterpart, Michelle Williams, gives one of the best female performances of the year. She seems to have a thing for playing alienated wives (see: "Brokeback Mountain"), yet here she does it better than she ever has. There is one scene where she pulls off a rare feat and manages to act with her eyes when the rest of her body isn't shown. In those eyes we see so much sheltered pain getting ready to come out. In those eyes we see, there is no love for her husband to be found.

"Blue Valentine" can loosely be described as a he said-she said type of story. Here is where the film's major problem lies: it tries to make us choose who to be sympathetic for. At first, it all seems to be the wife's fault. Then, it suddenly all becomes the husband's fault. In the end, it strangely doesn't acknowledge the problems on both sides and it makes us feel inclined toward only one character. The film could have used a smoother transition, or maybe more of a reconciling.

What drove me to this film, and what might drive many more of you, is the controversy surrounding the film. "Blue Valentine" originally carried a deadly NC-17 rating. After protest, that rating was brought down to an R. The NC-17 came mainly from the sex scenes which are graphic, but not pornographic. They are used not to give the audience some unholy pleasure but rather to show the different stages and feelings of the marriage.

Perhaps its rating was also raised because the MPAA felt that younger viewers would be too disturbed by this film to want to see it anyway. What is to be afraid of? Reality? Anyone who is mature enough to want to buy a ticket for "Blue Valentine" is mature enough to view it.