Back in 2003, when I wanted to be a filmmaker more than anything else (well... other than a writer of fiction, a pianist and a poet), I sent in an application to the premier filmmaking school in India. I breezed through the entrance exam, mainly because it didn't take any preparation. It was a series of creatively challenging questions, exercises of the imagination, and I had a great time doing it. The interview, however, was another story. The panel of faculty sitting across the table from me - the women with their kohl-lined eyes and chunky silver/stone/glass jewellery, and the men in their cotton kurtas, smoking their cigarettes - only had one question for me: how many films have you made so far? I, with my eager portfolio of scripts and stories, wanted to explain to them that even if I seemed like I was green behind the ears, I was confident that I would make a good enough filmmaker. But I saw that it wouldn't matter - over the one week that I had spent at the institute prior to the interview, I had taken a good look at the facilities and realised how inexperienced I was, and how lost I would be if I was, say, thrown into an editing suite and asked to edit a strip of film. So I quietly replied, none. They hardly had any questions for me after that, and as a confident twenty-year-old who believed she could conquer the world, I felt more than a little cheated. Six years down, after having acquired some of the skills it takes to create film or video, and having worked in production intermittently, I see the fairness of the interview. I would have been completely and utterly lost if I'd gone there without any experience at all.
Last week, however, I attended a showcase of short films by young filmmakers, an experience very heartening in its demonstration of how things are different. I am wary of sounding like a finger-wagging old woman with folds in her skin by saying that things have changed since the time I was a young punk with zero skills or experience; just the passion for making films bursting through the veins under my skin. It could be that, of course, or perhaps it's just that it works differently in the USA, and has worked like this for a while here. Maybe it's a combination of both, I don't quite know for sure. What I do know is that all these young filmmakers (between 15 and 21 years) brimmed with the sort of confidence that comes not just from blind faith in one's own ability, but from the experience of having seen it in practice.
The young filmmakers' showcase was a part of the Talking Pictures Festival, organised by Percolator Films, from May 1-3. Percolator Films is behind the decade old Reeltime cinema and discussion series, and brought to Evanston (IL) its first ever film festival this year. The young filmmakers shorts (hosted by Boocoo Cafe) featured a number of local filmmakers, so there was the opportunity to interact with them after the screening.
My first observation on the shorts I saw was that there was a significant difference between narrative and technical quality. If I was really an unbiased judge here, I would use the word 'sophomoric' to describe most of the narratives, but having been there myself, I am wont to be more generous in my criticism. Not only were most of the plots and narratives based on subjects that you tend to lose interest in as you get older, but what struck me was that they were typically the sort of things that most people make their first few films on, simply because they're still overwhelmed and blown away by the possibilities of the medium. So ghosts, or possible ghosts, dominated the array of plots. Also featured was death, and of course, the ubiquitous, ever-predictable 'twist-ending'. (It took me back to one of my first video exercises, a three-minute conversation piece revolving around a political assassination, at the end of which was what I then believed to be a stunningly shocking revelation!) The technical quality, on the other hand, was quite outstanding. Take, for instance, The Intruder, by Mikael Kreuzriegler. It's set around the persistent denial of sudden and unexpected death, a plot that's been done to - well - death, in the creepiest, scariest, cheesiest ways possible. The quality of this film, however, was stunning. Mis-en-scene and sound were spot on, but these are among the first things you master as a young filmmaker. What surprised me was the camerawork, and specifically, camera movement that had clearly been scripted for editing. In terms of visual and aural quality, The Intruder was no less than a regular budget Hollywood film.
Then there was the animated short Marshy by Joe Felix, an interesting 'tragedy' of a marshmallow. As for the narrative of Marshy, it almost ended before it really began, but again, the quality of animation was very high. My favourite short of the evening, though, was Token Hunchback by Tim Reckart. This is an animated short, on the life of a hunchback who works as an extra in films. For me, this was the one film that scored highly on all criteria: the animation was very well done, and the narration was funny, quirky, poignant and insightful. Unfortunately, Tim Reckart wasn't present for the post screening discussion.
What actually got me thinking about the exposure and access that young people have to the media and media equipment was The Corner, by Maya-Rose Dinerstein. The Corner is a simple film in both plot and execution. It isn't a great film by any definition, just a really neat video exercise. What is noteworthy is that Dinerstein is 15 years old, and claims to have had no training in film, video or photography, other than being guided by her father (who is a professional photographer or cinematographer, if I'm not mistaken). This information, put together with the fact that Dinerstein's film, though unremarkable in every other respect, was technically sound, held me in thrall. At the post-screening discussion, when she spoke about the 180-degree rule, it was music to my ears. When I first started working with video, this was the toughest thing to master for most of my cohort. Even when I teach, I find that explaining this rule to students is the toughest part. I think, however, that it has less to do with instruction and more with having free access to equipment, to be able to spend hours with it, experimenting and learning by trial and error. (Incidentally, what follows from this is my reason for believing that to be a good film/media theorist, you've got to have worked with the medium at some point. But I won't go into that now. That's a discussion for another time.) Watching these young filmmakers talk about their craft with confidence made the event really heartening.
My first video camera was given to me as a gift when I was 17 or 18, and I promptly used it to shoot about 90 minutes of footage around a 16th century fort in Hyderabad, India. I was keen on having that edited, and took it to a commercial editor in one of the cheaper studios in the city. As he sat there in the cold, white studio, looking at the rushes, and I sat next to him, completely overwhelmed by the the interface of AVID, he started making conversation.
"Who shot this video?"
"I did."
"Hmm. Is it for a school project of some kind?"
"No, I'm doing it because I'm interested, that's all. And I'm in college."
"Hmm... what exactly are you interested in?"
"Filmmaking. Well, I haven't really decided what aspect I want to take up, but yeah, I'm interested in production."
"Well, it's probably a passing fancy. In any case, you'd be better off thinking about more practical career options."
At the time, I was able to brush this off because of the brazen lack of self-doubt that goes with being young. But it helped that I had plenty of encouragement from everywhere else. As for now, I can tell you that there are few things that give me as much pleasure and satisfaction as going through the entire process of production. An all-nighter at an editing suite, for instance, jogging back and forth through hours of footage, splicing and arranging and rearranging and placing things together in a coherent AV segment.
I wish I had started when I was 15.
---
P.S.: For anyone interested, this is a good, short instructional video on the 180-degree rule:
Friday, February 20, 2009
Monday, February 2, 2009
The winners
Of course the Oscar-hype got to me. I'm always a keen follower of the whole Academy Award ritual (even if I always maintain that the Academy Awards aren't really proof of merit), and this year, I'm keener still, mainly because of the run up to the Oscars and the attitudes towards certain films. The Golden Globes, for instance, was full of surprises for me. Kate Winslet won Best Actress as well as Best Actress in a Supporting Role for Revolutionary Road and The Reader, respectively. Neither film has been reviewed favourably, but Winslet has been screaming for an award for a long time now. As Rose DeWitt Bukater in Titanic (1997), the young Iris Murdoch in Iris (2001), the colourful-haired Clementine Kruczynski in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) and Sarah Pierce (on of her best portrayals, in my opinion) in Little Children (2006), Winslet has persistently put in performances ranging from very good to almost brilliant. This year, she's got two films on her side, and performances that are being spoken of as her best ever. The question is, will they be judged as superior to Meryl Streep's Sister Aloysius Beauvier in Doubt?
The other thing that's possesed me is the manic excitement over Slumdog Millionaire. A nomination at the Golden Globes was expected, but as it won award after award after award, it just annoyed me. It annoyed me because everyone seems to buying its telescopic look at the Third World, it annoys me because no one seems to notice how badly written it is, and it annoys me because now I think it's actually going to go ahead and win everything this year.
And then the fact that Doubt, in my opinion one of the best films this year, hasn't even been nominated in the category of Best Film. So I thought, what the hell, let's take a closer look at all the contenders and make some predictions.
Actor, Leading Role:
Richard Jenkins (The Visitor)
Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon)
Sean Penn (Milk)
Brad Pitt (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button)
Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler)
Who is likely to win: Frank Langella
Who should win: Frank Langella
Mickey Rourke was stunning in The Wrestler. Having seen him in the kind of borderline B-Grade tripe he used to do back in the day when he had perfect hair and pretty lips, it shocked me to even just look at him in The Wrestler. His aging, lonely wrestler was perfectly played. I don't think he'd win for two reasons, though. Firstly, he's not the kind of actor the Academy favours. This is not the Golden Globes (which are often like consolation prizes for those who are likely to miss out at the Oscars). Secondly, unlike The Wrestler, Frost/Nixon was not a film made tailored entirely to showcase the strengths of its actor. And yet, Frank Langella carried the film. His Richard Nixon was much more than just good make up and voice training, and that tips the balance in his favour.
Sean Penn, of course, is another very, very close contender. His Harvey Milk was brilliant, but it was tailored for him. And he's won before.
Actor, Supporting Role:
Josh Brolin (Milk)
Robert Downey, Jr. (Tropic Thunder)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Doubt)
Heath Ledger (The Dark Knight)
Michael Shannon (Revolutionary Road)
Who is likely to win: Heath Ledger
Who should win: Heath Ledger
First of all, the guys at Tropic Thunder should be celebrating. An Oscar nomination? Who would have thought? Yes, I did think Robert Downey, Jr. was great, but the film was most ridiculous (I admit I enjoyed it). More importantly, it is not a film stained with tears, or frayed at the edges from age and pain and hardship. It's a wonder the Oscars even noticed it.
As for Heath Ledger: no, he isn't going to win it because he's dead. He's going to win it because each time he appeared on screen, he chewed it all up and swallowed it in one, tiny gulp. Because when he holds up a potato peeler and asks Rachel if she'd like to know how he got the scars on his face, it makes you feel mortally afraid. Because when he pulls his mouth back and raises his eyes to look at the people around him, you can't help a very, very nervous giggle. Because when he flicks his tongue in and out of his mouth like a salamander, he's actually going into the head of this very disturbed comic-book character, not making a caricature of it. And because very respectfully but surely, he pulled the rug from under the feet of Gods like Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman.
Actress, Leading Role:
Anne Hathaway (Rachel Getting Married)
Angelina Jolie (Changeling)
Melissa Leo (Frozen River)
Meryl Streep (Doubt)
Kate Winslet (The Reader)
Who is likely to win: Kate Winslet
Who should win: Meryl Streep
Like Ricky Gervais announced at the Golden Globes, "Do a holocaust film, you'll get the awards!" Let me not be unfair: I haven't watched The Reader. I think Winslet will get it, though, because a: it's a holocaust movie, b: somebody give it to her already!
Now I did watch Doubt, and even as I admit I'm a sucker for good performances, I was held in trance by Streep's Sister Aloysius, who snarls ans spits and roars and cowers, standing as fierce as a pitt-bull guarding its master's home, while betraying, every now and then, a fleeting glimpse of vulnerability.
Then again, she's the highest nominated actor in history, she's won plenty, and she's nowhere near bein done with acting. So Winslet can have it this year.
Actress, Supporting Role:
Amy Adams (Doubt)
Penelope Cruz (Vicky Cristina Barcelona)
Viola Davis (Doubt)
Taraji P. Henson (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button)
Marisa Tomei (The Wrestler)
Who is likely to win: Taraji P. Henson
Who should win: Amy Adams
This is possibly the toughest category for me, because everyone was spectacular. Marisa Tomei was perfectly cast as the aging stripper. Penelope Cruz doesn't cease to amaze me these days; I don't know if it's the Spanish in her, but there is an animation to her performances that is unmatched. As the mentally disturbed but ravishing Maria-Elena, she was brilliant. Let's be honest, though, these are not the kind of roles the Academy honours.
Viola Davis was stunning, the only concern is that her role was way to short. The pity is, with everyone's excitement over Davis' work, Amy Adams seems to have been sidelined a bit. Personally, I think she matched Philip Seymour Hoffman and Meryl Streep in acting. Her naive, quivering Sister James was beautifully subdued, and I think that is a part of the reason why no one seems to have taken much notice of her work.
Which leaves Taraji P. Henson, who did very well too, and had a full length role to compliment her talent.
Animated Feature Film:
Bolt
Kung Fu Panda
Wall-E
Who is likely to win: Wall-E
Who should win: Wall-E
I loved Kung Fu Panda. It was awesome. And then there's the philosophical, post-apocalyptic story of love which lends itself to a postmodern reading as an allegory of the degeneration of the human psyche, and the disintegration of the human race into nothing more than a group of identical, assembly-line, mechanical beings that leaves the cleaning up of its destruction of the Earth to a creature way ahead of its time, a machine who, ironically, is emotional, sensitive and intelligent: Wall-E.
Eat that, Kung Fu Panda!
Art Direction:
Changeling
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Duchess
The Dark Knight
Revolutionary Road
Who is likely to win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who should win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
In the case of the other four, while the art direction was great, it wasn't extraordinary. It wasn't anything beyond what one has come to expect of a big budget film of each of those particular genres. Benjamin Button, on the other hand, was interesting. It was challenging, it crept across decades, across places, and it kept the visual interest high with every scene (and change of scene).
Cinematography:
Changeling
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Slumdog Millionaire
I'll give it to Slumdog Millionaire where it deserves it: the cinematography was breathtaking.
Costumes:
Australia
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Duchess
Milk
Revolutionary Road
Who is likely to win: The Duchess/Australia
Who should win: Milk/The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Traditionally the Oscar in this category always goes to a period film. As if somehow it's terribly unchallenging or easy to design costumes for a group of men living in San Francisco in the 1970s, or for a subarban housewife of the 1950s, or a New Orleans couple whose journey spans decades, coming up to the present. So while I'd really like to see one of the others win, I'd put my money on The Duchess or Australia.
Directing:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Milk was a personality film, while Frost/Nixon belonged to the editor and writer (even though directors always tend to interfere in those specializations!). While I don't think Benjamin Button was the best film of the year, even a great film by itself, I do believe it was beautifully, and sensitively directed. Slumdog Millionaire was problematic in ways that it does not seem to realise. Is this the responsibility of the director? Of course it is. But we all know it's going to win, and by now, we all know why.
Film Editing:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Frost/Nixon
Milk
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Frost/Nixon
Again, kudos to Danny Boyle and his crew for being spot-on in all the technical categories. The editing of Slumdog was good, and it won't be altogether undeserved if it wins the award. Frost/Nixon, however, was possible only because of the editing. It was a film crafted out of one, long interview session, and to make that interesting was entirely the responsibility of the editor, who did a brilliant job of it.
Make Up:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Hellboy II: The Golden Army
Who is likely to win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who should win: The Dark Knight
If one of the contenders in this category involves taking Brad Pitt's face, making it look like it is seventy years old, and then putting it on the body of a five-year-old, the others can mostly forget about winning.
Really, though, no one ever conceptualised The Joker like this before. Jack Nicholson's Joker played up the legend of the horror behind the impenetrable, smiling face. The Dark Knight gave The Joker his own face. It was a face you could see, and yet a face that was horrifically painted. The red smudged across his mouth, the creases in the white paint where there were creases in his skin, all made The Joker so much more creepy. And, I think for the first time, it was the look that defined his character just as much as the plot and story did.
Music (Score):
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Defiance
Milk
Slumdog Millionaire
Wall-E
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Slumdog Millionaire
The music of Slumdog Millionaire is like the taste of mango chutney on the tongue of a white man. It tastes like nothing he's ever had before, he can't make head or tail of it, sometimes the flavours (oh, SO many flavours in that little drop of chutney!) get too much for him to bear, but he's hooked. He's hooked to the newness of it, the tantalising, heady feeling it gives him when he swallows it, the crispness of the little pieces of poppadums he dips in it, wondering what else he could eat it with...
Music (Song):
"Down to Earth" (Wall-E)
"Jai Ho" (Slumdog Millionaire)
"O Saya" (Slumdog Millionaire)
Who is likely to win: "Jai Ho"
Who should win: "Jai Ho"
To add to what I said above, of course, I do think AR Rahman is a genius. And it's nice that his genius is being recognised, even if just for a fleeting moment, on the international stage. Plus, "Down to Earth," While being a nice song, isn't much different from the inspiring, soaring, touching and truthful songs one gets so often in animated features.
Best Picture:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Milk/The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Grumble, grumble, grumble...
I mentioned, Benjamin Button isn't one of my favourite films, but one of my favourite films from this year, Doubt, never made it to the list (for which I'm still awaiting an explanation). Milk is a great film, no doubt, but I think a large part of its greatness stems from how inspiring the character and life of Harvey Milk are.
And let's be honest, it seems like this year, nothing's going to match up to the glorious tale of destitution that we've all had to take notice of.
Sound Editing:
The Dark Knight
Iron Man
Slumdog Millionaire
Wall-E
Wanted
Who is likely to win: The Dark Knight
Who should win: The Dark Knight
Personally, I don't think any of the films in this category did anything exceptional, but it is an award that needs to be given, nonetheless.
Sound Mixing:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Slumdog Millionaire
Wall-E
Wanted
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Slumdog Millionaire
Now this is something slightly more interesting. The other very close contender, I would think, is Wall-E, simply because as a film it depends to a very great extent on the maintenance of interest in its sound. Don't let the simplicity of the sound fool you. Every aspect of the sound in Wall-E, right from the scramble of the cockroach's feet to the soft, quiet and very expresseive sounds made by Wall-E and Eve, were dead right. Slumdog, however, had a lot more going for it (I guess there's just a lot more mixing to contend with when you're shooting on the streets of India, isn't there?). The multiplicity of layers in its sound mixing tips the balance in its favour.
Visual Effects:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Iron Man
Who is likely to win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who should win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Gotham was very well done, but very clearly Chicago in the end. And Batman isn't really a superhero, so there isn't the kind of potential one sees in Iron Man. That, in its turn, was very well done indeed, but remember, it's contending with a film about a boy who grows from old to young, and does so stunningly.
Writing (Adapted Screenplay):
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Doubt
Frost/Nixon
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: The Reader
Who should win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Doubt and Frost/Nixon lose out as far as I'm concerned, simply because of their unflinching loyalty to the plays they are adapted from. There really wasn't much 'adaptation' to do, frankly. Slumdog was just awfully written, frankly. The guys in the film, we're given to believe, speak English as their first language. Anyone who knows an Indian who speaks English as his/her first language, knows that he/she would cringe at somethig like "Mumbai is the centre of the world, and I am at the centre of the centre." It was a problem of translation, to a large extent: Jamal's brother murmuring "God is great" just as he dies, wouldn't have been half as ridiculous if it was said in Urdu.
The Reader will win, I think, firstly because it isn't going to win much else, secondly because I think it's the kind of heavy, bloodstained screenplay that grabs the fancy of the Academy.
Writing (Original Screenplay):
Frozen River
Happy-Go-Lucky
In Bruges
Milk
Wall-E
Who is likely to win: Frozen River
Who should win: Wall-E
Wall-E would have had to have a brilliant screenplay because it is a film that depends entirely on action, movement and mise-en-scene. Writing a screenplay for dialogue-heavy scripts is that much easier. However, Frozen River, again, is unlikely to win anything else, and going by precedent, the Academy likes honouring obscurity (albeit smart/interesting/brilliant obscurity) in this category.
I can't possibly comment on the live action and animated shorts, as I haven't watched any of them. Of the documentaries, I have only watched Man on Wire, which is gripping. A piece on that is forthcoming...
The other thing that's possesed me is the manic excitement over Slumdog Millionaire. A nomination at the Golden Globes was expected, but as it won award after award after award, it just annoyed me. It annoyed me because everyone seems to buying its telescopic look at the Third World, it annoys me because no one seems to notice how badly written it is, and it annoys me because now I think it's actually going to go ahead and win everything this year.
And then the fact that Doubt, in my opinion one of the best films this year, hasn't even been nominated in the category of Best Film. So I thought, what the hell, let's take a closer look at all the contenders and make some predictions.
Actor, Leading Role:
Richard Jenkins (The Visitor)
Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon)
Sean Penn (Milk)
Brad Pitt (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button)
Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler)
Who is likely to win: Frank Langella
Who should win: Frank Langella
Mickey Rourke was stunning in The Wrestler. Having seen him in the kind of borderline B-Grade tripe he used to do back in the day when he had perfect hair and pretty lips, it shocked me to even just look at him in The Wrestler. His aging, lonely wrestler was perfectly played. I don't think he'd win for two reasons, though. Firstly, he's not the kind of actor the Academy favours. This is not the Golden Globes (which are often like consolation prizes for those who are likely to miss out at the Oscars). Secondly, unlike The Wrestler, Frost/Nixon was not a film made tailored entirely to showcase the strengths of its actor. And yet, Frank Langella carried the film. His Richard Nixon was much more than just good make up and voice training, and that tips the balance in his favour.
Sean Penn, of course, is another very, very close contender. His Harvey Milk was brilliant, but it was tailored for him. And he's won before.
Actor, Supporting Role:
Josh Brolin (Milk)
Robert Downey, Jr. (Tropic Thunder)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Doubt)
Heath Ledger (The Dark Knight)
Michael Shannon (Revolutionary Road)
Who is likely to win: Heath Ledger
Who should win: Heath Ledger
First of all, the guys at Tropic Thunder should be celebrating. An Oscar nomination? Who would have thought? Yes, I did think Robert Downey, Jr. was great, but the film was most ridiculous (I admit I enjoyed it). More importantly, it is not a film stained with tears, or frayed at the edges from age and pain and hardship. It's a wonder the Oscars even noticed it.
As for Heath Ledger: no, he isn't going to win it because he's dead. He's going to win it because each time he appeared on screen, he chewed it all up and swallowed it in one, tiny gulp. Because when he holds up a potato peeler and asks Rachel if she'd like to know how he got the scars on his face, it makes you feel mortally afraid. Because when he pulls his mouth back and raises his eyes to look at the people around him, you can't help a very, very nervous giggle. Because when he flicks his tongue in and out of his mouth like a salamander, he's actually going into the head of this very disturbed comic-book character, not making a caricature of it. And because very respectfully but surely, he pulled the rug from under the feet of Gods like Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman.
Actress, Leading Role:
Anne Hathaway (Rachel Getting Married)
Angelina Jolie (Changeling)
Melissa Leo (Frozen River)
Meryl Streep (Doubt)
Kate Winslet (The Reader)
Who is likely to win: Kate Winslet
Who should win: Meryl Streep
Like Ricky Gervais announced at the Golden Globes, "Do a holocaust film, you'll get the awards!" Let me not be unfair: I haven't watched The Reader. I think Winslet will get it, though, because a: it's a holocaust movie, b: somebody give it to her already!
Now I did watch Doubt, and even as I admit I'm a sucker for good performances, I was held in trance by Streep's Sister Aloysius, who snarls ans spits and roars and cowers, standing as fierce as a pitt-bull guarding its master's home, while betraying, every now and then, a fleeting glimpse of vulnerability.
Then again, she's the highest nominated actor in history, she's won plenty, and she's nowhere near bein done with acting. So Winslet can have it this year.
Actress, Supporting Role:
Amy Adams (Doubt)
Penelope Cruz (Vicky Cristina Barcelona)
Viola Davis (Doubt)
Taraji P. Henson (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button)
Marisa Tomei (The Wrestler)
Who is likely to win: Taraji P. Henson
Who should win: Amy Adams
This is possibly the toughest category for me, because everyone was spectacular. Marisa Tomei was perfectly cast as the aging stripper. Penelope Cruz doesn't cease to amaze me these days; I don't know if it's the Spanish in her, but there is an animation to her performances that is unmatched. As the mentally disturbed but ravishing Maria-Elena, she was brilliant. Let's be honest, though, these are not the kind of roles the Academy honours.
Viola Davis was stunning, the only concern is that her role was way to short. The pity is, with everyone's excitement over Davis' work, Amy Adams seems to have been sidelined a bit. Personally, I think she matched Philip Seymour Hoffman and Meryl Streep in acting. Her naive, quivering Sister James was beautifully subdued, and I think that is a part of the reason why no one seems to have taken much notice of her work.
Which leaves Taraji P. Henson, who did very well too, and had a full length role to compliment her talent.
Animated Feature Film:
Bolt
Kung Fu Panda
Wall-E
Who is likely to win: Wall-E
Who should win: Wall-E
I loved Kung Fu Panda. It was awesome. And then there's the philosophical, post-apocalyptic story of love which lends itself to a postmodern reading as an allegory of the degeneration of the human psyche, and the disintegration of the human race into nothing more than a group of identical, assembly-line, mechanical beings that leaves the cleaning up of its destruction of the Earth to a creature way ahead of its time, a machine who, ironically, is emotional, sensitive and intelligent: Wall-E.
Eat that, Kung Fu Panda!
Art Direction:
Changeling
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Duchess
The Dark Knight
Revolutionary Road
Who is likely to win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who should win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
In the case of the other four, while the art direction was great, it wasn't extraordinary. It wasn't anything beyond what one has come to expect of a big budget film of each of those particular genres. Benjamin Button, on the other hand, was interesting. It was challenging, it crept across decades, across places, and it kept the visual interest high with every scene (and change of scene).
Cinematography:
Changeling
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Slumdog Millionaire
I'll give it to Slumdog Millionaire where it deserves it: the cinematography was breathtaking.
Costumes:
Australia
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Duchess
Milk
Revolutionary Road
Who is likely to win: The Duchess/Australia
Who should win: Milk/The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Traditionally the Oscar in this category always goes to a period film. As if somehow it's terribly unchallenging or easy to design costumes for a group of men living in San Francisco in the 1970s, or for a subarban housewife of the 1950s, or a New Orleans couple whose journey spans decades, coming up to the present. So while I'd really like to see one of the others win, I'd put my money on The Duchess or Australia.
Directing:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Milk was a personality film, while Frost/Nixon belonged to the editor and writer (even though directors always tend to interfere in those specializations!). While I don't think Benjamin Button was the best film of the year, even a great film by itself, I do believe it was beautifully, and sensitively directed. Slumdog Millionaire was problematic in ways that it does not seem to realise. Is this the responsibility of the director? Of course it is. But we all know it's going to win, and by now, we all know why.
Film Editing:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Frost/Nixon
Milk
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Frost/Nixon
Again, kudos to Danny Boyle and his crew for being spot-on in all the technical categories. The editing of Slumdog was good, and it won't be altogether undeserved if it wins the award. Frost/Nixon, however, was possible only because of the editing. It was a film crafted out of one, long interview session, and to make that interesting was entirely the responsibility of the editor, who did a brilliant job of it.
Make Up:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Hellboy II: The Golden Army
Who is likely to win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who should win: The Dark Knight
If one of the contenders in this category involves taking Brad Pitt's face, making it look like it is seventy years old, and then putting it on the body of a five-year-old, the others can mostly forget about winning.
Really, though, no one ever conceptualised The Joker like this before. Jack Nicholson's Joker played up the legend of the horror behind the impenetrable, smiling face. The Dark Knight gave The Joker his own face. It was a face you could see, and yet a face that was horrifically painted. The red smudged across his mouth, the creases in the white paint where there were creases in his skin, all made The Joker so much more creepy. And, I think for the first time, it was the look that defined his character just as much as the plot and story did.
Music (Score):
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Defiance
Milk
Slumdog Millionaire
Wall-E
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Slumdog Millionaire
The music of Slumdog Millionaire is like the taste of mango chutney on the tongue of a white man. It tastes like nothing he's ever had before, he can't make head or tail of it, sometimes the flavours (oh, SO many flavours in that little drop of chutney!) get too much for him to bear, but he's hooked. He's hooked to the newness of it, the tantalising, heady feeling it gives him when he swallows it, the crispness of the little pieces of poppadums he dips in it, wondering what else he could eat it with...
Music (Song):
"Down to Earth" (Wall-E)
"Jai Ho" (Slumdog Millionaire)
"O Saya" (Slumdog Millionaire)
Who is likely to win: "Jai Ho"
Who should win: "Jai Ho"
To add to what I said above, of course, I do think AR Rahman is a genius. And it's nice that his genius is being recognised, even if just for a fleeting moment, on the international stage. Plus, "Down to Earth," While being a nice song, isn't much different from the inspiring, soaring, touching and truthful songs one gets so often in animated features.
Best Picture:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Milk/The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Grumble, grumble, grumble...
I mentioned, Benjamin Button isn't one of my favourite films, but one of my favourite films from this year, Doubt, never made it to the list (for which I'm still awaiting an explanation). Milk is a great film, no doubt, but I think a large part of its greatness stems from how inspiring the character and life of Harvey Milk are.
And let's be honest, it seems like this year, nothing's going to match up to the glorious tale of destitution that we've all had to take notice of.
Sound Editing:
The Dark Knight
Iron Man
Slumdog Millionaire
Wall-E
Wanted
Who is likely to win: The Dark Knight
Who should win: The Dark Knight
Personally, I don't think any of the films in this category did anything exceptional, but it is an award that needs to be given, nonetheless.
Sound Mixing:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Slumdog Millionaire
Wall-E
Wanted
Who is likely to win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who should win: Slumdog Millionaire
Now this is something slightly more interesting. The other very close contender, I would think, is Wall-E, simply because as a film it depends to a very great extent on the maintenance of interest in its sound. Don't let the simplicity of the sound fool you. Every aspect of the sound in Wall-E, right from the scramble of the cockroach's feet to the soft, quiet and very expresseive sounds made by Wall-E and Eve, were dead right. Slumdog, however, had a lot more going for it (I guess there's just a lot more mixing to contend with when you're shooting on the streets of India, isn't there?). The multiplicity of layers in its sound mixing tips the balance in its favour.
Visual Effects:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Iron Man
Who is likely to win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who should win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Gotham was very well done, but very clearly Chicago in the end. And Batman isn't really a superhero, so there isn't the kind of potential one sees in Iron Man. That, in its turn, was very well done indeed, but remember, it's contending with a film about a boy who grows from old to young, and does so stunningly.
Writing (Adapted Screenplay):
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Doubt
Frost/Nixon
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
Who is likely to win: The Reader
Who should win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Doubt and Frost/Nixon lose out as far as I'm concerned, simply because of their unflinching loyalty to the plays they are adapted from. There really wasn't much 'adaptation' to do, frankly. Slumdog was just awfully written, frankly. The guys in the film, we're given to believe, speak English as their first language. Anyone who knows an Indian who speaks English as his/her first language, knows that he/she would cringe at somethig like "Mumbai is the centre of the world, and I am at the centre of the centre." It was a problem of translation, to a large extent: Jamal's brother murmuring "God is great" just as he dies, wouldn't have been half as ridiculous if it was said in Urdu.
The Reader will win, I think, firstly because it isn't going to win much else, secondly because I think it's the kind of heavy, bloodstained screenplay that grabs the fancy of the Academy.
Writing (Original Screenplay):
Frozen River
Happy-Go-Lucky
In Bruges
Milk
Wall-E
Who is likely to win: Frozen River
Who should win: Wall-E
Wall-E would have had to have a brilliant screenplay because it is a film that depends entirely on action, movement and mise-en-scene. Writing a screenplay for dialogue-heavy scripts is that much easier. However, Frozen River, again, is unlikely to win anything else, and going by precedent, the Academy likes honouring obscurity (albeit smart/interesting/brilliant obscurity) in this category.
I can't possibly comment on the live action and animated shorts, as I haven't watched any of them. Of the documentaries, I have only watched Man on Wire, which is gripping. A piece on that is forthcoming...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)