Oscar 2020

I’m a little late in posting my thoughts on this year’s Oscar race. Here goes.

BEST PiCTURE: In my opinion 2019 was not the greatest year for movies. Summer blockbusters were tepid at best. A couple of little films stood out. When the nominations for picture of the year came out, there weren’t a lot of surprises. “The Irishman” was the early front runner, with “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood…” not far behind. “The Irishman” is very well done, but way too long. “Once Upon a Time…” is a good Quentin Tarantino film, but I’m not sure it’s his best. The latest leader is “1917”, a World War I epic. It’s different and interesting, even though it meanders a bit. “Parasite” is a South Korean tale about the class system. I think ‘1917″ will win, but this is one of the categories that could surprise us. Frankly, I am not enthusiastic about any of the nominees.

BEST ACTOR: Joaquim Phoenix looks like a sure thing for this category. His performance was intense, showing a dissent into madness. All of the others nominees were quite good. Leonardo DiCaprio added another good performance as an almost has-been actor in “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood…”. Jonathan Pryce made Pope Francis’s back story compelling in a film that was almost all dialogue. Antonio Banderas was finally nominated for the Spanish film “Pain and Glory” and Adam Driver gave a great performance in “Marriage Story”. It was arguably his best performance to date. He will probably win an Oscar some day.

BEST ACTRESS: This is probably the category with the strongest nominees. From the beginning it has been Renee Zellwegger’s award to lose. Her performance as Judy Garland in her last year is mesmerizing. In any other year Charlize Theron in “Bombshell” would probably be the front runner. Her Meghan Kelley was spot on. Cynthia Erivo as Harriet Tubman was also great, making the historical figure human. Sairose Ronan continues to give realistic, interesting performances as she did in “Little Women”. Finally Scarlett Johannson is nominated for her nuanced performance in “Marriage Story”.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: It looks like Brad Pitt is the front runner in this category. He was really the center of “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood…” plus the feeling in Hollywood is that he deserves the award. I thought Tom Hanks as Fred Rogers was equally as good, but this isn’t his year. Al Pacino and Joe Pesci were incredible in “The Irishman”. Pacino, especially, was great, giving a real performance for the first time in years, not just shouting at the camera. Finally, Anthony Hopkins made me take a new view of Pope Benedict, a not totally sympathetic character. Still, this is Pitt’s year.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: It is nice to see that there are so many strong roles for women. Laura Dern, as the smarmy divorce lawyer in “Marriage Story”, has been winning a lot of the pre-Oscar awards. She was very good, playing a not-too-likeable character. Kathy Bates, as the mother in “Richard Jewell” gave another good performance and was the heart and soul of the film. Florence Pugh as Amy in “Little Women” added something to that role that predecessors couldn’t. And Margot Robbie did an excellent job as a harassed employee of Fox News in “Bombshell”. Look for her to be nominated in the future. If I were voting, my choice would be Scarlett Johansson in “Jo Jo Rabbit”. I have always liked her as an actress, but she gave a warm, funny and deeply moving performance as the title character’s mother. She stole every scene she was in.

BEST DIRECTOR: This race is between Sam Mendes for “1917”, Quentin Tarantino for “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood…”, and Bong Joon Ho for “Parasite”. Todd Phillips for “Joker” and Martin Scorsese for “The Irishman” don’t seem to be in the running. Tarantino’s chances depend on how the Academy views his film. He may just get the writing award as he has done in the past. “Parasite” will win Best Foreign Film, but I don’t think the director will take home the prize. That leaves Sam Mendes, who did a good job in “1917”.

There are my thoughts on the Oscar’s top 5 categories.

Spies in Disguise

“Spies in Disguise” is a computer animated film voiced by Will Smith and Tom Holland of Spiderman fame. Smith’s character is the world’s greatest spy and Holland is a young inventor, working on gadgets. He turns the super spy into a pigeon and he must solve a case like that. This film is strictly for the kids, but it is cute and has a few funny moments. Both Smith and Holland have done better.

Richard Jewell

Clint Eastwood’s latest directorial effort is “Richard Jewell”, based on the true story of the man who found the bomb at the 1996 Olympics. By finding it he saved countless lives, but ended up being blamed for putting it there. Jewell is a police wannabe, an overweight nerd who still lives with his mother. The supporting cast is very good with Kathy Bates as his mother, Jon Hamm as a FBI agent who doggedly pursues him, Olivia Wilde as a journalist who will do anything for a story and Sam Rockwell as Jewell’s only friend and attorney. The lead is played by Peter Walter Hauser who has had small parts in other films. He does a convincing job as Jewell. This is one of Eastwood’s better films lately. It moves and keeps us on the edge of our seats. Unfortunately it shows us how the government and the press can torment us.

1917

“1917” is a World War I story that is told in a unique way. Two British infantry men are sent into No Man’s Land to deliver a message to the commander of troops that are about to attack the Germans that it is an ambush. The body of the film is about these soldiers’ journey and is continuous. The story is compelling and the young actors do a good job. But the thing that makes this film different is the way it is told. it is a continuous journey, told in almost real time. “1917” has been winning most of the big awards, as has its director Sam Mendes. While I think the film is one of the best of 2019, I do not know if it is THE best. Still, see this movie and if you can, see it on the big screen because it is filmed beautifully.

Pain and Glory

I am a fan of Spanish film maker Pedro Almodovar. His films are well written and not predictable. “Pain and Glory”, his latest, is no exception. It’s the story of a washed up film director, who is wallowing in self pity because he’s sickly and alone. He agrees to come out of seclusion to publicly discuss one of his films. He has to reconcile with an actor from the film who he trashed. Through flashbacks we learn of his impoverished childhood and he was a prodigy. His mother in these scenes is played by Penelope Cruz, who seems to be channeling Sophia Loren’s earthiness. Antonio Banderas, who started his career in Almodovar’s films and became estranged from him, plays the director. It’s probably his best acting job ever. As with most of the director’s films it takes a bit to get started, but one it does, it packs a wallop.

Cats

I am here to tell you that “Cats” is not as bad as everyone says. If you are looking for a movie with a linear plot that is coherent and dialogue, stay away from this one. It is surreal, but then the play was the same way. I never understood why it ran as long as it did. The music is quite good; not Andrew Lloyd Webber’s best score, but it has a few memorable songs. Based on T.S. Elliot’s poems, “Cats” is more about the individual characters than what they are doing. It’s almost like a vaudeville or talent show. Each number shows off that particular cat’s story. Some of the performances are worth noting. Judi Detch, dressed up in a Cowardly Lion costume, is regal and intimidating. Ian McKellen’s one number as Gus the Theater Cat practically steals the show. Jennifer Hudson once again stops the show singing “Memories”. (Personally I like Betty Buckley’s version in the Broadway version.) Taylor Swift’s song is a hoot. The newcomers are all spot on. Again, it’s the missing plot that people can’t come to terms with. If you like musicals, fantasy and bizarre costumes, you’ll like “Cats”. Otherwise stay away.

Little Women

It seems like each generation has its own version of “Little Women”. There’s the Katherine Hepburn version from the 1930’s, the June Allyson version from the late 1940’s, the Winona Ryder version from the 1990’s, and now a new version from writer/director Greta Gerwig, of “Ladybird” fame. This latest retelling is different from the others. First, it is told in flashback. It is also very modern. Saoirse Ronan does a good job as Jo. Florence Pugh, as Amy, is a stand out and will probably be nominated for awards. The basic plot is the same, but it is told differently, which keeps your interest, even if you’ve seen other versions. Beautifully filmed, this is a movie that should be seen.