2014 Oscar Preview: Will Win / Could Win / Should Win

This is potentially the most unpredictable year in the 10 years since I started following awards season. There are very few categories that are completely wrapped up, and the Best Picture race is still somehow undetermined, despite one film taking every single relevant Best Picture award. There is also a sense of history with the potential outcomes of this year’s ceremony. 12 Years a Slave, the presumed frontrunner for the top prize, is probably only the favorite for one other category (Best Adapted Screenplay), which it actually lost at the BAFTAs. The last time a Best Picture had just 2 wins was 1940’s Rebecca. Since 12 Yearslost the BAFTA for screenplay, it is also conceivable that the movie could win just the top prize, which would be the first time since 1935’s Mutiny on the Bounty.

It is also noteworthy that the favorite for Best Picture has virtually no shot at Best Director (as opposed to simply getting snubbed, like 2012’s Argo). In recent years, like 2012 and 2005 with Crash, it appears that the Academy wants their top choice to win a minimum of 3 Oscars. They do not exactly go out of their way to shower the films with awards, but they give them the important ones, other than Best Director, which used to be a sure thing for the winner of Best Picture. What this tells me is that the Academy is finally doing its job. It is not just giving every eligible award to their favorites like they did in…say…in 2003 when Return of the King went 11 for 11. They have their favorites, no doubt, but they are also taking a good look at individual categories and really giving the awards to the best achievements. I love this because of how unpredictable it has made the race and how refreshing it is to not just keep hearing the same names called all ceremony (and all season long, for that matter).

With how this awards race has shaped up until this point, there is one Oscar race that stands out as being the clear doppelganger: 1972. The frontrunner (The Godfather, 12 Years a Slave) was the clear choice for the year’s best movie. It is hard to vote for anything else given how heavy and nearly perfect they are despite their huge aspirations. However, it was not really the best in any individual category. The Godfather won Best Actor and Best Adapted Screenplay. 12 Years will presumably win Adapted Screenplay and possibly Best Supporting Actress, at least that is its best chance at a third award (Best Costume Design could be somewhat of a consolation if that were the third). Why are they being passed up for the artistic/technical categories, the glorified stats stuffer categories? There is one artistic marvel that is brilliantly put together by a popular director who had yet to be rewarded. In 1972, it was Cabaret and Bob Fosse, which won 8 Oscars including Best Director. Alfonso Cuaron’s Gravity will win Best Director as well, and it is hard to picture it winning any less than 4 additional awards. The other Best Picture nominees included a very controversial box office hit (Deliverance, The Wolf of Wall Street) that everyone underestimated and a low key road movie that no one saw (The Emigrants, Nebraska). The Best Picture winner is looked at as one of the best movies of its time and (later) all time.

Without further ado, here are my predictions and category breakdowns (if you need a list of the nominations to keep up, either pull up the OSCAR CHALLENGE or just go HERE:

Best Short Film – Live Action

WILL WIN: The Voorman Problem

COULD WIN: Helium

SHOULD WIN: N/A

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Aningaaq – I am really terrible with the short categories, but if they Academy and everyone else was really that gaga over Gravity, then how could they snub the brilliant little companion piece written and directed by Jonas Cuaron? I guess it is just like how they traditionally snub the amazing Pixar shorts in the Animated Short category. Anyway, The Voorman Problem is a heavy favorite and will almost certainly take this.

Best Short Film – Animated

WILL WIN: Room on the Broom

COULD WIN: Get a Horse – If the Academy wants to go for nostalgia, which they do from time to time, then this movie with Mickey and Minnie Mouse would be the easy choice. Room on the Broom would be an upset, but rarely are the predetermined films the winners in these categories because such a small number of members see them and get to vote on them.

SHOULD WIN: N/A

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: N/A

Best Documentary – Short Subject

WILL WIN: Karama Has No Walls

COULD WIN: The Lady in Number 6: Music Saved My Life, Cavedigger– I went with a virtually unknown short here. The Academy typically likes to award short docs about foreign countries and their struggles. That is really my only justification for this choice. If you want the safe pick, go with Number 6.

SHOULD WIN: N/A

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: N/A

Best Documentary Feature

WILL WIN: 20 Feet from Stardom – It seems to be the most accessible of the nominees, and since the category’s rules have been reshaped, we are likely to see a lot more conventional docs winning the award.

COULD WIN: The Act of Killing – It is right in that Exit Through the Gift Shop mode where it was a tremendous movie, but it is a bit too out-there and less of a documentary that the conservative voters didn’t really hop onboard.

SHOULD WIN: The Act of Killing – It is actually the only of the nominees that I have seen, but I was blown away by its creativity and unflinching nature.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Stories We Tell – Sarah Polley’s beautiful and personal documentary is one of the richest examples of storytelling from 2013. Her snub is frustrating.

Best Foreign Language Film

WILL WIN: The Great Beauty – All of the signs seem to be pointing to Paolo Sorrentino’s comedy-drama. It would certainly be a surprise if it lost. There haven’t really been any real upsets in this category recently, other than The Secret in Their Eyes.

COULD WIN: The Broken Circle Breakdown – It is really the only other film with the viewership and pedigree to win this award over The Great Beauty. There isn’t always a really great film in the mix, but this year there appears to be a few.

SHOULD WIN: The Hunt – It is the only nominee that I have seen to this point, but it shook me up when I watched it. I will have to wait and see the others before really proclaiming this as being the best one, but it was borderline top 10 of the year for me.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: A Hijacking – In a year where Captain Phillips is able to get a Best Picture nomination, this was a very similar movie in story and theme that surpassed it in many ways. If it hadn’t been for that movie, then this would have probably gotten much more attention. I could have also included The Act of Killingfor this one, but the Academy rarely, if ever, doubles up on these awards. Not even Waltz with Bashir was able to.

Best Animated Feature Film

WILL WIN: Frozen– It has won every relevant award, and it is a nice way to move back into the realm of Disney princess musical films that would have dominated this category every year if it had been in existence.

COULD WIN: None, but The Wind Rises is the closest one if they want to give an award to the groundbreaking director Hayao Miyazaki’s final film.

SHOULD WIN: N/A. I have only seen Despicable Me 2, which I gave a mild thumbs down to. I can’t really speak to the quality of the other films.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Monsters University – I always get a kick out of the Academy not nominating Pixar. Does anyone really think The Croods and Despicable Me 2 was better than this movie? Doubtful.

Best Visual Effects

WILL WIN: Gravity– This is the biggest lock of any category in years. Not only have Best Picture winners in this category not lost to non-Best Picture nominees in 43 years, but its achievements visually are as breathtaking as any we have ever seen.

COULD WIN: NONE

SHOULD WIN: Gravity– See above.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Ender’s Game – Now the movie wasn’t really any good, but the CGI visuals were really impressive. They are much better than those in Iron Man 3, which is a series that I am always scratching my head over when it gets included in this category.

Best Sound Editing

WILL WIN: Gravity– This is another ridiculous lock for the film. Aside from the visuals, the sound effects are really what made the film so authentic and real.

COULD WIN: NONE

SHOULD WIN: All Is Lost – There was no dialogue in a movie with one character that was trapped at sea. The movie was thrilling and horrifying because of the sound effects and how stark and real they felt. It was an astonishing achievement.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Rush – It is still hard to wrap my head around this movie getting shut out. Artistically and technically, it was as fascinating as any movie this year outside of Gravity. The sound effects were absolutely blistering.

Best Sound Mixing

WILL WIN: Gravity– Normally, the sound categories go to the same movie. Last year was an exception, but again, with the achievement in sound and how important it was to blend all of the talking, sounds effects, and music, it is hard to imagine this movie not running away with this one.

COULD WIN: Captain Phillips – If the Academy really loves the movie (which is weird to think about when they snubbed Tom Hanks), then they might want to give it an award or two. This would be an easy, inconsequential Oscar to shovel its way.

SHOULD WIN: Gravity– There is no doubt about this one. This might have been the most impressive technical element in any film in 2013.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Berbarian Sound Studio – It was a bit of an obscure movie, but for reasons obvious to those who are familiar with the film, it really should have been nominated in this category at every awards circuit.

Best Original Song

WILL WIN: “Happy” – Despicable Me 2 – It would be a big upset, but I can’t for the life of me tell you why. The Oscars love to act relevant, and there is not more relevant song than this one. It is on pop/hip-hop radio, it is on countless commercials, it is currently #1 on the Billboard Hot 100, and it was even sung by a contestant on American Idol. It is the song of the year in movies, and it could get performer/producer Pharrell halfway to his EGOT.

 

COULD WIN: “Let It Go” – Frozen, “Ordinary Love” – Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom – Everyone is predicting Frozen to take this, and it very well might. I haven’t seen the movie, so I can’t speak to its importance to the film or anything. “Ordinary Love” would be a nice gesture award with Mandela’s recent death and U2 being the nominees for the brilliant song.

SHOULD WIN: “The Moon Song” – Her – There was no more important or sweet song in 2013 than this one. It is also sung onscreen live by the actors, which is rare for a non-musical.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: “So You Know What It’s Like” – Short Term 12 – This was a show-stopping part of the tough indie drama. With mock drums and pure passion, Keith Stanfield raps a brilliant short song in the middle of the movie. It was the best original song in years.

Best Original Score

WILL WIN: Philomena– I am picking another upset here. Alexandre Desplat’s scores are always very obvious and important to the story. This one is loud, but it is so flawlessly placed that it fades into the background. It is one of the better scores of the year, and it would be the easiest way to award the British drama.

COULD WIN: Gravity, Her – Gravity is the heavy frontrunner here, and probably for good reason. Her would be a cool way to get a bit of relevance at the ceremony, which would award the Arcade Fire guys. If Gravity is our eventual Best Picture winner, then this will probably be one of its many (like 7 or 8) awards on Oscar night.

SHOULD WIN: Her– The score is subtle, yet memorable. That is a difficult thing to pull off. With Arcade Fire doing this movie and Trent Reznor doing the Fincher movies, it is becoming clear that rock stars really are as great of musicians as any composer. They need to keep doing movies.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Ain’t Them Bodies Saints – I saw this movie early in 2013, and this was one of the elements that stuck with me unlike any other. The score was so different, and it was vital to the development of the story.

Best Makeup and Hairstyling

WILL WIN: Dallas Buyers Club – The drastic changes that the actors and characters go through was truly remarkable. Going up against Jackassand The Lone Ranger, it is hard to imagine this movie not being called as the winner out of sheer principle.

COULD WIN: Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa – Then again, stranger things have happened. The makeup work here was just as impressive as in Dallas Buyers Club, but it was done for comedic effect. It looked legit, though. How awesome would this be?!

SHOULD WIN: Dallas Buyers Club – I just cannot deny what the makeup/hair guys were able to do with Jared Leto. Astonishing work.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: World War Z – Zombie flicks are not always the popular movies to recognize, but especially after watching so much Talking Dead, it is clear that makeup is the most important part of making the undead look real. This movie did a fantastic job at just that.

Best Costume Design

WILL WIN: American Hustle – This would be a slight upset. It is probably in third place in terms of odds, but the authentic recent history costumes were so good that they might not be able to pass on it. The Academy normally loves older historical costumes, but this movie had such extravagant looks that it might be the exception.

COULD WIN: The Great Gatsby, 12 Years a Slave – 12 Years a Slave was able to win the Guild for period piece costumes, which was a pleasant surprise. This could be an under-the-radar way to give it that token third win. The Great Gatsby is the clear frontrunner with its beautiful costumes and how well they fit the period.

SHOULD WIN: The Grandmaster – It was the best element of one of the most amazing artistic movies of the past few years. You really feel like you are taken back to 1930s-1940s Hong Kong and watching real life. The costumes were exquisite.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Saving Mr. Banks – The costumes were the only thing that I really saw as being nomination-worthy from the film (aside from Emma Thompson’s excellent lead performance). In the mire of the predictability of the story, it still was able to at least look thoroughly appropriate and stylish.

Best Production Design

WILL WIN: The Great Gatsby – I cannot see this losing. They basically created an entirely new city for this movie, but still gave made it very clear where they were. It was beautiful.

COULD WIN: Gravity– This movie had essentially no set. Nearly the entire movie had its actor floating about, and yet it never looked less than breathtaking. They might also not want to give The Great Gatsby multiple awards…but then again, that didn’t stop them with Alice in Wonderland.

SHOULD WIN: Gravity– See above.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: The Grandmaster – Watch any clip from this movie, and your jaw will be on the floor with its gorgeous set decorations.

Best Editing

WILL WIN: Captain Phillips – Winning the ACE Eddie award is telling. In recent years, it has been proven that you are foolish to pick against the winner.

COULD WIN: Gravity– There are a few legitimate contenders, but this is the only one that can really dethrone the ACE winner. The editing of Gravity is an undeniable achievement, but the Academy really likes Greengrass films and non-CGI thrillers in this category.

SHOULD WIN: Gravity– The movie really was able to put everything together in a fascinating way. When something is so otherworldly, yet very genuine at the same time, it is difficult to make every scene make sense and seem vital. This movie passed that test with flying colors.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: The Wolf of Wall Street – They made a three hour movie seem like a two hour movie. They packed dialogue and events so tight that we saw even more than we ought to in a three hour movie. The pacing and film editing in this movie were simply miraculous.

Best Cinematography

WILL WIN: Gravity– Is it really possible for this to lose? Maybe, but I highly doubt it. The Academy has been in love with CGI movie cinematography recently.

COULD WIN: Inside Llewyn Davis – In any other year, this would probably be our winner. It still might be able to take it if the Academy feels bad about snubbing the Coens. There is not a single shot in this movie that doesn’t look like perfect photography.

SHOULD WIN: Gravity– The movie truly is something to behold. The movie is shot as clearly and skillfully as any I have ever seen.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: To the Wonder – The cinematography is always amazing in Terrence Malick movies. This one is no different. Some of the shots are truly stunning, but it is not in an obvious way as in some of his other movies. This one is a whole new visual experience.

Best Adapted Screenplay

WILL WIN: 12 Years a Slave (John Ridley) – They have to give the film something. The screenplay is terrific, but it is not necessarily an achievement in screenwriting. It is a tremendous story, and normally that is enough for the Oscar favorites (Milk, The King’s Speech, The Hurt Locker, Precious, etc).

COULD WIN: Philomena(Steve Coogan, Jeff Pope), Captain Phillips (Billy Ray) – With the Surprise WGA victory for Captain Phillips, it has somehow gotten back into the race. Philomena won the BAFTA, not really to anyone’s surprise. The surprise was that it lost Best Picture, meaning that the voters actually decided not to vote for their favorite film in this category. Interesting developments…

SHOULD WIN: Before Midnight (Ethan Hawke, Julie Delpy, Richard Linklater) – Obviously, this is my choice. It might very well be the best script of the series. It is flawless writing by three people who have lived with these characters for so long that they have seemingly become real people. It is a screenplay masterpiece.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: The Spectacular Now (Scott Neustadter, Michael H. Weber) – I love movies about high school and nostalgia. This one, by the guys who also wrote (500) Days of Summer, is one of the most melancholy and bittersweet movies ever made about the subject. It is incredible.

Best Original Screenplay

WILL WIN: Her(Spike Jonze) – Spike Jonze has really turned into one of the most interesting voices in the industry. He won the important awards, including the combined Best Screenplay Golden Globe, and he is in the lead to take down the Oscar that he deserves.

COULD WIN: American Hustle (Eric Singer, David O. Russell) – Somehow David O. Russell is on pace to go home empty-handed again. He has made 3 movies in 4 years, each of which were huge hits. This screenplay seemed to be the proper place for him to get that elusive victory, but he is going to come in second. It would be even worse if Dallas Buyers Club takes this award, which would be very similar to Preciouswinning over the beloved Jason Reitman, who also went 0 for 3 in 2009 with Up in the Air.

SHOULD WIN: Her(Spike Jonze) – The screenplay, no matter how far-fetched it may have seemed, felt 100% authentic at all times. It all should be accredited to Jonze’s incredible writing and imagination.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Inside Llewyn Davis (Joel Coen, Ethan Coen) – This movie was one of the Coen Brothers’ finest achievements. It is such a rich story and script. Every detail of the film feels true and genuine. When a fictional story seems more real than a true story, you know you have stumbled upon something special.

Best Supporting Actress

WILL WIN: Jennifer Lawrence – American Hustle – This category seems similar to the 2011 Meryl Streep-led Best Actress category. Lawrence won the Golden Globe and BAFTA. She is an incomparable movie star and icon. The only thing going against her is that she just won last year. Streep won twice in 4 years when she was starting out, but she at least had a nomination in between. Will they make her wait, or will they just bask in the glow of her rising star?

COULD WIN: Lupita Nyongo – 12 Years a Slave – She seems to be playing the unfortunate Viola Davis to J-Law’s Streep. She won the Critics Choice and SAG. Those two are traditionally more important, but Lawrence is a special case. Her role was heartbreaking and filled with feeling. If she doesn’t win, then we are likely going to see some 75 year history go down at the Oscars, unless 12 Years a Slave winds up losing Best Picture that is.

SHOULD WIN: June Squibb – Nebraska – All of the nominees in this category actually deserve them, which is rare. Squibb was such a scene-stealer in the subtle comedy-drama. She did it with an elegance and effortlessness that was hard to really forget. She should be winning this with her first nom at age 84.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Scarlett Johansson – Her – I have never nominated a voice performance before, but this is an exception. She developed a character without us ever seeing her face. She is not just a computer. She is a person to Theodore, and later, to the audience as well. We feel for her the same as he does. All the credit in the world to Johansson…I don’t know who else could have pulled that off. Honorable mention to little Annika Wedderkopp from The Hunt, my personal Best Supporting Actress and one of the top 5 child performances ever. She very easily could have been mentioned here, but recognizing Scarlett seemed more important.

Best Supporting Actor

WILL WIN: Jared Leto – Dallas Buyers Club – He has won everything, except the BAFTA, where he and his film were completely and astonishingly unmentioned. He is still going to win. It just might be a bit closer than it should be.

COULD WIN: Barkhad Abdi – Captain Phillips – He, surprisingly, was the beneficiary of Leto missing out on the BAFTA. His speech was awkward, so he probably didn’t gather any more fans from that. There is sometimes a newcomer that wins an acting award, and this year seems like one where there could be a massive upset. Can this be it? I hope not.

SHOULD WIN: Jared Leto – Dallas Buyers Club – Playing a character like Rayon has been done from time to time. Never (I mean that) has it been done with such grace and authenticity as when Leto did it. After watching the movie, I could not stop thinking about how amazing he was. I still can’t.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Casey Affleck – Out of the Furnace – In the disappointing The Deer Hunterwannabe, Affleck played the equivalent to Christopher Walken’s Oscar-winning part. He ripped our hearts out. He has a way about him where he has such built up passion and energy inside, and what comes out onscreen is a presence that is unlike any other modern actor. This is one of his finest performances and the best supporting performance of the year.

Best Actress

WILL WIN: Cate Blanchett – Blue Jasmine – She has won each and every award that she has been eligible for. The only thing going against her is that she has won in the past, but that was 9 years ago. She needs to win another, and this is certainly her best leading performance to date. Look for a bunch of tears during her speech, as she will almost certainly dedicate it to the late, great Philip Seymour Hoffman. That is if Jennifer Lawrence doesn't already take care of that.

 

COULD WIN: Amy Adams – American Hustle – Her nomination came at a surprise, but it was deserved…in the supporting category. Is there a bit of Kate Winslet in The Reader in Adams? Her part was equally difficult and wrongly placed. She has had 5 nominations now, this being the first one in this category. They may feel that she is overdue, even though her first nom was incredibly just 8 years ago. She is on a roll. This would be a downright shocker, but I am not counting her out.

SHOULD WIN: Sandra Bullock – Gravity – I have never been fully impressed with her until this movie. It was a one-woman show, and she made me feel just as vulnerable as her character. If she hadn’t won so recently, she might be in the hunt.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Elle Fanning – Ginger & Rosa – The best child actor in the world gave a subtle and fascinating performance that sadly far too few people saw. She will win her share of Oscars someday.

Best Actor

WILL WIN: Matthew McConaughey – Dallas Buyers Club – Until that head-scratching exclusion at the BAFTAs, he had come home with every bit of gold he was up for. His performance is pure McConaughey, but it was a shade to him we had never seen before. He is just on fire in this movie.

COULD WIN: Leonardo DiCaprio – The Wolf of Wall Street, Chiwetel Ejiofor – 12 Years a Slave – DiCaprio took home the Comedy awards at the Critics Choice and Golden Globes, plus his film has made a very impressive box office run amidst the controversy surrounding it. He will win one sometime…can it be this year? It is one of his best performances ever. Ejiofor won the BAFTA over DiCaprio, which may have only strengthened McConaughey. I am still putting the star of the likely Best Picture in contention, but do not buy too much into his stock. All of the nominees would be deserving winners.

SHOULD WIN: Leonardo DiCaprio – The Wolf of Wall Street – Leo had never done anything like this before. He was able to do his thing while making the audience laugh. His attitude and charisma carried the movie. It really would not have been anything too special without him and Jonah Hill working together at the movie’s core. They both deserve to be recognized for their work.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Michael B. Jordan – Fruitvale Station – This was another film that got unjustly shut out. Jordan is a born movie star. He has a Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler type of magnetism that you just cannot help but marvel at his presence on screen. It was a difficult role, and I am not sure there is another actor in that age bracket who could have done that role as much justice. He should be winning the Oscar.

Best Director

WILL WIN: Alfonso Cuaron – Gravity – This is just about wrapped up. The only thing going against him is that he might not be the director of the Best Picture winner. The same thing happened with David Fincher in 2010, when Tom Hooper snuck in and took Best Director at the last minute despite everything else going Fincher’s way (even the British votes). That was not as much of a slam dunk directorial achievement as this, though. Much like Bob Fosse in 1972, he is the conductor of the all of these ground-breaking elements. He brought it together. He deserves to win this.

COULD WIN: Steve McQueen – 12 Years a Slave – If there is another possible winner, it would be McQueen. His direction is so thorough and haunting. It is going to be strange to look back on this, much like we do with Francis Ford Coppola in ’72, and see that he did not win for his American classic.

SHOULD WIN: Alfonso Cuaron – Gravity – See above.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Spike Jonze – Her – Jonze is a striking visual director. With his previous films, it was very obvious when the director was leaving his mark on the movie. Here, it is much more about the story, and he lets it breathe. The movie would not work nearly as well if he were not the genius behind it. He creates his own world, and no one could have made this movie. It is a master class in directing.

Best Picture

WILL WIN: 12 Years a Slave – There you go: first time since 1940 that a movie will win Best Picture with only one additional award. It has yet to lose anything important (with the exception of the tie with Gravity at the Producers Guild of America). It is probably the best movie, and it will be remembered as the best movie of the year and one of the best of this era. Is that enough? Will the Academy really do this? I think so, but weird things happen at the Oscars. The door is still open for a couple films.

COULD WIN: Gravity, American Hustle – The case of Gravity has been made. It won the Directors Guild, which traditionally has the strongest correlation with the Oscar for Best Picture. It is going to win a bunch of awards, so they might as well just give it this one too. Sci-fi has never been the Academy’s thing, but this is the most popular one since Star Wars. In the case of American Hustle, it would be more about the other two films canceling each other out. It would be an easy, gutless, and safe choice for the Academy to hail it as the Best Picture of the Year, but I wouldn’t put it past them. They love David O. Russell, but they haven’t been able to show that with Oscar wins just yet.

SHOULD WIN: Her– It is weird to say that this is my vote, but I went to my TOP 10 LIST, and this was the top-ranked one. I feel like I have been talking about this movie enough on this article as it is, but let me just reiterate once more. This is a special movie. There is not a movie in the world like it. All of the artistic elements are less than showy, but they are standouts. All of the actors are perfection. The story only exists in Spike Jonze’s world, but yet it feels very The Truman Show-ish, knowing that at some point in the not-so-distant future, our world could look an awful lot like his world. Masterpiece.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOMINATED: Before Midnight – My #1 of the year has been in place since May. It is a faultless, tough, hilarious, and devastating little movie. Put it together with its two predecessors, and it is even better. It is not as obvious of an achievement as the films that wound up getting nominated in this category, but it is better. Trust me.

Real quick: I need someone to confirm this up for me. Brad Pitt is a producer on 12 Years a Slave. If that were to win Best Picture, would he be the first person with 3+ acting nominations to win his first Oscar in some other category? He would have to be, right? Well, at least we would be able to call him “Oscar-winner Brad Pitt” from now on…

Predictions? Thoughts? Comment below and definitely join the OSCAR CHALLENGE! Happy balloting!

Read More

What Maisie Knew (2013) Review

 

            What Maisie Knew illustrates why plot synopses rarely do movies justice.  On the surface, this is a movie with a 6-year-old girl as a protagonist who is forced to endure a cruel custody battle between her selfish parents.  The story is told from her point of view, meaning the specific details of the adult characters’ lives are largely obscured, and instead we get scenes of little Maisie coloring pictures with crayons, playing with baby turtles and singing songs at school.

            And yet somehow at the same time, What Maisie Knew is most decidedly not a children’s movie.  It is full of sadness, and not just because we see a little girl get used as a pawn in the erosion of a marriage between two adults.  It’s sad because it shows the worst kind of cynicism in the adult world, which was of course the modus opporandi of the 1897 Henry James novella from which the movie is based.  Maisie (played by big-eyed Onata Aprile) is constantly sifted through various parents, stepparents and babysitters because no one has time to watch her and worse yet, maybe they don’t really care about her.

            But here’s a provocative question: Are Maisie’s parents supposed to care?  I don’t necessarily want to take the side of Maisie’s irresponsible parents, but stay with me for a moment.  Everyone wants to believe that children should be the primary interests of the parents that choose to have them.  But society teaches us that for the first 25-40 years of our life, we need to put ourselves first – our careers, our motivations, our own lives and responsibilities.  This is a contradiction.  Is it morally reprehensible to ask how adults who have found a great deal of success in their work are supposed to balance the demands of their job with the demands of home life?  It’s like that saying about people who are either married to their spouse or to their job.  Recent studieshave shown that having children is the biggest cause of marital dissatisfaction and eventual separation – more than jobs, money or sex.  Then again, we don’t really need scientific research to show this when movies like Revolutionary Road, Blue Valentine, and even The Place Beyond the Pines illustrate it so vividly.

One theory suggests that children also tend to reflect the worst qualities of the caregivers that take care of them.  Adults who find daily success in their jobs aren’t used to dealing with such blunt and overt criticism from their child or spouse when they come home.  In little Maisie’s case, it is fortunate that she has only retained her parents’ best qualities (or, perhaps put another way, hasn’t yet picked up their worst features).  It is also clear that her bickering parents (Steve Coogan and Julianne Moore) are people who, despite their success in “the real world,” should have never had children.

I guess my sympathy with them goes as far as to suggest that they couldn’t have possibly known the depths of the misery that having a child would cause.  Then again, maybe their occupations suggested their incompatibility with family life: Moore’s character, Susanna, is rock ‘n’ roll musician who frequently goes on tour, while Coogan’s character, Beale, is an art dealer with clients in Europe.  Both are successful, wealthy individuals who are well-accustomed to the riches of life in posh Manhattan.  They are likely surrounded by other people whose jobs it is to give them words of affirmation.  A simple movie would have been content to show them as vapid, self-absorbed charlatans who only show affection for Maisie when it might benefit their divorce settlement. 

And this is what we think in the first half hour of the film.  But because What Maisie Knew limits the scope of what we know about Susanna and Beale to what Maisie is able to observe, we only see her parents’ best intentions.  We only want to project the best version of ourselves on to our loved ones, right?  Susanna and Beale may be self-centered, and their actions rarely appear to back up their loving words to Maisie, but beneath it all, we see two characters who are as disgusted with their ex-spouses as they are with themselves.

Two other prominent characters emerge.  One is the Scottish-born Margo (Joanna Vanderham), who was once hired to be a nanny to Maisie, but is also shown to be Beale’s lover and new wife.  Perhaps she is one of the causes for Beale and Susanna’s split.  Perhaps she is marrying Beale only for his money.  Or maybe Beale and Susanna are too invested in their daily routines to really give a shit.  In a refreshing deviation from “bitchy stepmother” caricature, Margo seems to genuinely care about Maisie, and spends time caring for and playing with her . . . but on the other hand, if she truly cared about the little girl, why would she ever allow herself to be put in such an awkward position between Beale and Susanna, knowing how much her presence would exacerbate an already toxic divorce? 

The same can be said about Lincoln (Alexander Skarsgard), who shows up one night at one of Susanna's parties and seemingly the next minute, becomes Maisie's new stepfather.  Susanna tells Maisie that she married him "for her" but we are not sure what this means or if we should believe her. Like Margo, Lincoln is quite a few steps below Susanna financially (he works as a bartender), but also seems to care deeply for Maisie, recognizing if he doesn't show her affection, there may be nowhere else in Susanna's life where Maisie can find it.

            At the heart of this movie isn’t Maisie or even Maisie’s parents, but Lincoln and Margo.  These are two complex, fascinating characters.  The fact that they both move into marriages so abruptly suggests deep-seeded emotional pain or fear of abandonment.  The fact that at a crucial moment in the film they recognize a sexual attraction to one another suggests as much vulnerability as instability.  Do they really think a relationship between them could work when their only shared interest is Maisie’s well-being?  Relationships, like jobs, demand a high degree of tunnel vision for them to work.  Throughout the film, Maisie becomes caught at the outside of this tunnel – first with her parents, and then, perhaps inevitably, with Lincoln and Margo.

            What Maisie Knew was directed by Scott McGehee and David Siegel, whose previous films (The Deep End, Bee Season, Uncertainty) dealt with families in crisis.  This is a film with a more leisurely pace, episodic at times, reminding us that for young children, sometimes life’s most significant moments occur during ordinary days.  What I admire the film is how it manages to sidestep the sentimentality of the custody battle and instead become a mature character study about adults with good intentions who fall victim to their own personal shortcomings.  Just like Dustin Hoffman knew in Kramer vs. Kramer, kids bring out the best and worst in their parents.  Then again, audiences may not have that degree of sympathy for four adult characters so self-absorbed that a six-year-old girl spends a night with a complete stranger because they each assume someone else is looking after her.  But in a way, that’s what I like about the film: Like Maisie, we are forced to choose our role models from only among the imperfect adults we know.

   

Rating: 3.5 stars

Read More

Zach Fearless NFL Playoff Predictions: Super Bowl XLVIII

            I’ve spent most of my post-adolescent life hating the Broncos and Seahawks, and so it’s appropriate that their first-ever Super Bowl matchup will occur in the cold, bleak snow of winter in the middle of New Jersey.  It’s also appropriate that (at least on paper) both teams have looked less than spectacular during the course of the playoffs.  The Broncos needed a fairly miraculous 3^rd-and-17 conversion deep in their own territory to prevent an epic collapse against the Chargers, and put up way too many field goals instead of touchdowns in beating an Aqib Talib-less Patriots team.  The Seahawks – a team that on average outscored home opponents by 15.4 points per game this season – somehow let a timid Saints team on the road hang around all game and needed an end zone interception to beat a 49ers team they had handled by a combined 55 points in their prior two meetings in Seattle.

             But see, that’s my negativity seeping in again.  I hate these two teams, so it’s natural that I see the “glass-half-empty” perspective first.  The truth is, the Broncos just beat two teams that had been playing their best football of the season (while also managing to avenge two of their three regular season losses) and Marshawn Lynch just manhandled the league’s third and fourth ranked defenses.   The other truth is the Broncos had the greatest offensive season in the history of professional football and the Seahawks have allowed a league-low 476 points over the past two seasons (to put that in perspective, the Chicago Bears gave up 478 points in 2013 alone). 

            And the other truth is I really shouldn’t hate these teams any more.  Over the last 15 years, they’ve combined for one Super Bowl loss, many mediocre head coaches and players, and a handful of bad seasons.  In fact, Denver and Seattle parallel each other a surprising amount if you examine the last 15 years more closely:

1998-1999: Denver wins back-to-back Super Bowls and an 11-year-old Zach Saltz first learns what it’s like to hate a professional sports franchise.  After Elway retires and the Broncos collapse, Seattle takes the temporary reins of the AFC West, fielding a particularly annoying team that started 8-2 and finished 1-6, including their home playoff loss to the Dolphins.

2000-2002: Not a lot happens here. The Broncos boast a different leading rusher each year, and the one year where Brian Griese plays well (2000), Denver loses to the eventual Super Bowl champion Ravens.  Seattle doesn’t do much either, but does find a star in RB Shaun Alexander.

2003-2007: The bad years.  Jake Plummer is just frustratingly inept enough to win 10 games each year and lay playoff stinkers . . . except in 2006, when the Broncos hand Brady/Belichick their first playoff loss ever in a fluky game.  The Seahawks do pretty much the same thing and make the Super Bowl in 2006, when they lose to the refs a quarterback with a 22.6 QB rating.  It’s this era which resonates the strongest for me.

2008-2009: Both the Broncos and Seahawks disappear from the planet.  Denver gives up a four-game lead with four games to go in 2008 and hires Josh McDaniels the next season. Meanwhile, Seattle fans, already suffering through the loss of their beloved Sonics, are forced to endure the Jim Mora era.

2010-2011: Resurrection in the unlikely forms of Marshawn Lynch and Tim Tebow (actually, I think the Tebow game was the best NFL game of the last five years). Suddenly, these teams would be considered back in perennial Super Bowl contention were it not for subpar quarterback play.  That is, until . . .

2012-2013: Peyton Manning 2.0 and Russell Wilson arrive.  During these seasons, the teams combine for a 51-13 regular season record, but suffer through unbelievably traumatizing playoff losses. 

            February 2, 2014 is where the Broncos and Seahawks separate: One will win the Super Bowl, the other will see its fan base continue to wonder what they did to make God smite them so. 

            If you are rooting for the Broncos, you make the case that experience and veteran leadership still matter in Super Bowls.  Denver has Peyton Manning, Wes Welker, Champ Bailey, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, and John Fox – that’s a total of six different Super Bowl appearances represented.  The only player Seattle has with comparable experience is Percy Harvin, who won two NCAA championships at Florida.  In last year’s Super Bowl, Seattle’s doppelganger, the 49ers, looked sluggish throughout the first half and ultimately could not get themselves out of a 22-point second half hole.  Similar stories with other Super Bowl newbies like the ’06 Bears, ’08 Cardinals, and ’09 Saints (who eventually outscored Peyton Manning 31-7 after trailing by ten points early).  If Manning and company are able to move the ball early and often against the Seahawks – maybe take quick 10-0 or 14-0 leads – it may be difficult for the methodical, run-oriented Seattle offense to muster adequate responses. It isn’t impossible to imagine that happening, since essentially that exact thing happened to the Chargers and Patriots the last few weeks.

            If you are rooting for the Seahawks, you make the case that experience isn’t as important has what has been considered the classical hallmark of teams that win Super Bowls – a dominating, bruising, physical defense.  Eli Manning, Aaron Rodgers, and Joe Flacco all had questionable playoff reputations before their defenses stepped up and made huge plays down the stretch en route to Super Bowl victories.  Another parallel for hopeful Seattle fans: Super Bowl 37, when the more “experienced” Oakland Raiders, led by Jerry Rice, Tim Brown, and 37-year-old league MVP Rich Gannon, got demolished by the unproven but spectacular Tampa Bay Buccaneer secondary.

            And one more good sign for Seattle: The cold weather should be much more conducive to their grind-it-out, physical style of play – a far cry from Denver’s 55 touchdowns through the air.  By now, we’ve heard all the stories about Manning’s inability to play in cold weather (and how the 63 degree weather last week in Denver may have diluted the actual way the Broncos play in January).  If Manning is off target, the Broncos will be forced to rely on a rushing game led by either a guy with bruised ribs who has been held out of practice (Knowshon Moreno), or a rookie (Montee Ball).  Meanwhile, the Denver defense, already missing its best player (Von Miller), will be lining up Rodgers-Cromartie, 35-year-old Champ Bailey and 34-year-old Quentin Jammer against Seattle’s sneaky-good receiving corps.  And in case you forgot, this was a unit that gave up 399 points and 4,360 passing yards to opposing offenses during the regular season; and although they shut Rivers and Brady down, they also haven’t forced a single turnover in their two postseason games.

            Seattle fans like to point out that the Seahawks played in the NFL’s toughest division and have played the league’s most difficult schedule.  In reality, that claim is questionable; according to advanced strength of schedule metrics, they tied with the Panthers for the 9^th toughest.  According to those same metrics, the Broncos had the league’s 8^th easiest schedule; however, it is worth noting that Denver faced off against more playoff teams in the regular season (7) than Seattle (5; although that number would have jumped to 7 had the 10-6 Cardinals made the playoffs like they should have).  As I have already pointed out in previous columns, the Seahawks owed a good portion of their outrageous 2013 pass defense statistics to the inferior passing games they faced for much of the season (including Cam Newton, Chad Henne, Mike Glennon, Ryan Fitzpatrick, and Kellen Clemens twice).  Holding Kaepernick to 153 yards through the air was impressive last week, but not if you consider the 49ers ranked 3^rdworst in the NFL in passing.  Three weeks ago, against Drew Brees – a 5,000 yard passer like Manning – Seattle gave up 309 yards (144 of which were to Marques Colston), a touchdown, and did not pick him off.

            What’s funny is how similar the storylines are between this year’s Broncos and Peyton Manning’s first Super Bowl team, the 2006 Indianapolis Colts.  That year, the Colts were criticized during the regular season for their horrific defense (which gave up a whopping 2,768 rushing yards), but played stellar D in their playoff games.  Manning’s credentials in big games were still being questioned (something that has stuck with him his entire career, I suppose) and as gametime approached in Miami, more and more lingering questions were asked about the weather conditions, like this year.  And like the Seahawks, the ’06 Bears possessed a bruising, opportunistic, genuinely scary defense.  But Manning was able to hold off the pressure by deferring to the running game with an unheralded former second stringer (Dominic Rhodes/Knowshown Moreno) and a talented rookie (Joseph Addai/Montee Ball). 

            And if you’re rooting for the Broncos, that is your best case scenario: That the Seattle D spends so much time honing in on Welker, Decker and the Thomases that running lanes are open and seized upon by a healthy Moreno and Ball.  The running game is so much more critical for the Broncos than most people realize; they open up Manning’s playbook for play action, audibles, and screens. But in 30 degree weather – and, to be blunt, with a 37-year-old QB who showed last year that he can’t throw 15 yards downfield in those conditions – many of Denver’s vertical options will be greatly diminished.  With Sherman and Earl Thomas covering Demaryius Thomas and Eric Decker downfield, the success of Denver’s passing game will depend largely on short patterns run by Welker, Julius Thomas, and Moreno.

            And if you’re rooting for Seattle, you hope that Bad Peyton shows up – the guy who can’t throw in the cold, can’t win big games, has bad luck, and whose greatest Super Bowl moments have come in luxury boxes.  You hope that even though Russell Wilson has looked jittery at times, the Seahawks don’t abandon their gameplan because you know that at some point in the third or fourth quarter, Beast Mode will show up and completely turn the tide of momentum. You also know that defense win championships. You know that the Seahawks have at least five defensive players (Sherman, Thomas, Kam Chancellor, Bobby Wagner, Michael Bennett) who are better than the Broncos’ best defensive player (Danny Trevathan).  You know that the three biggest factors in this game – turnovers, running the ball, and playing in cold weather – eventually favor Seattle.  You know that the winner of that epic NFC Championship game is the best team in football.  You know that Russell Wilson is a scoring threat from anywhere on the field.  You know that the previous record-setting offenses that made Super Bowls have all floundered (‘01 Rams, ‘02 Raiders, ‘07 and ’11 Patriots, and Manning’s own ’09 Colts).  You know that playing in cold, nasty weather is what real football is made of.  And you are angered by the fact that everyone is picking Denver to beat you.

            If there’s anything we’ve learned from pro football the last few years, it’s that Nobody-Believes-In-Us is more powerful than Everyone-Believes-In-Us (credit Bill Simmons with that theory).  All the hype this week about Peyton Manning’s record-breaking year overshadows the fact that the best defenses he faced were the Chiefs (who just gave up 35 second-half points to a team) and the Ravens (who gave up 49 points in Week 1).  All the hype this week about Richard Sherman overshadows the fact that, as a team, Seattle ranked first in the league in eight separate defensive categories.  Vegas favoring Denver is a reflection of their trust in Manning’s leadership and experience; but let’s not forget that the three quarterback kings of the AFC (Manning, Brady and Roethlisberger) are a combined 0-4 in Super Bowls since 2007.  Brady and Manning were favorites in their losses. 

            I have to pick the Seahawks here.  I did not think so originally, but after looking at the matchups, it’s pretty clear.  I think even if Denver jumps out to an early lead like the 49ers did, the Seahawks will settle in and dictate the tempo and momentum of the game.  I’m picking Seattle, but I still irrationally hate them – Pete Carroll’s smug smile and stupid ironed khakis, Richard Sherman’s antics which get overlooked by officials, the rampant PED use only scratching the surface, and the helplessly delusional fan base living in isolation from reality like Norma Desmond.  I refuse to like them and I am not alone (although I admit to being equally delusional for disliking them so much).  But they are the best team in football and they will win Sunday.  And I will be happy for Todd, Terry, Paul Allen, Cameron Crowe, Ann Wilson, Macklemore & Ryan Lewis, Kathy Goertzen, Dave Grohl, Bill Nye, Dave Niehaus, Digital Dave Niehaus, Howard Schultz, the Red Robin restaurant chain, Sir Mix-a-Lot, ferry boats, umbrellas, Skittles, the staff at Seattle Grace Hospital (current and diseased), Josh Brown, traffic on 520 Eastbound across Lake Washington, Sheriff Reichert, Serious Pie pizza, and Kurt Donald Cobain, may he rest in peace. Seattle > Omaha.

Prediction: Seahawks 34, Broncos 28

Playoff Doppelganger: Every Peyton Manning playoff game 1999-2006, 2008-present.  And every Super Bowl not officiated by Bill Leavy.

Read More

SNL 39.11 Review - Drake

It's the first episode of 2014 after Saturday Night Live took their Christmas break, and there are many things of note here.  Coming off what is as close to a perfect episode as you can get, this episode was going to feel slightly anticlimactic no matter what it held.  Some automatic excitement around this episode surrounded the newest cast member Shasheer Zamata who was hired to fill the "minority female" role on the cast.  Drake brought some excitement too, serving as the third host this season to serve double duty as host and musical guest (3.5 if you consider Timberlake's role in the Fallon episode).  I was wondering how well a guy like Drake could do in this setting.  Although the episode turned out to be pretty vanilla, Drake proved that he was worthy of the honor.

Cold Opening

With a month between episodes, they had to do something that allowed for a crash course in current events to start the show.  Enter Piers Morgan via Taran Killam.  They were able to cover Chris Christie's Bridge-Gate scandal, the A-Rod circus (which allowed for the rare appearance of the host in the Cold Open), and Justin Bieber.  It was quite a fun way to start the show immediately allowed for the audience to see some of the things that Drake was going to bring to the table.

Monologue

This was one of the best monologues of the season so far.  Drake explored the fact that he is a Black Jewish Canadian and flashed back to his Bar-Mitzvah.  All of a sudden, his Bar-Mitzvah recitations turned into a self-deprecating rap.  This was definitely the highlight of the show.  It also showed the first appearance of Zamata who instantly just became part of the gang.

Weekend Update

Seth Meyers only has a couple episodes left, and this episode continued the tour of his favorite Weekend Update guests with Nasim Pedrad's Arianna Huffington (one of her few characters that doesn't annoy me).  She was solid as usual, but the best part of this week's Weekend Update was their commentary on this year's Golden Globes featuring a silly and delirious Jacqueline Bisset brought to us by Vanessa Bayer.  It was a dead on impression of a very awkward moment during the yearly broadcast.

Best Sketch

Drake was great all night.  His monologue was outstanding.  He gave it 100% every time he was out there.  However, the material just wasn't there.  It was hard to pick a best sketch from all the very average sketches there were.  However, the one that had the best moments was probably the sleep over.  Having Zamata in the cast allowed for this sketch to be possible as Drake plays her dorky dad hosting the sleepover.  Every time the dad popped into the room of girls, one of the guests (Aidy Bryant) became more and more attracted to her friend's dad.  What starts as a slightly awkwardly funny sketch goes completely haywire by the end with Bryant showing why she is one of the most naturally funny cast members on the show right now.

Worst Sketch

This decision was easy, however it had nothing to do with the host.  As has been the case for several of my least favorite sketches this season, this sketch revolves around Nasim Pedrad producing yet another quirky Middle Eastern character that is supposed to be funny and really isn't.  This scenario puts her in Disney World experiencing what it was like to be Indiana Jones.  Drake was great trying to hold Rahat's attention and in turn, trying to hold the sketch together, but it ultimately failed.

Dark Horse Sketch

There really wasn't a dark horse sketch this episode.  None of the sketches after the Weekend Update halftime marker were really any good.  So instead I am going to talk about another one of my favorite sketches from earlier in the episode.  One of the interesting bits of trivia surrounding Drake was that he used to star on the TV show Degrassi.  This sketch explores other possibilities of rappers appearing in classic TV shows.  The highlight was Drake impersonating Lil' Wayne impersonating Urkel.  Pretty surreal.  Here is another highlight.  How are you doing on your New Year's Resolutions?  Hopefully better than these people...

Grade

This was a successful episode in the sense that it showcased a star in Drake displaying his comedic talent in a very effective way.  He really surprised me here.  I had a lot of fun watching his natural ability for entertaining in more ways than one.  However, it is starting to become a trend that the creative team of Saturday Night Live is not consistently producing material worth the talent the show is showcasing.  With head writer Colin Jost moving into the Update desk to replace Seth Meyers in a couple weeks, hopefully it will jump start the creative juices.  Either way, the show is still so much fun to watch because of the immense talent that is brought every week by the cast and the great run of hosts they have had.

***C+***

Watch the full episode here:

Read More