This Sunday is the Academy Awards. I'm going to try to compile my Oscar predictions by Friday. However, they will be based off of what I have seen. I won't be able to see everything. Therefore, I cannot be perfect (implying that were I able to see everything I would be perfect). I'm planning on watching all of the short films one of these next few days (and posting about them, of course). But I will probably not be able to watch the following films:
-Blood Diamond (nominated -- Leonardo DiCaprio for Actor, Djimon Hounsou for Supporting Actor, Editing, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing)
-Venus (nominated -- Peter O'Toole for Actor)
-The Pursuit of Happyness (nominated -- Will Smith for Actor)
-Notes on a Scandel (nominated -- Judi Dench for Actress, Cate Blanchett for Supporting Actress, Adapted Screenplay)
-Cars or Monster House (both nominated for Animated Feature)
-The Black Dahlia (nominated for Cinematography)
-The Curse of the Golden Flower (nominated for Costume Design)
-Marie Antoinette (nominated for Costume Design)
-Iraq in Fragments or My Country, My Country (both nominated for Feature Documentary)
-After the Wedding or Days of Glory (both nominated for Foreign Language Film)
-Apocalypto (nominated for Make-up, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing)
-The Good German (nominated for Music)
-Flags of Our Fathers (nominated for Sound Editing, Sound Mixing)
-Poseidon (nominated for Visual Effects)
If you think that list is long, try seeing the list of what I have seen.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Breach
It's this time of year that many, many, many movies come out that will never be remember. They're not necessarily bad movies, they're just movies that are decent to what we the movie-watchers know as "pretty good," and they come out at a time of the year when people don't care enough about new movies. This is Oscar season. People only care about Oscar nominated movies from the past year.
Breach is one of these films. It's not a bad film, by any means. It's a perfectly adequate piece of film. It's an interesting thriller, a well-told tale. But at the same time, it's missing that extra umph that would give it enough soul to make it a truly great film. The movie just lacks that soul. The soul is the overall "why do I care" factor. It's a good movie, but halfway into it I couldn't help but feel like I didn't really care all that much about where it was going. It's not that it's not interesting, it's just that it doesn't have enough substance. The way the movie opens tells you straight up how things are going to be. The actual duration of the movie is merely the fancy stuff that brings you from point A to point B.
But Chris Cooper does a wonderful job as the veteran FBI mole. In fact this doesn't even need to be stated. Everything that Chris Cooper has done has been wonderful. That man can do no wrong. And this is no exception. His performance really put some life into that character, which is something that could have been done wrong by another actor and would have led to a worse film. Chris Cooper alone gives this movie a little more reason for one to go see it.
But give it 5 years. Let the dust settle. Then you'll see what I mean. That's the sad part. Now go watch the Oscars.
B-
IMDB information on BREACH
Breach is one of these films. It's not a bad film, by any means. It's a perfectly adequate piece of film. It's an interesting thriller, a well-told tale. But at the same time, it's missing that extra umph that would give it enough soul to make it a truly great film. The movie just lacks that soul. The soul is the overall "why do I care" factor. It's a good movie, but halfway into it I couldn't help but feel like I didn't really care all that much about where it was going. It's not that it's not interesting, it's just that it doesn't have enough substance. The way the movie opens tells you straight up how things are going to be. The actual duration of the movie is merely the fancy stuff that brings you from point A to point B.
But Chris Cooper does a wonderful job as the veteran FBI mole. In fact this doesn't even need to be stated. Everything that Chris Cooper has done has been wonderful. That man can do no wrong. And this is no exception. His performance really put some life into that character, which is something that could have been done wrong by another actor and would have led to a worse film. Chris Cooper alone gives this movie a little more reason for one to go see it.
But give it 5 years. Let the dust settle. Then you'll see what I mean. That's the sad part. Now go watch the Oscars.
B-
IMDB information on BREACH
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Grindhouse Trailer!
Still 2 more months until this sure-to-please grindhouse tribute is released, but the trailer makes it look like it'll be what we're hoping for.
Trailer for GRINDHOUSE
Trailer for GRINDHOUSE
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Jon's Top 10 of 2006
I've finally made my decision. Now, without further ado, my list is as follows:
1. The Departed
2. Pan's Labyrinth
3. Little Children
4. Children of Men
5. The Prestige
6. Letters From Iwo Jima
7. Little Miss Sunshine
8. United 93
9. Babel
10. The Last King of Scotland
1. The Departed
2. Pan's Labyrinth
3. Little Children
4. Children of Men
5. The Prestige
6. Letters From Iwo Jima
7. Little Miss Sunshine
8. United 93
9. Babel
10. The Last King of Scotland
The Queen
Just as I suspected. The Queen is a movie solely based upon its leading performance. I had to dive right into that because this is the most essential information about the film.
I don't know, the subject matter doesn't seem entirely interesting enough to hold a film. Frankly, if Helen Mirren's performance wasn't as perfectly spot-on as it was, the film wouldn't really have a saving grace. Well, Michael Sheen also does quite a good job. The acting in the movie, in general, I guess, should get a round of applause. But it's the actual movie itself that I just find to be slightly interesting. It's very much a character study about a character that I had no reason to be very interested in. I got the depth of what was trying to be portrayed pretty early on... and it just stayed there. I was just not very satisfied with this film. Perhaps Rotten Tomatoes and it's near-perfect rating of it had me expecting a masterpiece, but this was just not too much.
Now Helen Mirren will win the Oscar, and she deserves it, too. No one is as convincing at being someone that they are not as she is at being the queen. But as for the other awards, including Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay, I would be baffled if it one them. It's definitely not one of the best movies of the year, and the screenplay was hardly noteable.
I really think I was expecting more. Disappointment is never good. Especially this close to the Oscars.
C+
IMDB information on THE QUEEN
I don't know, the subject matter doesn't seem entirely interesting enough to hold a film. Frankly, if Helen Mirren's performance wasn't as perfectly spot-on as it was, the film wouldn't really have a saving grace. Well, Michael Sheen also does quite a good job. The acting in the movie, in general, I guess, should get a round of applause. But it's the actual movie itself that I just find to be slightly interesting. It's very much a character study about a character that I had no reason to be very interested in. I got the depth of what was trying to be portrayed pretty early on... and it just stayed there. I was just not very satisfied with this film. Perhaps Rotten Tomatoes and it's near-perfect rating of it had me expecting a masterpiece, but this was just not too much.
Now Helen Mirren will win the Oscar, and she deserves it, too. No one is as convincing at being someone that they are not as she is at being the queen. But as for the other awards, including Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay, I would be baffled if it one them. It's definitely not one of the best movies of the year, and the screenplay was hardly noteable.
I really think I was expecting more. Disappointment is never good. Especially this close to the Oscars.
C+
IMDB information on THE QUEEN
Thursday, February 01, 2007
New Layout -- Top Ten List Almost In
Anyone who's been here before may notice that I've changed my layout a bit. I'd been meaning to change some things around and I finally got around to it. Hope it makes things more convenient for you, the reader.
As for my Top Ten of 2006 List goes, I've pretty much created a list already. However, I want to give all films a chance, so I will not make my list until I've seen The Queen, at the very least. If I can fit in Flags of Our Fathers and Notes on a Scandal I will, but I have a feeling they wouldn't make my list. I'll see them for nomination purposes before I make my Oscar predictions. But my Top 10 list should be ready with in the next week or so. Patience.
As for my Top Ten of 2006 List goes, I've pretty much created a list already. However, I want to give all films a chance, so I will not make my list until I've seen The Queen, at the very least. If I can fit in Flags of Our Fathers and Notes on a Scandal I will, but I have a feeling they wouldn't make my list. I'll see them for nomination purposes before I make my Oscar predictions. But my Top 10 list should be ready with in the next week or so. Patience.
Dreamgirls
Although taking a little time away from Los Angeles, I can never take time away from the movies. I finally caught Dreamgirls after a month of staying away because of the constant sold out theaters. I certainly did not get a sold out crowd; I went on a Monday night in New Orleans. There were 4 people in the theater.
As for the film, I enjoyed it. Not one of the best musicals I've seen, but it was definitely a fun film. The talent is tremendous. I can't even go 3 sentences without mentioning how wonderful Jennifer Hudson is. At the start I was hesitant. I thought, "could someone who has never acted before really win an Oscar? I mean, she's just singing." But her performance is amazing. "And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going" is the highlight of the film and one of the greatest moments of cinema from the past year. That song/scene alone will win her the Oscar or my name isn't Jon. And believe me, it certainly is.
The rest of the movie isn't bad. It's not one of those things where just a few aspects of it are good. There are loads of good performances. I was particularly impressed by Jamie Foxx, a man who I've been quite unimpressed with in the past. I thought he did a better job in this film than he did in the Oscar-winning performance of Ray. Ah well. Not that I want him to win. I think Eddie Murphy did a very good job as the James Brown-like Jimmy Early. And the songs are good, too. It's just fun to hear the different songs and go through the times with the music.
One thing I thought was going to be true about the movie was that it was going to feel a little odd being on the big screen since a lot of musicals don't translate well. However, this did just fine. The way they incorporated the music into montages and background worked perfectly in cinema. This is obviously something that wouldn't have happened on the stage, so the movie wasn't just a replica of the stage version, either. It's nice to see adaptations take some freedom with things.
As for what isn't hot about the film, there are problems with length (as there usually are in musicals), some performances that were less than extraordinary, and some dissatisfaction with the wrap up of the plot. But hey, who really cares?
But I'm not surprised about it not getting the Oscar nomination. I liked the film a lot, but I don't think it's one of the 10 best films of the year. It's not really better than the films nominated for best picture. But it's still an enjoyable movie. One of the most fun films of the year. It just wouldn't be right to go down in history as the "best film of 2006" when it's really just good entertainment with a few amazing performances. It's fine. Let it destroy the competition in every category it's nominated in. Forget the loss for best picture. It'll live on.
B+
IMDB information on DREAMGIRLS
As for the film, I enjoyed it. Not one of the best musicals I've seen, but it was definitely a fun film. The talent is tremendous. I can't even go 3 sentences without mentioning how wonderful Jennifer Hudson is. At the start I was hesitant. I thought, "could someone who has never acted before really win an Oscar? I mean, she's just singing." But her performance is amazing. "And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going" is the highlight of the film and one of the greatest moments of cinema from the past year. That song/scene alone will win her the Oscar or my name isn't Jon. And believe me, it certainly is.
The rest of the movie isn't bad. It's not one of those things where just a few aspects of it are good. There are loads of good performances. I was particularly impressed by Jamie Foxx, a man who I've been quite unimpressed with in the past. I thought he did a better job in this film than he did in the Oscar-winning performance of Ray. Ah well. Not that I want him to win. I think Eddie Murphy did a very good job as the James Brown-like Jimmy Early. And the songs are good, too. It's just fun to hear the different songs and go through the times with the music.
One thing I thought was going to be true about the movie was that it was going to feel a little odd being on the big screen since a lot of musicals don't translate well. However, this did just fine. The way they incorporated the music into montages and background worked perfectly in cinema. This is obviously something that wouldn't have happened on the stage, so the movie wasn't just a replica of the stage version, either. It's nice to see adaptations take some freedom with things.
As for what isn't hot about the film, there are problems with length (as there usually are in musicals), some performances that were less than extraordinary, and some dissatisfaction with the wrap up of the plot. But hey, who really cares?
But I'm not surprised about it not getting the Oscar nomination. I liked the film a lot, but I don't think it's one of the 10 best films of the year. It's not really better than the films nominated for best picture. But it's still an enjoyable movie. One of the most fun films of the year. It just wouldn't be right to go down in history as the "best film of 2006" when it's really just good entertainment with a few amazing performances. It's fine. Let it destroy the competition in every category it's nominated in. Forget the loss for best picture. It'll live on.
B+
IMDB information on DREAMGIRLS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)