There are a few issues I have with watching the Oscars. First of all, I’m not a huge movie fan. While I can binge on a TV series for days, I find it hard to get through a two-hour film.
I’m also audio sensitive. Not to the loud sound effects in theatres, like my wife and daughter, but to the eating. Yes, I get a little triggered when I hear people, not just in the theatre, but in the film eating. Mock me all you want!
And lastly, perhaps the most problematic of all, I don’t enjoy the Academy Awards. Watching three hours of nominations and thank you speeches is a tough go for me. Now to be fair, there have been moments that got me a little more interested. The announcement of the wrong Best Picture seven years ago made a big splash in the news. Then there was the infamous Will Smith-Chris Rock slap of 2022. To this day, I regret not seeing that live.
So this year, I planned to watch them. To help boost my interest, I set out to watch all ten movies nominated for Best Picture. I had already watched two of them – Barbie and Oppenheimer, affectionately known as a couple, Barbenheimer – so 20% of my work was done by the time the nominees were announced. Unfortunately, two of the films were still unavailable to stream or rent at time of writing, so I passed on those. That left me with six over two months which was doable, even for me. (Interestingly, some Oscars voters have admitted they don't watch all the films either.)
For those I watched, I will say that I thoroughly enjoyed half of them. With that out of the way, here are my critical reviews, in no particular order. The nominees are:
Barbie. I've already reviewed this one in a previous blog but let me repeat: It’s a fun ride. Clever. Imaginative. Hilarious at times. The great irony is that Ryan Gosling, who plays Ken, got nominated for Best Supporting Actor while director Greta Gerwig and lead actress Margot Robbie got nothing. Sigh. Such is life in a patriarchal world. 4/5 stars
Maestro. If you’re a Leonard Bernstein fan, I assure you, you won’t be after watching this movie. Nothing against Bernstein. He led a complicated life that produced some great musical productions like West Side Story. But with any biographical film, there has to be something interesting going on... And despite the great acting, I found very little to get interested in. Lo niente! (That’s Italian for nothing.) 1/5 stars
Killers of the Flower Moon. This was an illuminating drama about the tragic murders committed against the Osage Nation in Oklahoma in the 1920s. The movie’s biggest downside: It’s long... I could have almost read the book faster than Martin Scorsese’s three-and-half-hour production. As for acting, Leonardo DiCaprio's performance as a dim-witted scumbag was excellent (however you want to interpret that). Robert De Niro’s performance was more predictable – acting as he has in many roles before – this time as a pseudo-mafia boss/cattle rancher in the Midwest, which took something away from the movie’s believability (it is based on a true story). Restoring that authenticity was Lily Gladstone who plays a wise and trusting Osage woman at the centre of it all. I recommend to watch in two sittings. 4/5 stars
Poor Things. This movie wasn’t in a theatre near me and is only available for purchase. I refuse to own a movie I may not enjoy. Pass!
Anatomy of a Fall. This film is also long, going into intense detail about the death of a man whose demise at first appears mysterious, but after a while, you realize it’s not. I mean, there are only so many angles to play. While well written, I would not watch again. 2/5 stars
American Fiction. This is a witty film about a middle-aged Black author who finally achieves success by selling out to white audiences by writing a book called “My Pafology” (later retitled with an obscenity) as a joke. In return, this mild-mannered professor becomes a best-selling author who struggles with his new identity. While the film probably tackles one-too-many progressive issues in two hours, it saves itself with a unique ending (or two). We saw it in theatre, but definitely worth the money to rent or stream. 4/5 stars
The Holdovers. This story about a lonely teacher who bonds with a troubled teen in a boarding school over Christmas reminded me a little of Dead Poet’s Society. While he’s no Robin Williams, Paul Giamatti plays the role well. Did I find the film to be meaningful? A little. Was the ending a disappointment. Kind of. It was okay. 3/5 stars
The Zone of Interest. I would have loved to watch this film, even with subtitles, but alas, they want me to buy it. Pass!
Past Lives. This is a cute partially foreign film. It’s the classic he-loves-her-but-she-moves-to-America-and-he-stays-in-Korea-and-regrets-it-ever-since love story. Spoiler alert: They don’t get back together. As sad as the ending was (sorry!), I kind of enjoyed it. 3.5/5 stars
Oppenheimer. I took my family to see this at
our local IMAX – you know, the one on the street corner – and did not regret
it. Seeing that mushroom cloud on an eight-story tall screen with a wall full
of speakers blew me away (no pun intended). The cinematic trickery of when the
first atomic bomb went off was masterful... and quite funny from my perspective:
My wife and daughter, who had plugged their ears in anticipation, waited
through a good thirty seconds of silence before our seats began to shake from
the explosion’s rumbling base. Unlike Maestro, this three-hour film kept
me interested until the very end. I didn’t even hear anyone chewing
popcorn! My only complaint was the lack of subtitles. Sure, the movie is in
English, but with so many historical references and names thrown around, a few
footnotes at the bottom of the screen would have been nice. Other than that, a
masterpiece. Bravo! 5/5 stars
So, without further ado, the winner of Best Picture I would award to...
Maestro.
Just keeping things interesting.
No comments:
Post a Comment