MOB: The Social Network

This early morning's post will consist of a conversation about The Social Network, both of its own cinematic merits and its narrative this upcoming awards season.

Generally, people are trying to frame many of the major categories as if it's already over. The Social Nework, David Fincher, Colin Firth, Natalie Portman, and Aaron Sorkin. I do think it'd be an awful shame if that were the case, but I do think one thing is obvious: two films stand ahead of the pack to go vis-à-vis each other as it stands now for the top prize, and those are The Social Network and The King's Speech.

Numbers-wise, I posted the other day that The King's Speech had the numbers and pedigree to give it the edge between the two films. It didn't take long soon after to realize that, surface level, yes, it does seem hard to debate. But here's the thing it doesn't really have: the narrative. The Social Network has been framed as a generational event. Essential viewing. Speaks to a young generation as well as to that of all basic human instincts. Critics who aren't Armond White have monumentally supported the film with a tremendous 98 score on metacritic, zooming past Toy Story 3 as the best reviewed of the year.

Plus, it's not as if The Social Network doesn't have a leg to stand on in the Academy demographics. In fact, it has more than enough to win. Fincher's name will inspire more out of the directors than Tom Hooper. If there's any lock in the major categories its Aaron Sorkin for his complex, interweaving out-of-sequential order screenplay. It seems like a heavy favorite to take the SAG Ensemble Award and will probably come out of it with 1-3 acting nominations (most sure is Andrew Garfield, though Eisenberg and Timberlake have a considerable shot as well). So it's got the biggest demographics: the actors (though would still have to catch up to The King's Speech safe 3 acting nominations as of right now).

It's got the major bases covered. Out of techs, a few things seem to be pretty sure: that Roger Deakins will finally win his long overdue Cinematography statuette for True Grit (a kickass trailer included in the previews for The Social Network), heavy leanings in costumes and art direction for The King's Speech, and The Social Network's editing prize. It's as baity in editing as techs get, not only weaving together three simultaneous storylines but jumping back and forth between present and past. It could probably ride a wave of love over to a cinematography nomination as well with its various blurs and cold tones that keeps the viewer on their feet. It is very likely to see love out of the sound categories in both mixing and editing, and perhaps even Dave Navarro for Best Original Score. And, who knows, could even get visual effects with Fincher's usually subtle touches of CGI.

That itself could take it well beyond double-digit nominations, but the most important touch of all is the narrative that has already been set and put into play. It should be populist enough in a year that seems to be dominated by big Hollywood, tracking very well for this weekend with enough good word-of-mouth to sustain strong legs throughout the entire awards season only fueled by the more awards it will win. It has the critics on their side and could sweep the three majors (NY/LA/NSFC). But it's the way people are talking about it.

There have been doubts, however, that not all Academy members will respond well to it. It's a little too "fresh," little too "hip." They're referring to the ever large segment of older Academy voters, for whom the film is certainly not made for. But I would say that's one aspect equal in importance to all the others mentioned where The Social Network seems destined to ace in and dominate, and more than capable of overcoming that obstacle. It looks like its Fincher's turn to win this year, Sorkin's in the lead to win, its editing is in the lead to win, and Andrew Garfield looks like he may very well be able to stand on his own against long time heavy weights like Christian Bale, Sam Rockwell, Mark Ruffalo and Geoffrey Rush.

Can he win? At this point in doesn't seem all that likely with reviews not seeming to single him out more than any other member of the cast, but as far as I can tell, I won't see a better performance in the category this year. In a film brimming with mechanized characters rendered more robotically distant and cold due to technology and online social networks, he's the only one who brings a semblance of humanity. Written very sympathetically, you ache as he remains a loyal and faithful loving friend to Mark — at one time, each other's only close friend. The tension in his performance builds up throughout to the point where it boils over and is released at the climax of this already breakneck-paced film that he takes complete control over. Never histrionic, only real.

It's not as if he doesn't have a chance to win. Geoffrey Rush seems poised to be very friendly with critics this year. Christian Bale and Sam Rockwell will be pushed to get their first acting nominations in the categories but Rockwell's film doesn't quite have the reviews to keep it a very widely seen film nor widely recognized in other categories. I don't think The Fighter will, either. I think Garfield's age might be holding him back but he'll just need a Golden Globe to keep his name in the game, or even one of the major critics prizes (and not just the "breakthrough awards" that he'll be fighting for against Jennifer Lawrence).

Besides, leaving the film, the only thing anyone around me on all sides were talking about exiting the theater was his performance. They checked the credits to check his name — "Andrew Garfield...he was amaaaaazing!" He's a crowd favorite, for sure. And in a film billed as a once-in-a-generation event, being that much of a standout that he dominates the conversation about the film to many afterward is a very good sign that many seeing the film in Hollywood will feel the same way. Besides, he's an attractive young man (see: above). It will soon be revealed to people through interviews that he is, in fact, English (adding to his appeal and how much he impresses people with his undetectable accent in the film). He will also be shown to be absolutely adorable if not slightly geeky (see: his rendition of The Gregory Brothers' "Bed Intrusion Song"). People are looking forward to his reboot of Spider-Man. The kid's a star. That's the fact of the matter. And, very likely, he'll end up winning an Oscar one day. This very bloody well could be and, likely, should be the year.

So, there's that. He has a chance for the win, and if I have anything to do with it, then he will win. Read more!

RIP: Sally Menke

They say that when you make a film, you really make it three times: when you write it, when you actually shoot it, and then when you edit it. Significant editor collaborations have been crucial to specific directors and the effectiveness of their films, and when you think of the most important collaborators the two that would come immediately to my mind are Martin Scorsese/Thelma Schoonmaker, and Quentin Tarantino/Sally Menke.

Considered an unsung co-author of sorts by the mainstream of Tarantino's films, it's hard to imagine his films' pop culture impacts without the expert editorial work his unique vision required. How are you gonna keep the tension of Reservoir Dogs largely in a single warehouse in between all the Tarantinoan dialogue? How do you jump so unconfusingly between the three chronologically separate storylines of the enormously influential postmodern technique of Pulp Fiction? One scene they show in most of my film classes is the climactic exchange of money in Jackie Brown, which is a scene Tarantino needed desperately to work and is nearly all the work of Menke. Then we move on to the Kill Bills, where the first volume's rapid fast cuts including the iconic scene of the blood-racing fight between The Bride and the Crazy 88s lent to the proper tone Tarantino needed for that montage. You compare that with the slower, meditative long takes Menke cuts for the second volume, more necessary for that spaghetti western tone Tarantino had in mind. In Death Proof, Tarantino entrusted her editing skills for what turned out to be possibly the greatest car chase sequence in film history. Her most recent Oscar nomination came from Inglourious Basterds, where her work was endlessly impressive and nearly invisible. Think of the opening shot where she contrasts the long takes so effortlessly with the short ones that cut closer and closer into the two characters' faces as the tension builds. Think of the bar scene where you didn't realize the other guy in the room until half way through.

The sudden end of this collaboration is an enormous loss to the film world. One of the best editors there ever was, and who knows how much more she could have done at just 56. RIP Sally Menke.

Read more!

NYFF Diaries: Poetry, and first weekend report card

At the risk of giving too much away about this wonderful flick, I've decided upon a tablet format for this review as well.

Poetry is a fascinating and often heartbreaking story focusing around an older woman desperate for fulfillment, vision, and control over her thoughts and memories. At the center of it is a behemoth of a performance by Jeong-he Yoon, displaying a brave vulnerability throughout with sensitivity and delicacy. Points of the film will have you feeling as light as a feather from its sheer loveliness, other points will have your jaw to the floor in disturbing disbelief. With a runtime of approximately two and a half hours, it did tend to cinematically ramble a bit in its last half hour where it got slightly distracted from the beautiful simplicity of the central and most interesting storyline, but it compensates with a final scene of pure visual poetry that rivals any film sequence since the new millennium.

Grade: A-

Which leaves us with these results after this first weekend of the New York Film Festival.

Of Gods and Men: C
Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives: A+
Poetry: A-

Next up: Inside Job this Friday! Read more!

NYFF Diaries: Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives

Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives, which enchanted Tim Burton's jury to a Palme D'Or win at this year's Cannes Film Festival, is a mystifying and exquisite crowning jewel on Thai director Apichatpong Weerasethakul's young career so far. From the opening long take of a water buffalo immersed in the luscious Thai forests, you get the sense that Weerasethakul's whole world is very much alive. Each leaf in his frame has a liveliness and spirit all its own.

When describing her experience viewing director Apichatpong Weerasethakul's first festival sensation, Tropical Malady, Tilda Swinton once said: "I actually remember rubbing my eyes with my fists...convinced, for one split second, that I fallen asleep, that only my unconscious could have come up with such a texture of sensation." Certainly dreamlike, Weerasethakul's sensory cinema is a very pure and transportative one; you feel very much apart of the Thai jungles. You feel yourself in its waters. Trapped in its caves.

We follow Uncle Boonmee in his twilight days with the utmost passion. His wife returns to him and her sister he lives with in the form of a ghost at the dinner table. The way he had missed his beloved wife for so long is heartbreaking to see play out on the screen. His son walks up in the form of some sort of monkey-ghost. Weerasethakul modeled him after the almost campy Thai television of his childhood where these sorts of figures were clearly men in monkey costumes, but it doesn't play nearly as cheaply in appearance or theme. We follow one of Boonmee's recollections as a catfish who had once made love to a human princess. I guarantee you that you will never see such a sequence in film made so naturally, made to seem so ordinary, and so believable. Weerasethakul's ode to Thai folklore never comes across as the least bit absurd or hard to take seriously.

We see Uncle Boonmee predicting a future life in Thailand, shot very reminiscently of La Jetée's nightmarish account of a similar future, ruled by a thought-controlling military and the more fashionable people turning away from the natural life of peace in the forests we have lived with the character throughout the film in favor of a crueler life of modernity in fashion and technology. Once Uncle Boonmee passes, we see a life without him where people are glued to their TV sets and obsessed with counting money.

The film is a floating world of fleeting beauty. A quiet meditation of a land past, present and future. Alive with the sounds of insects, of night, of rustling leaves. The beautiful cinematography can capture the richness of tress, the pristine water or the monotony of manmade walls at any given moment. It's a stunning achievement.

Grade: A+ Read more!

NYFF Diaries: Of Gods and Men

Left to Right: Jacques Herlin as Amédée and Michael Lonsdale as Luc
© Marie-Julie Maille / Why Not Productions, Courtesy of Sony Pictures Classics

Technically, SPC asked me to hold off publishing any proper reviews until the film's US release in February, so here's just a little tablet.

Of Gods and Men offers some interesting looks into a group of very Christian monks at the onset of Islamic fundamentalism beginning to take hold in the Middle East in 90s Algeria. A true story, director Beauvois offers thought pondering parallels to how the West should probably interact with the region through such turbulent times, offering messages of tolerance and education of Islam's more peaceful teachings. There were fascinating sequences that played out in the film, but they were put very few and far between tedious scenes of the monks' average everyday activities and the repetition of their standard protocol. Long stretches of largely uninteresting dialogue tried desperately to inject the screenplay's themes after the film had wasted much precious time with recounting very mundane daily lives of these monks, and ultimately made the film play out at an excruciating pace that made the two hours feel more like four to five.

Grade: C Read more!

MOB: The King's Speech confirms its' frontrunner status by winning Toronto Film Festival Audience Award

Past winners of the Cadillac People’s Choice Award prize include BP nominees Precious, Slumdog Millionaire, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, and American Beauty. Read more!

MOB: Ranking the chances for the big win.

It's near impossible to tell at this point what film will wind up winning Best Picture, just like with any year, though this year seems particularly challenging. So much goes into play, from the politics to the timing (that can change per week) to the surprise wins and omissions. Steve Poland was able to do it last year with The Hurt Locker, and this year he's saying The King's Speech. I'm inclined to agree with him.

But first, let's start with the various cons.
I would love to say The Way Back, but with a release in itself this year being uncertain and, if it is, being handled by a less than capable distributor I think the film would get recognition in nominations but definitely not really be in play for the win (besides, its grim as hell). Harvey will pimp the hell out of The King's Speech, it will certainly have actor support, it will have tech support, and it should garner a fair share of the BAFTA block. But it just seems...too obvious. The Social Network suffers from being so anticipated so early, just think of the last Sorkin screenplay helmed by a loved director — Charlie Wilson's War was definitely slated to be the '07 frontrunner before any of the '07 movies came out. 127 Hours has legitimate buzz coming out of Toronto but, though not impossible, it seems way too soon to reward Boyle again (though, if he deserves it again he deserves it again [obvious statement is obvious]). Another Year should make a splash in the critics' arena, and I think it will be appreciated, but a bit too quiet next to this year's epics. Black Swan has the buzz and will have the devoted fanbase, and will have tech appreciation, and will have actor support, but it's said to likely to alienate the crucial older demographic of Academy voters desperately needed to stand out in a field of ten. I think Toy Story 3, The Kids Are All Right and Inception have been out long enough to solidify themselves as contenders for the nomination but perhaps too long to sustain enough buzz for the top win. Besides, Nolan couldn't even get nominated for The Dark Knight. What makes anyone think he'll actually win for Inception?

In the end, the Oscar race is a numbers game. And as such, I think The King's Speech has got the numbers it needs. I guess I'd rank the contenders as such, and this time offer up some pros and less cons.
Here are my rankings (this will also count as my updated Best Picture prediction):

1. The King's Speech - I think Richard Corliss broke it down pretty well in his underwhelming review of the movie:
"...whereas almost no recent box-office hits have been set in the historical past, nearly 60% of the films nominated for best picture from 2000 to 2009 were — at least two of the five nominees every year, and sometimes four or all five (in 2009: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader and most of Slumdog Millionaire). Fifteen of the 50 films nominated in that decade had historical figures as their subjects, from Howard Hughes to Ray Charles, Edward R. Murrow to Harvey Milk. Six of the 50 were set in Britain, and seven took place during World War II or the years leading up to it, with Hitler's shadow looming menacingly and conveniently. (The Academy voters still love to hate the Nazis.) It also helps to focus on a British monarch, as in The Queen, or on a character with a severe physical or emotional disability A Beautiful Mind, Ray, Benjamin Button) that he learns to live with or conquer through the help of those who love him.
...The King's Speech adheres to every rule in the Oscar playbook. It's a fact-based drama about a British monarch with a crippling vocal handicap, set in the years 1925 to 1939 and climaxing with Britain's declaration of war against Nazi Germany."

And as I said, numbers numbers numbers. A likely contender in 3 out of 4 acting categories — all the major characters of the film, really — and one actually really good shot of winning (the only major one, too, in Lead Actor), it'll clearly have significant support in the most significant of demographics (the Acting branch). Check. Harvey Weinstein pimping the hell out of it. Not guaranteed, but never hurts. Check. Baity techs in costume, set direction, makeup, etc. More and more votes pouring in. Check. Critical success. Excellent reviews, for the most part. Check. BAFTA support. With these kinds of actors? Please. Check. A weighed ballot system that will give more weight to "consensus" films than fringe fanbase ones? I think that will help this out a lot, since it can only inspire so much "passion" out of cinephiles. So...yeah.

2. 127 Hours - Anyone who thinks that the Academy regrets their decision to reward Slumdog Millionaire are just plain wrong. They are wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Slumdog was beloved and is still beloved in Hollywood and the general mainstream of American audiences, and most of the factors making Slumdog the winningest film in awards season history are only put to more boldly audacious and artistic use in 127 Hours. The other major film to get MAJOR awards traction out of Toronto after The King's Speech, Boyle seems to pull the concept off magnificently which will impress most who see it. It will work for those tech branches that also fell in love with Slumdog's techs — it looks like the general tactic of cinematography, editing, music, etc. will largely stay the same. Those are some major fucking voting bodies. Seems a one man show of sorts of James Franco, who the acting community in Hollywood (for some reason) seems eager to start rewarding. Seems like lightning can only strike so many times for one director, but it looks like the mainstream is finally getting a glimpse at Danny Boyle's largely impressive range and capability to come out consistently with something daring, fresh, innovative and different every time. Looks to be Fox Searchlight's most prized possession this year, and this past decade have seemed to learn enough awards savvy to outshine Harvey himself in Hollywood influence. Sasha Stone says it best: "Danny Boyle’s second slam dunk is causing tears, standing ovations and, on occasion, seizures." That should be good enough to keep it in the press conversation, too.

3. Blue Valentine - Total wildcard, but I think it will come out to really strong reviews. Too small to be considered too obvious or boring a choice, two superstar lead roles anchoring the film, will surely have more exposure than Another Year to American audiences, and will come out too late for any particular backlash to have really settled in around prime voting time. I think if AMPAS has trouble picking a film to latch onto by New Year's Eve, this could be a darkhorse contender. Who knows what Harvey has up his sleeve for this one.

4. Black Swan - Already pretty widely seen as good. Damn good. Will make money. Damn good money. Natalie Portman is just the right age in just the right role at just the right time for this to be her shot at finding herself on the Kodak Theater stage that night. Will have devoted fans, but will likely also have devoted backlashers. The tone's said to be gritty enough to join the club of the last four Best Picture winners.

5. Another Year - Anyone whose seen it seems to love it. Anyone who hates it hasn't seemed to have seen it, because frankly I haven't heard a negative word. Desperately needs to be seen, desperately needs hometown support before it gets eaten up by the BAFTA voters who think Colin Firth deserved an Oscar already. Definitely has the numbers to garner a nomination — wide enough array of underappreciated veteran British character actors, and Mike Leigh's uncanny ability to be nomination in writing and/or direction for his major festival pieces. Yet no wins yet (overdue alert!). Looks bleak enough that it will capture some attention from Oscar voters (unlike Happy-Go-Lucky which I guess just didn't look appealing to people to want to watch) but still with a light hearted edge to it. Brenda Blethyn and Sally Hawkins managed to win Golden Globes for their performances, perhaps more love for Another Year as a whole will keep it in the public consciousness. It's all a lot of maybes, though.

6. The Social Network - I know I just paralleled it to Charlie Wilson's War, but this isn't quite so much "been there done that." I think it will probably be difficult for it to live up to quite the level of expectation there is, and I don't think the public will really be too sold on it either. The actors aren't all that well known, or aren't actors at all, and it doesn't show much in the way of tech promise. But I mean, hey, Aaron Sorkin still seems in the lead (probably mano a mano against Michael Arndt) for his first Screenplay win. David Fincher, we learned last time he went up against Danny Boyle, has more than a fair share of love these days in the Academy as long as he makes something baity. Critics seem to like it enough. The more I type out the lower I'm deciding to rank it.

7. Toy Story 3 - if they really can't find a better live-action movie this year (which isn't too far-fetched of an option, but a summer blockbuster threequel will always find a hard time with Oscar success).

8. The Kids Are All Right - Small scale, from the summer, will be remembered but with nominations at best.

9. True Grit - The Coens are loved, but they're only actually bestowed a few statues every decade it seems. Things that hurt it here are that its not quite their own screenplay and it's been made before. I'm sure they'll prove everyone wrong and come out with a really great interpretation, and their only Best Picture winner was itself an adapted screenplay, but...I don't know, I guess I just don't see it. A rough and tumble Western, featuring actors we've more or less have seen enough of last year? Just doesn't seem the right year.

10. Inception - DVD release around this time will echo concerns of how ~overdue~ Chris Nolan is and how this would be payback for The Dark Knight. Maybe if it actually had come out in theaters in December a la Avatar, we'd be having a different discussion on its chances to win. Right now, enough time has passed that it's not considered a great contender.
Read more!