Deconstructing Sandler: An Introduction

 

                For years I have been wondering: “Why are hard-working American putting down $9 to see Adam Sandler as the same lame character, with the same stupid jokes, with the beautiful actress who is looking for a big paycheck?”  Well, for the next few months I am going to try to examine why.

                Adam Sandler started as a regular cast member on SNL then graduated to feature films, if that is what you want to call them.  Billy Madison and Happy Gilmore made him a star to my generation.  Poop & fart jokes and relatively safe dialogue galore.  While most stars somewhat evolve over time, Sandler believes that an occasional “art” picture is to appease critics and educated audiences.  Sure, Sandler has wonderful Punch Drunk Love but he also has the unbelievably offensive I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry.

                That said, I have decided to watch all of Sandler’s movies.  From Airheads (1993) to this year’s That’s My Son, I will analyze each movie based on not just quality.  I will also look at:

Best Joke: Simple, what joke made me laugh the most.

Worst Joke: Not that simple.  I look for the joke that makes me either cringe or visually angry.

Love Interest: Is this someone who could possibly be attracted to Sandler’s character, physically or emotionally?

Character: Is Sandler’s character lovable, hateful or even really a character at all?

Message: Sandler’s movies are known for their messages.  Is the message relevant and/or earned?

Wish me luck!  Thoughts and prayers would help too!

In Defense of...My Criticism of "The Hunger Games"

I do not own the above image.  For entertainment purposes only.  Copyright (c) Lionsgate Entertainment.  All Right Reserved.

Note #1: I would like to warn you or set everyone reading at ease, I have not read “The Hunger Games”.  I am on about line 100 on my Kindle.  From conversations I have had with those that have, I understand that a majority of my criticism is for the movie only and not specifically for the novel.

Note #2: I go in graphic detail about the final 15-20 minutes of the movie so…SPOILER ALERT!!!  If you haven’t seen it, stop reading, buy a ticket, watch it, then come back.  Then after reading, go see 21 Jump Street.  Seriously.

            Before I begin my lashing of Gary Ross’ adaptation of Suzanne Collins’ “The Hunger Games”, I just want to say that the first hour and a half or so are fantastic.  Ross, using Collins’ own script, is able to show a world and characters full of inequality but not total despair.  Jennifer Lawrence is her usual fantastic self as the heroine Katniss.  Ross showed wonderful attention to detail in his previous live-action films Pleasantville & Seabiscuit and he doesn’t fail here.  The total and complete opposite color schemes of the two completely different yet connected worlds are striking.

Best of all, though, is Ross’ subtle but completely effective and powerful sequence in the immediate prelude and beginning to the Games.  The scoreless sequence allows the audience to reflect on what has happened up to this point and allow the audience to make their own decision as to how to go about these Games and the dire consequences of bad decisions.  Unfortunately, that is where the relating to the characters ends.

From that point on, “The Hunger Games” slowly falters until it ends with a resounding thud.  A thud so loud I think to the bored people in the American Reunion showing heard loud and clear.  How Gary Ross, who helped us love spoiled kids thrown into a 1950’s TV show and three different Depression-era people & a horse, was unable to allow the audience care about a starving teenager and her secret admirer in a game played to the death is relatively simple.

The first problem is the inability to convey that the Games are nothing more than a twisted punishment by the Capitol on the twelve Districts instead of the television extravaganza that the second act perceives it to be.  Think about every time during the Games a scene takes place outside the arena.  There are three types of scenes: the President & the director talking, the director in the control room and Woody Harrelson negotiating with “sponsors”.  What is missing are shots of the audience.  All that is needed are a few scenes of recurring characters, just regular people like the bar patrons or security guards or the guy in the tub like in The Truman Show, just watching the Games and commenting or complaining about the lack of action.

The second problem is the rules to the Games.  I see that the Games over time have become the annual event for the Capitol and its uniquely dressed citizens and the government runs the whole operation.  But, why the rush to end the Games?  Who wants the Games to end a quickly as possible?  The audience?  Since we don’t see them whining and complaining at all, just let the Games continue.  You don’t need to create a super-panther, who kills the “4^th place finisher” off-screen (who has one extraordinarily important role in one critical scene but is never seen in the flesh in almost every other shot of the movie) and can survive an arrow through the neck at point blank range.  And worse yet, they end the Games.

Which leads to my final issue: who is the true enemy of the story?  Is it the Capitol, who oppresses the Districts and commands them to sacrifice two young lives each for entertainment?  Or is it the kids from Districts 1, 2 or 4, who train for the Games and are the most formidable opponents?  Well, it appears to be the latter.  But then why are they not developed?  At all?  We see the final adversary early scowl or something at Peeta but then is given nothing to do until the end when he appears to beg for mercy before being fed to the super-panthers.  He is trained to win or at least survive but he wants out at the end?  This is where I feel character development is most severely lacking: the other 22 competitors are rarely heard from, except Rue of course.

In the end, The Hunger Games succeeds in giving girls someone who they can look up to without having to be stone-faced and emotionless and pathetic.  But what it also does is show what is wrong with Hollywood: bring out the big potential franchises, show a few moments of greatness or perceived greatness then phone the rest of it in.  But, at least with The Hunger Games, there are plenty of things to love, if you can remember them an hour or so later.

Oscar Predictions and Personal Choices

Best Picture
Will Win: The Artist
Should Win: Hugo or Tree of Life
This has been a foregone conclusion for a few months.  Some even predicted the win after Cannes in May.  The Artist, whether you believe it is worthy or not, is almost exactly what the Academy loves: an old, simple story that celebrates movies.  That said, two (of the five) better options also celebrate wonderful things.  Hugo is a wonderful celebration of old movies and the need for study and preservation.  Tree of Life is, simply, about life and experience of living and learning in life.

Best Director
Will Win: Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist
Should Win: Terrance Malick, Tree of Life
Since 1950, the DGA Award and Oscar have not matched only 6 times, the last time was nine years ago.  Hazanavicius won DGA and will win here.  It was simply put his vision, with Harvey Weinstein's lobbying, that made The Artist I phenomenon that it was.  But if you look at all the movies released in 2011, it is Malick's vision on his most personal of projects that stands out.

Best Actor
Should and Will Win: George Clooney, The Descendants
The one "upset" I will predict.  The award is simply between Clooney and the real heart & soul of The Artist, Jean Dujardin.   Both were fantastic.  But what Clooney is able to do in the last few scenes is simply remarkable.

Best Actress
Will Win: Viola Davis, The Help
Should Win: Rooney Mara, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Another two way race.  This time, between two women who shared a screen three years ago,Viola Davis and 17-time nominee Meryl Streep.  Streep, playing Margaret Thatcher, will once again be a bridesmaid.  Davis would become the 2nd African American to win Best Actress.  But, when you rent Dragon Tattoo in a few months, pay very close attention to Mara as Lisbeth.  I think she gives the best acting performance of the year.  You will see why.

Best Supporting Actor & Actress
Should & Will Win: Christopher Plummer, Beginners and Octavia Spencer
These races are over.  If anyone else wins, there needs to be a recount.  PriceWaterhouse messed up.

Best Original Screenplay
Should and Will Win: Midnight in Paris
He routinely snubs them but the Academy loves Woody Allen.  Tonight, he should get his 3rd screenplay Oscar and first since 1987.  The Artist love could spill over to here but I don't think so.

Best Adapted Screenplay
Should and Will Win: The Descendants
He may have won before, but Alexander Payne may have surpassed 2004's Sideways in the writing aspect.  There is little to no competition.

Best Animated Feature
Will Win: Rango
The category stinks this year.  This March release has been buzzed about since it opened.  No contest.

Best Foreign Language Film
Will Win: A Seperation

Best Documentary Feature
Will Win: Paradise Lost 3

Best Art Direction
Will Win: Hugo

Best Cinematography
Should and Will Win: Tree of Life

Best Costume Design
Will Win:  The Artist

Best Editing
Will Win: The Artist

Best Makeup
Will Win: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Best Score
Will Win: The Artist

Best Song
Should and Will Win: "Man or Muppet", The Muppets

Best Sound Editing
Will Win: Hugo

Best Sound Mixing
Will Win: Hugo

Best Visual Effects
Will Win: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Best Animated Short
Will Win: La Luna

Best Documentary Short
Will Win: The Barber of Birmingham

Best Live Action Short
Will Win: The Shore

Review: Wanderlust

In the past several years, there has been a comedic revolution of sorts in at the cinema.  Many argue it started with Old School, but I think that Anchorman gave it the biggest jolt with the climax (hehe, climax) coming (coming...smirk) with 2005's The 40-Year-Old Virgin.  And while the quality of these wickedly hilarious and sometimes ridiculously smart comedies has only slightly fallen, I can't help but get the sense that these movies will be getting a rude awakening sooner rather than later.  It will be sooner if more movies like Wanderlust rear their (somewhat) ugly heads.

A married Manhattan couple, George & Linda (Rudd & Aniston), believe they are on the way up.  They each have careers on the upswing and just bought an "micro-loft".  Then, everything collapses.  Linda's "An Inconvenient March of Penguins" style documentary is rejected by HBO and George's company was shut down by the feds.  On their way to George's brother's in Georgia for a restart, they happen upon a commune run by a 90's era free spirit (Theroux) and owned by an old school hippie (Alda).

It is at this point where hilarity ensues.  At least it kind of does.  Paul Rudd continues to be one of the comedic actors in the business.  He could make reading the phone book the laugh out loud comedy of the year.  Rudd has a scene in front of a mirror that will have even the straightest-faced person rolling in the aisles.  It felt as if director David Wain, who also directed Rudd in Role Models a few years back, gave him free rein in the scenes where Rudd goes insane.

It is just a downright shame that none of the characters, not even George, is the least bit interesting.  The supporting characters seem to be the rejects from Forgetting Sarah Marshall.  The most interesting character is a wanna-be wine-making novelist nudist who has the largest fake schlong since Dirk Diggler.  Memo to Hollywood: stop giving Malin Akerman this kind of role.  I don't care how free spirit looking she is, she can't act very well at all.  And when did I miss Justin Theroux enter the movie industry?  Because I want to kick him out.  He added nothing to the character that was written for someone much more famous in mind who rejected the role.  And George's brother in Georgia?  Don't get me started on him.  One word: pathetic.

I could go more into the main plot revolving around the fate of the commune is so tacked on and uninteresting that it is not worth getting into.  Plus, if you go see this movie, it is to laugh, not to, like myself, ridicule the lame tacked on story.  And yet, after all that complaining, I laughed.  Isn't that the point of comedy?  To make the audience laugh.  I laughed in spite of myself.  But the story?  Just terrible.

**1/2 (out of 5 stars)

Review: The Vow

 I do not own the above image.  For entertainment purposes only.  Copyright Sony Pictures Entertainment.  All rights reserved.

There have been a few times where I have eaten crow after watching a movie.  I was skeptical of Harry Potter back in the summer of 2002.  I never thought "The Hurt Locker" would have lived up to the hype two and a half years ago.  And "United 93" caught me completely off guard.  But rarely is it that a movie which I expect to be completely awful shocks me enough to give it a solid positive review.

In the first few moments, The Vow doesn't waste time introducing us to the couple (Paige & Leo, played by McAdams & Tatum), the rising action (Paige loses about seven to eight years of memory) and the conflicts (Leo's inability to convince Paige they are married and Paige's parents' insistence that Paige go back to how things were at the point at which she remembers [understand?]) fairly quickly, even for a 100 minute movie.  The parents' conflict could have spiraled into absolute cheeseball and the wanna-be-rekindled romance could have been in Lifetime movie territory.

But something, or someone, got in the way, thankfully.  Jason Katims is that someone.  Who you may ask?  Katims is the Emmy winning writer of beloved yet under-watched TV shows such as classics "My So-Called Life" (including the greatest Christmas episode in TV history), "Friday Night Lights" and "Parenthood".  Katims understands the intricacies of life and love of young adults.  It is never more evident than in the 45 minutes after the accident that this script is in good hands.  McAdams is better than her average self as the lost Paige.  But it is Channing Tatum who shines.  That is not a typo.  Tatum has to be the heart & soul of this movie and he succeeds.

The flaw, however, is in the overhauled third act.  There are hints of cliches throughout but aren't fully expressed until the sister's wedding.  The conflict between Paige & her parents is way too obvious and concludes with a speech that makes no sense at all.  The ex-boyfriend is really cookie cutter.  In fact, if it weren't for the final scene between Tatum and McAdams, this review may not have been all that positive.  So Hollywood, listen up: Give Jason Katims more work and Channing Tatum better roles. Did I really just write that second part?

***1/2 (out of five stars)

Movie Review: The Woman in Black

This is a guest review by my lovely wife.

I have to wonder what the audience thought was in store for them when they showed up for The Woman in Black. Being scared in our day an age is so different than it was in the Golden Age of suspense with Hitchcock and Hammer. When I was deciding whether or not I wanted to see it for this blog, I watched a featurette “Ghost Story” on IMDB with different people involved in the film talking about it. As soon as director James Watkins said, “It’s about what’s in the corner of the eye, what you can’t quite see.” I was intrigued. When he finished with, “We want to make scares that really linger with people, real chills that when they walk out of the cinema, they stay with them slightly.” I knew I had to see this film.

My main problem with a lot of modern “scary movies” is that they don’t make us feel for our protagonist and The Woman in Black takes care of that almost right away. The introduction to Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe) and his son has you worried about what will happen to them throughout the film. The flashbacks and daydreams that fill you in on his character are perfectly placed and well done. The supporting cast is amazing and even though most of them don’t get backstories, you still feel for them and their families as well.

For a true ghost story, there’s got to be a reason for the ghost to haunt, and this story does not disappoint. Where a lot of movies just scare you to scare you, the movie’s namesake has a really good reason, to her at least, to be terrorizing the town. The little clues Arthur finds as he is going through all the papers at her sister’s mansion are a very nice touch and when he finally finds her reason for haunting the mansion the story doesn’t just end neatly and happily.

As can often be expected, a lot of the scary parts are in the trailers and commercials to the point that you are expecting them and they don’t startle you like they should. This isn’t your average scary movie that has you jumping in your seat but instead keeps you wanting to look over your shoulder. It’s the unexpected things that aren’t even typical in horror any more that get to you and keep you on edge. This also makes the “scary parts” you haven’t seen yet even more chilling and is what really sets it apart. Yeah, it’s a period piece, everyone has accents and some things had the audience giggling. But do what they did in a modern setting, and you might be able to revive true horror films from the graves scary movies dug them. And no matter where or when this is set, you still aren’t going to sleep after seeing it. Unless you sleep in a room with no windows or mirrors, that is. And that’s going to keep this girl coming back for more, no matter how many red bulls I have to drink the morning after.

Blog Update

Greetings, my wonderful readers.  As you may know, it is now February.  And February means only one thing in my profession: tax season.  I now work 10 hours three days a week and starting next Saturday, 8 hours on weekends.  This means during the week I have at most three hours of awake time par day.  Which means, simply, there will be fewer screenings and fewer postings.  And it will only get worse.

However, I will still work on this blog.  For the next ten to eleven weeks, I will do my best to create at least two posts a week.  This month, there will be at least one opening day review (next Friday), one guest review (this Friday), a "5 Questions for Oscar Night" post or posts, reviews of (hopefully) all 9 Best Picture nominees, the obligatory predictions post, and a special tribute/commentary post in a few weeks.  I will Tweet as often as I can, which includes live-Tweeting movies from Netflix or network TV (I am too poor to have HBO or Showtime).

During this time, I ask for patience.  I love my job, no matter how boring it may appear sometimes.  Without my job, there is no blog for everyone to enjoy, no way to see some wonderful images that I have enjoyed as much as I have.  Come April 18th, I will come back with a vengeance.

Review: Man on a Ledge

 I do not own the above image.  Used for entertainment purposes only.  Copyright Summit Entertainment.  All rights reserved.

"Man on a Ledge" is the kind of movie where plausibility shouldn't be very high.  It is the kind where you should be able to sit in the dark with an ice cold drink, alcoholic if necessary, and your favorite snack and just let the next 105 minutes or so just float over you.  But the key aspect of the movie is missing: fun.

Nick Cassidy is a cop convicted of stealing a $40 million diamond from a real estate mogul.  With the help of his brother, Joey, & his girl, Nick looks to prove his innocence.   Nick hatches a plan wherein his brother retrieves the not-really-stolen diamond from the mogul's vault while he plays a decoy on the ledge of the hotel caddy-corner to the office building.  Sounds like a blast right?  Not exactly.

About 45 minutes in, I looked at the Joey's face.  Jamie Bell may not be the best actor in the world but the deathly seriousness of his facial expression just doesn't fit.  And that may be because the combination of the genres doesn't either.  "MoaL" wants to be a escaped, innocent man looking for exoneration surrounding a heist movie.  But unfortunately, it plays like the opposite.  The innocent man is just the secondary plot line thrust into the spotlight.  Instead of the diamond being the MacGuffin, Nick walking onto the ledge is.

But that's saying the movie only has that one problem.  None of the characters, least of all Sam Worthington's Nick, are interesting.  Nick is essentially a cardboard cutout of the cliched newsmaker, playing up to the theatre's audience more than the character's audience.  Joey & his hot-bodied love interest Angie are bland caricatures, especially Angie, whose purpose in the entire movie is for the one fleeting moment that you have seen numerous times in the advertising.  The Elizabeth Banks police negotiator is the only real character of interest.  Her recent backstory is particularly intriguing but is never explored to any extent.  Finally, though, I feel so sorry for Ed Harris.  A three-time Oscar-nominee should not be relegated to a stock, rich, stupidly grandiose villain.

But most of all, the story, for as seriously as it is taken (and I'm talking "The King's Speech" serious), the entire plot and even some of the routine actions make absolutely no sense.  The list of issues could take as long as the movie is to discuss but there are a few that are so strikingly awful.  First, the escape scene is absurd.  From where Nick escapes to how he escapes and to the accident used as a decoy, which has to be seen to be believed, makes the idea that Middle Earth may have actually have existed realistic.  Maybe in a spoiler-filled discussion I can explain the issue with a certain minor character's identity.

Overall, Man on a Ledge is just plain boring for too long before the big payoff.  The payoff being the last 20 minutes or so where first time director Asger Leth tries to channel his inner Paul Greengrass to duplicate the Jason Bourne trilogy with high speed, frenetic chase.  But that moment only lasts so long until you realize that even that sequence is characteristically illogical and cliched.  It is way too much for a movie to ask us to sit patiently for an hour a & twenty minutes just to enjoy 20 minutes of excitement that doesn't survive 20 seconds into the end credits.

*1/2 (out of 5 stars)

Almost Oscar Reaction and the Nominees

I waited patiently, just like everyone else, for the YouTube(tm) stream to start.  At 8:39, it did, to much fanfare.  Five & a half minutes later, jaws were wide open.  The nearly unthinkable happened.  And it pissed the living daylights out of the blogosphere and Twitter-verse.  A movie that many feel manipulates the most harrowing event the America's history.  A movie reviled by critics unlike any film nominated before it, according the Metacritic.  A movie starring two of the most popular actors out there.  A movie that opened five days ago in Pittsburgh. Stephen Daldry's Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close.  Daldry's fourth film is his third in a row to be nominated for Best Picture but the first time he wasn't nominated for Best Director.  And the two actors: Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock.  Too much star power & Academy love to ignore?  Apparently so.

So this begs the question: Did I actually enjoy any nominations?  You bet!  First, I am stoked that Tree of Life, the cinematography and Terrance Malick got nominated.  I've only seen maybe 11 movies from 2011, but this is the best of the bunch.  Second, Rooney Mara, who did the best acting job of the year, got the spot I thought she would get and rightly deserved.  I doubt she'll win but the nomination is enough (for now).  Third, Bridesmaids did not get a Best Picture nomination, and rightly so.  I can't think of a more over-hyped and over-rated comedy in recent memory.  I will watch it again and review it in the blog.

But for the time being I will focus on the nine movies nominated for Best Picture.  My wife and I have only seen three: Tree of Life, The Descendants & The Help.  Two will arrive in the mail on Thursday: Midnight in Paris & Moneyball.  The other four are in theatres, in one fashion or another.  When I see each one will depend on how work is going.  Starting next week, I will review each movie in the order in which I see them.

Until then, here are the nominees.  Enjoy and tell me what you think of them.

Best Picture

• “The Artist” Thomas Langmann, Producer
• “The Descendants” Jim Burke, Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor, Producers
• “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close” Scott Rudin, Producer
• “The Help” Brunson Green, Chris Columbus and Michael Barnathan, Producers
• “Hugo” Graham King and Martin Scorsese, Producers
• “Midnight in Paris” Letty Aronson and Stephen Tenenbaum, Producers
• “Moneyball” Michael De Luca, Rachael Horovitz and Brad Pitt, Producers
• “The Tree of Life” Nominees to be determined
• “War Horse“ Steven Spielberg and Kathleen Kennedy, Producers

Directing

• “The Artist” Michel Hazanavicius
• “The Descendants” Alexander Payne
• “Hugo” Martin Scorsese
• “Midnight in Paris” Woody Allen
• “The Tree of Life” Terrence Malick

Actor in a Leading Role

• Demián Bichir in “A Better Life”
• George Clooney in “The Descendants”
• Jean Dujardin in “The Artist”
• Gary Oldman in “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy”
• Brad Pitt in “Moneyball”

Actress in a Leading Role

• Glenn Close in “Albert Nobbs”
• Viola Davis in “The Help”
• Rooney Mara in “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”
• Meryl Streep in “The Iron Lady”
• Michelle Williams in “My Week with Marilyn”

Actor in a Supporting Role

• Kenneth Branagh in “My Week with Marilyn”
• Jonah Hill in “Moneyball”
• Nick Nolte in “Warrior”
• Christopher Plummer in “Beginners”
• Max von Sydow in “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close”

Actress in a Supporting Role

• Bérénice Bejo in “The Artist”
• Jessica Chastain in “The Help”
• Melissa McCarthy in “Bridesmaids”
• Janet McTeer in “Albert Nobbs”
• Octavia Spencer in “The Help”

Animated Feature Film

• “A Cat in Paris” Alain Gagnol and Jean-Loup Felicioli
• “Chico & Rita” Fernando Trueba and Javier Mariscal
• “Kung Fu Panda 2″ Jennifer Yuh Nelson
• “Puss in Boots” Chris Miller
• “Rango” Gore Verbinski

Art Direction

• “The Artist”
  Production Design: Laurence Bennett; Set Decoration: Robert Gould
• “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2“
  Production Design: Stuart Craig; Set Decoration: Stephenie McMillan
• “Hugo” 
  Production Design: Dante Ferretti; Set Decoration: Francesca Lo Schiavo
• “Midnight in Paris” 
  Production Design: Anne Seibel; Set Decoration: Hélène Dubreuil
• “War Horse” 
  Production Design: Rick Carter; Set Decoration: Lee Sandales

Cinematography

• “The Artist” Guillaume Schiffman
• “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” Jeff Cronenweth
• “Hugo” Robert Richardson
• “The Tree of Life” Emmanuel Lubezki
• “War Horse” Janusz Kaminski

Costume Design

• “Anonymous” Lisy Christl
• “The Artist” Mark Bridges
• “Hugo” Sandy Powell
• “Jane Eyre” Michael O’Connor
• “W.E.” Arianne Phillips

Documentary (Feature)

• “Hell and Back Again”
  Danfung Dennis and Mike Lerner
• “If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front” 
  Marshall Curry and Sam Cullman
• “Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory” 
  Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs
• “Pina” 
  Wim Wenders and Gian-Piero Ringel
• “Undefeated” 
  TJ Martin, Dan Lindsay and Richard Middlemas

Documentary (Short Subject)

• “The Barber of Birmingham: Foot Soldier of the Civil Rights Movement” 
  Robin Fryday and Gail Dolgin
• “God Is the Bigger Elvis” 
  Rebecca Cammisa and Julie Anderson
• “Incident in New Baghdad”
  James Spione
• “Saving Face” 
  Daniel Junge and Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy
• “The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom” 
  Lucy Walker and Kira Carstensen

Film Editing

• “The Artist” Anne-Sophie Bion and Michel Hazanavicius
• “The Descendants” Kevin Tent
• “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall
• “Hugo” Thelma Schoonmaker
• “Moneyball” Christopher Tellefsen

Foreign Language Film

• “Bullhead” Belgium
• “Footnote” Israel
• “In Darkness” Poland
• “Monsieur Lazhar” Canada
• “A Separation” Iran

Makeup

• “Albert Nobbs”
  Martial Corneville, Lynn Johnston and Matthew W. Mungle
• “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2″
  Edouard F. Henriques, Gregory Funk and Yolanda Toussieng
• “The Iron Lady”
  Mark Coulier and J. Roy Helland

Music (Original Score)

• “The Adventures of Tintin” John Williams
• “The Artist” Ludovic Bource
• “Hugo” Howard Shore
• “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy” Alberto Iglesias
• “War Horse” John Williams

Music (Original Song)

• “Man or Muppet” from “The Muppets” Music and Lyric by Bret McKenzie
• “Real in Rio” from “Rio” Music by Sergio Mendes and Carlinhos Brown Lyric by Siedah Garrett

Short Film (Animated)

• “Dimanche/Sunday” Patrick Doyon
• “The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore” William Joyce and Brandon Oldenburg
• “La Luna” Enrico Casarosa
• “A Morning Stroll” Grant Orchard and Sue Goffe
• “Wild Life” Amanda Forbis and Wendy Tilby

Short Film (Live Action)

• “Pentecost” Peter McDonald and Eimear O’Kane
• “Raju” Max Zähle and Stefan Gieren
• “The Shore” Terry George and Oorlagh George
• “Time Freak” Andrew Bowler and Gigi Causey
• “Tuba Atlantic” Hallvar Witzø

Sound Editing

• “Drive” Lon Bender and Victor Ray Ennis
• “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” Ren Klyce
• “Hugo” Philip Stockton and Eugene Gearty
• “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” Ethan Van der Ryn and Erik Aadahl
• “War Horse” Richard Hymns and Gary Rydstrom

Sound Mixing

• “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”
  David Parker, Michael Semanick, Ren Klyce and Bo Persson
• “Hugo” 
  Tom Fleischman and John Midgley
• “Moneyball”
  Deb Adair, Ron Bochar, Dave Giammarco and Ed Novick
• “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” 
  Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers, Jeffrey J. Haboush and Peter J. Devlin
• “War Horse”
  Gary Rydstrom, Andy Nelson, Tom Johnson and Stuart Wilson

Visual Effects

• “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2″ 
  Tim Burke, David Vickery, Greg Butler and John Richardson
• “Hugo”
  Rob Legato, Joss Williams, Ben Grossman and Alex Henning
• “Real Steel” 
  Erik Nash, John Rosengrant, Dan Taylor and Swen Gillberg
• “Rise of the Planet of the Apes”
  Joe Letteri, Dan Lemmon, R. Christopher White and Daniel Barrett
• “Transformers: Dark of the Moon”
  Scott Farrar, Scott Benza, Matthew Butler and John Frazier

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

• “The Descendants” Screenplay by Alexander Payne and Nat Faxon & Jim Rash
• “Hugo” Screenplay by John Logan
• “The Ides of March” Screenplay by George Clooney & Grant Heslov and Beau Willimon
• “Moneyball” Screenplay by Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin  Story by Stan Chervin
• “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy” Screenplay by Bridget O’Connor & Peter Straughan

Writing (Original Screenplay)

• “The Artist” Written by Michel Hazanavicius
• “Bridesmaids” Written by Annie Mumolo & Kristen Wiig
• “Margin Call” Written by J.C. Chandor
• “Midnight in Paris” Written by Woody Allen
• “A Separation” Written by Asghar Farhadi

Almost Oscar Predictions

I do not own any of the posters above.  Used for entertainment purposes only.  Copyrights for each poster detailed below.
 

          Tuesday morning, all of Hollywood will be up at 5:30 in the morning for the most exciting day of the movie year : the Academy Award nominations.  Academy President Tom Sherak and Oscar nominee Jennifer Lawrence will beall dolled & caffeined up to announce all the major categories.  You, however, can get a heads up on everyone else and catch a glimpse of the nominees before the announcement below.  For various reasons, I haven’t seen many of the movies (they will be noted by an *) so these are predictions based upon previous awards results and not personal preference.  If they were, Bridesmaids wouldn’t be sniffing any category and The Help would…well you’ll find out later this week.

Best Picture

1.       The Artist*

2.       The Descendents

3.       Hugo*

4.       Midnight in Paris*

5.       The Help

6.       Moneyball*

7.       The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

8.       Bridesmaids

9.       War Horse*

10.   Drive*

According to the new Academy rules, there could be up to 10 nominees and at least five.  Most, including myself, believe there will be 7 or 8 nominees.  I’m thinking 8 will make the cut, with my top 6 as locks.  Dragon Tattoo is all but in and the 8^th slot could go to any of the bottom three.

Best Director

                Michel Hanazavicius, The Artist*

                Alexander Payne, The Descendants

                Martin Scorsese, Hugo*

                Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris*

                Bennett Miller, Moneyball*

Three of these gentlemen (Hanazavicius, Payne & Scorsese) are locks, with Allen virtually assured his spot.  The coveted fifth spot can be claimed by as many six different men.  David Fincher is the most obvious choice, but I feel that the Academy doesn’t think as highly of him as cinephiles do.  If it isn’t Miller, then its Spielberg.

Best Actor

                George Clooney, The Descendants

                Leonardo DiCaprio, J. Edgar*

                Jean Dujardin, The Artist*

                Michael Fassbender, Shame*

                Brad Pitt, Moneyball*

Three locks (Clooney, Dujardin & Pitt) then two huge questions.  First, did the Academy see the NC-17 rated Shame?  Second, does the Academy remember seeing the bomb that was J. Edgar?  I think yes to both, less so for DiCaprio.  If no for either, look for Gary Oldman to get some love.

Best Actress

                Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs*

                Viola Davis, The Help

                Rooney Mara, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

                Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady*

                Michelle Williams, My Week with Marilyn*

Seven actresses, five spots.  Davis & Streep are in, Close & Williams are near-locks.  The fifth spot will go to Mara, or previous winners Tilda Swinton or Charlize Theron.  I don’t know how the Academy can reject the best acting performance all year though.

Best Supporting Actor

                Albert Brooks, Drive*

                Jonah Hill, Moneyball*

                Nick Nolte, Warrior*

                Patton Oswalt, Young Adult

                Christopher Plummer, Beginners*

Three locks here (Brooks, Hill, Plummer) and a near-lock overdue nod for Nolte.  Oswalt could easily be overtaken by Kenneth Branagh but I don’t believe so.

Best Supporting Actress

                Bernice Bejo, The Artist*

                Jessica Chastain, The Help

                Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids

                Octavia Spencer, The Help

                Shaileen Woodley, The Descendants

If these aren’t the five, I will be shocked.

Best Original Screenplay

                The Artist*

                Bridesmaids

                50/50*

                Midnight in Paris*

                A Separation*

Three locks (Artist, Brides & Midnight) and two fairly open spots.  50/50 is in because of the weak field.  A Separation will edge out Young Adult.

Best Adapted Screenplay

                The Descendants

                The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

                Hugo*

                The Help

                Moneyball*

Four locks with Dragon Tattoo & Ides of March battling for the fifth spot.  Dragon Tattoo gets it.

Best Animated Feature

                The Adventures of TinTin*

                Cars 2*

                Puss in Boots*

                Rango*

                Winnie the Pooh*

Only 2 locks here (TinTin & Rango) with Arthur Christmas & Kung Fu Panda 2 waiting in the wings.

Best Cinematography

                Guillaume Schiffman, The Artist*

                Jeff Cronenweth, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

                Bob Richardson, Hugo*

                Emmanuel Lubezki, Tree of Life

                Janusz Kaminski, War Horse*

Best Editing

                The Artist*

                The Descendants

                The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

                Hugo *

                Moneyball*

Best Art Direction

                The Artist*

                Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2*

                Hugo*

                Midnight in Paris*

                Tree of Life

Best Costume Design

                The Artist*

                Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2*

                The Help

                Hugo*

                Tree of Life

Best Makeup

                The Artist*

                Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2*

                Hugo*

Best Original Score

                The Artist*

                Drive*

                The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

                Hugo*

                War Horse*

Best Original Song

                “The Living Proof”, The Help

                “Life’s a Happy Song”, The Muppets

                “Man or Muppet”, The Muppets

                “Pictures in My Head”, The Muppets

Best Visual Effects

                Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2*

                Hugo*

                Rise of the Planet of the Apes*

                Transformers: Dark of the Moon*

                Tree of Life

Best Sound Editing

                Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2*

                Super 8*

                War Horse*

Best Sound Mixing

                The Artist*

                Hanna*

                Hugo*

                Super 8*

                War Horse*

The Artist is (c) of The Weinstein Company.  The Descendents is (c) of 20th Century Fox.  Hugo is (c) of Paramount Pictures.  Midnight in Paris is (c) of Sony Pictures Classics.  The Help is (c) of DreamWorks SKG.  Moneyball is (c) of Columbia Pictures.  The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is (c) of Sony Pictures.  Bridesmaids is (c) of Universal Pictures.