Oscar season is upon us, so here are my grades for the 2013 best
picture nominees. (click here for 2010-2012) You know the drill (or maybe you don’t know the drill), worst
to first, and I’ll try not to reveal too much in my reviews:
Beasts of the Southern
Wild – My emotions went from interested, to confused, to bored. Are they
supposed to be self-reliant? Obviously I’m missing a lot, but I never got into
this. Grade C
Life of Pi – Maybe
I’ve grown impatient with age. Maybe I should have seen this in 3D. The few
thought provoking moments were drowned out by my general boredom. Grade C
Les Miserables – Russell
Crowe should not be singing. His singing is so bad that it’s distracting. Maybe
if he’s in a bar doing karaoke with a bunch of other drunks he’d sound great,
but next to Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway he sounds ridiculous. Other than that, it’s still Les
Mis. You could do worse than spending a couple of hours with this. Grade B
Lincoln – Did you
know that Daniel Day Lewis grew six inches for his role as Abraham Lincoln?
This movie didn’t quite do what I was hoping it would. It had unforgettable attention
to detail—which is why I'd watch it again—and I love the stuff
about Lincoln’s family, but the mixing of fact and fiction to turn the passing
of the 13th Amendment into a gripping narrative didn’t quite quite do it for me. Maybe this was a victim of high expectations. Grade B+
Amour – This is tricky. You’re probably not going to hear many people say they “enjoyed” Amour. After an hour, I was ready for it to end – but not for the same
reason I was ready or Life of Pi and Beasts of the Southern Wild to end. It
wasn’t boring; it was painful, and I wanted the pain to end (which is the
aim of the filmmaker.) So we’re back to the question of what we want from
a film: and if you can say you want something other than entertainment, then
I’ll recommend you sit down with Amour. Grade B+
Silver Linings
Playbook – I have some huge gripes about this film. This could have been a
timeless A, but the filmmakers took some shortcuts—maybe it was to reach a
wider audience and pay for those big name actors, or maybe they were just lazy.
Nevertheless I enjoyed it. Grade B+
Argo – The
problem I had with Argo is that it was based
on a true story. The embellishments for the sake of making a more action-packed
film left me trying to pick out the fiction. Don’t get me wrong, it was highly
entertaining, with great acting and lots of drama, but if given an option
to re-watch, I think I’d pick one of the next two. Grade A-
(deja-vu: the top two are a Quentin Tarantino revenge story and Kathryn Bigelow modern war story)
Django Unchained – Django was >2.5 hours, yet I never felt bored. Of course it was ridiculous and full of over-the-top violence and gore, and it’s certainly not for squeamish or easily offended, but Cindy made it through the entire thing without a complaint. And I found myself having the typical Tarantino reactions: laughing, wincing, and paying full attention. Grade A
Zero Dark Thirty –
The controversy with this film is that it overstates the value of torture, and
from everything I’ve read on the subject it probably does. But I think the
anti-torture lobby is so outspoken that maybe Bigelow felt the need to push it
a bit further and let people know that perhaps there is some value to torturing
motherfuckers. She repeats a couple
of the tension-builders that worked in Hurt Locker, but didn’t overdo it. Lots
of great scenes, and Jason Clarke was great -- and maybe I'm a bit higher on this film than most because I went through a phase where I really got into reading about the mission to capture Bin Laden. Grade A
Random thoughts on other films:
Drinking Buddies – I’ll use this to comment on the
“mumblecore” style of filmmaking (which uses less scripted dialogue.) I enjoy
romantic comedies more than the average guy -- I’m not going to sit here and tell
you I didn’t like Knotting Hill. But the problem with actors improvising—like
in Drinking Buddies—is they’re not as funny as writers (good looking people are
generally not as funny as their aesthetically challenged counterparts), and
when they’re told to improvise scenes in a romantic comedy, you’re essentially
left with a light romantic melodrama. Which is fine. Drinking Buddies isn’t too
bad, but I only recall finding one part even mildly funny. Grade: C+
To Rome With Love – This was no Midnight in Paris but it’s
still Woody Allen doing what he does. Several laugh out loud moments for me.
Grade: B+
Moonrise Kingdom – I’m not smart/perceptive enough to
appreciate Wes Anderson. His stuff is probably better the second
time around, but I never want to invest the time because there’s enough of a
likelihood I’m not going to appreciate it the second time around either. Grade:
C
The Master – speaking of filmmakers named Anderson: this was
too disjointed and slow for me. Grade: C
Arbitrage – Good honest suspense. Richard Gere doesn’t get paid millions of dollars because he can’t act. Grade B+
Killing Them Softly – Parallels a confidence crisis in a criminal poker ring with the modern financial system (and a bunch of other stuff.) Worth watching. Grade: A-
Skyfall – The first Bond film I’ve liked since Golden Eye. Grade: B+
Side Effects – Stephen Soderbergh knows a thing or two about how to keep a guy like me watching. Grade: A-
Documentaries:
Salinger – Interesting portrait of a writer, but the cynical
side of me thinks it’s a glorified, agenda-driven ad for a bunch of
soon-to-be-released posthumous work. Grade: B
Searching for Sugarman – about a folk musician from the
early 70’s. Grade: A-
Somm – four guys training for the master sommelier exam. Ridiculous,
memorable, and applicable to anyone interested in what it’s like to completely
immerse yourself in something. (though I imagine this was partially funded by
the master sommelier accrediting organization.) Grade: B+
2 comments:
I enjoyed your movie review. You should do it more often.
good review...keep UP the good work.
Post a Comment