OSCARS 2015: PREDICTIONS, REACTIONS, AND A LOOK BACK ON THE FILMS OF 2014

The big night is upon us, so here are some thoughts on the nominees and my predictions for the six big categories:

(This is extremely last minute, but I had to catch up with all the nominated movies, which took me until this weekend. Having said that, I still haven't seen The Imitation Game but enough people whose taste I trust tell me  it's akin to The Theory of Everything in quality. That's good enough for me to not feel bad about seeing it!)

2014 wasn't a spectacular year in movies, maybe not even a good one. For me, there were three films that were special (one especially so)... then everything else. Compared to last year, when every acting category was jam-packed with A-listers who gave really interesting performances, and the overall buzz and excitement about the Best Picture nominees seemed to be at a higher frequency wave, there just aren't as many stories or subplots to really get excited about with this group of nominees. I think the industry at large is aware also of this down year, which might explain some very curious trends with who was nominated. I'm fascinated that there was so much noise over a few movies that honestly probably aren't going to be remembered too fondly five, ten years from now. That is the power of film though, it's so subjective and ever-changing. Sadly though, in this current landscape, the general go-to setting of (unnecessary & useless, mostly) outrage in social media is tailor fit for movie awards season. Despite that, there are several front-runners for which a golden man would be richly deserved, and that is almost always enough to allow ourselves to forget the mediocrity of some nominated movies or misplaced rage for non-recognition of others.  Let's dive in to a few hot topics:

-The biggest outcries of snubbery have came from the Selma camp. With its historically gigantic protagonist and (kinda self-promoted) ties to the current racial tensions the past year with Ferguson, it seemed all but a lock for Picture, Director, and Actor nominations (it only ended up getting Picture). With the success of 12 Years a Slave last year, it's certainly understandable that the filmmakers would believe this very Important thematically driven piece would be enough to garner nominations for their above-the-line cast and crew. The bread crumb trail of what is likened to a smear campaign started with an op-ed piece in the Washington Post tearing down director Ava duVernay's depiction of Lyndon B. Johnson as unfair and cruel. Other politically right-leaning journalists chimed in their agreement. Then the backlash from the liberal media was louder, and back and forth it went. First of all, there isn't one singular journalist out there with the writing prowess to stop a movie curtailed to get awards dead in its tracks, so let's throw that theory out the window. Secondly, the Selma team should have let those jabs from the conservative side roll off their back, instead they responded with vitriol and a defensiveness that probably didn't sit well with the overwhelmingly older male demographic of the current Academy voting body. That defensiveness came off as "if you don't like our movie, then you're racist," which really is like if the Still Alice filmmakers said "if you don't like our movie, then you hate senile people." Not a convincing argument, is it? It's too bad that they felt so ardent about taking that stance because I think much of Selma's strength as a film comes from its moderate and fair treatment of both the marchers and the Oval Office. Yes, Johnson is stubborn the whole film about pushing the Civil Rights Act through, but in the end, when he does, he's heralded. Conversely, Martin Luther King Jr. is not all savior. Some of the strongest scenes allude to his infidelities, and also to his followers' doubts about his non-violent approach. This is all secondary to the real reason Selma didn't get more nominations: it was released too late in the year. The ads and billboards can only do so much, you have to let word-of-mouth build and you can't do that if you give the Academy voters no time to see it. And although I really liked the film (and it does have strong direction and marvelous acting from Oyelowo and others), it's no 12 Years a Slave. Sometimes you can ride on the coattails of your film's quality, and I think the filmmakers/marketing team took that for granted. They can blame the snobby journalist in his ivory tower for being insensitive, but really, they shot themselves in the foot.

-Speaking of riding your film's quality to the finish line, The Theory of Everything, everybody! Wait no, I mean the opposite. The fact that this film has been in the conversation, not only that but a frontrunner, for its entire existence is beyond baffling to me. Why the Academy insists on having a flavorless, formulaic British biopic that takes no real swings artistically speaking as a Best Pic nominee every year is a mystery, but Theory and Imitation Game are drawing those straws this year. Not to say that Stephen Hawking isn't a fascinating subject, he is. But when all his scientific accomplishments are brushed over in a two-minute scene in which his friend explain his breakthrough theory by drawing it on a pub table with spilled beer, why is his life worth depicting? Eddie Redmayne seems like a really charming dude, and he is a talented actor, but his sweeping of all guild awards for this performance is again (Broken record over here, I know...) confusing, at best. It doesn't happen often that actors sweep every award leading to the Oscars, and when it does, it's usually for something so overwhelmingly great that there can be no other (Daniel Day Lewis for Lincoln & There Will Be Blood, Natalie Portman for Black Swan). For me, the physical transformation is all that he's playing, and that's not enough to be wowed. It's an accomplishment, but you could push over the emotional depth of his Hawking character with a feather. I have no problem with his being nominated, but to be such a huge favorite at this point with so many other strong lead actor performances is a shame. With that said, the Academy loves a comeback story, and has there been a better one than Michael Keaton this year? He gave probably one of the three best performances of the year by anyone in my opinion, and I do think he has a puncher's chance this year. His winning would be a wonderful thing because he's so unique and singular as a performer, I can't really see him being in this same spot again. This is the role of his lifetime, written specifically for him, and it'd be nice to see that rare perfect symbiosis of performer and role get rewarded.

-Wes Anderson is one of the most culturally polarizing artists of modern times. Everyone's got an opinion on him, whether in worship or dismay. He's been nominated three times before for screenplay twice and animated feature. He has three nominations this year for Grand Budapest Hotel. Not to take anything away from Wes because I think he is one of the finest filmmakers working today, but his film this year is not one of his strongest. So it's strange to see the abundance of endless praise from its release last winter through today, mainly because I don't think it really stands out above the rest of his movies, which is also one of his signatures that all his films are so alike aesthetically. In terms of the quirky spectrum, which is Wes' trademark stylistic attribute, it lands closer to the extreme end. Only his most diehard fans will defend the most quirky fantastical movies like The Life Aquatic & The Darjeeling Limited. I know Wes is capable of authentic relationships and dilemmas that aren't compatible only to the escapist illustrious dollhouse worlds that he likes to construct, but to anyone experiencing first love, heartbreak, or struggling to co-exist with dysfunctional family members (Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums, Moonrise Kingdom). I look at these Director and Picture nominations as a tribute to Wes' contribution to cinema since he emerged in the mid '90s (and also frankly because it was a weaker year). He will probably win for Screenplay this year, but the film itself is far from his crown jewel.

-There are three sure things in the acting categories: Julianne Moore, J.K. Simmons, and Patricia Arquette. Many are saying this is a career lifetime achievement award for Moore, who has been nominated four times previously but never won, and that may be true to some extent. This may not be her best performance (I'm still partial to Boogie Nights), but she is pretty damn great in Still Alice and gets even better as the movie goes on. When I'm actively rooting  against someone in a category, it's either because I believe the performance was inferior to someone else's or I'm not a fan of their general persona. Moore has neither of those problems as she is endlessly radiant and affable, and while I'd still pick Rosamund Pike, I will not be upset when Jules undoubtedly ascends to the stage tonight. The supporting actor category was so, so close to being an all-timer. Four of these performances were so ridiculously captivating (including the will-be winner Mr. Simmons), I honestly have trouble picking a favorite. I haven't seen The Judge, but having seen Mr. Duvall act in another recent movie, I'm willing to bet the house that he doesn't reach the same level of excellence that Josh Brolin achieves in Inherent Vice. J.K. Simmons is one of the all-time "that guy" character actors, and I'm looking forward to seeing the culmination of all the tremendous work he's delivered in recent years. It is really tough for actresses, especially those 35 or older, to find great roles, especially ones in which they don't have to show skin or be the love interest of a male protagonist. Not to throw this back to the guys, but god bless Richard Linklater for writing such a realized authentic strong female character The vulnerability and total lack of vanity that Patricia Arquette put on the screen for Boyhood was astonishing. Her last scene of the movie is probably the single best-acted scene of any film this year. It will be a richly deserved win for her.

-The Directing and Picture nominations are both really close this year, which almost never happens. It's a two-man race between Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu and Richard Linklater, and their respective films. Some of the backlash against Boyhood is that it's a gimmick, that it's a totally uninteresting story, it's just the fact that it took 12 years to make that gives people a reason to recognize it. I'm not going to disagree that its production process is an integral part of why the movie is so magical, but the authenticity and realness (they are separate things) that the film gives to its settings and its characters put it so far out of reach of being correctly labelled a gimmick. In fact, much of the Boyhood dissenters seem to be coming from the Birdman camp, which is ironic because I think the latter is most certainly a gimmick-y movie. Not to say that's a bad thing, I really enjoyed Birdman, might have been the most fun I've had in a theatre last year. For the most part, the movie knows what it is and is fine staying in its wacky, free-roaming corner, but tries to go for something deep in the end, and it leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth. It is a technical marvel, but I don't think it seeps into your soul the way Boyhood does. In terms of voting, it really is a toss-up. I think whoever wins Director will also win Picture.

Here are my predictions for the evening, plus those who I'd replace as nominees, and honorable mentions for the six big categories. I realize some of my replacements had no chance at getting nominated, these are just  my dream scenarios.

PREDICTIONS

BEST PICTURE (anywhere from 5 to 10 nominees):
AMERICAN SNIPER
BIRDMAN
BOYHOOD
THE IMITATION GAME
THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL
SELMA
THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING
WHIPLASH

Who I'd replace:

UNDER THE SKIN, GONE GIRL, FOXCATCHER, INHERENT VICE, HAPPY CHRISTMAS, THE BABADOOK, WILD

for

AMERICAN SNIPER, THE IMITATION GAME, THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL, SELMA

Honorable mention:

THE IMMIGRANT, PALO ALTO, IDA, NIGHT MOVES, SNOWPIERCER, THE DOUBLE, THE ONE I LOVE, SELMA, ENEMY, NYMPHOMANIAC VOL. 1, NOAH, ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE, NEIGHBORS, X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST, OBVIOUS CHILD, EDGE OF TOMORROW, THE ROVER, LIFE ITSELF, GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, FURY, NIGHTCRAWLER, INTERSTELLAR, A MOST VIOLENT YEAR

Will win and Should win: BOYHOOD

BEST DIRECTOR

Richard Linklater, BOYHOOD

Alejandro G. Inarritu, BIRDMAN

Bennett Miller, FOXCATCHER

Wes Anderson, GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL

Morten Tyldum, THE IMITATION GAME

Who I'd replace:

 David Fincher, GONE GIRL; Damien Chazelle, WHIPLASH, Paul Thomas Anderson, INHERENT VICE

for

Miller, Anderson, Tyldum

Honorable Mention:

Wes Anderson, GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL; Denis Villenueve, ENEMY; Jonathan Glazer, UNDER THE SKIN; James Gray, THE IMMIGRANT; Darren Aronofsky, NOAH; Gia Coppola, PALO ALTO; Pawel Pawlikowski, IDA; Kelly Reichardt, NIGHT MOVES; David Michod, THE ROVER; Bong Joon-Ho, SNOWPIERCER; David Ayer, FURY; Dan Gilroy, NIGHTCRAWLER; Christopher Nolan, INTERSTELLAR; Bennett Miller, FOXCATCHER; Richard Ayoade, THE DOUBLE; Jennifer Kent, THE BABADOOK; Jean-Marc Vallee, WILD; J.C. Chandor, A MOST VIOLENT YEAR; Ava DuVernay, SELMA

Will win and Should win: Richard Linklater, BOYHOOD

BEST ACTOR

Steve Carell, FOXCATCHER

Benedict Cumberbatch, THE IMITATION GAME

Bradley Cooper, AMERICAN SNIPER

Michael Keaton, BIRDMAN

Eddie Redmayne, THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING

Who I'd replace:

 Miles Teller, WHIPLASH; Jake Gyllenhaal, NIGHTCRAWLER; Joaquin Phoenix, INHERENT VICE; Jesse Eisenberg, THE DOUBLE

for

Carell, Cumberbatch, Cooper, Redmayne

Honorable Mention:

Ralph Fiennes, GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL; Jake Gyllenhaal, ENEMY; Joaquin Phoenix, THE IMMIGRANT; Tom Hiddleston, ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE; Guy Pearce, THE ROVER; Ben Affleck, GONE GIRL; Brad Pitt, FURY; Matthew McConaughey, INTERSTELLAR; Steve Carell, FOXCATCHER; Channing Tatum, FOXCATCHER; Eddie Redmayne, THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING; Oscar Isaac, A MOST VIOLENT YEAR; Mark Duplass, THE ONE I LOVE; David Oyelowo, SELMA

Will win: Eddie Redmayne, THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING

Should win: Michael Keaton, BIRDMAN

BEST ACTRESS

Marion Cotillard, TWO DAYS, ONE NIGHT (haven't seen this, but gonna switch w/ another Cotillard performance, so it's cool)

Felicity Jones, THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING

Rosamund Pike, GONE GIRL

Julianne Moore, STILL ALICE

Reese Witherspoon, WILD

Who I'd replace:

Scarlett Johanssen, UNDER THE SKIN; Marion Cotillard, THE IMMIGRANT

for

Cotillard, Jones

Honorable Mention:

Emma Roberts, PALO ALTO; Jenny Slate, OBVIOUS CHILD; Jennifer Lawrence, THE HUNGER GAMES: MOCKINGJAY PART 1; Anna Kendrick, HAPPY CHRISTMAS; Essie Davis, THE BABADOOK; Felicity Jones, THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING; Elisabeth Moss, THE ONE I LOVE

Will win: Julianne Moore, STILL ALICE

Should win: Rosamund Pike, GONE GIRL

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Robert Duvall, THE JUDGE

Ethan Hawke, BOYHOOD

Edward Norton, BIRDMAN

Mark Ruffalo, FOXCATCHER

J.K. Simmons, WHIPLASH

Who I'd replace:

Josh Brolin, INHERENT VICE

for

Duvall

Honorable Mention:

Jeremy Renner, THE IMMIGRANT; Nat Wolff, PALO ALTO; Jack Kilmer, PALO ALTO; Zac Efron, NEIGHBORS; Dave Franco, NEIGHBORS; Jake Lacy, OBVIOUS CHILD; Robert Pattinson, THE ROVER; Zach Galifianakis, BIRDMAN; Logan Lerman, FURY; Shia LaBeouf, FURY; Riz Ahmed, NIGHTCRAWLER; Joe Swanberg, HAPPY CHRISTMAS; Benicio Del Toro, INHERENT VICE; Owen Wilson, INHERENT VICE; Henry G. Sanders, SELMA

Will win: JK Simmons, WHIPLASH

Should win: Mark Ruffalo, FOXCATCHER (best perf. of the year IMO)

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Patricia Arquette, BOYHOOD

Laura Dern, WILD

Keira Knightley, THE IMITATION GAME

Emma Stone, BIRDMAN

Meryl Streep, INTO THE WOODS

Who I'd replace:

Tilda Swinton, SNOWPIERCER; Naomi Watts, BIRDMAN; Amy Ryan, BIRDMAN

for

Knightley, Stone, Streep

Honorable Mention:

Uma Thurman, NYMPHOMANIAC VOL. 1; Emma Watson, NOAH; Jennifer Connelly, NOAH; Mia Wasikowska, ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE; Agata Kuleza, IDA; Alison Pill, SNOWPIERCER; Carrie Coon, GONE GIRL; Emma Stone, BIRDMAN; Andrea Riseborough, BIRDMAN; Rene Russo, NIGHTCRAWLER; Mia Wasikowska, THE DOUBLE; Katherine Waterston, INHERENT VICE; Melanie Lynskey, HAPPY CHRISTMAS; Reese Witherspoon, INHERENT VICE; Jessica Chastain, A MOST VIOLENT YEAR; Hong Chau, INHERENT VICE; Jena Malone, INHERENT VICE; Carmen Ejogo, SELMA; Kristen Stewart, STILL ALICE

Will win and should win: Patricia Arquette, BOYHOOD

Look out for my Top 10 of 2014 later this week!

-Rex

PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN, KING OF THE UNCOOL

Before Super Bowl XLVIII turned out to be not so super, there was already a considerably gloomy cloud hanging over anyone that appreciates the power of art on Sunday. The actor Philip Seymour Hoffman was found dead, at 46, of an apparent heroin overdose in his Greenwich Village office. It's with performers like Hoffman, who seemed to repel the very existence of the term "typecast", that you not only realize you took his gargantuan talent for granted, but that you didn't even recognize him as a fellow member of your own species. When an actor delivers paramount material time after time, again and again, we tend to slice through everything else that makes him/her a real person (flaws, hobbies, interests) until they're automatons built for one function, performance. That they're powered down at the end of the shooting day. So, to hear that a giant of his form, a master of his craft, fell in such an unmighty way, shatters the lie we all tell ourselves: that famous people only exist to us as we project them to exist. That is to say what I briefly "knew" about his personal life: devoted father and partner, artistic director for local theater, a regular New Yorker, doesn't seem to be attributes of the same guy that left this world with a needle in his arm.

Pointless inquiries arise: How did a guy like Hoffman know heroin dealers? Heroin was his drug of choice? Heroin?? There's nothing to be done now, but it's difficult not to ponder how his commitment to diving deep into a character's painful world didn't have an impact on his real emotional state. How it was a release for him, but left him so drained that a crutch seemed more and more appealing, even necessary. It's been written by people who knew him that he was unbearably hard on himself, researching and experimenting endlessly on his subject. That effort yielded astonishing results. Greatness just came with the package, it wasn't that you were disappointed when he wasn't great, because it never happened. Perhaps the spoils we received watching him and the mountainous standards we held for him felt invisible because he put all of it on his back. That the output of the art was always more important than the endurance needed to maintain the illusion of effortlessness. That generosity seeped through the screen.

I can't speak for his heralded stage work or Capote or Happiness or Before The Devil Knows You're Dead, but from what I have seen of his work, I can comfortably estimate that he was one of the most innately talented working screen actors, Daniel Day-Lewis and Joaquin Phoenix, and maybe Leonardo DiCaprio, are the other ones in his weight class. To say he had no vanity as a performer would be nonviable, because he didn't have a lot of vanity to flaunt. He was rotund, had a giant head, freckled skin that looked dried out by the sun, thin lips that stretched too far across his face, and a receding flop of hair that was chameleonic in its shades of fire-red, yellow, and white. His amorphous shape seemed to coincide with his flexibility as contributor to an entire puzzle, assuming whatever form was needed to fit. Often he would be a small piece, a one-and-done scene stealer, but his screen time in those pictures was disparate from the burn he sizzled in your memory. I think of his prah-per speaking Brandt nervously chuckling as The Dude gazes foggily at the Little Lebowski Urban Achievers portrait in The Big Lebowski, the spoiled silver-spooner Freddie calling out Ripley on his peeping in The Talented Mr. Ripley, the delusional former child star or anarchic villain of otherwise forgettable blockbusters Along Came Polly and Mission Impossible III, and his high-minded rock critic Lester Bangs in Almost Famous. His "uncool" speech in that film has been diluted by people who throw that quote around too much, and ironically, but not surprisingly, have never felt uncool themselves. But it speaks to Hoffman's delivery of those lines, he made being an unsocial, polarizing, loudmouth critic seem like a sympathetic, misunderstood intellectual. He made the uncool cool. You sense that Paul Thomas Anderson, who had Hoffman in five of his films, not only admired him but craved his inspiration on set to get his own creative juices flowing. Hoffman repeated lines in all of Anderson's movies ("fun, Fun, Fun!", "I'm a fucking idiot", "SHUT SHUT SHUT SHUT", "Say your name, say it again, say it again"), and those mantras seem now like Hoffman revving his engine, warming up his acting muscles, accelerating into higher and higher RPMs. A big theme of Anderson's films is family, and Hoffman was almost always the one you'd respond to like a family member. You want to send Scotty a mixtape of break-up songs when he gets rejected by Dirk in Boogie Nights, you want to set his saintly Phil Parma from Magnolia up on a date, you want to party with his obnoxious craps player from Hard Eight for a night like an estranged cousin and then not see him again for a couple years. In light of his death and the correlation of his stringent work ethic of giving everything to a performance, I suspect two of his lead roles in Synecdoche, New York and The Master will have the longest legs when looking back on his career years from now because they both are about the suffering that comes with being the creator of something, and I suspect people will not be able to watch them the same way now. Synecdoche reveals the endlessness of the process, how even when something's finished, the artist is never fully satisfied. The Master hits really close to home because it dives into how hard it is to keep up an act when you no longer believe the truth of it, and why substances (in the film, Joaquin Phoenix's paint thinner cocktail) are so dangerous because they make the job so much easier. Although the latter is one of the most gigantic, magnetizing performances of the past ten years, Hoffman seemed okay with being overshadowed by others in the ensemble. Two of the most underrated performances of recent times were Hoffman's in Moneyball and The Ides of March. Other performances were more celebrated in those films, but Hoffman's collaborative gift had a sizable effect on elevating his costars to the podium of public debate. It's no shock that this selflessness was why he was so adorned by his peers.

Selfishly, the first thought that crept into my mind Sunday was "Man, no more great Hoffman performances." Someone who does not conform to the movie-star life cycle, which he didn't, also can't be applicable to any age limit for expiration of watchability. As brilliant as he was, I'm surely not the only one to think the best was still to come from him. Still, the sadness I, and many others feel, about what could have been is entangled with tremendous gratitude of what he did leave us, and what he left us is magic. He mattered. And his art will never stop mattering.

-Rex

REX'S TOP 10 FIILMS OF 2013

I LISTED MY TOP 10 BRIEFLY IN MY OSCAR POST. I'LL DIG A LITTLE DEEPER INTO EACH ONE NOW. THE LIST:

Honorable Mention:
The Place Beyond The Pines, Mud, This Is The End, The Bling Ring, Pacific Rim, The Conjuring, Lee Daniels' The Butler, Star Trek Into Darkness, Much Ado About Nothing, Short Term 12, Prisoners, Rush, Enough Said, The Counselor, All Is Lost, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, Upstream Color

High Honorable Mention:
16. Stories We Tell
15. Blue Jasmine
14. Captain Phillips
13. Nebraska
12. Frances Ha
11. Drinking Buddies

10. The Spectacular Now- While most of us are glad that the high school days are long gone, it is one of the easiest periods in life to romanticize about: little to no responsibility and the wild college days are still ahead. It's also often a checking point which you refer back to with regret or, at least, curiosity: "If I had done that one thing differently, my life might look like this instead, I might be this person instead...". The Spectacular Now examines the denial of graduation for one teenager who genuinely loves high school or at least this time in his life and the people in it. Miles Teller's, in a star-making turn reminiscent in look and spirit of John Cusack in Say Anything, character revels in being the life of the party, and living in the moment, not giving a damn about the future. He's in danger of being the guy who goes nowhere and will wonder where ten years went, until he starts seeing a tender, innocent bookworm (Shailene Woodley), and starts to realize that being "the man" won't matter when all his worshippers move on to bigger and better things. Teller's charisma, and his chemistry with Woodley, carry the story, and the naturalistic feel for high school life and first "love" will most certainly return some nostalgic feelings about that spectacular then.

9. Her- A brilliantly conceived vision of a near-future L.A. in which a lonely writer falls in love with his operating system, Spike Jonze's Her is touching, funny, and insightful about our own relationship with technology. One facet I particularly enjoyed was the look of L.A.: endless skyscrapers, speed-shuttles to the beach, serious over-population problems, how an entire indoor mall seems to have been built around the main character's apartment building entrance. Yet none of it is mentioned, the cityscape is just background noise, because as seen in one haunting sequence, the only progress we appreciate is happening in our phone screens. To paraphrase the famous gospel song, We've got our whole world in our hands. Another thing Jonze executes flawlessly is relational interactions between man and woman, whether it be a blind date or a brutal breakup. What Joaquin Phoenix and Rooney Mara exert during their marital dissolution flashback, without any sound, is scarily authentic. And what Olivia Wilde manages to show, not tell, us about her character's past dating life in only one disastrous scene is remarkable. Phoenix and Amy Adams flaunt their sensitive side beautifully, two damaged characters who couldn't be more different than the ones they played in The Master. This movie sticks with you because of how personal it feels, many estimate this is Jonze's answer to ex-wife Sofia Coppola's Lost in Translation, another story involving a failing marriage. It is not as enjoyable a movie experience as others on this list because of the sad sack nature of Phoenix's character, but it should be endured for being a meticulously crafted artistic endeavor. The real discovery here is the invisible Scarlett Johanssen as the OS, Samantha. Yes, she's been one of the biggest movie stars for some time, but her moneymaker may not be her curves, it may be her sultry pipes.

8. The Act of Killing- Certainly one of the most searing documentaries I've ever seen, The Act of Killing delves into the evil that lawlessness breeds, and the emotional toil that plagues those who committed heinous crimes. Director Joshua Oppenheimer invites Anwar Congo, leader of a paramilitary organization in Sumatra in the 1960's, personally responsible for at least 1,000 deaths, to re-enact his killings in a film production. The elderly Congo coasts the streets merrily with his right-hand man, Herman Koto, boasting about strangling people with wire in a courtyard, and how they always got away with it. The scary thing is that Congo is not threatening, he's more jovial, a magnetic camera presence, and loves referencing American crime movies, many of which inspired their performances as themselves in the re-created film. But as the re-creations are being filmed, and Congo is forced to relive his crimes, you see a killer confronted with his sins for the first time. A scene at the end positions Congo in front of a TV to watch his scene as one of his former victims (pictured above), and his guilt-ridden response results in one of the most powerful scenes I saw last year. Oppenheimer is a director to watch, as his hallucinatory settings look like a Hollywood production, and coincide with Congo's real nightmares, which probably will haunt him for years to come.

7. Side Effects- My full review of Steven Soderbergh's icy, Hitchcockian sexual thriller can be found here.

6. American Hustle- David O. Russell gets the ol' gang back together for this loose adaptation of the 70's ABSCAM scandal. All-American girl Amy Adams bares a lot of cleavage and is riveting in her sexiest role yet. She has three or four scenes in the first half of the film that are jaw-dropping in their command and seductiveness. Her chemistry with Bradley Cooper's doofus FBI agent is scalding, and provides some priceless comedic payoffs. Cooper has never been better as a libidinal man-boy. Christian Bale as the neurotic frontman, Jennifer Lawrence as the unstable possessive housewife, and Jeremy Renner as the honorable mayor all are memorable. That is the gift of Russell, The Actor's Director, whose films have a very loose, improvisatory feel which provides for some preposterous dialogues that generate tremendous wacky energy. Some may say that the narrative goes wayward and that, by the end, they feel they just left a mess. I believe this is Russell's purpose, and I adore the mess. The only thing that bugged me was the Goodfellas-ripoff attempt with the narration, which he gives up on halfway through, and the quick Scorsese-like zoom-ins, which he attempted at inopportune moments or line readings, and frankly after seeing the actual Scorsese movie this year, just don't look as crisp as the real thing. Hustle is an acting showcase, and the different things he tried with the camera last year in Silver Linings Playbook had a much more substantial impact on that film's success. Nonetheless, this was one of the most fun watches last year. It hits its peak about halfway through at Studio 54, culminating in Adams' party-girl howl to a bathroom ceiling. The result is the most euphoric two minutes I spent in a theater in 2013.

5. Gravity- We should all be grateful to director Alfonso Cuaron's patience, who imagined the film's concept years ago but had to wait until the technology was far enough along to start shooting. The work of art is one of the most transcendent cinema experiences I've ever had. Starting with a 13-minute long tracking shot that revolves and floats and dips with these astronauts repairing their ship as they orbit around Earth, I knew that this was unlike anything I'd ever seen. The end of that single sequence, with Sandra Bullock's character floating away into nothingness, is one of the most majestic images in all of science fiction cinema. George Clooney is his usual presidential self as the veteran astronaut, but this is Bullock's show. Her fear and lonesomeness is what much of the movie relies on, and Bullock's empathy makes her astronaut the latest in a long line of great action heroines. If you haven't seen it yet, then I urge you to find a theater it's playing, because a TV viewing will not do it justice. If ever there was a movie that demanded the biggest of screens, it's this one.

4. Inside Llewyn Davis- Surviving the wintry New York is brutal when you don't have a coat or a permanent residence. Such is the life of folk singer Llewyn Davis, resident couch surfer, who makes whatever he can scrap together from community baskets at coffee lounges where he plays. Llewyn's musical partner just recently killed himself, and now the sidekick has to find a way to survive as a solo man. Like many of the Coen Brothers' protagonists, Llewyn's downward spiral is the spine of the film. He isolates everyone he knows with his innate contempt for others who have any sort of success, his music is rejected time and again for major consideration, and when he eventually tries to get out of the business, he finds himself doomed to play in the Village forever. But Oscar Isaac, with his passionate singing and doggedly defeated eyes, keeps Llewyn in our good graces. The film's about how far you will push when it's clear that there's no longer a place for your artistry. The music is joyous, the look of the dimly lit 1960's Greenwich Village is magical, and the brilliant comedic pitch of the Coen Brothers is ever-present.

3. Spring Breakers- Bodies swaying side to side, middle fingers in the air, crotch grabbing, tit wiggling... these are the monsters that occupy the beaches of St. Petersburg, FL. The monsters are us. An apocalyptic wasteland, the wild, wild south. Director Harmony Korine's cautionary tale of youth and mainstream media is a fever dream of shocking images and chasing the impossible perfect escape fantasy that spring break vacation represents. Four college girls don't have enough money for the trip, so the three baddest ones rob a restaurant, and off they go on a bus down to St. Pete. There they trip, booze, and get lost in Skrillex music mindlessly with other scantily clad strangers. They talk about never leaving, how this place is special. Eventually they get busted, and get bailed out by aspiring rapper/criminal/gangster Alien, decked out in cornrows and gold teeth. James Franco as Alien has never delved deeper into a character, and he is both alluring in his boastfulness and repulsive in his outlook on life. His "Look at my shit" monologue is already carving out a cult corner as a tableau for materialistic delusion. In one of the most visually arresting sequences I've ever seen, the girls march out to Alien's backyard donning pink unicorn-embroidered balaclavas and toting big guns. Alien begins playing the sweet, simple Britney Spears melody "Everytime" on his piano, and the song keeps playing during a slow-mo montage of the masked crew robbing tourists at gunpoint. Korine is deliberate with this notion that the most seemingly innocent sources of entertainment intake can be a gateway to violent, nasty impulses. That's the fascinating thing about Alien, he didn't learn to talk or accessorize like a black rapper through his own tough upbringing or gang run-ins, he probably learned it through TRL. The film has a pace and feel and sound to it that is intoxicating. Between the endless guttural rapture of Skrillex and the neon dreamlike cinematography, it is a total hypnotic sensory intake. Korine has a special interest with his past films in the freaks, low-lifes, the despicable scum of the earth. Despite the painful oddities of his past miscreant creations, his genius as a filmmaker did shine through the scum from time to time. His motor has always been fueled by anarchy, and now that he's focused that gutter art on halfway-normal people with this outing, it feels like he's stopped hitting his head on the wall, and maybe is willing to accept commercial success.

2. The Wolf of Wall Street- Martin Scorsese's operatic farce based on Jordan Belfort's life is a drug-fueled, adrenaline rush through the lives of Wall Street culture in the 1990's, and is also the funniest film of 2013. The work itself seems less important than what is "necessary" to complete the work: endless drugs, hookers, and obscene debauchery. This isn't a Wall Street office, it's a cave in the wilderness full of savages, pounding their chests, yelping tribal calls. Money and greed has turned them primitive. Leonardo DiCaprio's Belfort loves the idolatry his worker bees lay upon him, and his vulgar state-of-the-union pump-up rallies are a raucous vision of endless striving for immorality. DiCaprio, able to let go of his vanity like never before, unleashes a twisted, paranoid messiah that feels like discovering him again for the first time. Terence Winter's brilliant, over-the-top script permits Leo to leave nothing on the field, so to speak. Martin Scorsese, similarly, hasn't felt this vital and reckless in a long time, it's mind-blowing this is a film made by a 71 year old, but Scorsese is, still, not of this planet. Jonah Hill is terrific as Belfort's schlubby, loyal number two, and the newcomer knockout Margot Robbie proves very valuable in later scenes as Belfort's wife when Jordan hits rock bottom. The arguments that Wolf glorifies these guys, and that the filmmakers lack integrity for not showing what happened to the people that got ripped off are thunderously insipid to me. It's as if these critics have never seen a movie about people doing bad things that don't get punished as severely as they deserve to be. The argument I will listen to is that it's long... it is. But for every valley of conversations that drag on too long about midget throwing or teasing someone about their wife, there are sky-high mountains of immaculate writing, directing, editing, and acting. Jonah Hill tripping at the beach house, Jordan acting a fool on the plane to Switzerland, the work speeches, the boat confrontation with Kyle Chandler, the yacht in the storm, the brutal fight at home with the Mrs., and of course the Lemmon quaalude scene, as far as I'm concerned, on the Mt. Rushmore of all-time Scorsese scenes. At the end of the film, Jordan has lost his money, his family, his company, but the last shot reveals the essential component that made the other things attainable in the first place: disciples.

1. 12 Years A Slave- Steve McQueen's harrowing journey into one of the most shameful periods in U.S. history is haunting in its southern imagery and sadism. The true story follows Solomon Northup, a free black man from New York, who is kidnapped and sold into slavery in the south for a dozen years. It is far from an easy watch, and McQueen's relentlessness with the brutality and psychological warfare the slaves deal with everyday borders on excessive. But McQueen's stupendous long takes serve the material so well because it reinforces the idea that any pain and suffering endured is out of the victim's hands, Solomon will hang under a tree all day clinging to life until someone cuts him free. That is how real life is too, you can't just change to a different scene when faced with awkwardness, humiliation, agony. McQueen doesn't grant the audience any slack, and because of that, the whole film is an emotional sledgehammer, enriched by Hans Zimmer's somber violin score. Yet you never feel manipulated to feel an artificial way, the art of the filmmaking transposes all the culturally important ideas to the right places. It's an important watch not because it's the most punishing of films depicting slavery, but because it's one of the most realistic portrayals of human nature, which is that we are engineered to want to live, no matter how miserable our lives have become. Lupita Nyong'o is devastating as the perpetually tortured Patsey, and Michael Fassbender is a complicated, spiritually conflicted beast of a slave master, but it's Chiwetel Ejiofor's solemn and quietly dignified protagonist that makes the nightmare journey through the dozen years so worth it. Of course, since it's not called A Lifetime A Slave, Solomon returns to his family in the end, and the reunion, more or less, detonated my heart. I haven't felt that shell-shocked and overwhelmed walking out of a theater in a long time. It's ultimately a horror movie, but Solomon need not scream bloody murder, the fear and despair is all on display in those big, orbital eyes.

-Rex

@rexman2001

OSCARS 2014: AMPAS, YOU M-M-M-MAKE ME HAPPY

The 86th Oscar nominations were announced by the AMPAS (Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences) last Thursday, and in the other tradition unlike any other (for film enthusiasts, at least), that annual January morning is a second Christmas. The same jitters that jolted me awake at the crack of dawn years ago in my bunk bed on Dec. 25 re-assemble every year for this day, the culmination of my movie-going year. Yes, there is still the awards show itself, but hardly are there ever Cinderella upsets at the Main Event, and if there are, it's only in one category. These days, the winners are set in stone before the nominations are even announced. So, the real excitement for me is who's going to be immortalized (in Hollywood folklore, at least) by getting nominated, not to mention the Oscars are continually finding new pointless ways to drag on the show. Even though the Golden Globes'  voting body, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, is far less reputable than the Academy, the producers of that show have a flawless execution plan every year: No pauses in between awards for Cirque du Soleil bullshit or interpretive dance of the Original Scores, don't even show clips of the acting: just read the names, and most importantly for entertainment purposes, drown the celebrities in booze: keeps them happy with the hosts and us happy with the slurry speeches. But I digress, this year nomination morning had me buzzing with high hopes for my favorite actor who, in boxing terms, shot up three weight classes with one of his movies (Leo), an actress who I never thought of as more than indie baggage that blew me back in my seat (Sally Hawkins), and also a few performances which were all but locked in as "sure things" (Daniel Bruhl, Robert Redford, Emma Thompson- seriously, can anyone explain the appeal of that Thompson character?) that I hoped would be swiped by some more deserving ones. Now, when you're a 24-year old guy whose tastes range from delicate to obscene and you're relying on more classical and historical tastes of an overwhelmingly elder bunch to make your day, you can expect that only one, maybe two of your ponies are going to pull through. The nomination announcement is akin to being grateful you didn't lose everything at the track, and cut your losses.

I'm happy to report that this year, almost every nook and cranny not occupied by the actual "sure things" was filled by my underdogs. My verbal utterings as the nominees are read off the list in any other year usually range from, "Of course", "Bogus", "Come on..", "Really?". This year, it was closer to "Whoa", "Whoa!", "WHOA!!". I can't remember being more satisfied and genuinely shocked overall than this year. Maybe I cared more since I saw twice as many movies as I had last year, so the performances and directors that really stuck with me I felt I could, and should defend since it seemed like I had seen everything and could definitively say he/she deserved to be a finalist (There's still about 20 movies from this year I haven't seen and feel I need to see...because I'm an addict). But this year, in particular, emits a sentiment that a changing of the guard is beginning to occur inside the Academy: less obligatory nods to flavorless "socially conscious" (and usually mediocre) movies, no nods to big (overrated) comebacks (Redford) and perennial Oscar favorites (Hanks) or just human favorites (Oprah). It represents, perhaps, that we're on the precipice of another new wave of cinema, not because more of the right kinds of movies are getting made and seen, but because this year might be the start of getting back to celebrating the right kinds. That the Oscars might actually mean what they should mean. The urgency to wave new and younger voters into the Academy is a joy to hear because the same old, sentimental, rigid Academy stiffs that have been so predictable the past decade were once the same young guns who got A Clockwork Orange, Taxi Driver, and Dog Day Afternoon nominated. The times they are a changin'. Here's a few random thoughts on the nominations this year:

-One popular narrative is that this was the black year in cinema, and that the Academy was being racist for only including 12 Years A Slave, and completely shutting out Fruitvale Station and Lee Daniels' The Butler. First off, I agree it was a terrific year for films primarily starring and made by African Americans, but to say that voters are racist for not including the other two is nonsense. 12 Years A Slave is a vastly superior movie to the other two, and while I would give Dallas Buyers Club and Philomena's Best Picture spots to them, their absence of nominations is more due to when they were released, which is admittedly a problem. But it's not the Academy's fault, it's no secret that you have a better chance of getting nominated the later in the year you release that picture, so really it's up to the filmmakers who want to risk losing money going against three other awards contenders on a November weekend, or dominate the box office early in the year. It's not like Fruitvale Station even really had a choice like that, if it doesn't go to Sundance, it maybe never gets distribution from Weinstein Co. Let's not forget, it's still really just a Sundance darling, to expect it to stay in the epicenter of awards conversations for a full year like Beasts of the Southern Wild did last year is wishful thinking. And Lee Daniels' The Butler is a far stranger movie than its commercials would have you think, the reviews calling it Oscar bait when it first came out got it wrong, it's Oscar imitation meat. And for that matter, 12 Years, which I think will win Best Picture, is another bewildering horror show that the Academy usually doesn't cuddle close to, all to say that Slave's raw power and haunting affect was enough to carry it to the finish line, and the other two, while perfectly adequate films, weren't making enough noise at the end to get in.

-The Academy really likes Alexander Payne and David O. Russell movies. Payne snuck in as Best Director, when he was thought to be on the fringe at best, and for a very bare-bones, smaller project. His lead Bruce Dern beat out critically adorned Robert Redford for the old-timer spot in the Best Actor race, rightly so in my opinion. David O. Russell got his third Director nomination in four years, and for an unprecedented second year in a row, got his actors a nomination in each category. Pretty remarkable. This year, I believe each of the main four actors were all deserving, but last year's supporting nominations were a stretch. Nonetheless, Russell's zany energy that he infects his actors with clearly brings back fleeting memories of Grant-Hepburn and Bogey-Bacall screwball classics to the older Academy members. Russell has said that American Hustle is the end of a trilogy with the other parts being The Fighter and Silver Linings Playbook, and that his next film, stylistically, will be much different. We'll have to wait and see if Russell's new stuff does it for the Academy the way his trilogy really, really did. It's interesting that the voters used to feel this way about the Coen Brothers, but Inside Llewyn Davis was only nominated for a couple technical awards, even though their more abstract A Serious Man was nominated for Best Picture. I guess their muse-ship has been temporarily removed, until it's not. The Brothers are never more than a picture away from returning to the Kodak Theatre.

-Tom Hanks was thought to be a shoo-in for Captain Phillips, most supporters saying the last twenty minutes is one of the finest stretches of performance he's ever given. I would concur, but I would also say much of  the film before that, he is rather passive, being overshadowed by some of the scarier Somalis. Which makes it baffling that one of the more compassionate pirates, played by Barkhad Abdi, did get nominated without the film's indispensable movie star. Not that Abdi doesn't deserve it, but to think that it would be without Hanks would have been hard to imagine a month ago. Philomena, a very precious, very British movie that you forget almost instantly once you walk out of the theatre got a Best Picture nomination, thanks to one man. Or should I say warlock? Ogre? By any means, he is one hell of an Oscar campaigner: Harvey Weinstein. And Dallas Buyers Club, a movie 20 years in the  making, got a Best Picture nod as well. You can't keep all socially-conscious drub out, and while it  boasts a powerhouse performance by McConaughey, did anyone else feel it was a little contrived having it be about a homophobe who has to learn acceptance by being around gays and trannies all the time? Well, it's based on a true story, right? Uh, well, news has arisen (at a rather convenient time, don't you think?) that McConaughey's character, Ron Woodruff, was actually bi-sexual. So, why would they make him straight in the movie? Uh-oh for Dallas Buyers Club's Oscar chances. Not that it had a real shot at Best Picture, but it could derail its two stars', both of whom are big front-runners, otherwise perfectly smooth rides to the Kodak stage.

Here are the nominees in the 6 major categories, plus those who I'd replace, as well as honorable mentions in each category, and my picks for who will win and should win on the big night.

Oscar-nominated movie(s) I haven't seen: Before Midnight

Side note: Behind the Candelabra would have been a front-runner in every eligible category had it gotten picked up by a studio like it deserved. Alas, it was picked up by HBO, and must settle for being the greatest TV movie ever.

These are all in no particular order.

BEST PICTURE (anywhere from 5 to 10 nominees; 9 this year)

Nominees:
American Hustle
Captain Phillips
Dallas Buyers Club
Gravity
Her
Nebraska
Philomena
12 Years A Slave
The Wolf of Wall Street

Who I'd Replace:
Side Effects, Spring Breakers, The Spectacular Now, Drinking Buddies, Inside Llewyn Davis
for Dallas Buyers Club, Nebraska, Philomena, Captain Phillips

High Honorable Mention:
Blue Jasmine, Captain Phillips, Frances Ha, Nebraska

Honorable Mention:
The Place Beyond The Pines, Mud, This Is The End, The Bling Ring, Pacific Rim, The Conjuring, Lee Daniels' The Butler, Star Trek: Into Darkness, Much Ado About Nothing, Short Term 12, Prisoners, Rush, Enough Said, The Counselor, All Is Lost, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, Upstream Color

Should Win and Will Win: 12 Years A Slave

I will go further in depth with my Top 10 of 2014 post early next week. This is by no means a lock, Gravity is very close behind, and American Hustle has a puncher's chance, having split evenly between them the Producers and Screen Actors Guild Awards. While Gravity is a technical landmark, that almost never is enough to sew up the Best Picture race. It wasn't enough for Avatar, which is the most successful movie of all time, and also amazing to look at. American Hustle will not win unless it wins its Director and Screenplay awards, which I don't see happening. This is an actors' movie, but there's not a lurking-beneath-the-surface bigger meaning that the Best Picture usually goes for. Which is why, I believe, 12 Years A Slave covers all the bases: It's about an important time in America, it stays with you in ways few movies do, and perhaps most important, one would look like an ignorant ass trying to oppose a film about the brutality of slavery. That brutality may turn off some voters who are dismayed by its relentless depiction of human nature at its worst. But it does not feel in any way like pandering or backing its audience into a corner, it's an important, artfully executed film and a necessary one, and also the best of the year.

BEST DIRECTOR

Nominees:
David O. Russell, American Hustle
Alfonso Cuaron, Gravity
Alexander Payne, Nebraska
Steve McQueen, 12 Years A Slave
Martin Scorsese, The Wolf of Wall Street

Who I'd Replace:
Spike Jonze, Her; Joel & Ethan Coen, Inside Llewyn Davis
for Russell & Payne

Honorable Mention:
Payne;  Russell; Steven Soderbergh, Side Effects; Harmony Korine, Spring Breakers; Sofia Coppola, The Bling Ring; Ron Howard, Rush; Paul Greengrass, Captain Phillips; Woody Allen, Blue Jasmine; J.C. Chandor, All Is Lost; Noah Baumbach, Frances Ha

Should Win: Steve McQueen, 12 Years A Slave

Will Win: Alfonso Cuaron, Gravity

A two man race here with Cuaron the slight favorite. I've gone back and forth with this one, but I feel like this will be the consolation prize for Gravity not getting Best Picture, and Cuaron, who had this idea for years and had to wait until the technology was far enough along to push it into production. I think that patience will be rewarded, and while Steve McQueen's exquisite long takes and close-ups are essential to the tone of his film, Gravity is not only the all-time "You have to see it on a big screen" film, but also the all-time "How the hell did they do that?" film. You could argue that James Cameron didn't get it for Avatar, but he was going against Kathryn Bigelow, at a time in which the Academy felt it needed to end the drought of females losing the Best Director award (not that she didn't earn it). Once the Director's Guild Award is announced, we'll have a much clearer picture of who will win.

BEST ACTOR

Nominees:
Christian Bale, American Hustle
Bruce Dern, Nebraska
Leonardo DiCaprio, The Wolf of Wall Street
Chiwetel Ejiofor, 12 Years A Slave
Matthew McConaughey, Dallas Buyers Club

Who I'd Replace:
Oscar Isaac, Inside Llewyn Davis; Joaquin Phoenix, Her
for Bale & Dern

Honorable Mention:
Bale; Dern; Jude Law, Side Effects; Tye Sheridan, Mud; Leonardo DiCaprio, The Great Gatsby; Michael B. Jordan, Fruitvale Station; Forest Whitaker, Lee Daniels' The  Butler; Chris Hemsworth, Rush; Miles Teller, The Spectacular Now; Tom Hanks, Captain Phillips; Robert Redford, All Is Lost

Should Win: Leonardo DiCaprio, The Wolf of Wall Street

Will Win: Matthew McConaughey, Dallas Buyers Club

The Dallas Buyers Club controversy isn't the only thing going against McConaughey, have you listened to any of his acceptance speeches this January? He's clearly been waiting years to get awards, because he's got a lot on his mind, including Neptune? (Watch the SAG acceptance speech) His loopiness could be a turn-off for some voters who want a winner that's a tad more cordial and restrained. I personally love it because it's not the same boring, predictable speech that we've heard a thousand times. But voters love redemption stories, or mid-career reinvigoration, and there have been none more notable recently than McConaughey's. I'd be very surprised if he didn't win, I suppose I'm just grasping at straws, trying to think of ways it couldn't happen, because the runaway best performance in any category for me was Leonardo DiCaprio. Some kind of valve was uncorked that unleashed the most insane, animated, physical, and downright hysterical acting Leo has ever given. I really do think, given the lewd, crude, obscene nature of the character, that the fact he was nominated at all in this category which was maybe the deepest it has ever been with worthy contenders, he has a shot.

BEST ACTRESS

Nominees:
Amy Adams, American Hustle
Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine
Sandra Bullock, Gravity
Judi Dench, Philomena
Meryl Streep, August: Osage County

Who I'd Replace:
Rooney Mara, Side Effects; Brie Larson, Short Term 12; Olivia Wilde, Drinking Buddies
for Bullock, Dench, & Streep

Honorable Mention:
Bullock; Dench; Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Enough Said; Shailene Woodley, The Spectacular Now; Jennifer Lawrence, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire; Greta Gerwig, Frances Ha; Amy Seimetz, Upstream Color

Should win and will win: Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine

This is one of the absolute locks. Walking out of Blue Jasmine this summer, I could practically hear the enscribers chipping Cate Blanchett's name into the Best Actress trophy. Voters love crazy, especially from women, and none were more wacko and mesmerizing than Blanchett. I also equally loved Amy Adams in American Hustle, whose first half could have been re-titled Amy Adams Conquers the World. Her nomination is good enough for me, as she was on the fringe before last week. She, in my mind, is the best living actress, and her date with a golden man is coming soon, just not this year.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Nominees:
Barkhad Abdi, Captain Phillips
Bradley Cooper, American Hustle
Michael Fassbender, 12 Years A Slave
Jonah Hill, The Wolf of Wall Street
Jared Leto, Dallas Buyers Club

Who I'd Replace:
James Franco, Spring Breakers; Jake Gyllenhaal, Prisoners
for Abdi & Leto

Honorable Mention:
Abdi; Leto; James Franco, This Is The End; Ryan Gosling, The Place Beyond The Pines; Dane DeHaan, The Place Beyond The Pines; Matthew McConaughey, The Wolf of Wall Street; Matthew McConaughey, Mud; Danny McBride, This Is The End; Andrew Dice Clay, Blue Jasmine; Bobby Cannavale, Blue Jasmine; Keith Stanfield, Short Term 12; James Gandolfini, Enough Said; Kyle Chandler, The Wolf of Wall Street; Kyle Chandler, The Spectacular Now; Brad Pitt, The Counselor; Will Forte, Nebraska; Jonah Hill, This Is The End; Jeremy Renner, American Hustle; Chris Pratt, Her; John Goodman, Inside Llewyn Davis

Should Have Won: James Franco, Spring Breakers

Should Win (of those nominated): Bradley Cooper, American Hustle

Will Win: Jared Leto, Dallas Buyers Club

I'll talk more about Franco in my Top 10 post. This category is the other one that's completely wrapped up. Leto has swept every award, and while his performance was moving, it wasn't a standout performance for me. It was an impressive turn for someone that's been away from acting for some time, and that is one of the reasons voters have gone crazy about this role. Leto was one of the more prominent character actors at the turn of the millenium, but stepped away for his music career. So, between the comeback narrative, and the cross-dressing, and the deadly disease, Leto is the closest thing to "Oscar bait" this year. Of those nominated, I most enjoyed Bradley Cooper. He hits high notes in David O. Russell movies that he doesn't anywhere else, and his jittery, instinctual motor-mouth Richie DiMaso found Cooper at his funniest and most magnetic.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Nominees:
Sally Hawkins, Blue Jasmine
Jennifer Lawrence, American Hustle
Lupita Nyong'o, 12 Years A Slave
Julia Roberts, August: Osage County
June Squibb, Nebraska

Who I'd Replace:
Scarlett Johanssen, Her
for Roberts

Honorable Mention:
Katie Chang, The Bling Ring; Emma Watson, The Bling Ring; Melonie Diaz, Fruitvale Station; Oprah Winfrey, Lee Daniels' The Butler; Melissa Leo, Prisoners; Julianne Moore, Don Jon; Cameron Diaz, The Counselor; Mickey Sumner, Frances Ha; Anna Kendrick, Drinking Buddies; Margot Robbie, The Wolf of Wall Street; Rooney Mara, Her; Olivia Wilde, Her; Amy Adams, Her; Carey Mulligan, Inside Llewyn Davis

Should Win and Will Win: Lupita Nyong'o, 12 Years A Slave

It's between Jennifer Lawrence and Lupita Nyong'o. J-Law is the "it" girl, her popularity probably couldn't get much higher.  I, like everyone else,  find her public persona to be irresistible, and her range as an actress at her age is astonishing. However, I think her performance was the worst of the ensemble in American Hustle, and that's not to say she was bad, she dominates a couple scenes like few other actresses could, but she just wasn't in the movie enough to hold her in higher regard. The fact that critics are talking about her first when explaining things they liked about the movie is odd to me. There should be only one choice in this category: the anguish and endless misery that Nyong'o portrays with her Patsey is heartbreaking to an immeasurable degree. Patsey is among the most tragic movie characters I've ever seen, and Nyong'o's performance is among the most jaw-dropping film debuts ever.

Look out for my Top 10 post early next week. And I'll post again closer to the show with final predictions for the big night. Thanks for reading!

-Rex

@rexman2001

APPETITE FOR DESTRUCTION: "MAN OF STEEL" MOVIE REVIEW

Let's talk about superheroes in the movies: They occupy five of the top ten opening weekends of all time. There are at least two released every summer whose budgets usually exceed $200 million. They are the cash cows for the major studios that release them. Everything is riding on these movies making their money back plus a lot more. The risk factor is astronomical, yet they are the closest thing to a safe bet (Moreso than adapted books: you may get Twilight or you may get Beautiful Creatures). They are almost never discussed critically among the best films of the year, but their proven box-office success permits the giddy film executives who acquire the rights to them to slate release dates for sequels years in advance. Mainstream film fads come and go, the vampire and zombie phenomena are on its last legs, the bros who popularized the bromances are trying to evolve, but for the high court of superheroes: Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, the X-Men, and the Avengers, there is no end in sight. So, why do we keep coming back to stories where we more or less know what's going to happen? Beyond the sensory intake, there is one thing that non-adapted stories cannot do for an audience: re-experiencing the origin story through various subjective stances. People cannot get enough of the average joe or bullied kid slipping on that mask and knotting the cape for the first time. The myths of ascendance into each hero's respective role are pretty much set in stone, so the real reason floods of people rush back for a franchise reboot is to witness a new director's aesthetic changes, and compare it to the last trilogy. That's kind of a nice thought, that we all believe in the Auteur theory, even if most of us are unaware of it. Unfortunately, for Man of Steel director Zack Snyder, his vision involved trying to replicate another successful superhero filmmaker, and along the way attempting to be someone else fueled him to overcompensate with carnage, which crushes the plot and audience empathy into ashes.

That second or third first time I discussed earlier? Well, this was my FIRST first time for a Superman movie, so my anticipation was pretty high, this was going to be the benchmark by which I judge all future Superman films (or past, apparently the first two films from the '70s are excellent). Even some early jeers from the Zack Snyder hater nation didn't faze me (I was kind of middle of the road on Snyder before this movie: Dawn of the Dead is gory fun, the part of me that thought 300 was a great movie died long ago, Watchmen is extremely heavy-handed and uneven in tone but I will contend that the revisionist-60's opening credits sequence is quite lovely).

The movie opens with Superman (Kal-El, given name) entering the world, as the world he's entering is crumbling to pieces. The planet Krypton looks like a haunted, super-sized Grand Canyon and its native people have exhausted its natural resources, and its doom is all but certain. Kal's birth is significant in that there hasn't been one on the planet in many years, and his father Jor-El (Russell Crowe) intends on protecting him from the vigilant General Zod (Michael Shannon), who is planning an overthrow of the government, by instilling the Kryptonian genetic code into his son and sending him to a distant planet. Jor is killed by Zod, but not before Kal is sent in a tiny pod with the future of the race embedded with him. As the prologue concluded with Krypton exploding and Zod off to space jail, I was engaged in the possibilities of what would transpire on Earth with an adult Kal, and my doubts about Snyder's visual approach for a story of this scale were, for the time, halted.

Fast forward 33 years later, and we see Kal aka Clark Kent (Henry Cavill), working on an oil rig, grizzled and built like a redwood, forced to squat a falling tower to save a couple ungrateful workers. The tonnage upon his back and the fact that he's engulfed in flames leave little mystery left to the height of his powers, he's indestructible.  This is the first of several no-nos that Snyder chooses in starting with fully-formed Superman and reverting to flashbacks to show his parents' (the perfectly cast Kevin Costner & Diane Lane) attempt to help him harness and hide his abilities from the world as he first starts to learn that he has them. Jumbled narrative, for movies that use it correctly, should propel the momentum of the plot forward (Pulp Fiction would not work as a chronological story), not hinder it. This is where some of the most striking, "God's Country" Malick-esque images of Kansas you may recognize from the trailer happen, so the flashbacks weren't a total misfire. The story would have functioned just as well, or perhaps better, starting with Clark as a kid, so throttling back and forth in time only serves to distance ourselves from the adult Cavill, and makes us care less about his "finding yourself" nomadic journey.He does finally discover his real history up in Alaska while working for an archaeological crew who ponder correctly that there's an otherworldly ship underneath a glacier. Among that crew is Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, Lois Lane (Amy Adams). It is in the ancient ship that Clark meets the specter of his real father who re-tells, through a granular module, the fallen history of Krypton. This isn't a huge dilemma, except we already know what happens to Krypton from the movie's inception, so it's only for Kal's purpose. The writer David Goyer, who co-penned the Dark Knight trilogy and his script here is by far the best that Snyder's worked with, needed to cut out either the prologue, or have Jor explain the backstory to Kal off-screen. Exposition is a necessary evil in most studio movies. It should always be limited to what's necessary, and should never be repeated as it is here.

The two Els travel to a desert planet for the obligatory training sequence. This is where the visual effects are best utilized, as Clark learns to fly straight, like a kid who's had his training wheels taken off, with astonishing velocity and power. Good thing this kid is modest because he truly knows now that he has no limits. Meanwhile, Zod is hightailing it to Earth after breaking free from the outer-limits pen, and intends to re-start the Kryptonian race after wiping out humans first. Once Clark dons the crimson and blue, the allegories between Superman and the most famous Savior in history are overbearing. From his messianic age of 33 to his father's sermon of destiny to the stained glass depiction that's directly behind Clark's head in one shot to Clark's cross-like body position as he floats in space before rocketing back to Earth, Snyder is all but drowning you in holy water. The likeness between Jesus and Superman is so deeply inherent in the myth itself, so you feel like Snyder either thinks we're dumb or he doesn't trust himself as a storyteller to get across what Superman means to the human race. Either way, it's a turnoff for the audience. However, unlike Christ, Clark is not a man. Jor predicts for Kal in the prologue that humans "will worship him". Not exactly. Kal/Clark has been too busy running away from humans after they inevitably are witness to one of his godly physical feats. (Even Lois is trying to hunt him down the whole movie after a peek at his abilities, which is why the meek attempt at a romance near the end feels forced.) His whole life has been repressing his emotions when facing antagonizers (which seems to be EVERY place for Clark) because he knows how easily he could waste them. There is nothing the film depicts that makes us believe Clark would want to save humanity, which seems like kind of the whole point of the story. Again, I haven't seen any of the previous incarnations of Superman, but I know that they include Clark Kent working in the Daily Planet and flirting with Lois and intermingling with co-workers. It's clear to me now that you can't remove that part of the story. How else will Clark have believable sympathy for people when they need his help? Of course he does end up saving them, because we need to cross the bridge to Superman 2 somehow.

Zod lands with his gang of turtle-shell armored Kryptons in Smallville, where Clark is reconnecting with Moms. The military has gotten the heads-up about the impending attack, and set up some artillery on Main Street, but of course get throttled by Zod's female No. 2 before Clark comes in to finish her off. This display of re-directing bullets and tossing of soldiers like they're shot puts results in downtown Smallville being levelled, and the wreckage is enough of a climax for two movies. It could have stopped here in Mid-America with Superman and Zod duking it out. Snyder could have saved his big guns for the sequel, but instead he withdraws an atomic bomb. Naturally, Zod escapes Clark long enough to set up a vacuum laser right on the coast of Metropolis, which proceeds to demolish skyscraper after skyscraper. Disaster porn would be a wrong way to describe this, because porn is implicitly supposed to be enjoyed. Snyder's evocation of the deadly attack on a major city is so clearly meant to be entertaining, but instead, you're coughing up dust like the citizens that he so purposefully shows screaming in the streets, and who must be occupying these falling buildings. By the time the laser has been shut down, and Superman and Zod tackle each other through whatever concrete and glass is left standing for the 100th 9/11 re-enactment, you're not just exhausted by the annihilation, you're imprisoned by it. You wonder why Supeman doesn't fly off into space to avoid more obliteration, I mean Zod would follow him wherever he goes. Zod's final extermination is so unoriginal and dumb, but you barely have the energy to scoff. The aftermath is almost worse in that there is no remorse, no sign of rebuilding and unifying as a city, which Christopher Nolan would always do with the chaos his villains laid down. From using the same screenwriter and composer to the dark tone, it's apparent Snyder wished to Nolan-ize his movie, but he lacks the sensibility that Nolan has to show the significance of the sacrifice that superheroes, and heroes in general, make. By all accounts, Snyder's Superman stopped Zod, but is he even important to the people he saved? Do they even know who he is? You have to give credit to Snyder for going all out, but it's clear after Man of Steel that his ambition is farther than his reach as an artist.

Cavill certainly looks the part and has leading-man charisma, but you never feel any moral dilemma with him. He never questions why he shouldn't save Earth, he's never too angry at Zod. It's not enough that he loves his mom, he never feels like a true patriot and defender of people. Conversely, Michael Shannon doesn't have a screw loose to wrap his grip around, which he really needs. He excels most at the mumbler with the distorted face (Boardwalk Empire, Take Shelter) or the loudmouth who has no filter (Revolutionary Road). He has nothing psychological to play with, so you're never really scared of the boundaries Zod will cross to get what he wants, his lack of craziness doesn't allow him to think out of the box the way memorable villains do. Other amazing actors might as well be stand-ins: Crowe does an Obi-Wan Kenobi impression the whole movie, Adams is the damsel-in-distress that Clark always has to save, Laurence Fishburne as Adams' boss is pulling people out of the rubble but you see too little of him to care that he's a good citizen. The underusing of big names seems to be Snyder saying, "Ah, I'll worry about the characters in the next one." Unfortunately, Snyder saved the wrong aspect of his first movie for the next one.

 I know it seems like I've been trashing the movie this whole time, but up until the Metropolis fiasco, I was not hating it. In retrospect, I'm giving it some leniency because I really like the myth itself, and the spectacle of Supeman being super, when he's not smashing into buildings and killing innocent people, and Clark finally having a reason to care about people by starting work at the Daily Planet (which is somehow the only building still standing) at the film's conclusion was enough for me to go see the sequel. But I'm not exactly counting down the clock until it's released (and with the news from Comic-Con that the sequel is going to be essentially Superman vs. Batman, my interest is waning at light speed). As a franchise filmmaker, it is your job to make us want to see the sequel, not force us to go see it because you didn't give us enough of what we deserved. The Superman package is a sleek, shiny fast vehicle, and with the right driver, I believe it can provide sensational thrills. Time to hand the keys over, Zack.

2.5 out of 4

@arm2001

SEEING THE LIGHT: "ENLIGHTENED" Series Review

The opening moments of Enlightened show a woman with hellfire in her eyes ready to reign chaos against her superior. Her name is Amy Jellicoe (Laura Dern), and as she storms through the hallways of Abaddonn Industries (cosmetics conglomerate, think Amway) with make-up streaking down her face and a contempt that is downright flammable, the first impression of her is she's self-destructive and unstable. After discovering she's not getting a promotion she thinks she deserves from her boss, who she's been engaging in an affair with, she causes a scene in the elevator lobby so manic that only some kind of intervention can follow. Abaddonn sends her to a rehab clinic in Hawaii called Open Air insisting her job will be waiting for her when she gets back. Amy experiences an overwhelming sense of calm along the pristine beaches, and is driven to make some big changes in her life. But upon her return home, she discovers almost nothing is as she left it. She may have been enlightened as to the mistakes she made, but moving forward, her desire to return to normalcy at her job and her new found purpose in the world mesh together like a square peg in a round hole.

The external appearance of the new Amy is enough to know that things aren't going to continue as they were as if someone had hit a pause button while she was away. She's let her wavy hair down and chooses bright, flowy sun dresses, which alienate her from the grey mass of three-piece suits and hair gel in the building. Her first thud of truth comes when she discovers that her former assistant, Krista (Sarah Burns), has been promoted to her job and taken her office. Krista is friendly, but seems ever aware of Amy's unpredictability, and tries to keep her distance as much as possible. This unavailability of "openings" on her former high-level floor causes her to be relocated to a new department of Abaddonn called Cogentiva. It's like a giant glass chamber run by a dorky surfer dude named Dougie (Timm Sharp) and littered with techie weirdos and misfits, and one introverted computer-whiz Tyler (Mike White, show creator) that, like Amy, was relocated from a different department, and they become buddies.The metaphor of the good-looking people lounging in their large workspaces while the outcasts are crowded in a basement punching numbers all day is not subtle, but it's organic in how it ties to Amy's ultimate singular focus of being an "agent of change."

The internal struggle for Amy throughout the show is coming to grips with the fact that she no longer is one of the cool kids, and maybe never was. Her only outlet to her former work circle is Krista, who is too nice to tell her directly what she and everyone else in the office is thinking, that she's a ticking time-bomb bound to explode again. It's not only her infamous public meltdown that is blockading her from winning her old cronies back, it's her total lack of awareness of others' lack of comfort around her, and her preaching against the unethical environmental practices that Abaddonn is participating in. Every encounter with Krista is clear to the audience that this is a one-way relationship, that Amy is rather unenlightened to how people are reacting to her. Even when she catches Krista red-handed ditching her at lunch, or after she ruins Krista's baby shower by launching into a feminist work collaborative pitch, Amy still marches up to her old office the next day as if they're best buds. Eventually she learns that her new work dungeon actually serves a crucial purpose, its giant hard drives are monitoring everyone's work productivity. She recruits Tyler to help her hack into some executives' computers, and hatches a plan to take the company down for its harm to the environment. Her mission is admirable, but she's doing it for the wrong reasons. There are many shots of Krista and the old crew smiling and laughing at a business lunch while Amy passes by with a desperate sense of wanting to belong. Her takedown of Abaddonn is a reverse on the old adage: If you can't join 'em, beat 'em.

Her desire for the former status quo in the workplace makes sense when we see Amy's life outside of Abaddonn's glass walls. She's still in love with her separated husband Levi (a never-better Luke Wilson), and is urging him to go to rehab as his substance abuse problem is worsening. We see how Levi got this way, and how Amy got so bad before rehab, in flashbacks showing they had a devastating miscarriage and their beloved dog died, which fueled both their dire needs to escape reality. Amy, while in rehab, lost her apartment and now is living with her shut-in mother Helen (Diane Ladd, also Dern's real-life mom). Amy attempts to crack Helen's tough exterior with outwardly showy love, but the mending of their dark past,which includes a family member's suicide, is often too tall a task for Helen to reciprocate in. The best episodes of the show are when we step away from Amy because it's refreshing to get a perspective of someone who doesn't take life's bruisings and rough-ups with such resilience. We get to see Tyler's first awkward attempt at a adult relationship with a gentle co-worker (Molly Shannon), and Helen's daily struggle with past letdowns while Amy's at work, in respective episodes dedicated to them. In the finest half-hour TV episode so far this year, Levi arrives at the same rehab clinic that transformed Amy, but being sober does not sit well with him, nor do the team-building exercises he's encouraged to participate in. He sneaks off one night with a couple of rich, spoiled kids down the beach to party at a hotel. They booze and snort, and they gabble about what suckers the other rehabbers are for buying into the gospel. But as the night creeps into the wee hours, the youthful rebels show their true colors as heartless and lost. Christopher Abbott, the recently departed Girls cast member, is one of the wildlings and after getting sick in a toilet, reveals he's "such a piece of shit. I don't even wanna wake up tomorrow. There's so much I hate, and so little I love." It's the kind of monologue that's immediately relatable even if you haven't gone off the deep end with drugs or booze. It beautifully encapsulates the identity crisis that almost every young person experiences (or knows someone that goes through it), that which is the question Why is life worth living? For Levi, it's a wake-up call that he's been lying to himself for years about why he's stoned all the time, and it's clear to him now that if he has Amy on his side, he doesn't need extra supplements to make him feel something.

It's not really a spoiler to say that Amy executes her operation because this show is so much more about the little interactions between characters than plot. Creator Mike White clearly originates from the quiet, nerdy outcast crowd the most, but you sense from his writing that he's a seasoned vet of observing human behavior. He nails the nature of the suits, the surfer dudes, the spoiled assholes, the free spirits, the soon-to-be mothers so genuinely, and yet doesn't judge them for how they treat each other. He's created a completely justified world when it comes to behavior toward other social groups, even the corrupt president of Abaddonn seems to be more level-headed than Amy in some scenes. Dern is the glue that holds it all together, simultaneously fierce yet fragile, endearing yet frustrating, has purpose and yet is still wayward. We so want for her to get back on her feet, and yet it is impossible not to root against her sometimes. White and Dern seem like a mismatched pair creatively speaking but really they are perfect for each other. White's idiosyncratic writing voice and Dern's unabashed earnestness and melancholy, not to mention peculiar body type for a lead actress, was the perfect remedy to concoct this flawed heroine.

Alas, Enlightened is no more, it wasn't picked up for a third season. Despite the protests of many super-fan celebrities on Twitter, the show never got traction with a regular audience. I can only speculate that in the cruel landscape of female-protagonist shows, it was in a no-man's land, between the straight comedies (Parks & Recreation, Veep) and the action/procedural programs (Homeland, The Good Wife). But, what about Nurse Jackie & The Big C? Aren't they similar in tone and still on the air? I guess it's appropriate with Amy's current position on the social hierarchy that Enlightened remains the kid that just never fit in. The last episode worked as a series finale though, with Amy dazed after getting fired for exposing the company. Sure, a few executives are going down, but the skyscraper will still stand, Abaddonn is too big to fail. She's left asking herself, "What was it all for?" Uncertainty surrounds every aspect of her life going forward from here. One thing's for certain, I enjoyed going down the rabbit hole with her.

-Rex

Season 2 of Enlightened is available on HBO On Demand. You really can start watching here without going back to Season 1, you get a sense of what's going on after a couple episodes.

Follow me on Twitter @arm2001