Well, we’re a week away from this year’s Oscars, and I’ve seen every Best Picture nominee, so let’s talk about them.
american fiction
Jeffrey Wright is one of the most compelling actors working today. When he’s on screen, no matter what he’s doing, you cannot look away. When I heard he was heading up an acclaimed satire, I was excited. Wright, unsurprisingly, is fantastic. The rest left me feeling a bit conflicted.
Wright plays Dr. Thelonious “Monk” Ellison, a writer and college professor, who finds his books about mythology assigned to the African-American Studies section of the bookstore. Following an event where few people care about his book, but everyone cares about a book called We’s Lives in Da Ghetto, Monk decides to make a quick buck by writing a book that is essentially a checklist of what he thinks white audiences want from Black authors. It’s a great premise, and it leads to some very funny moments. The dialogue is sharp, and the situations are appropriately ridiculous. However, this is only part of the movie.
American Fiction is also a family drama, as Monk returns home and has to help his mother. It is well-written and well-acted family drama, but it feels so disconnected from the over-the-top satire. On the literature side of things, we see an acclaimed white author who seems so dumb that he has probably never read a book. I have no idea what kind of author he is supposed to be, but it would be fine if the movie went all-in on the satire. However, on the family drama side, we have Monk’s gay brother (Sterling K. Brown) struggling to find acceptance and his mother’s gradually worsening Alzheimer’s. I have heard people make connections between the two plotlines, and for a lot of audiences, it works. For me, it’s like if The Producers had a completely sincere plotline about Gene Wilder’s dying cat.
Despite my issues with it, I still liked American Fiction quite a bit. Again, it is genuinely funny. I laughed out loud many times. However, when it comes to satire, I prefer the kind that goes all in. If you have a point to make, I would prefer you twist the knife instead of lightly poking. Think Network, The Producers, The Menu, or the obvious comparison point to this film — Bamboozled. This one will cast a wider net, but I did leave scratching my head a bit at what exactly it was trying to say, which is not the mark of great satire.
ANATOMY OF A FALL
A gripping courtroom drama from director Justine Triet, Anatomy of a Fall is the favorite to win Best Original Screenplay at the Oscars, and it’s a few people’s longshot favorite for a few others. Here is a courtroom drama that truly puts the audience in the position of the jurors. Even though we get to know Sandra (Sandra Hüller) before the trial, information is revealed casually throughout that completely turns the story on its head. The screenplay zigs and zags when we aren’t expecting it, and we’re left to wonder about what we really know at all.
The entire ensemble is phenomenal here, from Sandra’s kindly lawyer (Swann Arlaud) to her young son (Milo Machado-Graner) to the court-appointed caretaker (Jehnny Beth). Unsurprisingly, the film takes inspiration from the 1959 classic Anatomy of a Murder. Both look at the unseemly sides of their respective country’s court systems without ever outright telling us the truth of what happened. All we have are the facts, and they are messy and frustrating. Even the emotions we feel at the end are complicated, and the movie leaves us thinking about it long after the credits roll. I know I still am.
BARBIE
Everyone in the world has seen this movie already. It was the highest grossing film of the year. You’ve already made up your mind about it. If you really want my thoughts on it, here they are.
Greta Gerwig’s previous two films were two of my favorites of the last decade. Lady Bird was probably the only high school movie to ever connect with me on an emotional level, and Little Women was just astoundingly beautiful. Barbie is … the best that it can be. At the end of the day, it’s a toy commercial for kids. It can be deconstructive, but only so deconstructive. It can have meaningful themes, but they can only go so far. Again, this could have been so much worse. A toy commercial directed by Greta Gerwig starring Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling is a whole lot better than one without them. If this impacts kids and people who aren’t reading these important discussions other places, then that’s wonderful. They’re important discussions, and they’re presented well. They’re just presented as part of a toy commercial.
Again, you’ve already made up your mind about this one, but I will say that the scenes with Will Ferrell are absolutely insufferable to get through. Everything else in the movie fits the vision and flows smoothly, but I audibly sighed every time Ferrell and his pointless subplot showed up. I’m guessing this was a way to get dads into the theatres, but clearly this wasn’t a problem. I’m admittedly not a big fan of his anyway, but I feel like even a lot of his fans must have been annoyed by this.
THE HOLDOVERS
I fell in love with The Holdovers from the opening scenes. Its setting is so rich, and its characters are so defined, that it could have gone pretty much anywhere with them and I would be OK with it. Are the basic story beats a bit cliche? Sure, but they feel so real here, thanks to the brilliant performances from Paul Giamatti, Da’Vine Joy Randolph, and Dominic Sessa. Randolph gives us such a raw and brutal portrayal of grief that it’s no surprise she is a lock to win Best Supporting Actress at the Oscars.
Set in 1970 at a boarding school, The Holdovers sees an unlikely bond form between prickly teacher Paul Hunham (Giamatti) and student Angus Tully (Sessa) when they have to stay at the school for the holidays. It’s set over Christmas break, and it definitely feels like Christmas all throughout, but it’s all very bittersweet. It is definitely trying to look and feel like a film from 1970, not just a modern film about 1970, and for the most part, it succeeds. I do think the ending scenes wrap up more things than a New Hollywood classic ever would have, and I did find myself wondering why it didn’t shoot for a more ambiguous ending to things. Director and writer Alexander Payne hasn’t been afraid of these kinds of endings in the past, so maybe he didn’t listen to his instincts here. Who knows? Regardless, it’s a thoroughly entertaining and heartwarming film that I would recommend to pretty much anyone.
KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON
It is fascinating that the legendary Martin Scorsese, more than 55 years removed from his first motion picture, is currently in the most interesting stage of his career. He’s made classics in every decade since the ’70s of course, but his three-film run of Silence, The Irishman, and Killers of the Flower Moon can be put up against any director’s best run of three. Based on the book of the same name which focused on the FBI’s investigation of the Osage murders, the film shifts focus to the Osage Nation and those who victimize them. Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo DiCaprio) is an unpleasant, dim-witted man who goes along with his uncle William Hale’s (Robert De Niro) plan to marry and murder the wealthy Osage. However, it is just as much the story of Ernest’s wife, Mollie (Lily Gladstone). Gladstone gives the finest performance of the year as a woman who sees her world falling apart around her and has to take things into her own hands. She doesn’t have big monologues, but her subtlety is her strength. There are still a few big moments though, like when she gives a scream of grief so primal and deep that it will shake you.
Scorsese is a big fan of horror films, and while this is not classified as one, it definitely gave me the same feelings I get watching Rosemary’s Baby or Hereditary. At one particularly horrifying moment, I remember thinking the movie was playing out like it was about to reveal that the conspirators all worshipped Satan. Of course, this is not that kind of movie, and all the true horror had already been revealed. It is nothing more than a band of monstrous men who will stop at nothing to get what they want, and that is just as horrifying as any demonic conspiracy.
Killers does not require you to have watched previous Scorsese films, but new layers will be revealed if you have. In Goodfellas, De Niro’s character kills off the various conspirators from an airport heist when things go south. It’s portrayed as paranoid, but it still plays out over a cool and stylized montage set to the piano coda of “Layla.” Here, De Niro’s character pathetically makes things even worse by trying to dispose of his conspirators. There’s nothing cool about William Hale; he’s just a worm, and a pretty dumb one at that. Prepare yourself for a challenging watch if you sit down for this one, as the subject matter is obviously quite heavy, but it is an absolutely brilliant film. You won’t be able to look away, and if you’re like me, you’ll find yourself wanting to return to it before too long. I could go on and on, but I do have to mention Robbie Robertson’s score, which has become one of my favorite of all time. Robertson said of the music:
I feel that the score is unexpected in many ways and authentic to the heart of the story. For me, it’s kind of perfection to be able to go all the way around this big circle. Starting at Six Nations when music comes along in my life, and then to my history with Martin Scorsese and all the movies leading up to Killers of the Flower Moon.
Robertson died last year, but his legacy lives on through the most powerful score I have heard in some time.
MAESTRO
Well, we go from my favorite of the bunch to my least favorite. How in the 2020s are we still making the kind of film that Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story was parodying in 2007? I’m not saying all biographical dramas are like this, and there’s even another biographical drama in this category that I like. I’m specifically talking about these “visual representation of a historical figure’s Wikipedia page” biopics that have nothing to say and refuse to challenge us. Leonard Bernstein did some cool stuff. Thanks for showing us. All we get is the what, not the why or really even the how.
I like Bradley Cooper, but between this and A Star is Born, it seems that I’m not a big fan of him directing himself. Admittedly, even though it wasn’t a true story, A Star is Born also followed a lot of the tropes of a rise-and-fall biopic. He’s better when he does something weird, like Nightmare Alley or his small performance in Licorice Pizza. Here, he has an impressive makeup team that sure makes him look like Leonard Bernstein, but I can’t see past the actor. He and Carey Mulligan get a lot of big character moments, but we’re not given reason to care about them. That said, it’s not quite Bohemian Rhapsody bad. It’s just boring. Thankfully, it’s a very strong year overall, and that’s enough to make this the weak link.
OPPENHEIMER
The more interesting of the two biographical dramas nominated for Best Picture, Oppenheimer is a bold film that takes a lot of chances. Christopher Nolan’s early films do a lot for me, but after The Dark Knight (which I love), they start to drop off. I was tentative going into Oppenheimer, but I ended up really liking it.
Cillian Murphy is the Best Actor frontrunner for his work as J. Robert Oppenheimer, and I can’t argue. It’s an extremely actor-y performance, with a lot of big emotional moments and dramatic line deliveries. Murphy has been putting in solid work for decades, and this will probably go down as his signature role. The enormous ensemble cast is great too, because even if we cannot remember which character is which, we can identify the famous actor playing them, which is all we need. Matt Damon is the standout as the sarcastic Leslie Groves, who offers many of the film’s most memorable moments. Robert Downey Jr. is the one nominated for Best Supporting Actor, and he’s the favorite to win. The Oscars do love a comeback story, after all. There are also brilliant performances by Alden Ehrenreich, Emily Blunt, David Krumholtz, and Dane DeHaan.
Even though audiences were looking forward to the famous nuclear testing scene, the most gripping part of Oppenheimer is the last hour. Never have dueling senate hearings been this enthralling. This is the kind of biopic I can enjoy, because it’s something beyond just a biopic. It’s not a birth-to-death story of Oppenheimer or even a rise-and-fall. It’s an engaging psychological drama about a man who is brilliant but also entirely full of himself. He feels bad about what he’s done, but then he wants people to praise him for feeling bad about it. I suppose you could view this as a straightforward “look at this poor genius who wasn’t appreciated,” but that’s not how it’s intended.
However, I think there’s a reason Oppenheimer is both the Best Picture frontrunner and a favorite of audiences everywhere. Unlike Killers of the Flower Moon, this movie doesn’t put you face to face with the evil its main character commits. If you go into Oppenheimer thinking that the atomic bomb was a necessary evil (or have an even worse opinion than that), you won’t be challenged on that. I don’t think the movie is pro-bomb, but its message seems to be the message of so many movies from the ’50s and ’60s. Instead of dwelling on the tragedies at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the movie suggests we’ll one day destroy the world. The final scene of the film (not a spoiler, I promise) sees Oppenheimer dreaming about piloting a plane that drops a bomb in some kind of world-ending event. He clearly feels some guilt for what could happen, but not for what did. If this fantasy sequence had shown him dropping a bomb on Hiroshima or Nagasaki, the movie could have sent a stronger message. I don’t think it’s a perfect film, but a lot of the big swings really pay off.
PAST LIVES
A simple story about complicated emotions, Past Lives is one of my favorite films of the year. Nora (Greta Lee) and Hae Sung (Teo Yoo) are 12-year-olds who crush on each other, but right as they realize this, Nora’s family moves from South Korea to Canada. 12 years later, Nora is living in New York, and they reconnect online, but nothing comes of it besides an intense friendship. It takes another 12 years for them to meet again, and by that point, Nora is married to Arthur (John Magaro).
So many situations in Past Lives have been played out before in sitcoms and romantic comedies, but not like this. Instead of forced drama or awkward comedy, Past Lives treats its characters as human beings with adult emotions. No one is a punch line or a disposable character getting in the way of true love. There are a lot of big, showy movies up for Best Picture this year, and most of them are great. It’s nice to see this smaller film included with them, because it’s exactly what it sets out to be. It’s sweet, romantic, and nuanced, and it’s perfect.
POOR THINGS
Yorgos Lanthimos’ films have not worked for me in the past, so I was a bit nervous about Poor Things. The Killing of a Sacred Deer and especially The Lobster really left a bad taste in my mouth and a gross feeling in the pit of my stomach that I couldn’t shake. Thankfully, Poor Things didn’t do that at all, and I quite enjoyed it.
I wasn’t quite sure of the tone at first, but once I realized that it wasn’t so much a dark comedy as a laugh-out-loud comedy where everything was funny on purpose, I had a good time. It may have lavish production design and an acclaimed cast, but this is a very silly movie in the best way. It’s a fun parody of Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein. Willem Dafoe plays a Dr. Frankenstein-type named Godwin Baxter, often referred to literally as “God,” who puts the brain of a baby into the head of an adult woman (Emma Stone).
Stone plays the evolution quite well, centering the film with a convincing and hilarious performance. Mark Ruffalo turns in a great supporting performance as her pseudo-posh suitor, and Margaret Qualley and Kathryn Hunter are quite memorable in their small roles. More than any film this year, I’m actually surprised at how much I liked this one.
THE ZONE OF INTEREST
Here is a film that establishes its thesis statement in its opening minutes and then proceeds to repeat it over and over until the end of the movie. I like plenty of movies where the protagonists are evil, and I even like a few where they’re unrepentant monsters. I like movies that show evil as perfectly banal and boring. Sadly, in an attempt to show how boring evil people can be, The Zone of Interest ends up being a movie that is pretty boring.
Rudolf Höss (Christian Friedel) and his wife Hedwig (Sandra Hüller) live right next to Auschwitz, where Rudolf works. We simply see the day-to-day life of the family as we hear the horrifying events going on in the background. The sound design is phenomenal and is really the standout aspect of the film. It doesn’t show us the horrifying events, but they are ever present, and we can’t avoid them.
The messages are clear. People can live what seems to be an average life while being responsible for some truly horrible acts. There are horrible acts going on in our own backyard that we become desensitized to. These are both important and relevant messages about both the Holocaust and today’s world. It’s hard to make a compelling film out of bad people (or any people, really) simply going about their day-to-day lives. I could see this working as a short film or part of another bigger film, but as it is, the message of “evil is boring” sadly leads to a film that’s boring. However, that’s not to say that you can’t make an interesting film with the same themes and ideas. Take a look at the 2001 HBO film Conspiracy. It’s nothing but Nazi officials sitting around a table, calmly plotting genocide. It’s as horrifying as The Zone of Interest, but it’s also gripping and compelling. The dialogue is well written, and the performances are all great. I’m not saying it’s a perfect film, but it sure tackles its themes far better than The Zone of Interest.
FINAL THOUGHTS
Overall, this is a really good year. There’s only one film in the category I outright dislike (Maestro), and even that isn’t as bad as other biopics of the last few years. Some of the films leave something to be desired, but that doesn’t mean they’re bad or that I wouldn’t recommend them. It looks like Oppenheimer is going to take Best Picture and Best Director, which is understandable. Again, it takes a “this was bad” approach to historical tragedy without making the audience dwell on it for too long. It’s right in that sweet spot the Academy loves. It’s a well-made film, so I won’t be too upset if it wins. The only other film I could see taking home the big prize is Anatomy of a Fall. It’s winning a lot of screenplay prizes and some smaller Best Picture equivalents, and it feels different enough from Oppenheimer, while still being a serious enough drama, that I could see it as a longshot. I’d be quite happy if it took home Best Picture, because I know my favorite, Killers of the Flower Moon, has no chance. Actually, I don’t really see any of the others having much of a shot. Poor Things seems to be some people’s longshot winner, but I think it has too much thematic overlap with Barbie, and it may not be original enough to merit the big win (However, this is the voting body that gave an even more racist rewrite of Driving Miss Daisy the top prize a few years ago, so maybe I’m being too generous).
Best Actor seems to be a two-way race between Cillian Murphy and Paul Giamatti, with Murphy the favorite. I don’t really have a preference between those two or likely-third-place-finisher Jeffrey Wright, as they all gave strong performances. Whichever two don’t get it will get one in due time, I’m quite sure. Emma Stone and Lily Gladstone seem to be neck-and-neck for Best Actress, and while Stone gives a great performance in Poor Things, it can’t be compared to Gladstone’s stunning work in Killers of the Flower Moon. I don’t think there’s a performance in any category that compares to Gladstone’s work. It’s the kind of performance these awards are made for. The two supporting categories are locked up for Robert Downey Jr. and Da’Vine Joy Randolph respectively, the latter of which I’ll fully agree with and the former of which I’ll live with. What do you think about this year’s lineup? Leave a comment and let me know!
Movie Match-Up 