My Reaction to the Oscar Nominees

The Oscars are always one of my favorite events of year. Even when I don’t agree with some of the nominees and winners, it’s still a fun show and I love having a celebration of the year in film. Well, the nominees for the 87th Academy Awards were announced a few days ago, and I’ve finally gotten all my thoughts on them straight.

DISCLAIMER: All film is subjective, so just like my reviews this list will be completely opinion-based.

BEST PICTURE

American Sniper: This should definitely not be on here. Great lead performance, bad movie.

Birdman: Terrific. This belongs here, and is probably gonna be the winner.

Boyhood: This is my pick for most overrated movie of the year. It wasn’t bad, but I wasn’t enthralled by it like most people.

The Grand Budapest Hotel: Sure, why not?

The Imitation Game: My favorite movie on this list, but it doesn’t have a strong chance of winning.

Selma: CONTROVERSY: It was just okay. Not worth a nomination in my opinion.

The Theory of Everything: Very nice to see this nominated.

Whiplash: Even nicer to see this nominated. One of the best movies of the year, and it gets better every time I see it. If I haven’t seen it I won’t comment.

Will win: Either Birdman or Boyhood

Should win: The Imitation Game

BEST ACTOR

Steve Carrell, Foxcatcher

Bradley Cooper, American Sniper: In a weaker year, I would’ve put him on here. But this was a stacked year, and I would rather have seen David Oyelowo or Jake Gyllenhaal in his spot.

Benedict Cumberbatch, The Imitation Game: He belongs here for sure.

Michael Keaton, Birdman: So does he. One of Keaton’s best performances.

Eddie Redmayne, The Theory of Everything: Yet another extremely strong contender. This is Redmayne’s best performance to date.

Will and should win: Michael Keaton, Birdman

BEST ACTRESS

Marion Cotillard, Two Days, One Night

Felicity Jones, The Theory of Everything: I loved her performance. She belongs her for sure.

Julianne Moore, Still Alice

Rosamund Pike, Gone Girl: YES YES YES!! I would’ve freaked out if she wasn’t nominated.

Reese Witherspoon, Wild

Will win: Julianne Moore, Still Alice

Should win: Rosamund Pike, Gone Girl

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Robert Duvall, The Judge: He’s got no chance, but he was the best part of that movie and deserves a nomination.

Ethan Hawke, Boyhood: He should be on here. The parents in Boyhood were much more compelling than Mason.

Edward Norton, Birdman: Another great performance in a movie filled with them.

Mark Ruffalo, Foxcatcher

J.K. Simmons, Whiplash: This is a very strong category, but I don’t see how he doesn’t win.

Will and should win: J.K. Simmons, Whiplash

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Patricia Arquette, Boyhood: She and Ethan Hawke made the movie watchable for me. That enough is worth win.

Laura Dern, Wild

Keira Knightley, The Imitation Game: Knightley has come a long way in the last few years, and this is a vindication of all her efforts.

Emma Stone, Birdman: She was terrific.

Meryl Streep, Into the Woods: I didn’t like the movie. It was about an hour too long. But Streep was great, same as always.

Will and should win: Patricia Arquette, Boyhood

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE FILM: I don’t like this category. It exists only to give the Academy an excuse not to nominate animated films for Best Picture. BUT HOW THE HELL DOES THE LEGO MOVIE NOT GET NOMINATED? I don’t use the term snub lightly, but this is a snub.

Big Hero 6: I loved it. Lots of fun, and yet another credit to Disney.

The Boxtrolls: I enjoyed it, and it’s nice to see it get nominated.

How to Train Your Dragon 2: Without The Lego Movie in competition, this is my clear favorite.

Song of the Sea

The Tale of the Princess Kaguya

Will and should win: How to Train Your Dragon 2

BEST DIRECTOR

Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Birdman: This is the first time that I can honestly say he did a great job directing. He did a truly amazing job.

Richard Linklater, Boyhood: I wouldn’t put him on here. I don’t think he did a very good job creating a compelling story. But I appreciate his ambition.

Bennett Miller, Foxcatcher

Wes Anderson, The Grand Budapest Hotel: A good one for Anderson to get nominated for.

Morten Tyldum, The Imitation Game: It wasn’t very showy direction, but Tyldum told this story very well and pulled good performances out of everyone.

Will and should win: Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Birdman

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Jason Hall, American Sniper: No thanks.

Graham Moore, The Imitation Game: I’m surprised this is Moore’s first screenplay. He did a fantastic job.

Paul Thomas Anderson, Inherent Vice: I love PTA, but this screenplay was not a strong one.

Anthony McCarten, The Theory of Everything: A great screenplay. He deserves the nomination.

Damien Chazelle, Whiplash: Yet another great screenplay.

Will win: Too close to call.

Should win: Graham Moore, The Imitation Game

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Jr. and Armando Bo, Birdman: With a movie this good, how can the screenplay not be nominated?

Richard Linklater, Boyhood: I wouldn’t give it to him, but I understand why he’s nominated. I was an ambitious effort.

E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman, Foxcatcher

Wes Anderson and Hugo Guinness (story), The Grand Budapest Hotel: I’m kind of surprised to see this get so many nominations, but I can’t complain.

Dan Gilroy, Nightcrawler: A better movie than any of these, and yet this is its only nomination. Glad to see it get something.

Will win: All those unpronounceable names, Birdman

Should win: Dan Gilroy, Nightcrawler

So, there’s all the big ones. I might not agree with all the Academy’s decisions, but that doesn’t matter. Like all art forms, film is subjective, and it’s nice to see that people have varying opinions. I’m sure this year’s show will be a lot of fun, especially with all of the surprises. The Lego Movie not getting nominated is insane, though.

Need For Speed Review

Premise: A mechanic is framed for the death of his friend and must compete in a famous street race to clear his name. Starring Aaron Paul, Dominic Cooper, Imogen Poots, and Michael Keaton.

Pros: I was intrigued by Need For Speed’s use of practical effects in the action, and boy do they look good. The action and visual effects are all really impressive stuff, and as a result the film is at its best whenever someone was in a car. If it can be accused of aping the Fast and Furious franchise, then it certainly does so effectively. Props to everyone involved. If only I could say the same for the rest of the movie.

Cons: The more I think about it, the more I realize that Aaron Paul was completely wasted. I was never in love with Breaking Bad, but I feel in love with Jesse Pinkman. He was a really compelling character portrayed brilliantly, and I was hoping some of that magic could rub off onto this. Not so. Paul is given a thankless role as a very typical protagonist with no real depth, and worst of all he does it poorly. My jaw was on the floor at the piss-poor job he did, which is really a shame because I expected more from him.

The movie’s pretty slow and boring, and most of all lacks the fun of another similar franchise. The action, while helped along in the realism department by being practical effects driven, is mostly pretty pedestrian and not as adventurous as you’d like it to be. Also, the editing grinds everything to a halt, with a frankly glacial pace that wouldn’t feel out of place in a Michael Haneke film.

Most of the secondary characters are pretty uninteresting, especially Paul’s sidekicks. If you remove them from the film entirely, almost nothing changes. That is the definition of a useless character. Even the villain was terribly bland and offered no plausible threat.

As a last point, there’s too many long shots. Way. Too. Many. LONG. SHOTS.

Verdict: So, Need For Speed is a technically proficient but slow, uninvolving, and poorly plotted mess that’s yet another knock against video game movies. Overall, I give the film a 2 out of 10.

Robocop Review

Premise: Pretty much the same as the original. A severely injured police officer becomes a cybernetic cop. Starring Joel Kinnaman, Gary Oldman, Samuel L. Jackson, Abbie Cornish, and Michael Keaton.

Pros: Not to say that it’s more important than a good story, but good visual effects are always beneficial for a sci-fi action film. From a visual perspective, Robocop film is quite appealing. Everything from the visual effects to the action is very technically proficient. You really get the sense that director Jose Padilha took a look at a project like this and grabbed it by the throat, ready to conquer Alex Murphy’s visual world. 

Speaking of Alex Murphy, Joel Kinnaman does a fine job. He’s tough and menacing, yet also has a heart, certainly the biggest one in this movie. And Samuel L. Jackson has some great moments as well, hamming it up until there’s no scenery left to chew.

Cons: The problem with Robocop is that it’s never fun. Everything feels mechanical (pun intended), and there’s no room for the film to breathe. What made the original so great was that even if it was a goretastic display of violence, it also had some lighthearted moments and knew when to have a good time. This new Robocop is just a pedestrian experience that doesn’t let up. 

Verdict: Robocop is a technically proficient but uninspired effort that is quite disappointing. Not horrible, but not really worth seeing either. Overall, it gets 5.5 out of 10.