Will the Academy Engage in Narcissistic Navel Gazing - Or Deliver A Real 'Best Picture' Award?

A recent article on salon.com by Andrew O'Herhir observed:

If “Birdman” wins best picture on Sunday – and that’s where the smart money is coming down – that would be, to quote the inestimable Mark Harris in Grantland, “the third time in four years that people who make movies have given top honors to a movie about people who make movies.” (In case you’ve forgotten, and if there is any mercy in heaven you probably have, the earlier examples are “The Artist” and “Argo.”)

Self-regarding movies about the greatness and craziness and triumph and tragedy of those who make movies have become the new Oscar norm, replacing the suddenly outdated Oscar norm of comic-sentimental British costume drama draped over anodyne messages. The producers of “The Theory of Everything” and “The Imitation Game,” a pair of pictures conspicuously molded to that old Oscar-bait template, evidently hadn’t gotten the memo.

REALLY? So I guess my take that 'Imitation Game' was a shoo -in, e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-imitation-game-shoo-in-to-win-best.html

was a bit premature. Well, that's too bad. Because if the Academy is now on a navel-gazing bender it is likely to discredit their choice of  'Best Picture' and demean it as a less than objective selection. Just reading the passage above ought to send off alarms that while you (in the movie business) can be forgiven awarding top honors to a movie about people who make movies - you can't make it a habit. We refer to this as "artistic incest."

The Academy, then, needs to be more serious in its take this year. While Keaton is a good actor, and 'Birdman' is probably worthy of top honors I say the Oscar ought to go to Richard Linklater's film 'Boyhood',  (certainly if  'Imitation Game' is out of the running.) Why 'Boyhood'? Let's start with being 12 years in the actual making - an uncommon achievement for any film nowadays. Imagine the editing alone that had to go into cutting those millions of hours of film down to 2 hours and 45 minutes. 

Watching the film (which we did on pay per view last week) was an experience in itself, seeing all the characters aging naturally - including female lead Patricia Arquette. The kids' characters also age by those 12 years and their experiences are melded seamlessly into the whole. The effort alone - not to mention the acting - is Oscar worthy.

I therefore tend to agree with O'Herhir when he writes:

I can’t get super exercised about “Birdman’s” likely victory, honestly. As Harris has noted, it speaks to a widely shared experience in Hollywood, the attempt to create something beautiful and meaningful that runs off the rails into the swamp. It’s “a movie about someone who hopes to create something as good as ‘Boyhood,’” a reading both barbed and generous, and right on the money.


So why give the top award to a 'wannabe good' flick as opposed to giving it to the actual article? It would make no sense at all. But from past choices (e.g. 'Hurt Locker' over 'Avatar' a few years ago - despite Cameron's film setting new cinematic standards) we know the members of the Academy aren't always committed to acting sensibly. Politics, as Harvey Weinstein noted in an interview on CBS Early Show a month ago, also plays a huge role - and who knows how many Academy members can be bought off at the last minute by sundry blandishments and perks? (Including extra $$$ in those 'swag bags')

Let us hope they are this time!

On another note, the Best Actor Oscar ought to go to Eddie Redmayne for his incredible portrayal of physicist Stephen Hawking in 'The Theory of Everything' which we saw last night. The performance, including meticulously manifesting every one of Hawking's movements (and speech) as he develops ALS, is as worthy of Oscar glory as Dustin Hoffman's portrayal of an autistic in 'Rain Man'. If Hoffman merited an Oscar for his performance, so does Redmayne now!
--------------------------

Footnote: After watching 'Birdman' my assessment stands as given. Way too much obsession with acting kitsch and one guy's drama in attaining (Broadway)acting perfection following the end of his Hollywood career. Too much navel gazing, in other words. Janice, in fact, was ready to ditch the viewing after barely a half hour - so tired did she become at the over the top acting rehearsals and 'character exploration' rituals. The ending was also way too esoteric, and some of the scenes with Riggan flying around Manhattan (with his 'Birdman' persona) absoluotely surreal, like out of some LSD'ers bad dream. 

'The 'Imitation Game': A Shoo-In To Win "Best Picture" (Some Minor Spoilers)

Do you own a computer? Do you work with one in any kind of capacity? Then, it is incumbent on you to see  the Weinstein Company's  'The Imitation Game', starring Benedict Cumberbatch, Keira Knightly and Charles Dance (from the 'Game of Thrones'). This film had us gripping our seats for two hours as we watched the goings on at an obscure place called Bletchley Park, during World War II . According to Wikipedia:

"Bletchley Park, in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, was the central site of the United Kingdom's Government Code and Cypher School (GC&CS), which during the Second World War regularly penetrated the secret communications of the Axis Powers – most importantly the German Enigma and Lorenz ciphers."

But left unsaid is the torturous, years long effort to crack the Enigma machine's ciphers which daily set new U-Boat and bombing targets and which the British were at a loss to stop using archaic methods. None of the usual cipher-busting methods work because well, you were talking about a machine that could create over 170  million permutations of the letters. At a dead end, the War Office had no choice except to try a new approach, and that is where Alan Turing (played by Cumberbatch) enters. Turing, then a Mathematics professor, told the war authorities: "The only thing that can beat a machine is another machine, and that is what I intend to build." And that led to the original "Turing Machine" and the basis for modern digital computers.

Turing and his team (including Keira Knightly's character) then set out to crack ENIGMA, though at the beginning Turing is isolated - all by himself in a side room - fiddling with his rotors and circuits, lacking the social skills to entice cooperation. Indeed, the other four members of his team (before Knightly arrives) continue their old ciphering methods and regard Alan's machine as a more or less useless waste of time, even costing lives every day.

To test the success of ongoing efforts, the Bletchley team had its own German ENIGMA machine (seized during one op)  so that if they believe at any point they've cracked the code for the day - they can run it through the German  machine to see if the result matches actual events, e.g. U-Boat attacks. Once recruited for their task, they aim  -each day - to crack the ENIGMA code to be able to stave off attacks the next day.

None of this works, and ultimately the War Office loses patience, threatening to close down  the Cipher squad unless they can get results in one month. They're already miffed at having shelled out over 100,000 pounds for Turing's  machine.

I will not relate the critical breakthrough, but in many ways the "Eureka" moment - captured when Turing is hobnobbing at a party (after finally developing some rudimentary social skills) - reminded me of John Nash's solution of his game theory breakthrough  in a key scene in 'A Beautiful Mind' . That occurred while in a Princeton, NJ bar with his buddies,  trying to decide which of 4 coeds they'd approach.

At Bletchley, the solution was now in sight,, which amounted to an input.  As the team raced back to check it they're delighted by the success. The ENIGMA machine spit out actual latitudes and longitudes for future U-Boat attacks with the dates. Some members of the team demand an immediate phone call to alert commanders of when and where the attacks will occur, but Turing won't have it. "You can't do that!" he screams. One team member with a brother on a ship due to be attacked is so vexed he punches him in the face.

The reason? If the Germans see that the attacks are neutralized, they will know the ENIGMA code has been cracked and therefore  re-design new codes and new machines.  The only solution? The Cipher bunch comes up with a new program in conjunction with the War Office called "Ultra".  The basis of Ultra is - having seen which attacks are coming up - to compute statistically (using the Poisson distribution of 'expected events') the accepted number of  interventions (hence saved lives) which are below the random threshold - so as not to arouse suspicion.

In the last part of the film we see the team at work computing 'saves' that are acceptable and within the bounds of the "randomly expected"  statistics.  It is brutal, thousands still die, but it is vastly more important to preserve the cracked existing code to ensure the D-Day success.

Of course, this Bletchley Park plot  runs in parallel with Turing's own life situation and being hounded by a nosey detective - determined to open his high security war file. When the snoop meets impediments he gets suspicious and ultimately his  persistence pays off. It is at this point, Turing's homosexuality is exposed and he's given the brutal choice of either spending his years in prison - or taking hormone treatments which remove the sex drive (but also wreak havoc on one's brain.)

To my mind this is the best movie of the year, and I would be amazed if it didn't win the Academy's "Best Picture". See the movie and then decide whether you agree!

To read more about ENIGMA and Enigma machines:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enigma_machine

And The 'Best Picture' Oscar SHOULD Go to: '12 Years a Slave'

To my mind it would be damned near a crime - almost as bad as the Academy passing over 'Avatar' several years ago (for Hurt Locker) to award any nominee other than '12 Years a Slave', 'Best Picture. For those who don't know, the film is a British production, directed by Steve McQueen from an adaptation of the 1853 memoir of the same name by Solomon Northup, a New York State-born free negro who was kidnapped in Washington, D.C. in 1841 and sold into slavery. He worked on plantations in the state of Louisiana for twelve years before his release.

This movie has all the elements of a Best Picture, except perhaps one: it is very difficult to watch. It is definitely not a film you will see for "entertainment". But it is riveting history. My wife and I were so taken up by the drama that we weren't able to leave our seats for the entire screening time, to use the restroom. That is how captivating it was.

The most appalling scenes occur when Northrup is taken to the Louisiana plantation to work the fields. The scenes of the whippings -beating are so realistic that it was hard to get them out of your head. But the memory - from the film- of what happened to this courageous African-American will burn into every engram and stay with you and also (should) arouse you to fury if you see balderdash written by simpletons that, "Hey, slavery wasn't that bad'. See:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2014/01/walter-block-another-libertairn.html

from a Loyola prof libertarian blockhead.

Thus, the only reason '12 Years' may not move to the winners' circle is the unrelenting gravitas of the film. In this case, the Academy may well veer to the space flick 'Gravity' - which to be sure, is also a terrific film, e..g. see:
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/10/gravity-space-flick-to-keep-you.html

So, to be truthful, I wouldn't be terribly disappointed if 'Gravity' won instead and I'd understand it. The Academy may simply opt not to choose a film that is so unremittingly intense and which may also not sit well with some of its members (mainly the 'over 65' group, as pointed out by MSNBC's Chris Hayes on Friday night).

But at least the choice would be tolerable compared to 'American Hustle' or god forbid, 'The Wolf of Wall Street', both of which, imho, glorify criminals and sleaze bags - the last thing we need in Neoliberal America!  If either of these flicks gets the Best Picture, I will really be pissed, but hey  - who can account for such anomalies especially after the dissing of 'Avatar'?

As for Best Actor, I'd like to see Bruce Dern get it. He's labored in the movie mills for many decades (e.g. 'Silent Running', 'The Two-Headed Transplant' etc.) without getting much acclaim though he's a top notch actor. This would cap off a life of intriguing, contrarian roles and set within a compelling drama about an older guy on the brink of losing it to Alzheimers, in 'Nebraska'.  (The award will probably go to Matthew McConaghuey.  )

For 'Best Actress', my pick is  Sandra Bullock with Best Supporting Actress going to Jennifer Lawrence, star girl from 'The Hunger Games'.

Anyway, we will see. At least the Oscars should be a temporary diversion from what's going on in Ukraine.

Why ‘ARGO’ Will Win Best Picture Hands Down

What film will walk away with top honors tonight?  My own pick is 'ARGO’ (produced by George Clooney & Ben Affleck) to win the ‘Best Picture'. You can make book on it. Having seen the movie back in October, I told my wife that the early setup-background sequence alone was worth the price of admission. It showed what few Americans know, that the subsequent hostage crisis, as well as the more recent upheavals (including Iran going for its own A-weapon) are all a result of early U.S. interference – namely deposing Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953. (Mossadegh was removed from power in a coup on 19 August 1953, organized and carried out by the CIA  at the request of the British MI6 which chose Iranian General Fazlollah Zahedi to succeed Mossadegh.)


Until one grasps that background it’s impossible to understand either the Iran Hostage crisis or subsequent events, including the Iran-Contra conspiracy, and the current nuclear impasse.

The movie itself brought back the tense period (over 1979-80) of the 52 American hostages, held 444 days by Shi’ite zealots at the U.S. Embassy in Iran. It also brought back memories of what led to that dire standoff, and what nasty deals followed in its wake, including the Iran-Contra conspiracy. In the latter, money from the sales of the arms to Iran was  funneled into Nicaragua to support the Rightist “Contras’, a violation of the then Boland Amendment, and basically exposing the Reagan administration’s covert support for paramilitary activities conducted against the Sandinista government. Reagan used Oillie North (another former Marine knothead) and others to act as "cut outs" to expedite it, then sought to cover it up. As noted on p. 56 of The Iran –Contra Report:


“The federal conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 371, states that ‘it is a crime to conspire to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose’”


For all these reasons of historical attention, as well as the comedic undertones (with Alan Arkin, John Goodman as movie director, producer) 'ARGO'  deserves the award.

Originally, I believed ‘ARGO’ might lose out to ‘Lincoln’ based on a recent Salon.com article that claimed the movie’s final scenes, e.g. with the Revolutionary Guards- armed with Kalashnikovs- chasing the departing plane, were fictitious. But then ‘Lincoln’ was exposed as having its own historical issues, when critics pointed out the inaccurate portrayal of two Connecticut reps voting against the 13th amendment. They had actually voted for it!  (Tony Kushner admitted to changing history in order to make the final House vote closer, hence more dramatic. Bad move, Tony!)


This controversy offset immediately made ‘ARGO’ the favorite, especially after having won a slew of other awards (e.g. Golden Globe) .

So, I am going with ‘ARGO’ as Best Picture.


Meanwhile, I predict Spielberg will win Best Director for ‘Lincoln’, adding to his two earlier history-based Oscars (for ‘Saving Private Ryan’ and ‘Schindler’s List’). Meanwhile, it’s a given that Daniel Day Lewis will win Best Actor for his role as Lincoln, squeaky voice and all.


Best Actress had me wondering, until I saw ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ and Jessica Chastain’s performance as ‘Maya’ – the CIA prodigy who exposed the final hideout of Osama bin Laden. So now, I am going with her. (Though the Hollywood cognoscenti have Emmanuelle Riva  ('Amour') winning it because of her advanced years, and she may not get another shot. Fair enough!)


The other awards are more difficult to parse and predict, but we will see. It ought to be an enjoyable evening for movie lovers, and I’ve already got the pizza and beer on order, with extra food in case the show goes late!