The Year Oscar Got it More or Less Right

So the results are in, the campaigning and speculation are over for another year (and no, I'm not talking about the US presidential elections). Oscar has made its decisions and, for once, there's not much you could really argue with.

No Country for Old Men edged out There Will be Blood in the big categories and it was the more enjoyable of the two films. Daniel Day-Lewis' performance was justly recognised as was Javier Baardem's - a talented and undersung actor finally getting his deserved moment in the spotlight. There was finally some deserved love for the Coens and a subtitled performance winning in best actress. It was also good to see The Bourne Ultimatum picking up awards, albeit only in the technical categories.

Atonement thoroughly deserved the best score as Juno did for screenplay and it was nice to see indie-charmer Once holding off the Enchanted three-pronged attack for best song. Ratatouille was always a shoe-in and The Counterfeiters was the only one of the foreign language films I'd seen, but it was good, so no complaints there.

The only slight quibble I'd have would be in the best supporting actress - not that Tilda Swinton wasn't good - she was, but Cate Blanchett was just superb in I'm Not There. At the end of the day maybe her double nomination hurt her or maybe the film was just too inaccessible for many Oscar voters.

But all in all, Oscar has set itself a high standard to live up to in years to come and given the right people the prizes.

Just for fun - some Oscar predictions

So what will happen tomorrow night. Well here are my guesses - I think in general we're looking at a contest between the two Texas-filmed entries - There Will Be Blood (review coming soon) and No Country for Old Men, with There Will Be Blood seeming to have the momentum going into things.

Best Picture - Lets rule out Juno as indie comedies don't win big, Michael Clayton ain't good enough and Atonement seems to lack the buzz, so you'd have to go for There Will Be Blood although I think I preferred No Country more as a watch. Overlooked in the nominations was The Assassination of Jesse James


Best Director - Traditionally this goes to the same film as Best Picture, so could be Paul Thomas Anderson's year, but don't bet against the academy following a recent trend and splitting them and going for the Coens. As a real outside bet, Julian Schnabel for The Diving Bell and the Butterfly. Overlooked in the nominations - Joe Wright did a better job with Atonement than either the direction in Michael Clayton or Juno. Also, although it would never happen, Paul Greengrass did a wonderful job directing The Bourne Ultimatum - unfortunately you need to be called Scorcese to get nominated for directing a genre flick.

Best Actor - It's hard to look beyond Daniel Day Lewis at the moment - a neck ahead in a strong field. Johnny Depp will win an Oscar one year, but not this one. If its not Lewis, it will almost certainly be Tommy Lee Jones. Overlooked in the nominations - Brad Pitt for Jesse James and Beicio Del Toro for Things We Lost in the Fire. Along with second nominations for Jones (No Country) and Philip Seymour Hoffman

Best Actress- well it won't be Ellen Page, I've a feeling Cate Blanchett's (stronger) supporting actress nod will count against her and Marion Cottillard's performance is subtitled, rarely a winner with the academy. So, Julie Christie is favourite, but don'tbet against a surprise win for the perenially overlooked Laura Linney. Overlooked in the nominations - Halle Berry for Things we Lost in the Fire.

Best Supporting Actor - a very open and high quality field, ranging from young to old, co-leads to cameos. Will probably come down to Javier Baardem against Casey Affleck, but don't rule out a sentimental vote for Hal Holbrook. I'm going with Baardem to get a well-deserved award. Overlooked in the nominations - Tom Cruise for Lions for Lambs and Chris Cooper for Breach.

Best Supporting Actress - for my money Cate Blanchett is streets ahead of the field in the category. As an outside bet, Tilda Swinton to repeat her Bafta success. Overlooked in the nominations Meryl Streep for Lions for Lambs

Original Screenplay - it's hard to see this not being Juno's deserved moment for success in the category quirky indies traditionally triumph in.

Adapted Screenplau - Will probably be between the big two again, although don't rule out The Diving Bell. I'm going for No Country for this one.

Elsewhere - Ratatouille will win Best Animated film and Atonement's consolation will come in Best Score.With three out of five nominations, Enchanted will surely win best song and The Assassination of Jesse James will pick up best cinematography.

The Non-Oscar Contenders

Amidst all the heavy-duty worthy awards contenders sometimes you find yourself needing some pure popcorn entertainment. Three of them from this weekend:

National Treasure: Book of Secrets
Lets not kid ourselves, National Treasure wasn't a great movie, but what it was was fun and entertaining. In fact, it ended up being a darned sight more entertaining than the similarly themed Da Vinci Code released the same year. It is somewhat bizarre therefore, that for the sequel they seemed to have decided to have emulated The Da Vinci Code. And that's not a good thing.

So gone is any sense of a coherent plot or character motivation. The plot speeds across the globe from set-piece to set-piece, leaving more holes than in a swiss cheese and most importantly having no sense of fun. Character motivations are too obscure to interest and there are hideously glaring lines of dialogue where you can't help thinking that the scriptwriters suddenly realised that talking about native american treasure they'd better stick in something to say that murdering them all was actually wrong.

Whatever chemistry Nicolas Cage and Diane Kruger had from the first film has completely disappeared (the characters have, of course, split up since movie 1 in Hollywood cliche no. 25). Even Justin Bartha's sidekick Riley seems to have had his sense of humour surgically removed. Ed Harris does his usual snarly villain (see A History of Violence) but a last act redemption is a step too far for even this nonsense.

Its therefore left for the older generation - Jon Voight and Helen Mirren - to try an inject something watchable and in their few moments together they almost succeed, but you can't help the feeling that both are thinking they deserve better material.

Overall - 1.5/5 A definite step in the wrong direction since the first film. Save your money and wait for Indy IV instead.


Jumper

Director Doug Liman has a decent pedigree - The Bourne Identity, Mr and Mrs Smith, Go - which makes his involvement in this piece of sci-fi popcorn all the more surprising. And it is, probably by quite a long way, his weakest film to date. After all any movie with Hayden Christensen in the lead is likely to be struggling. To be fair to Christensen he has doubled his usual emotional range from scowling to include scowling in a slightly different manner.

Christensen plays David, a young man who discovers he has the ability to "jump" (teleport himself to anywhere else on the planet he already knows. Being an upright, moral sort of a fellow he uses this ability to rob banks until Samuel L Jackson turns up, one of a number of people called "paladins" whose mission is to kill all jumpers using rather questionable methods including getting at David through his childhood sweetheart Millie (Bridge to Terabithia's AnnaSophia Robb in early years, later Rachel Bilson). Then you throw into the mix possibly slightly deranged jumper Jamie Bell and thats about it.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind it ain't, but actually if you can suspend your disbelief for a while, its rather fun. Christensen is at least bearable, but Bell is on good form and Jackson is basically being Jackson. The special effects are passable and some of the switches are quite neat. There's the odd moment where the jumps happen too quickly to really follow, but on the whole the action is skillfully handled (as you'd expect from Liman).

Overall - 3/5 Great cinema it ain't, but for an evening's undemanding entertainment there's far worse around.

At least the globetrotting in Jumper looks real, which is more than you can say for

The Bucket List

A movie whose leads apparently travel all around the world without ever convincing you that they've left a cosy studio in California. The story such as it is follows Carter and Edward, two men from very different walks of life, who meet in hospital whilst dying of cancer and then team up to do all the things they want to do before dying. Of course, they have that particular movie kind of terminal cancer which is agony in hospital but then allows them to skydive, drive racing cars and visit the himilayas before passing away peacefully. Along the way there's rather predictabke things about being reconciled to estranged family members and so on.

The film marks a new low for director Rob Reiner, who seems like he will never recover from his post 80s (when he gave us the delights of Spinal Tap, The Princess Bride and When Harry Met Sally) slump. In fact, but for two things this would be unbearable, irredeemable sentimental tosh - those two things being Messers Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman. Nicholson does his growly Jack Nicholson thing with his usual aplomb, whilst I doubt there is anybody working today who can make such twee sentimentality sound as credible and watchable as Freeman. Oh, and Sean Hayes does a decent job as Nicholson's put upon assistant.

Overall - 2/5 Only the presence of two of the most watchable of Holloywood greats makes this bearable.

Juno

Juno arrives on our screens with some sense of expectation and much Oscar-hype. It's the latest in what is becoming its own sub-genre - the unwanted pregnancy sub-genre - following Waitress and Knocked-up and it might well be the best of the lot of them. It maybe is not quite as laugh out loud funny as Knocked-up, but its humour is smarter and ultimately, as a film, it hangs together a bit better and is more moving.

The script, by the oscar nominated delightfully named newcomer Diablo Cody, is smart and witty (if at times a bit too smart and witty to be totally believable for teenagers) - I mean would even smart American teenagers still use Diana Ross as a reference point? Ultimately this doesn't matter a whole lot - despite the High School setting, one suspects the film is ultimately aimed at a slightly older audience and the scripts ultimate purpose is to entertain and amuse, which it does brilliantly.

There's a great, quirky soundtrack - again possibly appealling to a slightly older audience. Director Jason Reitman's last film, Thankyou for Smoking, was highly entertaining whilst neatly side-stepping actually having a stance on the issue - so much so that both right and left claimed it as their own. Here, he tackles teenage pregnancy and again, effectively sidesteps dealing with the abortion issue.

Ellen Page is great in the title-role as the knocked-up teen, managing to suggest the deeper issues behind the front of witty self-assurance. Her performance should come as no surprise to those who saw her, possibly even better, one in Hard Candy. But the cast as a whole work well - Superbad's Michael Cera gives us another slightly wimpy nice guy (who, as far as I remember school, only get the girl in movies). The West Wing's Allison Janney and Spiderman's JK Simmonds are as solid as you might expect as Juno's parents. Jason Bateman is charming enough with a slightly creepy edge as the potential adoptive father. However, despite the plaudits for Page, the real star turn here is Jennifer Garner as the adoptive mother - conveying the heart and fragile desperation just below the surface of her character.

In the last third the movie moves into slightly darker territory as Juno realises that all is not as easy or perfect as she imagined it, but finishes in a place that, bare of the smart wit, is actually genuinely tender and affecting.

Overall - 4/5 Alternatively funny and moving - despite the teen setting, this is a smart comedy for an adult audience and, in Page and Cody, announces the arrival of two very promising new talents.

Defintely, Maybe

Lets's face it, the rom-com has not been the most original of genres in recent years, so it comes as something of a breath of fresh air when a film arrives with something more of a fresh approach. Definitely, Maybe starts with Will Hayes (Ryan Reynolds) about to sign divorce papers and telling his young daughter the story of his romantic history with the names changed and seeing if she can work out which one of three candidates is actually her mum.

Reynolds shows again that he's a far more talented performer than most of the material he's had to work with and makes a very entertaining and watchable leading man. The three women in his life are all good in different ways - Elizabeth Banks as childhood sweetheart Emily, Rachel Weisz as good as you'd expect as aspiring journalist Summer, but the real standout is from Isla Fisher (Wedding Daze, Wedding Crashers) giving us another of the cute oddballs she's coming to specialise in. There's an unusual depth to the cast for a rom-com as well - Kevin Kline comes close to stealing the whole movie whenever he's on screen as the drunken writer Hampton Roth. It also doesn't hurt that the daughter in question is Little Miss Sunshine herself, Abigail Breslin.

Its not totally original - there's a whole book inscription thing which is lifted from Serendipity (but if you're going to steal, steal from the best). And the audience will work out long before Will does who he's supposed to be with (but then, as his 11 year old also does, this in kind of the point). And along the way there are a few twists and turns and red herrings that keep things interesting.

Overall - 3.5/5 Its that little bit more orginal, smarter and funnier than the average rom-com, which makes it well-worth watching for some undemanding, but worthwhile entertainment.

The Savages

The story of a couple of dysfunctional siblings struggling to come to terms with the need to care for their elderly father who never really cared for them might sound like pretty heavy going. But it would be a mistake to let that put you off, because The Savages is really a very good piece of film-making from writer-director Tamara Jenkins.

She is aided by a cast that includes two of business' most consistent actors in Laura Linney and Philip Seymour Hoffman. Hoffman plays Jon Savage - a lecturer specialising in Brecht who won't marry his longterm girlfriend despite the fact that her visa is about to expire and force her to return to Poland. Linney plays his sister Wendy - an aspiring playwright working as a temp and having an affair with a married man. Linney's performance is fully deserving of her Oscar nomination. Hoffman's is his third great turn in a month of releases and perhaps the best of the bunch. His Oscar nominated turn in Charlie Wilson's War is maybe the more memorable character, but this is a much subtler and more nuanced act. Philip Bosco as their increasingly confused father is also excellent.

However, the real star here is the (also oscar nominated script) from Jenkins - successfully treading a fine line between the comedy and the tragedy of the situation - there are both moments of pathos but also of humour. Her characters are rounded individuals - neither saints nor sinners, neither entirely likeable nor entirely unlikeable. Motivations are mixed, torn between duty and self. The past is alluded to, but not dwelt on. Here is humanity in all its weaknesses and insecurities, but not without hints of goodness.

Overall - 4/5. A difficult subject handled with an intelligence and subtlety that keeps it from being either depressing or heartless, aided by some first class acting makes this well worth watching.

Things We Lost in the Fire

Since winning the Oscar for Monster's Ball, it would be fair to say that Halle Berry's roles have ranged from entertaining rubbish (X-Men) to the just plain rubbish (Catwoman, Gothika, Perfect Strangers - anyone?). The fact that she turned up at the Razzies to accept her award for Catwoman, parodying her Oscar acceptance in the process shows that she is only too aware of this. One suspects that she must have been so grateful to have been offered a decent role like the one here.

She plays Audrey, a woman whose husband Brian (David Duchovny) is shot after intervening in an argument. Following the funeral she forms an unlikely friendship with Brian's friend and recovering heroin addict Jerry (Benicio Del Toro). Throw into the mix two children trying to deal with the loss of their father and another ex-addict (Alison Lohman (Big Fish)) who takes a shine to Jerry and you have something that could either end up being relentlessly depressing in an art-house kind of way or fakely uplifting as a Hollywood tear-jerker. Director Susanne Bier (After the Wedding, The Brothers), in her first English language film, manages to more or less successfully tread a line between the two is no small achievement.

She's helped in this by two great performances from Berry and Del Toro - and its a good job they're on top form as the director's penchant for extreme close-ups leaves little room to hide. Bier also plunges the audience straight into the scenes of grief before really introducing Dunchovny's departed character through a series of flashbacks. There's a rawness to some of the most emotional scenes, often presented bare from music of any kind. Where the score does come in, it lends a haunting quality to scenes. And not everything is grim - there's a warmth and surprsising moments of humour here, many provided by John Carroll Lynch's loveable neighbour.

Not everything works so well - the intercutting of the shooting with Berry receiving the news, milk bottle smashing and all, feels very much old-hat, seen-it-all before. And its the wrong kind of movie to have the 10 year old moppet come out with lines like "Do you ever feel like you're living in a movie?". But these are really minor gripes.

Overall - 4/5. Stunning performances and some skillful handling of the details and emotions make this more moving and genuinely heartwarming than the average drama.

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead

Philip Seymour Hoffman has clearly been a busy man - this is his third film released in the UK in so far this year. And following his oscar nominated turn in Charlie Wilson's War and his apparenttly excellent one in The Savages (which I've yet to see), it's another great performance from the man.

Hoffman plays one of two brothers (along with Ethan Hawke) who to get themselves out of financila difficulties, plan a robbery of their own parents' (Albert Finney and Spiderman's mum Rosemary Harris) with disastrous consequences. The dysfunctionality of the family being further exacerbated by the fact that Hawke is sleeping with Hoffman's wife (Marisa Tomei).

Hoffman is the shining light in a universally strong cast. Its just a shame that the film as a whole doesn't live up to the performances. Structurally it uses the Rashomon style trick of repeatedly re-winding to re-tell the story from a different perspective, but there's not enough difference between the re-treads and the end effect is for things to feel unnecessarily slow and repetitive. Its view of humanity also borders on the misanthropic with none of the characters being particularly likeable or sympathetic and attempts to explain their dysfunction feeling contrived and unsatisfactory. Furthermore, where the plot could have lent itself to a promising noir-ish thriller, this lacks any sense of either thrill or lightness of touch.

Overall - 2.5/5 Some great performances, especially from Hoffman, but the film as a whole is pretty hard going without the rewards at the end to make it worthwhile. Approach with caution.

Cloverfield

After the ultimate in teaser trailers, Cloverfield arrives on our screens and despite all the trails of clues and red herrings that fans have tracked down across the internet, at one level there's not much more to it than there was in the trailer. This is basically Godzilla with a little bit of Aliens slipped in and inevitable 9/11 overtones.



What makes it different and more innovative (apart from the marketing campaign) is that rather than focussing on the heroes who fight the monster, this focusses on the ordinary guys and girls caught up in the middle. This combined with the lack of any recognisable stars means that there is a genuine doubt about who if anyone will make it through to the final reel. The other thing that Cloverfield catches on to is that most of the world's big events these days are captured not by professional new crews, but by amateurs on their mobile phones or video cameras. Hence the whole film is supposedly captured by the characters on a hand held camera. At one or two points this stretches credibility, but on the whole it works, actually adding to the tension and occasionally disorientating the viewer.

The monster itself is far more effective when caught in glimpses or heard off screen than when seen full on, but again, on the whole it works and there are some great scenes - like on the bridge or in the tunnels. The largely unknown cast also do a good job, even if the characters are some way off full of well developed and the main cameraman does get a bit irritating after a while.

Overall - 4/5 An old story well re-told in genuinely innovative ways which fairly races along through some great moments and real tension. It will doubtless spawn far too many imitations, so its worth checking out the original.