Oh, the Oscars

Well, I suppose I can't deny it anymore. With the nominations out, Oscar hysteria is now at full throttle. Even more so this year due to a few Academy surprises, most notably the absence of Kathryn Bigelow ("Zero Dark Thirty") and Ben Affleck ("Argo") from the Best Director list, despite both of their films being included in the Best Picture category.

But when has the Academy ever really gotten it right? Or perhaps a better question is, whose "right" are we talking about? Each year I'm amazed at how worked up everyone seems to get over the Oscar race. Either people feel vindicated when the movie they championed made the cut, or disgusted when it didn't. Maybe they think the selections are overly commercial, or they're complaining that they're too arty for a mass audience. Perhaps they blame the Academy members, calling them a bunch of old fogies. Or maybe they're saying that the voting population is packed with left wing nuts who hold political grudges against films or filmmakers.

Every year these arguments get trotted out, whipped into a frenzy in the weeks leading up to the star-studded night, then slowly seep away like a malfunctioning whoopee cushion as everyone shifts their focus to what really matters -- how boring/funny/long/controversial the awards broadcast was.

I can understand all the hoopla and hysteria over a campaign that had to do with something that actually affected our lives -- like, you know, an election.  Even if the democratic process is starting to seem like donor-backed political theater, it's still a process that, in the end, each and every eligible citizen can participate in.

But the Oscars? It's all hot air. It's movie studios spending months and millions ramping up their lobbying efforts to convince an exclusive group of individuals to support their candidate. Sometimes really amazing work is rewarded with a statue, and all the glory and money that comes with it. Just as often, a hack gets the gold. Again, it depends on who's talking and, when it comes to the Oscars, it isn't the moviegoer that anyone's listening to. More often than not, it's the Weinsteins.

The best spin I can put on it is that it's horse race political coverage with no real consequence. In politics, all that breathless minute-by-minute reporting tends to  distract and detach the voting public from what's happening in the larger context -- stuff that actually effects their lives. But with the Academy Awards we can root and hoot, complain and caterwaul, ogle designer gowns and celebrity dates, all without undermining our own democracy. I guess that's what you call entertainment!

So what do I think of the nominations.  Well, first of all I'm happy to say I interviewed two five of this year's nominees: director Ang Lee ("Life of Pi"), "Beasts of the Southern Wild" director Benh Zeitlin and lead actress  Quvenzhané Wallis, and screenwriter John Gatins ("Flight"), which is kind of cool to say. Otherwise, here are my thoughts in bullet point:

• Passing on Bigelow was an overstated and unjustified slap in the face.
• Passing on Affleck, petty.
• Love that "Amour" got so much love. Same for "Silver Linings Playbook."
• A bit baffled that "Django Unchained" made it to Best Picture, but pleased Christoph Waltz did too.
• I was sure Joaquin Phoenix would be ignored since he's so bitter about Oscar campaigning, but thrilled he wasn't because he was amazing in "The Master." 
• Disappointing that Jean-Louis Trintignant wasn't recognized for his amazing work carrying the other half of "Amour's" heavy load, but Emmanuelle Rivas' recognition is a delight.
• Nice to see "Searching for Sugarman" on the documentary list (I neglected to mention it in my cheat of a Top 10 - plus 12 more - list). Equally pleased that the overhyped, accidental commentary on the most vulgar of American consumerism, "Queen of Versailles," was left off.

If I make it through the campaign season, I'll give you my predictions when we get a little closer to the big night. In the meantime, don't you have some movie catch-up to do?

Later, Beav. Ya' never even existed.

This clip from last night's Daily Show is a brilliant piece of media criticism (if Fox news still qualifies) and a reminder that history isn't just something that happened before our time; it's still happening, and will continue to happen, every moment that a society, civilized enough to keep some record of its existence, manages to survive. It seems that Jon Stewart and his writers are the only ones calling it in real time -- well, in entertaining and easily digestible video format, anyway.

I love how Stewart cuts Bill O'Reilly and Bernie Goldberg down in such a way that we just "awww, how cute" at them like caricatures as adorably irrelevant as the Muppets' Statler and Waldorf, the two old coots blathering and bemoaning from the balcony seats about the inevitable end of their era as the American ruling class.

Oh, and the clip is damn funny too. Pairs well with "Lincoln."


!!!!

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
It Was the Best of Times, It Was the Best of Times
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

"Undefeated" is Unquestionably Moving

Look, "Undefeated" shouldn't have won the Oscar for Best Documentary of 2011. I'd have to really think it through to decide what film should've won, but I know it would be between "Bill Cunningham New York," "Project Nim," "Senna" and "Buck."

Even though I begrudge the film its Academy Award, I still cheer it on to victory in theaters. It's inspiring, poignant and heartbreaking. It's about how good coaching -- mentorship, really -- can change a kid's life. It certainly did for mine. And how can you not root for a movie that keeps you in a constant state of tears (happy and sad) the entire time -- BOTH times you watched it?

Of all the interviews I've done to date, talking to Coach Bill Courtney was the most thrilling. Not just because he is a hoot to listen to (he is exactly the same as he comes across on film), but that he so eloquently explains just how fundamentally his experience coaching the kids at Manassas High School changed his views on America's supposed "level playing field." Whether he meant to go there or not, he makes a truly authentic and refreshing political statement.

Here's my review of "Undefeated" and my interview with Coach Courtney. Hope you all go see the film and hope every man who has the time joins up with a mentorship program for at-risk boys. You are needed.

Annual Oscar Complaint and Predictions

I have a serious love/hate relationship with the Academy Awards. As a television viewing event, it's by far my favorite -- even when it's torturously long, cheezy or just plain infuriating. Ripping on it is just as enjoyable as the rare moments of spontaneous elation (Cuba Gooding Jr.'s "Jerry Maguire" glee still probably tops it).

I never really had friends who enjoyed watching the telecast, which was fine  because it's really a tradition reserved for my mom and me. We both know when it's acceptable to talk during the broadcast, when to keep our mouths shut and, most importantly, we've actually seen most of the movies.

And now, the hate. The entire premise that the Academy Awards have anything to do with the "best" films of a particular year is beyond bunk. It's politics, pure and simple, covered with the same depth and perspective as the horse race primary coverage for the Republican presidential nomination. None of it has to do with the actual quality of the candidate, but how much money he has in the bank and how many commercials he can put on the air. It's a competition, yes. But one of marketing savvy, not filmmaking (just ask the Weinsteins).

And even if it was a legitimate competition between films, what's the point of that? Can you REALLY fairly compare "Tree of Life" to "Hugo?" And why would you want to in the first place? Ranking art (or at least attempts at art) is a premise that completely undermines the idea of art in the first place.

And if that argument doesn't convince you how silly it all is, then this one should: "War Horse" was nominated for Best Picture. Yes, "Extremeley Loud and Incredibly Close" is also an injustifiable inclusion in the category, but at least I could sit through the entire thing. I found "War Horse" to be so tedious and predicatable that I actually got up and left half-way through, something I've never done before. (And this from a girl who has a slight equine obsession.)

It wasn't until I became a professional film critic that any of this really bothered me because it suddenly became part of my job to participate in the ranking, or at least comment on it. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited to watch the Oscars tonight. I'll be with my mom, with Billy Crystal on-screen, just like the good old days. But when so-and-so's name is announced as the winner, I won't be thinking that anyone really "won."

So now that I've taken all the joy and relevance out of the Oscars, here are my picks for the winners. Please keep in mind that politics really isn't my beat, but I did a fair amount of research -- and made a few Hail Mary picks of faith--so this really is my best effort. Let me know how you fared!

Alison Gang's Oscar Picks

84th Academy Awards 2012

You can read my justifications for the first six categories here.

• Best Picture: "The Artist"
• Best Director: Michel Hazanavicius, "The Artist"
• Best Actor: Jean Dujardin, "The Artist" (but Clooney is almost as likely a winner)
• Best Actress: Viola Davis, "The Help"
• Best Supporting actor: Christopher Plummer, "Beginners"
• Best Supporting Actress: Octavia Spencer, "The Help"
• Best Animated Feature Film: "Rango"
• Best Foreign Film: "A Separation"
• Best Original Screenplay: "Midnight in Paris"
• Best Adapted Screenplay: "The Descendants"
• Best Art Direction: "Hugo"
• Best Costume Design: "The Artist"
• Best Cinematography: "The Tree of Life" (this is one of the few picks I'm making out of sheer hope, because Malick's film should be recognized for something and this would be the most fitting category)
• Best Film Editing: "The Artist"
• Best Makeup: "The Iron Lady" (though I really want to be wrong. I'm pulling for "Potter." If "Albert Nobbs" wins, I might jump out a window.)
• Best Sound Editing: "Hugo"
• Best Sound Mixing: "Hugo"
• Best Visual Effects: "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" (really, how could anything else win?)
• Best Original Song: "Man or Muppet" 
• Best Original Score: "The Artist"
• Best Documentary: "Undefeated" (but I'm rooting hard for "Pina")
• Best Documentary Short: "God is the Bigger Elvis" (admission: haven't seen any films in this category, but this sounds like a promising pick)
• Best Animated Short: "The Fantastic Flying Books for Mr. Morris Lessmore"
• Best Live Action Short: "The Shore" 

Reviews: Jane Eyre (3 stars); I Am (2 1/2 stars)

If you're as emotionally beaten up as I am by the happenings in the world over the last week -- the disaster in Japan, the House's anti-NPR bill, the draconian cuts to education and social programs in California (including my full-time employer UC), and more I can't bring myself to think of -- then the two films I reviewed this week might serve you well.

The dreamy Michael Fassbender as
Edward Rochester in "Jane Eyre"

First, find comfort in the familiar with the umpteenth film adaptation of "Jane Eyre." With so much unforeseen devastation in real life, sometimes it's nice to know exactly who is hidden in the attic. But still, director Cary Fukunaga's version stands on its own and is certainly worth a trip to the theater (Michael Fassbender's jawline alone is worth the price of admission). My full review here.

Director Tom Shadyac (left) and
Archbishop Desmond Tutu in "I Am"

If you're feeling lost, ashamed of the direction this country is taking, or just in the mood to reflect on the bigger themes of life, there's Tom Shadyac's philosophical treatise of a documentary, "I Am." It's not the best or deepest bit of filmmaking I've seen, but the "kumbayah" ideas he brings to the table go down as easy as mom's homemade chicken soup during times such as these. My review here.

Whatever it is you do this weekend, make it a safe and peaceful one.

Review: Carlos (4 out of 4 stars)

Just got home from seeing the 5 1/2 hour  "Carlos" at the Gaslamp Theater. Besides taking up the better part of a mostly sunny vacation day, it was entirely worthwhile-- especially as I put the finishing touches on my Best of 2010 list.

The film follows the exploits of the infamous terrorist Carlos "The Jackal" throughout the 70s, 80s and early 90s, and reveals him to be a charismatic sociopath with a hint of James Bond  -- if 007 fought exclusively for the bad guys.

Of course, Carlos sees himself as a loyal solider in the communist revolution and his ruthlessness earned him a lot of business --and protection--from like-minded regimes. But nothing lasts forever. While we're reveling in Carlos' militant globetrotting, we're also witnessing the evolution of late 20th century geopolitics--or at least its ugly underbelly.

Besides telling an immensely complex and compelling story, director and co-writer Olivier Assayas  deserves recognition for the sheer scope of the project,  shot in nine countries on three continents and featuring 11 languages. And, of course, the hyper-realistic hostage takings and down-and-dirty bombings, some of which reminded me of the bumbling terrorists in the comedy "Four Lions," playing just across the hall.

As Carlos, Venezuelan actor Edgar Ramirez is simply incredible, turning a shadowy public figure into someone frighteningly real. The role must  have been physically grueling as well, taking the actor from a svelte young soldier, aglow with  high ideals, to a bloated relic of the Cold War, hiding out in the few remaining countries that'll still have him. Oh, and Ramirez delivers his lines with equal strength in English, Spanish, Arabic, German, and who knows what else I'm forgetting. Amazing.

But the character's most compelling transformation happens gradually, as Carlos' extreme political ideals begin to twist and contort over the years, eventually becoming little more than bizarre justifications for cold-blooded murder.

It's understandable that you might be turned off by the film's running time. In fact, it was originally produced for television, so watching it at home over the course of a few nights could be a more convenient option for you. But seeing "Carlos" on the big screen, joined by a smattering of equally brave comrades-in-film, gives this monumental cinematic effort the respect it deserves.

And now to throw in a little playful disrespect, allow me to offer up a potential drinking game to pair with a home viewing of "Carlos."  A terrorist leads a busy life. Changing passports, airplanes and cars like most of us change our underwear. Assayas captures this constant stream of motion in almost obsessive detail, particularly when it comes to cars. Getting in. Getting out. Pulling Up. Driving Away. It's effective and, likely, accurate. But, if you're like me, it might become tiresome by the fourth hour.

This is where the drinking game comes in. One sip for every car door slam. Two sips for every curbside pull-up, driveway arrival or departure. A chug for every rental car driven away. A shot for every car that peels away from the curb. You get the picture. Enjoy. (But don't drink and drive.)

Stewart's Shades of Gray

When Jon Stewart takes a vacation, the news of the world gets a little harder to take. I'm not one of those people who rely on The Daily Show for "real" news, but Stewart's "fake" newscast takes the edge off the ridiculousness and hypocrisy of politicians, talking heads, everyday racists, and everything involving South Carolina.

When my boyfriend and I load up the latest show (one day delayed), we experience one half-hour of camaraderie with other people who actually see the world in shades of gray.

Instead of getting down in the dumps when Stewart takes a vacation, we've started watching archived episodes of The Daily Show. Our TV is connected to the web (we ditched cable, hallelujah) so we have all 11 years of the show at our fingertips. Neither of us watched the show regularly before about 2007 (night owls, we aren't), so we've had a blast going back and "discovering" correspondents like Steve Carell, Ed Helms and Steven Colbert.

But The Daily Show is so much more than comedy. Sure, some mistake it as a mouthpiece for the Left, but that characterization only holds water for lazy thinkers who see the world in black and white. That kind of thinking is for Fox News and MSNBC blowhards who want you to turn off your brains and tune in their channel for some adrenaline-pumping cheerleading.

Stewart, on the other hand, is the referee. He cuts through the bullshit, blows the whistle, and calls foul on anyone who step out of bounds. He uses humor to get your attention and, more importantly, illuminate the convenient narratives being shaped by politicians, media, and the corporations who own them all.

In effect, Stewart is America's mainstream media critic and, as far as I'm concerned, should be essential viewing for anyone who wants to see the world more honestly.

Since my review of "The Tillman Story" ran last Friday, I've received only two kinds of feedback: kudos for "telling it the way it is," and disdain for implying that the military or the Bush administration did anything wrong. Sides are clearly drawn - black and white, Left and Right.

But I'm curious to know what both camps will think if and when they actually see the film, which throws every assumption we're pressured to make -- about politics, war, honor, football players, family--into question. It's a film about shades of gray.

With "The Tillman Story" still on my mind, we decided to dig into The Daily Show archive and watch episodes from significant events in recent history. First we went to March 19, 2003, the day before the U.S. invaded Iraq. Then further back to February 6, 2003, the day after Colin Powell's presentation to the United Nations about Iraq's hidden weapons of mass destruction. If you need any proof of Stewart's good-natured ability to cut through the crap, these video time capsules are it, especially his interview with Bush speechwriter David Frum, whose smugness and phony "awe" of the President are sickening.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
David Frum
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

You also can't help but notice how much sunnier Stewart was back then in the early days of the Bush administration. Of course, he's older now, fuller-faced with more gray hair and better suits. But he's also angrier, more frustrated. I was a bit startled by the levity he displayed in talking about our run-up to Iraq. Still sharply funny, but without the "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!" vibe he has now.

You know why? Because he knows that his gray-shaded take on the world is losing to the inanity of the Birthers, Tea Baggers and Glenn Becks of the world. And all these years he's been preaching to the choir. The very small, cable television choir.

We need more Jon Stewarts, more mainstream media critics, more angry, clear-thinking people insisting that Americans shove aside the black and white lazy-mindedness and start thinking (and acting) our way out of this mess of stupidity.

Start by going to see "The Tillman Story"-- and bring everyone you know.