Movie Review: Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close

This is the (almost impossibly) dark horse in the Oscar race for Best Picture this year.  Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close has had its ups and downs in terms of buzz and critical response, and many thought it would slip through awards season under the radar, as it had until the Academy Award announced its 2012 nominations just a few weeks ago.  Since then, the film has enjoyed an uptick in people talking about it (of course, the talk has hardly been all flattering), mostly wondering how in the world it made the list of the nine best films of this year.

And now having seen it, I can tell you (with authority I've awarded to myself) that it made that list because it is one of the better movies of this year.  It is well-crafted and genuinely heartfelt, and the performances by everyone involved are superb.  Of course, it would appear that the majority of moviegoers over at Rotten Tomatoes disagree with me, but I'd like to make the case for disregarding their opinions.  This film is easy to fall into and enjoy immensely, there are simply a few things you need to keep in mind, things that the critics have been too quick on the draw to point to as reasons for the film's failure.

First, the film is not about 9/11.  That might sound strange, and I'll clarify:  it's not about 9/11 in the way you're expecting (and the way some of the ads have made it look).  Yes, they address the attacks and their impact, but from a singular perspective (Oskar and his family's), and the event itself is an impetus for the real story, rather than the story itself.  The real story here is one about the things and people we lose on our journey through life, and the sometimes difficult-to-see threads which tie us to one another.  It's a story about how everyone has a story, even one you might not anticipate on first meeting them, and that those stories can help us understand and co-exist with each other more than just about anything else.

Second, the film is not about autism.  Yes, the possibility of Oskar suffering from something on the autism spectrum (and I'd like to be clear that it is never confirmed, in the film nor the book, that he does) is an interesting facet of his character, and one the film chooses to highlight and make accessible rather than making it into a "there's something wrong with the kid" type of film.  However, I think Oskar can be read in a variety of ways, and the more important takeaway is how trauma can worm itself into our lives (this is showcased brilliantly in the differences between Oskar and "the renter", both traumatized by past events and both coping with it in unusual ways) and really impact who we are and how we interact with the world.  Oskar might have been any other child, a little bit quirky and socially inept but earnest, but it is the terrible thing he has experienced that exacerbates his stranger tendencies and drives his obsession with establishing a connection to his deceased father.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the viewer (most particularly those who've read the novel upon which the film is based) must bear in mind that while this might seem an imperfect adaptation, it really is doing the best it can.  Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close is a very complicated novel with (in typical Safran Foer fashion) numerous threads running through its narrative, connecting characters through space and time in unexpected ways.   A film adaptation was never going to successfully capture the novel's scope verbatim; rather, it sought (and in my opinion, succeeded) to serve as an interpretation of the book's essence, of painting its message with broad strokes rather than scrambling to include details.  Of course, it would have been great if we'd gotten the more fully-realized back story on the renter that the book provides, and yeah, it would have been cool to see even more of Oskar's various travels, but that might have taken away from the film's tone, and its expression of something really pure and human about the way we deal with our ties to other people, and the loss of those connections.

Just about every actor in this movie turns in a phenomenal performance.  Thomas Horn carries the admittedly difficult role of Oskar with visible dedication and passion (though his over-eager narration can be a bit much at times), Sandra Bullock and Tom Hanks are wonderful as his parents, and Max von Sydow gives the best silent performance not featured in The Artist of the year (his surprise nomination for Best Supporting Actor makes sense after just a few minutes of screen time).  Additionally, and on the unfortunate side, this film gives us the second moving, remarkable musical score for which Alexandre Desplat has not been awarded or even nominated (the first, of course, is last summer's Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2).  In my book there are few composers who really give voice to a film the way Desplat does, and it's about time he started earning more recognition for his work.

Oscar Nominations 2012: Surprises and Snubs

This morning's nominations were a mixed bag of the absolutely predictable (my jaw would've hit the floor if The Artist and Hugo weren't swimming in nods) and some pleasant surprises (Rooney Mara, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, to name a few).  I think on the whole, though, and based on the films I've seen this year, I'm a little more satisfied with these nominations than I was with the Golden Globes.  Even with fewer slots for nominations, it feels like the spectrum of films being included has widened, and a few dark horses sneaked into the race.

Surprises

*Melissa McCarthy in Bridesmaids:  This performance has never screamed "Oscars" to me, but you know what?  It should.  These awards are supposed to be about rewarding people who perform at the very top of their game, and McCarthy did exactly that.  Just because her game happens to be outrageous, gross-out comedy rather than heavy drama doesn't mean she didn't give a hell of a performance.  I don't think she has the momentum behind her to take this award from Octavia Spencer, but I would love to see a shocker in this category come Oscar night.

*Jonah Hill in Moneyball:  Not necessarily surprising given the critical acclaim that has followed him since the film's release, but I'd like to assert my agreement with this nod.  Hill was, for me, one of the few compelling features of Moneyball, a film that on the whole was boring and a little too sure of itself.  If we must award this Brad Pitt vehicle, I'd like to see it in the form of an award for Jonah Hill as Supporting Actor.

*Rooney Mara in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo:  This is the nomination that shocked me probably most of all.  Yes, Mara gives an absolutely amazing performance, but it's in a gritty David Fincher film that barely squeaks by with an R-rating, and just doesn't seem to fit with the other nominees.  I love that she'll be going up against heavyweights like Meryl Streep and Viola Davis (the two women currently leading the flock) and the long-overdue Michelle Williams, but I don't think she'll win this one.  That said, I think it really says something about the Academy and what they're trying to do this year by branching out--and hey, I bet Rooney Mara isn't complaining.

*Kristen Wiig & Annie Mumolo, Best Original Screenplay for Bridesmaids:  Another nomination where I'll make the case for not discounting comedy simply because it's comedy.  This one was a little more predictable given the significantly smaller number of original scripts in the race compared with the overcrowded Adapted Screenplay race, but it's a fun addition nonetheless.

*Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, Best Picture:  This film has risen and fallen in terms of buzz all year long.  It was an early contender with a lot of festival attention, then the chatter faded as the release was delayed again and again, and now it seems to be back on the map, despite a shutout at the Golden Globes.  I haven't seen this one yet, but it is an adaptation of one of my all-time favorite novels, so my hopes are very high. 

Snubs

*Ryan Gosling:  I was really pulling for Gosling to get a nod for any one of the excellent performances he gave in 2011, but given his dual loss at the Golden Globes, my hopes weren't high.  Sure enough, he missed out on both acting categories.  The upside, though, is that this will push him to keep striving for better, and hopefully we'll see him in the Oscars race again soon.

*Leonardo DiCaprio:  This is one dude who has got to be pissed he got up early to check the nominations.  The Best Actor award was supposed to finally be his this year, and he was thwarted again.  Can we all just agree that he gets a nomination next year for Great Gatsby, no matter how good or bad it is?

*The Ides of March:  Yes, this film slipped into the one category it unquestionably belongs: Best Original Screenplay.  But it should have been in the running for Direction and Best Picture as well.  I've been championing this film since it's release, and so it was a disappointment to see the Oscar voters leave it out.

*David Fincher:  I find it amazing this man doesn't yet have an Academy Award.  Maybe he and DiCaprio need to make a movie together to overcome their respective dry spells.  Make it happen, Hollywood.

*50/50:  Will Reiser's screenplay deserved a nomination, at the very least.  I also would have happily accepted a surprise nod for JGL.

Movie Review: The Descendants

If the Oscars (or moviegoers) are looking to take the family tearjerker route this season, The Descendants is an obvious choice.  Not only does it star George Clooney who, let's face it, is wonderful in just about everything, but it tells a genuinely compelling and heartfelt story, tragic without veering into melodrama. 

The story centers on George Clooney's character Matt, whose wife has slipped into an irreversible coma after an accident, and who must also make a huge decision which will have a life-changing impact on both his career and his family.  This of course, is made no easier by his rebellious teenage daughter (played by the surprisingly fabulous Shailene Woodley, who I'll get to in a minute), his rebellious younger daughter, and the small revelation that his wife has been carrying on an affair behind his back.  Cue a family journey (both literal and metaphorical) that is at times wacky and a times truly heartbreaking, as Matt and his daughters set out to try and locate his wife's paramour while simultaneously trying to navigate the arrangements surrounding her impending death.

Cynical as it may sound to say, I find that many films or television shows involving someone in a coma (and most especially anything featuring scenes of characters talking to the person in a coma), has about a 95% chance of coming off completely cliche and ridiculous.  This film somehow manages to subvert that, and in spectacular fashion.  By the time Matt actually makes it to his wife's bedside,  there is a tension that has accumulated which can't be relieved in any other manner.  The film's final scenes provide an extremely powerful catharsis, which is all the more affecting thanks to a cast of characters who demand a genuine empathy from the very first minutes of the film.

Let's get to the acting, though, because that's what people are really buzzing about when it comes to this film.  Clooney is wonderful, multi-faceted and surprisingly convincing as a family man in emotional turmoil.  I still think Ryan Gosling gives a better performance in The Ides of March, but having to settle for Clooney as a close second really doesn't feel much like settling at all.  Shailene Woodley is the film's biggest surprise, though, not least because her biggest claim to fame prior to this was a starring role in ABCFamily's nonsensical Secret Life of the American Teenager.  It is easy to see where she could have defaulted to playing the stereotypical caricature of the wayward daughter, but instead she brings something deeper to the role, something that evokes sympathy and indeed (at least, in my opinion), paints her as the heroine of the film. 

On the whole,  this film tells a great story of one family, while also exploring the larger theme of what it means to be a descendant, to carry on a legacy and what that means.  I think for this reason it is not only likely to earn awards for its stellar individual performances, but for the story itself.  The combination of these elements makes it a top contender, in my opinion, for an award for screenwriting as well as a strong candidate for Best Picture of the Year.

Movie Review: My Week with Marilyn

So I might be disgracing lots of ladies my age (and older) by saying this, but I've never really seen Marilyn Monroe as a personal icon, as someone to emulate or even someone all that fantastic, really.  My interest in this movie was initially sparked out of a need to see Michelle Williams (whom I consider to be a much more fitting aspirational figure for myself) in her much raved about performance.  And I have to say that while Ms. Williams was indeed fantastic, the film did something I wasn't expecting, which was making a woman I've long considered overrated come across as both intriguing and sympathetic.

The thing that really jumps out at me about this movie is the phenomenal cast, full of British icons as well as new faces, all of whom absolutely excel in telling this story, and providing a snapshot of not only Marilyn's life, but the lives of those around her, and exposing the profound impact this one woman was capable of having on them.  Michelle Williams certainly adds new dimensions to Marilyn, including a strong awareness of the role playing demanded of her as a celebrity, but her admirer Colin (played by the charming and relative newcomer Eddie Redmayne) stands out as equally, if not more compelling.  Yes, his is a typical journey through the marshes of naivete and ensuing heartbreak, but he captures the spirit of it in a very honest, fresh way.  Of course, there are many supporting players who fill out the rest of the film, from Dominic Cooper and Emma Watson, whose respective presences are minimal but impactful, to Dame Judy Dench and Kenneth Branagh, who bring their usual level of skill and command of the screen.  Overall, this film needs its actors to carry the story, which covers only a brief portion of the tumultuous story of a very complicated woman, and the performers tasked with this have risen to the occasion.

My Week with Marilyn is not the film to watch if you're interested in Ms. Monroe's life story or an expose of the many scandals associated with her.  It isn't even, I would suggest, a film to watch if you don't have at least a minimal insight into the sort of person Marilyn Monroe was (or might have been).  The infamous instability of the woman at the center of this story is what drives it, and its nuances can be much more appreciated if you approach the film with this condition in mind.  And as far as awards season goes, I think this one is a contender, but a bit of a long shot.  Sure, I can easily see Michelle Williams winning the Golden Globe for this turn, especially separated as she is from some of the other heavily favored contenders, because this movie somehow got pushed into the 'Musical or Comedy' category.  However, I think there might be other better performances out there, and I certainly feel that Williams' performance in last year's Blue Valentine trumped this one by a hundred miles.  That said, there is every possibility she might earn a surprise "one year too late" Oscar nod (it's happened before: see Denzel Washington, among others), but for now it's anyone's guess.  And the film is not a likely favorite for Best Picture-- a nomination, maybe, even probably, but not a win.

Movie Review: The Ides of March

This is by far the most outstanding film I've seen this year.  All the elements are in place, and it is clear that George Clooney and company are not fucking around this time.  They are gunning for an award (or ten), and this movie makes an absolutely compelling case that they deserve one.

First, let's talk about the fundamentals.  This is one of the most well-written movies I've seen in a very long time.  I honestly don't remember the last time that thought rang so thoroughly through my mind while I was in the midst of watching a film, but it did this time on several occasions.  The script does a brilliant job of plowing right into the meat of the plot, no time for dumbing-down or explanations.  Words are rarely, if ever, wasted in this script, and the various twists and turns are set up with such careful precision that they are unexpected and yet completely logical.  No one is going for sheer shock value or flash here, just plain good storytelling. 

The cast of this film is impeccable, starting with the supporting players.  Phillip Seymour-Hoffman and Paul Giamatti play campaign advisers on opposite sides of the political spectrum, but who both have the same brand of sleaze just oozing from them.  Both play their parts perfectly, giving the audience a simultaneous disgust for their tactics as well as a dull appreciation for their cleverness.  Evan Rachel Wood also has a surprisingly impressive turn in this film as a young intern working on the Mike Morris (the character played by Clooney) campaign alongside Hoffman and Ryan Gosling.  She is perfect in this role, and it is far and away the best performance I've ever seen from her.  And of course, George Clooney plays the handsome, good-natured politician in a part it seems he was born to play.  Though his performance as Morris is somewhat understated (though no less compelling for that), his influence on the film is pervasive, not merely in credit (he directed, produced, and co-wrote the film), but in style.  It is clear that he has pushed everyone, including himself, to be their very best in this film.

And speaking of performers at their best.. no one is more on top of their game in this movie than Ryan Gosling. It is possible that I actually have too many good things to say about Gosling's performance in this film.  I have said in the past that he gets better with each film he appears in (well, the serious ones, anyway), and Ides of March does nothing to disprove this theory.  Gosling's character Steven goes on an incredible and nuanced journey in this film, and capturing the essence of his transformation would be a challenge for any actor, but Gosling makes it look effortless.  And his success in this role can't even be attributed to the fact that he's got a fabulous script to work with; I'm convinced a deaf person could watch this film and read the story in Gosling's face and eyes, and leave with the same overwhelming sense of awe as those of us who could hear his lines.  What is even more impressive is the fact that, among this all-star cast, Gosling genuinely stands out.  He plays well off of all the other actors, but none more so than George Clooney-- they have a confrontation in a kitchen near the film's climax that will just about blow your mind--and Gosling comes out the stronger performer of the two, which is no small feat. 

Overall, this film is everything I've come to want from an Oscar contender.  Actors turning in the performances of a lifetime; a thought-provoking and intriguing script; and perhaps most importantly, a story that is startlingly relevant to our current state of affairs.