![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
defrogI don’t really go out of my way to see Oscar-winning/nominated films, but it seems that – for once – this year’s Oscar bait actually turned out to be films I would have gone to see anyway. Or some of them, anyway.
As usual, all of them opened in Hong Kong just before/just after Oscar Night (for maximum publicity), except for Selma, which opens this week. Meanwhile, here’s what I’ve seen:
Birdman
It’s not often I can post about seeing the Oscar-designated “Best Picture Of The Year” – partly because I don’t recognize the authority of NARAS, and partly because the films that win Best Picture are usually the kinds of films I’m not interested in seeing. But I saw Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Birdman before the Oscars happened (I’m just now getting around to writing the review), and I’m surprised it won – not because it’s bad (the opposite, in fact), but because it’s not the usual kind of film the Academy goes for.
Or maybe it is. Between the buzz about Iñárritu’s heroic efforts to make the film look like a single shot and the storyline (actor famous for playing blockbuster superhero Birdman tries to revive career on Broadway with adaptation of Raymond Carver story while his family life, his sanity and the production itself falls apart around him), it’s tempting to write the film off as self-indulgent Oscar bait with actors acting a story about acting and the art of acting and how hard it is to be an actor, and isn’t it ironic that we’re satirizing actors, etc.
Which would be accurate except that (1) the film never comes off as being ironic or self-absorbed, and (2) the performances overall are just too good to write off, especially for Michael Keaton, who takes the title role far beyond what you might expect from a guy who once played Batman. The film’s only real problem is a tendency to get sidetracked with a couple of subplots that don't really go anywhere and seem to serve as a distraction while they’re setting up the next scene off-camera. Apart from that, though, it’s fascinating to watch the tension build as the film edges towards opening night.
Whiplash
That jazz drumming film that “real” jazz lovers hate because it’s unrepresentative of real jazz and music conservatory instructors. It’s kind of like people complaining that Lethal Weapon is unrepresentative of law enforcement procedure – it might be true, but who would go see a realistic version?
In any case, I don't really think Whiplash is about jazz – it’s about obsession with jazz, or with music in general. Both aspiring drummer Andrew Neyman and cruel teacher Fletcher are obsessed with jazz and musical genius in different ways, and it’s that obsession that pits them against each other. Fletcher is undoubtedly abusive – he’s the R. Lee Ermey of jazz schools, only more so – but J.K. Simmons makes Fletcher so believable that it doesn’t matter that most jazz instructors don’t behave that way. This one does, and he’s terrifying.
So yeah, I liked it, although it’s such an intense film that I don’t know if I could sit through it again. But in a good way. It's like a rollercoaster – intense while yr on it, then once yr off you want to ride it again.
The Imitation Game
I don’t go much for biopics, but at least this one has an interesting hook – how Alan Turing cracked the Enigma code, invented computers and for his trouble was later arrested for being gay with another man. And I’ve got mixed feelings about it.
On the one hand – like all biopics (and hence the reason I don’t generally like them) – it plays fast and loose with the facts in order to make Turing’s role bigger than it actually was. On the other hand, filmmakers have almost always sacrificed facts for drama, so the real benchmark is whether the film holds up on its own merits regardless of accuracy. On that level, The Imitation Game works as a WW2 thriller – it’s a great story that’s well told and brilliantly paced.
That said, I’m also a little critical of Benedict Cumberbatch’s take on Turing – it plays a little too strongly on the tortured-antisocial-arrogant-genius stereotype that these kinds of movies tend to deploy (and which Cumberbatch has already done via Sherlock Holmes). For the most part he’s very good, but occasionally he overdoes it. But overall, it’s still entertaining.
Real genius,
This is dF
As usual, all of them opened in Hong Kong just before/just after Oscar Night (for maximum publicity), except for Selma, which opens this week. Meanwhile, here’s what I’ve seen:
Birdman
It’s not often I can post about seeing the Oscar-designated “Best Picture Of The Year” – partly because I don’t recognize the authority of NARAS, and partly because the films that win Best Picture are usually the kinds of films I’m not interested in seeing. But I saw Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Birdman before the Oscars happened (I’m just now getting around to writing the review), and I’m surprised it won – not because it’s bad (the opposite, in fact), but because it’s not the usual kind of film the Academy goes for.
Or maybe it is. Between the buzz about Iñárritu’s heroic efforts to make the film look like a single shot and the storyline (actor famous for playing blockbuster superhero Birdman tries to revive career on Broadway with adaptation of Raymond Carver story while his family life, his sanity and the production itself falls apart around him), it’s tempting to write the film off as self-indulgent Oscar bait with actors acting a story about acting and the art of acting and how hard it is to be an actor, and isn’t it ironic that we’re satirizing actors, etc.
Which would be accurate except that (1) the film never comes off as being ironic or self-absorbed, and (2) the performances overall are just too good to write off, especially for Michael Keaton, who takes the title role far beyond what you might expect from a guy who once played Batman. The film’s only real problem is a tendency to get sidetracked with a couple of subplots that don't really go anywhere and seem to serve as a distraction while they’re setting up the next scene off-camera. Apart from that, though, it’s fascinating to watch the tension build as the film edges towards opening night.
Whiplash
That jazz drumming film that “real” jazz lovers hate because it’s unrepresentative of real jazz and music conservatory instructors. It’s kind of like people complaining that Lethal Weapon is unrepresentative of law enforcement procedure – it might be true, but who would go see a realistic version?
In any case, I don't really think Whiplash is about jazz – it’s about obsession with jazz, or with music in general. Both aspiring drummer Andrew Neyman and cruel teacher Fletcher are obsessed with jazz and musical genius in different ways, and it’s that obsession that pits them against each other. Fletcher is undoubtedly abusive – he’s the R. Lee Ermey of jazz schools, only more so – but J.K. Simmons makes Fletcher so believable that it doesn’t matter that most jazz instructors don’t behave that way. This one does, and he’s terrifying.
So yeah, I liked it, although it’s such an intense film that I don’t know if I could sit through it again. But in a good way. It's like a rollercoaster – intense while yr on it, then once yr off you want to ride it again.
The Imitation Game
I don’t go much for biopics, but at least this one has an interesting hook – how Alan Turing cracked the Enigma code, invented computers and for his trouble was later arrested for being gay with another man. And I’ve got mixed feelings about it.
On the one hand – like all biopics (and hence the reason I don’t generally like them) – it plays fast and loose with the facts in order to make Turing’s role bigger than it actually was. On the other hand, filmmakers have almost always sacrificed facts for drama, so the real benchmark is whether the film holds up on its own merits regardless of accuracy. On that level, The Imitation Game works as a WW2 thriller – it’s a great story that’s well told and brilliantly paced.
That said, I’m also a little critical of Benedict Cumberbatch’s take on Turing – it plays a little too strongly on the tortured-antisocial-arrogant-genius stereotype that these kinds of movies tend to deploy (and which Cumberbatch has already done via Sherlock Holmes). For the most part he’s very good, but occasionally he overdoes it. But overall, it’s still entertaining.
Real genius,
This is dF
