nelsoncarvajal.com/blog

 

For the most part, the Cannes Film Festival has been the benchmark for film festivals. It's got all the glitz and glam of a Hollywood awards show minus the Jonas Brothers. It's a stretch of days where an auteur has more mass appeal than Ryan Reynolds. If there is a sense of juvenile sarcasm in my diction, then congrats on having a set of perceptive reading eyes.

In past years, films that have won prizes from the Cannes jury went on to a live a shelf life of noted greatness and were brought up amongst lovers of the cinema and teachers and mentors within extensive movie dialogue. Anyone who knows the names Dardennes, Haneke or Koreeda is someone who actually LOVES movies.  There are of course some common household names that make bill throughout the years: Coen, Anderson and Tarantino. Even when a big film winner from a Cannes fest goes on to North American financial and mainstream success (for example Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" or Polanski's "The Pianist"), it is considered a welcome feat and not "selling out." Why? Because they played with the big boys. Other artists from parts of the world we would otherwise never bother learning about. And they won.

However, 2009 marked the fest as a time when vagueness was probably confused with greatness. Two films in particular spurred up the biggest hub-bub: "Thirst" and "Kinatay."

Ebert wrote in his Cannes blog about the fest in retrospect: "Has there ever been a more violent group of films in the Official Selection? More negative about humanity? More despairing? With a greater variety of gruesome, sadistic, perverted acts? [...] And most of these films were not over quickly. Not that there's something wrong with a film running over the invisible 120-minute finish line, if it needs to, and is a good film. I regret that not all the 21 films in this year's selection were good. And that's not just me."

It wasn't. In fact, when Director Park Chan Wook collected the Special Jury Prize for his "Thirst" there were actual boos that could be heard in the distance. So why award him the prize? Is there the frightening possibility of an overlap between distribution deals and jury award merit now? You know the whole, 'If you really want this film to have overseas distribution, then it might help to slap a "WINNER OF THE..." thingamajig on that poster' kind of dialogue happening between some studio guy and a jury member with interest. Ah, but now I'm just letting my colorful imagination take the best of me.

A week ago I sat in a on a sneak preview screening of "Thirst" here in the great city of Chicago. With a packed house of eager "Oldboy" fans, "Thirst" seemed destined for greatness. I mean, it won the fucking Jury Prize right?? Well, while not a complete failure, "Thirst" seemed to be a weird offspring of an ingenious Director who suddenly had a plethora of neat commercial resources to hammer out a personal and much less needy story. If while watching "Thirst" you feel as if the film is physically bloated--it's because it is. What a concept though! A priest who suddenly becomes an unofficial vampire (note the lack of fang emphasis)! And now he wants to have sex too to boot! It's just dripping (sorry) with potency. But the truth is, "Thirst" is like the Coens' "Burn After Reading." Coming off the critical success of "No Country For Old Men" it just feels like they phoned it in. Eh, but one day it may show up on my Underrated Series column. Maybe a second life will find it one day.

And what about Brillante Mendoza's "Kinatay." It hasn't been released in the States yet, but this guy won the Best Director award for it. So if it turns out to be lackluster, I just might cry. And Ebert's warning doesn't look to hopeful: "The 2009 feature film jury awarded some reasonable prizes, and then lost its mind. In my opinion the Mendoza film "Kinatay" deserved no award [...] But why in heaven's name would you give him the award for best direction? The second half of his film is an illustration of directorial monomania--a willingness to drive audiences from the theater not so much by the violence (rape, beheading, vivisection) but by the directorial style itself."

Oh yeah, and "Kinatay" is about these shady cops kidnapping a woman and cutting her into little pieces I believe. 

Let's see.

 

Posted by nelsoncarvajal at 10:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

A year after that dismal SAG-Strike-riddled Golden Globes telecast, Hollywood came back in full force, with all the beauty and pricey champagne the west coast has to offer. And we just lapped it up.

If anything, the 2009 Golden Globe Awards proved to be an evening of happily welcomed upsets. With two music nominations (one for song in "Gran Torino" and one for score in "Changeling") under his belt, Clint Eastwood had the edge going into the night. He lost in both categories; more notably losing to Bruce Springsteen for Best Original Song in "The Wrestler." Springsteen joked about how this was the only opportunity he had to be in the same competitive category with Eastwood--and that it felt really good to win.

Darren Aronofsky's "The Wrestler" performed well in a major dramatic category as well: Best Actor. 2008's Comeback Kid Mickey Rourke had a very thoughtful acceptance speech. Right away, former colleagues of mine from the A.V. Club as well as other pundits criticized Rourke for not thanking screenwriter Robert Siegel (also a former Onion scribe) upon receiving his award. Of course, I am more sympathetic to the man. It was a huge moment, and a very emotional one. So I won't hold it against him for thanking his pet dogs, who he says were the only ones there for him when he was in exile from Tinseltown.

             

Colin Farrell joked about his cocaine problem while presenting an award early in the night and later on shocked many by actually winning Best Actor in a Comedy or Musical for "In Bruges." For once, the always sure and cocky Farrell was a bit shaken up with high spirits and found it hard to not stutter his words of gratitude. It was a very warm side of the fellow. And to no one's (and I mean those in the machine) surprise, the late Heath Ledger won for his supporting turn in "The Dark Knight." Director Christopher Nolan accepted on his behalf in an articulate speech stressing the idea of the glass being half full rather than half empty when it comes to Ledger's career. There was a very awkwardly placed/staged clip of Ledger in the film that was played before Nolan was allowed to speak, and well, it just didn't work. Nolan's words hit deeper.

But that's Hollywood for you.

 

Posted by nelsoncarvajal at 01:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

 

Oscar winning Director Steven Soderbergh ("Bubble," "Traffic") was at the center of attention of this year's Cannes Film Festival.  His audacious epic "Che"--rummored to be split into movies, "The Argentine" and "Guerrilla," come this fall--caused an uproar with many critics during its premiere.  Aside from being well over four hours in running time, the digitally shot epic avoids some key issues in the life of Ernesto "Che" Guevara.  A.O. Scott of the New York Times wrote from Cannes, "There is a lot, however, that the audience will not learn from this big movie[...]Guevara was an important player in the Castro government, but his brutal role in turning a revolutionary movement into a dictatorship goes virtually unmentioned."

Still, even with an exhaustive running time and the fact that it is all mostly in Spanish (subtitled in English), Del Toro's much-buzzed about performance didn't fail to impress the jury; he walked off with the Best Actor prize on the closing night.

Del Toro won his first Oscar under the direction of Soderbergh for 2000's "Traffic."  If any distributor or buyer has the guts to cave into Soderbergh's $8-$10 million dollar asking price for "Che" they might have to start making Oscar night plans now.

 

 

 

Posted by nelsoncarvajal at 02:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 
The Coen Brothers graced the stage at the Kodak Theatre last night a total of three times.  Ethan did his "Thank You"-watered-down bit and Joel, the unofficial spokesperson for the two, tried harking to some relatable banter via mentioning an old childhood movie project.  The night ended on a whimper.

As expected, the pair won the Best Picture Oscar for their overall exceptional adaptation: "No Country For Old Men."  There's nothing wrong with awarding a well-made picture, but here "No Country" found itself in the same ranks and category of the far-superior "There Will Be Blood"--which, no matter which way you look at it, should have won.  The film is the offspring of five-time Oscar nominee Paul Thomas Anderson, this generation's best and most influential filmmaker.  Usually, on Oscar night, there's an inexplicable excitement in the air, as the night comes to a close and the possibility of the Academy actually picking the real Best Picture as the winner, comes within grasp.  The chance to surprise.  The chance to inspire.

But last night found the Academy pulling the "Crash" card and picking the current critic-fave babe of "No Country" for it most coveted prize.  The Academy played it safe and a good movie won.  Ho-hum.

   

Though, as the Coens walked on the stage, without any excitement, I was met with the image of "Ordinary People"--the 1980s critical favorite--beating Scorsese's "Raging Bull" on that Oscar night.  Shit, now that I think about it, "Ordinary" and "No Country" each won 4 Oscars, all in the same categories: Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay and Supporting Actor.  That's funny.

In retrospect, as the years went on and countless critics groups gathered and analyzed past cinema, "Ordinary People's" importance somehow dwindled, and "Raging Bull" came into the spotlight.  The visceral, lyrical prose of its narrative, the off-putting maniac anti-hero DeNiro had created and the overall difficult initial viewing experience audiences had with it, all suddenly sank in.  "Raging" was great, and important.  So important, it stood the test of time.

                          

I guarantee, as time will show, "There Will Be Blood" will find its path following a parallel journey to that of "Raging Bull's."  "Raging," like "Blood," was mildly awarded on Oscar night (each with a Best Actor award, and one technical prize win) but found its audience reinvented in each decade to follow.  "Blood" will only get better with each viewing, and will resonate more profoundly and deeply with viewers in the years to come.

 "It's too dark for the Academy..." "That ending!"  "It's not perfect!" --all common soundbites heard from the people back in the 80s.  The same kind of arguments were built against "Blood" these last few weeks.

Now, let me ask you film wizards, scholars and students this: Was it "Raging Bull" or "Ordinary People" that was a more influential film in your undergraduate studies?

That's what I thought.
   

Posted by nelsoncarvajal at 12:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

 

 
"No one who's seen "There Will Be Blood" can have the slightest doubt as to what a best picture Oscar for it would be supporting. Though star and likely best actor winner Daniel Day-Lewis is the film's irreplaceable public face, this film stands in plain sight as a tribute to the cinematic virtuosity of writer-director Paul Thomas Anderson.

Anderson, a modern cinematic visionary, is happiest when he is out on the aesthetic edge, using a ferocity of approach to involve audiences in disturbing, difficult narratives. If "There Will Be Blood" were to win, it would validate the "one genius, one film" approach to moviemaking that goes at least as far back as Orson Welles and "Citizen Kane.""

-Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times

My pick for the best film of 2007 is "There Will Be Blood"--and I cannot imagine a single reason why Oscar should not think the same.  Oh, wait, that's right: it's been a monkey-see-monkey-do awards season, with packs of critics hording around their "critical faves" and pitching to the world how this time they've found the 'perfect' movie.  It's total bullshit, as films (in the Best Picture category) like "Atonement," "Michael Clayton" and "Juno" have inexplicably found themselves beating the likes of such towering achievements as "The Diving Bell & The Butterfly," "Before The Devil Knows You're Dead" and "The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford." I mean, I thought "Atonement" was entertaining and had a wham-bam ending, and I very much admire "Michael Clayton" for its lean exercise of making the ideal adult thriller that every John Grisham adaptation aspired to be (hell, I think I even said it just like that to Director Tony Gilroy himself during the Chicago Film Festival last fall) but ultimately they were not better than the above mentioned titles.  Oh, and "Juno."  The more I hear misled critics and audience members gush and rave over it being "the year's best fim" the more I'm starting to dislike it.  That's not good.  I thought "Knocked Up" was the more engaging, utterly hilarious accidental-pregnancy movie of the year.  I'd be curious to see what would have happened if "Juno" had come out over the summer, and "Knocked Up" released with a coveted Christmas release date.  Hmmm. 

If "Juno" wins Best Picture tomorrow night, I hope the 2-disc unrated DVD has a big "Oscar Fucking Blew It" sticker slapped on it.

There's hope though.  "No Country For Old Men" is the fifth Best Picture nominee and here's an actual nominee deserving the nod (alongside "Blood"); it's ingenious in its minimal use of sound effects (the hotel scenes for example), it's strong pacing (for most of the movie anyway), and for its flat out unconventionality, largely due to author Cormac McCarthy himself.

But it's not the best film of the year.  Those last couple of scenes with the excess articulation of the film's already prominent and obvious themes were not needed.  They simply were not and they hurt the film's slick pacing.  In the novel, those scenes played better.  But film is a different medium.  On the big screen, in a dark auditorium, you can almost hear the air coming out of a tire while Tommy Lee Jones is talking about dead fathers and nightmares.

The shitty thing is, people have actually said, "Oh you don't get the ending..."  I obviously do, if the film landed on the number 3 spot on my yearly top ten list.  I think it's great.  But little mistakes like the all-too-literal adaptation the Coens took with the closing chapters just bumped it down from a possible higher spot.  Just the other day, I was in discussion about it, and someone perfectly explained it: "It's a good book ending.  It's not a good movie ending."

That's that.

I could go on about how many mistakes the Academy has already made, like where's the Best Original Song nomination for "Into The Wild"? Or where's Jonny Greenwood's Best Original Score nomination for "There Will Be Blood"?  Yeah, yeah the Academy and other pundits have aleady "explained" their omissions, but still, what the hell are they thinking?

So, without further wait, here goes my Oscar predictions on the day before its big telecast:

Note: The ACTUAL WINNER slots will be filled in as they are announed on Sunday February 24, 2008

BEST LIVE ACTION SHORT

My Preference: Le Mozart Des Pickpockets

My Prediction: Le Mozart Des Pickpockets

ACTUAL WINNER: *Le Mozart Des Pickpockets*

BEST ANIMATED SHORT

My Preference: I Met The Walrus

My Prediction: I Met The Walrus

ACTUAL WINNER: *Peter & The Wolf*

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT

My Preference: Freeheld

My Prediction: Freeheld

ACTUAL WINNER: *Freeheld*

BEST DOCUMENTARY

My Preference: Sicko

My Prediction: No End In Sight

ACTUAL WINNER: *Taxi To The Darkside*

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

My Preference: Persepolis

My Prediction: Ratatouille

ACTUAL WINNER: *Ratatouille*

BEST ORIGINAL SONG

My Preference: "Falling Slowly" Once

My Prediction: "Falling Slowly" Once

ACTUAL WINNER: *"Falling Slowly" Once*

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS

My Preference: The Golden Compass

My Prediction: Transformers

ACTUAL WINNER: *The Golden Compass*

BEST MAKE-UP

My Preference: La Vie En Rose

My Prediction: Pirates of the Caribbean-At World's End

ACTUAL WINNER: *La Vie En Rose*

BEST FOREIGN FILM

My Preference: Die Falscher (Austria)

My Prediction: Die Falscher (Austria)

ACTUAL WINNER: *Die Falscher* (Austria)

BEST SOUND EDITING

My Preference: There Will Be Blood

My Prediction: There Will Be Blood

ACTUAL WINNER: *The Bourne Ultimatum*

BEST SOUND

My Preference: No Country For Old Men

My Prediction: No Country For Old Men

ACTUAL WINNER: *The Bourne Ultimatum*

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE

My Preference: Atonement

My Prediction: Atonement

ACTUAL WINNER: *Atonement*

BEST ART DIRECTION

My Preference: There Will Be Blood

My Prediction: There Will Be Blood

ACTUAL WINNER: *Sweeney Todd*

BEST COSTUME DESIGN

My Preference: Across The Universe

My Prediction: Atonement

ACTUAL WINNER: *Elizabeth: The Golden Age*

BEST FILM EDITING

My Preference: There Will Be Blood

My Prediction: The Bourne Ultimatum

ACTUAL WINNER: *The Bourne Ultimatum*

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

My Preference: The Savages

My Prediction: Juno

ACTUAL WINNER: *Juno*

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

My Preference: There Will Be Blood

My Prediction: No Country For Old Men

ACTUAL WINNER: *No Country For Old Men* 

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

My Preference: There Will Be Blood

My Prediction: There Will Be Blood

ACTUAL WINNER: *There Will Be Blood*

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

My Preference: Cate Blancett, I'm Not There

My Prediction: Cate Blanchett, I'm Not There

ACTUAL WINNER: *Tilda Swinton, Michael Clayton* 

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

My Preference: Javier Bardem, No Country For Old Men

My Prediction: Javier Bardem, No Country For Old Men

ACTUAL WINNER: *Javier Bardem, No Country For Old Men*

BEST ACTRESS

My Preference: Marion Cotillard, La Vie En Rose

My Prediction: Julie Christie, Away From Her

ACTUAL WINNER: *Marion Cotillard, La Vie En Rose*

BEST ACTOR

My Preference: Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood

My Prediction: Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood

ACTUAL WINNER: *Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood* 

BEST DIRECTOR

My Preference: Paul Thomas Anderson, There Will Be Blood

My Prediction: Paul Thomas Anderon, There Will Be Blood

ACTUAL WINNER: *The Coen Bros., No Country For Old Men*

BEST PICTURE

My Preference: There Will Be Blood

My Prediction: There Will Be Blood

ACTUAL WINNER: *The Coen Bros., No Country For Old Men*

My instincts tell me, 'NO COUNTRY IS GOING TO WIN' and it pretty much has won almost every major prize up until now.  But it is Saturday afternoon, and the Oscars are tomorrow.  I've admired Paul Thomas Anderson for some time now; he being the most influential of Directors to me personally.  I love the Coens, and if they win tomorrow, they're getting away with murder (c'mon, a pair winning Best Director?).  I guess as long as "Juno" doesn't win, "No Country's" assumed victory won't leave that much of a bad taste in my mouth.  Nevertheless, I'm going to take a chance and predict "Blood" going for the gold tomorrow.

It's the best film of the year; a masterpiece, pure and simple. 

Posted by nelsoncarvajal at 01:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

 

During an interview with Creative Screenwriting Magazine, the Coen brothers admitted that while writing "O Brother Where Art Thou" they weren't exactly adapting Homer; it wasn't until late in the process, that the two realized the similarities between their screenplay and "The Odyssey."  So what happened?  The Academy honored the pair with a "Best Adapted Screenplay" Oscar nomination.

As of this past Tuesday, the brothers find themselves competing again in the same category, though this time, the source material was recognized right away--Cormac McCarthy's same-titled novel.  "No Country For Old Men" (no. 3 on my top ten list for 2007) is without doubt a great film, though one can't help but notice its almost too-literal adaptation on screen.  Tommy Lee Jones' monologues in the film are italicized in the novel, the action scenes match paragraph to paragraph, beat to beat, and the film ends in the same anti-climatic, epilogueesque note as the novel.  All together, the Coen's have remained true to McCarthy's original vision, but for a pair of filmmakers who are starkly original in their body of work, one can only quietly wish that Coens could have brought a bit more of themselves to the table--added to their masterful talents of film editing and directing. 

For me, the "No Country" screenplay is essentially a weak entry (out of the five nominated) for the category, though I predict it will ultimately win it due to its recent wins with the National Board of Review and the Golden Globe Awards. But the other four nominees represent what is key to adapting a screenplay: elevating and augmenting the source material to a degree that can be best viewed as whollistically new, yet thematically similar (to the source).  Look at Sarah Polley's delicate balance of nuanced episodes of past and present in "Away From Her," or Christopher Hampton's selective trimmings of class commentary in the first act of "Atonement."  Paul Thomas Anderson, perhaps the most significant case of adapting, takes the historical and personal impacts of Upton Sinclair's "Oil!" and manifests a story that is in no way a mirror to the novel, but has the same staggering effect in "There Will Be Blood."  Oscar-winner Ronald Harwood ("The Pianist"), in a bold and brilliant stroke, takes the thin-paged memoir of the late Jean-Dominique Bauby, and repositions the audience into a first-person subjective point of view in order to experience the dilemma in a move that juxtaposes the novel's poetic, dreamlike examination of ideas and philosophies in "The Diving Bell and The Butterfly."

Yet, it seems that it's been a year for "No Country" (great, but not the year's best), so the Coen's might be adding another Oscar to their mantle.  If it does happen, maybe the Academy will not honor the pair in the directing category, and give the gold statue to the true Best Director (note the singular) of the year: Paul Thomas Anderson. 

Posted by nelsoncarvajal at 01:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

 

It would seem that the "Juno" backlash has indeed begun: the film was shut out at Sunday's Golden Globe Awards, seeing the likes of far worthier nominees walking away with the golden statue.  Ellen Page rightfully lost to Marion Cotillard who was divine in "La Vie En Rose," Diablo Cody's almost-too-hip-for-its-own-good script lost to the violent poetry found in Cormac McCarthy's "No Country For Old Men" (adapted by the Coen Brothers), and the movie lost the Best Picture (Comedy or Musical) award to "Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street."

The big surprise of the night was Julian Schnabel's upset victory (this writer however is inspired by the choice) for Best Director with his remarkable "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly."

And, on a wonderful note, Daniel Day-Lewis adds yet another award for his epic portrayal of greed and madness in "There Will Be Blood." 

Posted by nelsoncarvajal at 07:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)