First Impressions Double Shot! Deadpool & Wolverine / Joker Folie a Deux

We've maybe done a double impression before but this one is special. I'd like to compare these two flicks - Deadpool & Wolverine (2024), which I saw in theaters last July, and Joker 2 (2024), which I saw on MAX a few weeks ago. Both handle fan service in wildly different ways and SPOILER - one was good! You know I'm difficult so gonna say this from the jump, I liked Joker 2 a whole lot better!

Let's rewind. I saw D&W in theaters a year ago (hence this timely post) and I was pretty pumped up. It was a really fun movie, had a lot of great action, enthralling performances, and actually found something to say. I want to go into all that in a bit, but then two things made it fall apart. First, I was pumped when it dropped on Disney+ because I genuinely wanted to ride that ride again but I found it fell totally flat. I think it was really because perhaps more than any movie maybe ever, it was ridiculously reliant on outrageous cameos. Once you know Channing Tatum's Gambit is coming, his actual presence doesn't hold much weight or push the story forward.

There is still a lot I liked about it. Mostly there is an actual thematic resonance there, which is kind of the search for a theme. Deadpool is searching for a reason to matter, which is all kinds of meta when he is trying to find his way in the new Disney / Fox merger that now lets him interact with the Avengers. How can he fit in? Well, that's a really tough puzzle, and just like Adaptation (2002), they just decided to make the movie about that.

This all comes together really well with a not so subtle plot conclusion - the collision of matter and anti-matter. They use Wolverine as a stand-in, since his Logan (2017) was really one of the weightier superhero movies ever, rich with meaning, though, and artistry. Stuff the Deadpool movies generally lack, they're just fun rides (although I really did enjoy Deadpool 2 [2018], I think there's a lot going on there), but they wallow in irreverence, compared to Logan and Wolverine as a character. But it also contrasts with the MCU, which is built upon a lot of big stories that actually matter (okay, fine, they don't, but they do pretend to!).

It made me think of Nathan Fielder's Rehearsal that just wrapped up. Is it possible to create comedy that inspires change? Where is that line? Can you make something silly that is also imbued with enough thematic resonance to actually matter? That is really at the heart of Deadpool & Wolverine. Does it stick the landing? Well, not really, but that final scene is pretty cool. Matter and anti-matter joined together in a climactic sacrifice.

Staying on that point, there were a few things I liked - one, that they didn't show Hugh Jackman's ripped physique until that moment, which seemed like definitely a way to not force him to work out and be shirtless for most of the movie. Again, there's meaning in that joke, though! It works for the theme, giving something goofy the big payoff. I also noted that they kept the mask on him for that, I really wonder if he was CGI...

Also I really hated the mask, a lot of people loved it, I don't think it worked on screen and there was a reason why they kept it off him for 24 years. Whatever, it definitely makes CGI Wolverine a lot easier. But the claws punching the machine was pretty much perfect.

Of course, though, this whole plot makes no sense, like, why was Deadpool rescued by the TVA, only to kill him later as some part of some other plot? It doesn't hold up, none of the TVA stuff really makes sense, you have to squint a lot. The first watch tumbles through on the strength of jokes and excitement. It melts pretty hard on the second watch.

I'll give Hugh Jackman a ton of credit for crafting a pretty different Wolverine than the one in Logan, but still one of the better, richer portrayals. I would have preferred a stronger background for his melancholy, like something out of Old Man Logan where he was tricked into killing the X-Men by Mysterio, but maybe that was too dark? I also noted just how much he said "fuck" in this movie. It's crazy. They really went for it.

Let's get into the rest - I think the whole 'nsync "Bye Bye Bye" gag of cool, violent guy ironically doing stereotypical gay shit is played out beyond played out by now. I feel like Deadpool is ending anyway, which is fine. There's unfortunately not a ton of evolution to be had once you've made that meta commentary. You can't just keep making it, the point is already there. I also found the ending love letter to the Fox-era Marvel movies to be laughable. I literally just ranked these on an unrelated jag and they're all terrible. What are we pining for here? X2: X-Men United (2003)? I mean, that movie's great, but it's not like this nostalgic era. And again, I don't think Deadpool totally earned the right to be sentimental. Deadpool just gets weird when he gets serious.

Okay, so why am I throwing Joker 2 into all this? Well, I really found these to be absolute polar opposite movies. D&W is really built on fan service. You're giving Wolverine the costume and the mask, you have him fight Sabretooth, oooh look it's Pyro! oooh look it's Elektra! oooh look...Gambit... Blake Lively as Ladypool! Like, all this stuff, layer upon layer. Wolverine on the cross, Age of Apocalypse, it's as if it was Leo Pointing at the Screen the Movie. Again, first time around, it largely works out of audacity, and there is some nice throughlines tying it together.

Actually, sidebar, I found it extremely ironic that at some point the plot was just that of Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania (2023), where they completely remove a notably smaller grounded story and put it in a weird alternate world where they spend most of the run time. That's totally just what this movie did. Amazing what cameos can do you for you.

Joker 2 does none of this. Like, blatantly none of this. It's mind-blowing. I approached this with a certain disdain for the first Joker (2019). I really think Todd Philips can write and shoot a movie. The Hangover: Part II (2009) is an absolute gorgeous looking film that everyone ignores because it's The Hangover: Part II. Rich film stock, depth of field, high contrast, lights, shadows, a green yellow haze over the film that matches setting to theme and feeling that lifts when they reach their goal. It's really good. So I approached it with curious optimism, but found a disjointed film that wanted to be King of Comedy (1982) but couldn't be and whose plot beats didn't quite add up, and whose intent appeared ugly and was also taken out of context by pretty much everyone.

Joker 2 made me understand Joker, though. Because I finally got it - I don't think Todd Philips gave a rat's ass about making a Joker movie or a comedy movie. He wanted to make a weird introspective gritty 80s movie. But he couldn't, so he did it through DC and made a billion dollars. Then for some reason they let him do whatever he wanted, so he made an even more introspective film about choosing your identity, social pressures, and accidental inspiration, which happens constantly in this.

I am a firm believe that so many more people would have enjoyed this film if they didn't tie it to the Joker. Like, if it was just about a dude named Arthur Fleck, I think most people would be perfectly fine. But since it has to be an intellectual property, which is how these kinds of films are ever going to get made, people put their own expectations on to what should happen. However, I felt less like my expectations were being poured into this than I did for Deadpool & Wolverine! I literally just gave you a slight rewrite a few paragraphs ago. I was just along for this ride.

The first line in the Wikipedia entry under "Themes and Analysis" says "Critics noted that the film was a work of metafiction designed to intentionally antagonize audiences who were fans of the first film." I disagree, I think intentional antagonization is a strong word. I think that's a reaction you have when you are so put back that you must assume it's intentional. It made a lot of sense to me watching it. Joker only works as the Joker when he is remorseless for his crimes. Joker 2 makes him not the Joker by giving him some humanity. He's a beta male who is tempted with alpha male-ness but then realizes what kind of monster that's making him and then owns up to his mistakes and experiences real growth as a human being. It's an astounding high wire act to pull off. GaGa is there totally wanting him to be Joker and he just refuses because that is all she wants from him. It's stunning.

Could you read GaGa as an audience surrogate, or his fans as audience surrogates? Sure, I guess. But I don't think it's extremely telegraphed that way. It feels more part of the story and authentic then a cheap ploy like that, like it's just a gut reaction. And what would that motivation be? To prank a billion dollars worth of fans of the first film?

I will admit, it's hard to see why Philips went in this direction. It seems like a direction that no one really liked, except maybe GaGa and Joaquin Phoenix. And me. It does feel a bit like a really expensive prank, but if so, I don't know why Philips wouldn't have owned it (like Fleck!) and instead supposedly spent opening weekend on his isolated ranch with the phone unplugged. It's confounding. Like, it was so brave to make this movie the way he did, and then he kind of slunk away in shame.

I can't think of a better commentary on our current culture. Deadpool & Wolverine went for cheap (well, probably not so cheap) cameos, hauling out 90-year old Hugh Jackman, and made fan service the movie and made all the money in the world. I'm not going to totally knock it, but it seems to me like it will struggle to have staying power. Joker Folie A Deux could have done that. They could have gone for big hammers and hyenas, and Batman, and whatever else. Instead, they just bucked fan service at every turn and made Joker into an actual human being and was one of the biggest flops of all time. Yay.

At the end, it does appear as if Fleck inspires the actual, possible Heath Ledger-esque Joker and that's a fun out. But I could live without it. I just keep thinking about how good this thing looks. And why the hell anyone would ever sit through a 2 hr and 18 minute courtroom drama about maybe one of the biggest character misrepresentations since Taskmaster. Why didn't it piss me off, though? Maybe because the Joker is an awful character. I mean, literally, like an awful person, maybe one of the worst people in fiction (but American, dammit!), so if you're going to make him your protagonist, you need to do something interesting with him? Or make him sympathetic in some way? I think it might be as simple as it's just well-constructed, well-shot, and well-acted movie, and those three big things are going to win me over every time.

So, listen, you probably read all the non-sense and wrote off Joker 2, I suggest you go see it. It's the least fan service movie of all time, and I really think that's more in service of crafting a good narrative rather than purposeful antagonization, which is supposedly what we all want. If you're fed up with recycled garbage (Robert Downey Jr. as Doctor Doom! Superman again! Jurassic World: Afterbirth!), maybe check this thing out, I thought it was cool, and bold, and if it truly was just a massive career ending Todd Philips studio prank, well, I'm down for that, too.

2019 FINISHED! Movie Stuff of the Year

It's that most lovely time of year, folks. Not only do we countdown our movies and scenes and music and all the food we ate, but we dig a little deeper. This column has ranged a little bit over the years but we're sticking to the basics in 2019. Can't you tell?

Actor of the Year

One may only look towards the Golden Globe nominees to see how weird 2019 has become. Hanks, Hopkins, Pesci, Pacino, Pitt reads like it's 1991. What the hell is going on here? After Once Upon a Time ... in Hollywood and Ad Astra, is Brad Pitt having the best year? Is he really the definitive Actor of 2019? Keanu Reeves was certainly the Actor of May 2019. Adam Sandler? Again, 90s. Shit, man. James McAvoy actually had one of the more prolific years, with Glass, It: Chapter Two, and X-Men: Dark Phoenix. Every single one of these movies felt like the lesser version of their predecessor, though. Going with IT, hell, maybe it's Finn Wolfhard or Bill Hader.

Let's go with a classic double shot. Chris Evans gave us the most defining performance of the biggest movie of the year as well as played that completely against type in a critical and commercial darling (that made 6% of Endgame's total worldwide). I'm not totally sold on it, but between Endgame and Knives Out, Chris Evans is maybe THE ACTOR of 2019. Of course The Rock has Jumanji coming out to add to Hobbs & Shaw. And Adam Driver has The Rise of Skywalker to add to Marriage Story and The Man Who Killed Don Quixote and The Report. Maybe it's Adam Driver's. It certainly feels like a bigger year for Driver rather than Evans. Let's go with him.

Actress of the Year

Jessica Chastain has the same deal as McAvoy. I mean, quite literally, they were in the same movies. Poor cultural influence, though. Scarlett Johansson goes the Adam Driver route of Marriage Story and a big one, Endgame. Jennifer Lopez is hot right now because it's the 90s. Daisy Ridley pulled down Jumanji and Endgame. Endgame casts a long damn shadow.

Naomi Scott should fit the bill. Huge movie with Aladdin and a solid follow-up franchise starter with Charlie's Angels. Except the former bombed and seems to have passed quickly from memory. Even Aladdin doesn't seem like it ended up holding much weight. That's not fair - Scott is the biggest non-Will Smith name in that cast! Oh, maybe that's why. Margot Robbie had OUATIH and the upcoming Bombshell which would be a really good case in any other year...

But let's go with a no brainer, a newbie who held her own against actors who have been doing this superhero thing for eleven years. Brie Larson in the one-two punch of Captain Marvel and Endgame proved herself to be a cultural force this year unlike many who came before. I have no idea where they're taking her next (she was conspicuously absent of Marvel's next plan. They also didn't really know what to do with her for most of Endgame. Cool. Can't wait to see what's next whenever they think of an actual idea.

Trailers of the Year

I really didn't watch many trailers this year. I've kind of stopped. Even for movies that I think I'll like - I most just go see them instead. There weren't a ton that stood out. There are a few Christmas releases that have all been pretty interesting. Let's rank by order of goodness:

Jumanji: The Next Level



Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) was a huge guilty pleasure for me. I have no shame about this. This sets up a sequel with the same exact premise but pushed even more insane by having The Rock play Danny DeVito and Kevin Hart play Danny Glover. The trailer shows all this and more. It works on premise more than stakes and it does a great job of getting me interested in wasting $10 this Christmas.

Bombshell



According to early reviews, this trailer is a little better than the final film, which seems to deal with more surface level Fox News issues than digging deep into these problems and providing a proper #MeToo film. That's okay - we can still watch this trailer and pretend this is the massive takedown film it could be. Starring three fantastic actresses in different stages of their careers coming together is amazing. It's like a blonde version of The Hours (2002). I'm a big fan of teasers that show one simple scene that demonstrates the feel of the entire movie. Bombshell knocks this out of the park.

CATS



Lol just trolling you. But really, this trailer is fine, great even. The subject matter is just so cuckoo bananas off the mark that there's no way anyone will see this film except for the dumpster fire memes it will generate. Ooh, we should just through Sonic The Hedgehog (2020) on this fire, too. I'll give the Sonic people all the credit in the world for admitting a weird mistake and correcting it. CATS not so much. They really should probably just have human bodies or cat bodies, not somehow both.

Wonder Woman 1984



This just dropped and I love it. I have no idea what this is about or why Steve Trevor is back and it seems to probably reveal way too much, but the soundtrack is bumpin and the humor and action seem on point. Why is it in 1984? Just nostalgia porn? A fascinating inability to set women superhero stories in the present day? I don't know, this does seem fun, though. It finds itself my most anticipated superhero film of 2020.

Hero of the Year

There are so many good candidates. Iron Man? John Wick? The Girl from Crawl? Queen Elsa? Let's go with a dark horse candidate from an insanely underrated movie - SHAZAM! This was all about a kid who wants to be a hero, and then becomes one, but has to learn that it's not that easy. That sounds simple, but this fun flick paid off in really satisfying ways that felt weirdly under the radar for a major DC movie. I guess that's why.

It was a really weird feeling. I think about who I would want in my corner. I just want Shazam there zapping folks. We probably need a Shazam vs. Thor movie now. That would be perfectly fine. I welcome the haters for not picking a single character from Endgame. Or CATS.

Villain of the Year

Eek! I've been waiting seven months for this! It's King Ghidorah from Godzilla: King of the Monsters! I heartless alien fiend that can't be reasoned with or spoken to - merely unleashed and then uhh...leashed. It's a literal alien monster hurricane that destroys most of the planet before Godzilla can nuke him out of Boston. He's fearsomely powerful, intelligent, and untouchable. It's perfect.

Ok, Thanos, Joker, It, the alligator from Crawl. Or the entire village from Midsommar. Or the Tethered from Us. Damn, these are all good candidates. I'm sticking with Ghidorah. My second pick would be SPOILER stop reading if you haven't seen Far from Home, but you should honestly have figured this out - Mysterio! Slyly powerful, a master emotional manipulator, mind games, illusions - always one of my favorite villains brought to life in the best possible way. It's honestly better if you don't know he's a villain, but also every single appearance of Mysterio in every comic, TV show, and video game has started out like this. That Far from Home actually still sells that and almost convinced me, is brilliant. It's like Paul Rudd totally definitely not playing the same Mac and Me (1988) clip on Conan.

Conclusion

2019 was  a very big year. Endgame, Star Wars, Marvel, Disney remakes, Pixar fourquels. It's a lot. Maybe I'm just digging a bigger niche hole for myself, but not many of the biggest movies seemed to make a cultural impact, though. Where are the Toy Story 4 and Lion King memes? I'm at a point where I'm not actually sure if I just have superhero algorithms blasting at me in my self-perpetuating bubble or nothing else really made an impact.

There were massive flops. Audiences may actually be getting tired of seeing the same crap totted out over and over again. To be specific, though, they still want crap, just new old crap. There are weird Disney flops, though, like Mary Poppins Returns (2018) and Maleficient: Mistress of Evil. Comparative flops, of course. It's clear that audiences are sick of some stories, like ANOTHER X-Men and ANOTHER Men in Black and ANOTHER Terminator. Yeah, remember all those came out?

It's time to rank the original movies at the box office. Us is still in the Top 10 and there's totally not a movie coming out Friday that will knock them out... Next up is Hustlers at #25, then Ford v. Ferrari, Good Boys, and Knives Out, getting down to #34 at that point, still over $75 million. That's not entirely terrible, but far from a great sign.

In 2020 we have no Avengers, Star Wars, or Jurassic Park movie. We have one Disney remake, Mulan, a Godzilla movie that will probably do no money, a ninth Fast and Furious film that I'm actually predicting is over (no trailer yet?), a Ghostbusters movie that maybe won't suck? AKA Stranger Things: The Movie. DC is sure trying to have a big year. I've talked about WW84 and they have Birds of Prey as well. Marvel really only has Black Widow. Sure, The Eternals, but what the hell even is that, guys? There is a new Bond movie, and supposedly Daniel Craig's last, but Bond has been retiring for longer now than between Casino Royale (2006) and Skyfall (2012). Sure.

What did you like about 2019? Looking forward to anything next year?

Reconciling The Stuff We Wanted to See in 2018

Hey Folks, I promise that we will have the normal flurry of end-of-year posts and that yes, this website does still exist. How could I have gone so long without talking about Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)? Anyway, each and every January we countdown a bunch of crap we're pumped up about. By Decembery time it's time to stroll down that long dark hallway of self-loathing as we realize that everything we look forward to sucks ass. Let's begin!

For the record, here is our original post.

Slice (2018)

Oof I wanted this to be good. So much. It's very original and a great premise that should have been a slam-dunk. Instead it felt rushed and choppy, full of awkward make-up effects, and not nearly enough Chance the Rapper being a cool, casual werewolf. The cast is still incredible, but there's not really enough catharsis for anyone involved. It's also 83 minutes.

Verdict: SUCKED

Hotel Artemis (2018)

I did not get a chance to see this one and it's looking like I won't by the time the year is over. Still, this landed with a surprising thud. Audiences responded with a resounding "That was okay" and despite a dream cast it seemed to miss the mark. I won't fully judge until I watch it with my own eyes, but after expecting a John Wick (2014) and getting anything less, it feels generally disappointing.

Verdict: Probably Sucked

Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)

Kind of in that same vein of a Hotel shoot 'em up premise, this film is actually far from that and a steady directorial hand by Drew Goddard sees it through. It's far too long for its own good and not everything pays off, but it's an all around exciting caper and entertaining flick. Chris Hemsworth is surprisingly vile and Cynthia Ervio combines this with Widows (2018) in a breakout year. At the end though, it comes off as Tarantino-Lite and the story framing doesn't totally work.

Verdict: Good

Infinity War (2018)

This was pretty good. I don't know how you'd follow along if you aren't as well-versed in MCU lore as I am, but I couldn't expect anything better than the product Feige and the Russos threw up on the screen. There are flaws of course, but in a movie like this it's more about feeling (and selling toys) and this had plenty.

Verdict: RULED

Deadpool 2 (2018)

There are some big issues with murdering Morena Baccarin in the first scene and then oddly undoing the whole movie at the end, this was top to bottom a better Deadpool movie. It wasn't nearly as funny or catchy, but no comedy sequel really is. The cast is brilliant and having a ton of fun and the parachute scene works perfect. Celine Dion should be GaGa for the Best Original Song Oscar.

Verdict: Pretty Good

Hold the Dark (2018)

This sucked so hard. Actually the Iraq scene was amazing, but the rest of this film was boring as hell. After Jeremy Saulnier hit the tension and steady progression of action so well in Green Room (2015) I had high expectations. I weirdly like Alexander Skarsgard in anything he's in these days and Jeffrey Wright is always reliable but this film was far too plodding for what should have been a pretty engaging Alaskan Frontier Wolf Murder Mystery movie.

Verdict: SUCKED

Annihilation (2018)

Finally a film that justified my anticipation. Annihilation was full of crazy sci-fi Lovecraftian body horror that was half-Under the Skin (2014) and half-Stargate (1994). Not only that, but it was full of competent female military scientists like it was no big deal. It's not hard to make this work.

Verdict: RULED

The Beach Bum (2019)

Not out yet but we got a trailer!



This looks... like a Harmony Korine film. I'm still down. Whenever it comes out.

Verdict: Looks okay

Widows (2018)

I didn't quite know what to make of this premise and am about to write about this film extensively because there is A LOT to unpack here. It rejuvenates heist films, robbery films, political films, racial films - it's quite an accomplishment that I feel is already slipping under the radar. But well worth it.

Verdict: RULED

Isle of Dogs (2018)

With any kind of movie that elicits controversy we have to acknowledge problematic issues before we dive in. As far as Japanese racism there is a little bit of fetishization here and legitimately no reason for the American exchange student character to even exist, much less have the leadership role she has, but centered on the dogs this is a heartwarming story. There are some plot turns that don't quite make sense, and honestly some puppy characters who could have been consolidated. Also weirdly the female pups are horribly underwritten prizes for the male pups. Alright, there are some issues here. But a lot of cuteness too.

Verdict: Just Watch Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009)

Aquaman (2018)

Have not seen this and probably won't by the time the year ends, but it looks bonkers and I'm so unnaturally pumped for Black Manta. Jason Mamoa is doing crazy publicity rounds and appears like the chillest bro ever. Early reviews and vibe are that this is pretty good, or at least self-aware good, which is good.

Verdict: Probably Okay

The New Mutants (2019)

Whelp. A lot has happened since January 2018. Fox is now Disney and who the hell knows where this possible gem will end up. The X-Men were mature enough that the company was really spinning them in some crazy and creative ways and that's probably over now. This ought to come out next year sometime and with the current Horror Revival going on right now it'll probably turn out alright.

Verdict: Who knows

Others: I predicted Scorcese's The Irishman and Gilliams The Man Who Killed Don Quixote out this year. Well, to be fair I said there's no way either of these are coming out this year. Neither did. The former is, I don't know, still somewhere, and the latter is embroiled in a legal dispute preventing distribution. If we ever watch either it'll be grand.

First Impressions: Deadpool Dos

For no fault of its own, Deadpool 2 (2018) is actually dropping at a weird crossroads in cinematic history. What's the last great comedy you can remember? I mean, truly deserving, game-changing comedy? Like...22 Jump Street (2014)? Or maybe it's Deadpool (2016). Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping (2016). But that made no money nor cultural impact.

2017 was really rough. Girls Trip (2017) gets the title without much competition and literally nothing else is memorable. Despite a lot of effort, we haven't seen much of anything in 2018. We have Game Night (2018) and Blockers (2018), but can we really talk about any of these films with the same breath as The Hangover (2009) or Bridesmaids (2011), or going back, a Billy Madison (1995) or Zoolander (2001)? No, we cannot.

So, it would appear that we're in a rough patch of comedy. The numbers and percentage of box office gross supports this as even promising stars like Melissa McCarthy and Amy Schumer have headlined pretty awful bombs in the past month. It seems difficult for anyone to truly breakout and make a run of high-concept mainstream comedy films these days. Sandler is trying on Netflix, but they're all pretty bad and more importantly, wholly outside of the cultural conversation.

Into all this we get the curveball of Deadpool 2, which IS the mainstream R-rated comedy that we seem to be so desperately lacking. The pessimists would lament that even our comedy films these days have to be name recognition superhero movies that only work if we also really understand the cultural context of other superhero movies. It's like literally our only world is superhero films.

The optimist would say, who cares, it's funny. It's also surprisingly well-written. I always like to talk free from the burden of SPOILERS, so SPOILERS abound all through the following article. There are a lot of shocking moments, although considering most are either undone by the end of the film or simply happen in the first ten minutes, it's tougher to really spoil anything. Instead, there are plenty of jokes and cameos here that really deserve a first-time, unabashed viewing. So, if you're into that, go see it and come back. The Internet will still exist in the next two hours.

Welcome back! With a movie like this there are going to be obvious comparisons to the first installment, and in general comedy sequels have a difficult time re-creating magic. I talked about this way back with Anchorman 2 (2013, which I still think SURPASSES the original. I said it). In essence, comedy only works when you present this cognitive dissonance, a combination of surprise, recognition, the unexpected, and familiarity - all these seemingly competing ideas combine with timing and context to provide a vast array of possible scenarios that elicit a chuckle. Sequels, or doing the same thing over again, is inherently contrasting to the surprise, or cleverness necessary for comedy to work.

Maybe it's fair to Deadpool 2's success then that superhero sequels are generally better, because there is no need to be bogged down with an origin story or character introductions. Superheros generally work better when we just accept that they're ridiculous and we know we're here to just watch a bunch of costumed idiots slam up against each other anyway.

Sometimes, though, the only point is an origin story. This is also why many villains are doppelgangers of the hero - they work to both stay in the same world and create a counterpoint to the hero. That is, when examining the hero's origin and his or her choices, it enhances the theme to show the wrong path. Sometimes that works really well (Black Panther [2018]), other times it comes off contrived (Ant-Man [2015], Iron Man [2008], Doctor Strange [2016]). The best superhero films find a way to make their villain the inverse of the hero. The Dark Knight (2008) was so good in part because its villain both fit into the world and universe, added to the film's themes, and also provided a perfect counterpoint to the hero. Spider-Man 2 (2004) featured its villain as a spiritual counterpoint to the hero (Doc Ock, like Peter Parker, was dedicated to science, but in a fulfilling relationship with balanced responsibilities, victim of a scientific accident but without moral guidance, and powers that emulated Spider-Man's without being a direct copy - wall crawling, stretchy mid-range combat, strength, and agility. I could still write a whole Spider-Man 2 post). This is a really long tangent, but also circles back to Deadpool 2 because its villain introduction revitalizes the film.

See, I don't think 2 is as good as Pool in terms of jokes. It doesn't have that unbelievable kick to the dick that the first one did, not does it really exist in as perfect of a realm between our world and Deadpool's, where Hugh Jackman, Ryan Reynolds, and 20th Century Fox are all things that Deadpool somehow knows about. There is some of that this time around, but we get the schtick. How many movies full of Hugh Jackman jokes can we really have? It's all kind of one note. Deadpool might be better served to check in on the development of superheros ten or twenty years down the line rather than right now. Sure we get some updated Logan (2017), Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016), and Infinity War (2018) jokes, and they all land when you understand context, but that's not really sustainable. Instead it's more meta recognition that's become the only lens for understanding films. Fucking Ready Player One (2018) again.

Where the movie succeeds, though, is the long winding path through character interactions, where everything everyone does has a motive, a causal relationship, and consequences. It's actually amazing. Cable, the main villain turns into an ally. Firefist, an ally turns into the main villain. The fucking Juggernaut! Sorry, I just got excited for that song, which is perfect in every perfect way. Cable is a brilliant counterpart to Deadpool (and has been for nearly thirty years now), because he's the total opposite personality - dark and serious, but they also both really love guns. You can see that in the final battle (naturally, Deadpool has to comment on it) when their fighting is so in sync and they become best friends.

Likewise, Firefist is a great kid sidekick (nice to see The Hunt for the Wilderpeople [2016]'s Julian Dennison again - no Taikia Watiti THOR: Ragnarok [2017] reference? Maybe even that was too deep). Both he and Deadpool learn across the movie about themselves - Deadpool not to be so much of a dick to everyone around him, and when he's able to overcome this and reach Firefist (shades of the Rainmaker in Looper [2012] here. See, I can make references, too) and prevent his dark descent, it's a truly cathartic moment. The fact that that moment is undercut with jokes is less distracting than in some Marvel movies because we're not really meant to take the whole movie seriously.

The only time this really doesn't work is the opening, where yeah, Morena Baccarin's Vanessa dies. Celine Dion's "Ashes" (which is actually an original song, done so well you could swear it's a kitschy 90s ballad and one of her old hits - totally should win an Academy Award) comes in and there's a doofy James Bond-style opening, which doesn't feel right. Again, the film is aware of this, and the opening credits agree with our jaw-dropped feelings. Seriously, "Directed by One of the Guys Who Killed John Wick's Dog" is spot-on. In addition to this being an unfortunate 2018 fridge-stuffing incident it seemed painfully clear that a Deadpool movie doesn't know what to do with a girlfriend. Vanessa was gone for most of the original before becoming a damsel in distress. While it is the best way to put Deadpool down this depressed, suicidal path, since this was the only thing he really cared about, and greatly fuels his desire for death which becomes a major theme as he is able to accept this and repair himself and his relationships to others, it left a sour taste in my mouth.

To some extent Deadpool 2 does the same as its predecessor, where it will do something lazy or tonally off, then point it out in an attempt to wink at us and let us know they're in on the joke. This film actually does a better job of rising above still proceeding with the tropes as Deadpool did, which really still followed beat-by-beat a superhero film while winking at us. There's quite a bit more to this film derived from its complex character interactions, genuinely engaging action scenes, and again the facts that the jokes work enough that everything is smoothed over. Still, things like "Here's a CGI fight!" followed by a big CGI fight is more surface-level pandering than digging in and solving a trope in a unique way. It's still better at this point that having a mindless crappy CGI scuffle, but it also leaves me wondering if we can ever again have sincerity in our films. I had this idea when watching Blood Fest - horror films are so victim to tropes these days that their only way out is to expressly call them out.

There's a lot else this movie does really well. The assembling of X-Force and summarily dismissal of nearly the entire crew is hilarious, if not a total rip-off of MacGruber (2010). I've really reached a point where no reference can get by me. It's still an impressive cast of Terry Crews, Bill Skarsgard, and Brad Pitt, and their deaths are also both clever in a Final Destination-sort of way, foreshadowed by the high wind advisory (which Deadpool's irreverent personality dismisses), which is made funnier because it's the kind of innocuous comment you wouldn't take seriously, even when it's brought up again. It ALSO adds to Zazie Beetz' Domino character in both seeing her unique luck abilities and personality on screen. There is a lot going on here, and it's one of the reasons this movie works so well at the intersection of action, plot, character, and comedy. Beetz is also fantastic here.

We should probably talk about the ending. Apparently even Ryan Reynolds thought it was cheating a little. So yeah, this movie is all about Deadpool learning to cope with his inability to save the love of his life while simultaneously being literally incapable of dying. At the end he's finally granted death, but Vanessa sends him back because he needs to learn to accept others into his life and not just her. In thirty seconds during the end credits, though, he goes back in time and saves her. This actually undoes the entire movie, and seems like a tacked on, hokey ending. I mean, even Conker's Bad Fur Day knew how to employ this the right way to hit you in the gut. Again, my obscure references are on point.

Excising Ryan Reynolds of his personal demons from X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009) and Green Lantern (2011) are also inspired. I mean, we have Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool shooting Ryan Reynolds in the head and MY head exploded. Yet, not a single reference to Blade: Trinity (2004). I mean...Thundercunt. There was a subtle moment earlier actually, where the current Deadpool does what the earlier Deadpool was most famous for - deflecting bullets with katanas. Here of course, he's riddled with bullets anyway, which shows his real superpower. Was I also the only one who really wanted a Two Guys and a Girl reference. Maybe through Traylor Howard some work, she ain't doing shit anymore.

As I reflect on this post, it's amazing I haven't dwelt more on X-Men lore. It was great to see the fore First Class mutants super briefly, and the idea that we never see them in a Deadpool movie because they're actively avoiding Deadpool is kind of amazing. It's also an interesting concept to re-tool Juggernaut away from this (which listen, The Last Stand [2006] is rough, but Vinnie Jones is alright), and make him more comic accurate, which also got me thinking that between him and Colossus, these characters really are finally standing on their own, totally separate from the need to even have a recognizable actor play the role. Or frankly, even an unrecognizable actor (Juggernaut is credited as himself, although the voice is actually Ryan Reynolds). One day everything will be CGI and we won't have any actors at all. Cool beans.

What did you think? Are you down with the pool? What do you think about the intersection of comedy, meta, superheroes, and Two Girls, A Girl, and a Pizza Place? Leave a comment below

The Deadpool 2

That'd be fun, right? Clint Eastwood.

Oh, Ryan Reynolds.

Since I'm a living, breathing asshole, I was a big fan of Deadpool (2016). I was never super super into his character, not only because the 90s Deadpool is totally a man without time (about as cultural influential as The Last Action Hero [1993], and come to think of it, the exact same thing), and not really that kid-friendly anyway. It takes a build-up of cultural understanding to see why Deadpool is even funny and on top of that you need to appreciate both a lot of X-Men / Comic Book / Hugh Jackman lore AND both extreme violence and hard-R rated comedy.

It's like a Gift from Cable

You'd think that'd be a lot, but Deadpool is the #1 X-Men movie of all time. By like $130 million. Throw in inflation, whatever, it's still on top. It hit that perfect nexus of meta-commentary on the superhero genre, a starved year for good comedy, and a sarcastic, reflexive cultural kick to the ass that is appealing to an evermore jaded youth population. I made the mistake of going to a Sunday afternoon 4:20 showing of Deadpool in an isolated college town. That theater was packed and they were INTO it.

And good for Ryan Reynolds. We had been trying to make Ryan Reynolds happen for decades now. The irony is that this movie worked in part because it had free reign to make fun of both the X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009) Deadpool and Green Lantern (2011). In that way, the movie puts its arm around you and says, "Hey, we know this whole thing has sucked and is kind of stupid, but WE'RE here to have fun." Ironically, this helped the film connect with audiences.

It's also a damned shame that Fox's X-Men, who were JUST cresting the really weird and bold wave with Deadpool, Logan (2017), and The New Mutants (2019) is now all Disney. Somehow they still crank out shitty X-Men: Apocalypse (2016)-kind of flicks, and in the insane world we know live in, X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019) is a February release and Deadpool 2 gets mid-May. What the hell is going on.

Anyway, a sequel was a given, and here we are with Deadpool 2. Domino and Cable are welcome additions, even if it's weird to see Josh Brolin in his second huge comic book role in four weeks. #JonahHex2. It helps Deadpool because it's adding more from his comic book canon, which is plenty welcome after nerd audiences were screwed over for years, not so much in changed source material, but in the sense that producers seemed kind of ashamed of the pulpy source material. Cable's seriousness has always been a great contrast to Deadpool's cheekiness, especially since they still both like killing a lot.

With all our Donald Glover talk, we should talk about
fellow Atlanta star Zazie Beetz and how that cast
is now just taking over all movies.
Where's LaKeith Stanfield in The Incredibles 2

Deadpool 2 faces the difficulty that all comedy sequels face. They've already shot their wad on the high concept, riffed on every obvious facet of that premise, and in this case, exhausted the anticipation of seeing a proper Deadpool adaptation on the big screen. This film has the added difficulty of no longer being an underdog. The budget is far higher, the director changed, and the entire cultural conversation around the character is far more overblown. All these aspects contributed to the grimy feel of the original. Deadpool is a flexible enough character to acknowledge these changes, with plenty of room for fourth-wall breaking, but that's also difficult to sustain for an entire film.

The major issue with Deadpool was that although it commented on and made fun of many superhero tropes, it structurally didn't actually diverge that much from a superhero movie. I felt the same way with 22 Jump Street (2014), which seemed to constantly announce that it knew what tropes it was making fun of, but didn't actually shift any of those tropes to create a new narrative in a meaningful way. This is the issue with making meta movies that only exist as regurgitation making fun of pop culture. And yeah, both these films ARE really funny, and they get a pass because the jokes land more often than they should, but the core concept of inviting us behind the curtain falls flat.

Deadpool succeeds in its irreverent tone, effortless attempts at cool confidence, and the charisma of Ryan Reynolds. I am interested to see what a Deadpool 2 does with some pressure - will they double down on the things that made it ridiculous or pull back? It's still a breathtakingly rare exercise in blockbuster filmmaking. The amount of R-rated action superhero comedies are...well, Deadpool. That's it.

Now, how can Deadpool fit in with the main Marvel Cinematic Universe now that they're all under one house...he does have a storied history with Thanos... At any rate, I'd expect Deadpool 2 to unseat Infinity War (2018) this week, but it's in a tough spot between that and Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018). I think those nerds overlap. Right? It's still oblique possible that Solo bombs, although to be honest, the mainstream public who either doesn't know about the behind the scenes turmoil or doesn't care won't really be affected. I'm getting ahead of myself. The point is, normally these would be very different audiences, but that may not even be the case anymore.

What are you seeing this weekend?

Ingrinity Blar

Here we are folks. A week early, mostly to not run into Solo (2018) - ahh synergy, we have one of the most hotly anticipated films of all time. Avengers: Infinity War (2018) has been brewing for ten solid years and could very well become one of the biggest movies of all time.

That's all a given. I personally think this will easily outweigh some of the more recent Star Wars (maybe not The Force Awakens [2015] absurd $936 million domestic, but surely in that $700-800 million range). I mean, Black Panther (2018) just hit $681 million for the #3 all-time slot. The only question is just how high this thing can go. Maybe it does crack a billion at home and beat AVABAR (2009) worldwide. It's pre-release figures are insane and the hype is real.

Also, every MacGuffin becomes a Super-MacGuffin!

This is a different level of hype, though. It's almost a taken for granted hype. There was a certain level of excitement when Marvel first started cranking out really good movies that highlighted comparatively lesser-known, "B-level" superheros like Iron Man, and when they teased a major crossover Avengers movie, that was a big deal. In the end, that feels very surface-level though, now. The universe has pivoted more and more and steadily grown, actually teasing Thanos for longer than we were teased of the concept of an Avengers team-up. That timespan has given people plenty of time to catch-up, canonize all 18 Marvel movies in the popular consciousness, and expand little niches of the universe like sci-fi and magic and technology until they become as commonplace as they are in the preceding comic book source material.

We're at this weird crossroads now, then. There's a distinct feeling of finality to all this. I obviously have abstained from a lot of trailer watching, as per regulation, which is easier because I'm currently lacking a TV. That's where this hype is different. Advertisements are needed to get randos into the seats for sure, but for most folk this is just a culmination of a ten-year journey with these characters. You get the feeling we could see some major deaths, shake-ups, or changes.

And this is all supposedly only Part I, right? I mean, there's another one slated for next year. I suppose they want to keep that under wraps. We'll probably get a full trailer as the post-credits sequence of Infinity War. But there's where that weird crossroad comes into play. We're casually talking about this movie breaking a domestic billion dollar mark. They're going to make more. While this will likely be simply with a new cast of subtly shifting actors, it still represents a big change in what the MCU has long held sacred.

That's why I reject a lot of "superhero fatigue" bullshit. The public is clearly not fatigued. I think that critics are, but that's because they have always had their own little indie world. And when you strictly analyze a lot of these films, they're not totally great, but by and large they're not bad, either. An 18-film multi-arcing story with multiple directors, writers, and sometimes cast members is actually marvelously impressive to pull off. It's just that we need to see it as such.

This mostly started with Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014), which I still consider the first Marvel film that really became a great film on its own. That was also the first one to gleefully undercut the rules of its own universe. It's a common complaint that all Marvel films are the same, and that's largely true for pesky origin stories that we should really stop caring about exploring, but the arc from Winter Soldier through Age of Ultron (2015), CIVIL WAR (2016), and now Infinity War is a character study and test for this group of superheroes on par with anything the Academy regularly favors. It's a legitimately carefully crafted slow burn of competing ideologies, with political and personal ramifications that echo beyond their individual worlds. Yeah, okay - Ant-Man (2015). There are some duds, but their duds are at least fun duds, worthy ways to spend a Sunday afternoon.

Their latest films just keep pushing. THOR: Ragnarok (2017) was so successful because it wasn't afraid to literally break everything iconic about its character. It's this kind of confidence and daring that keeps attracting fans as well as keeping them interested. This is often mistaken for weird conspiracies like Disney is paying off critics or we're just all biased, but this also largely ignored that all those same people loved Wonder Woman (2017). It's not the studio, it's the product. We respond to good product.

That's where I'm skeptical of this "superhero fatigue" statement. This may have been more true in that 2003-2007 zone where we had Daredevil (2003) and Fantastic Four (2005) and Ghost Rider (2007), all these sub-par films that didn't quite know what they wanted to be. Were they action films or adventure films or expressly "superhero"? Looking back, they are all actually distinctive, but also all pretty bad. Is it worth it to have the inverse? All good films, but none that are distinct? Again, I'd like to think that's not even true, as Marvel continues to surprise with film after film, going bolder, weirder, and truer to its insane source origins. Unarguably, FOX is actually doing this on a grander scale with Deadpool (2016), Logan (2017), Legion, and The New Mutants (2019), although for some reason its core franchise is stuck spinning its wheels. I digress.

We're not in superhero fatigue. That's grossly inaccurate. That's like saying we're sick of comic books. Sure, that does actually happen as the industry waxes and wanes (ahem - 90s), but these characters also all have 50 years under their belts now. And they've become such a pop cultural focus point that there are countless iterations that can be developed and re-developed and pushed and pulled, constructed and deconstructed. What's amazing is that Watchmen (2009) came out nine years ago - barely at the tip of our current boom. What should have been a genuine deconstruction was instead another nail. Winter Soldier deconstructs more.

Is there blockbuster fatigue? It's more accurate to say that studios have poured a lot more money into making things "happen" when they probably shouldn't have. We just saw Rampage (2018) become one of the most expensive B-movies of all time, if it hadn't been for Pacific Rim Uprising (2018) a few weeks earlier. The fallacy here is that studios feel like they have to spend a ton of money to make a huge film that will recoup enough to justify its costs, but in reality they should spend less, make a solid B-movie and be content to make their money back. This line of thought will never happen, in large part to the mentality created by The Avengers (2012) and Disney's studio posturing.

This may be crazy to think about, but Disney (parent company Buena Vista) has only won the years 2016 and 2017. You have to go back to 2003 to find the last year they were the top-grossing studio. In 2015 Universal was crushing everyone through a combination of Vin Diesel and Jurassic World (2015), yet it's crazy how much of an afterthought Fallen Kingdom (2018) now feels. The slap-hazard marketing that doesn't know what genre the film is and a remarkable revulsion to the film that's happened in the past three years doesn't really help things.

Even in 2012 alongside The Avengers, Buena Vista was edged by SONY under Skyfall, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Hotel Transylvania, and 21 Jump Street. Warner Bros also beat them, mostly through a combination of The Dark Knight Rises and the first Hobbit movie. 2012 was also the year of John Carter. Enough said. The age we're in now is that every possibly big film is treated as a blockbuster on The Avengers level. When people say superhero fatigue they possibly really just mean blockbuster fatigue, which is also isn't really a thing. Is Rampage all that different than 10,000 BC (2008) or Mighty Joe Young (1998) or Action Jackson (1988)? I don't really think so, although it just has a bigger budget and more hoopla. But just like these flicks, we won't remember it beyond a quick byline in 2028.

All this is to say that in an era where everything with the slightest hint of possible recognition is treated like a mega-hit blockbuster and every potential franchise is a shared universe, when The Avengers come along it's the real thing. It's become that blockbuster that's beyond blockbusters. It's what people actually wait for and are organically invested in, rather than something thrown together with the Rock to make a quick buck. I'm really shitting on Rampage right now, which I haven't actually seen but assume is stupid, but in fairness that's only because I've seen all the marketing and read the reviews.

Man I hope Mantis is the main protagonist. Make Thanos feel!

This is what drives these comic book movies even further away from the other pretenders to the thrown. Not only can these flicks not emulate the success of Disney and Marvel, but their existence enforces their inferiority, bolstering the growing track record of the comic book adaptation studio. We aren't fatigued. Movies have always been stupid. Disney has found a really nice way to use corporate synergy and backing to create movies that are actually innovative within the genre (or at least appear so, there is a strong argument to be had that most of their universe structural changes are still surface level) and keep viewers coming back for more. This has been made better with relevant, beautiful casting, confident production decisions, and deep, accurate marketing campaigns. That's really it. It's a deep well to draw from, but they've drawn from it well - ho ha!

I'm excited for this. There's always the spectre of disappointment in a big film, but it's worth it just to see where we've all been headed these past ten years. There is some flirtation with legitimate greatness and not just popcorn greatness, but that's clued into a slightly different movie-going experience. The simple fact that no other studio has been able to catch up, despite having ten years to try to do so, is also a testament to the fact that this blockbuster stuff isn't really that easy.

2018 Oscar Dreams Come True!

Are you ready for this? The ultimate, most accurate Oscar predictions ever? This is it, folks. There's no need to ever look at another website again. Oscar Nominations came out last week, but we here at Norwegian Morning Wood take our time and research all the ups and downs of Oscar buzz. We did NOT just get busy. This time, THIS YEAR is OUR YEAR. I guarantee you that right now, at this very moment, in this space and time that the following predictions with 100% come true. There is no need to doubt or fear. Just look at this track record:

2010: 12/24

2011: 14/24

2012: 16/24

2013: 14/24

2014: 20/24

2015: 13/24

2016: 14/24

2017: 13/24

Long-term average: 14.5 / 24

Fuckin shit-dicks. I just spent the last few minutes re-reading last year's LIVE posts, which I'll try to do again this year. Maybe via Twitter. But that ceremony made me so angry. Not the Moonlight / La La Land (2016) thing, just how bad I did for so long. This year we got this on lock! Oh, 2014...how I miss you so. Anyway, let's get to it.

Best Picture

The Shape of Water
Get Out
Lady Bird
Dunkirk
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Phantom Thread
The Post
Darkest Hour
Call Me by Your Name


Predicted Winner: Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

I just think Three Billboards has it because Shape of Water is kind of stupid. It'd be amazing if Get Out or Dunkirk snuck in, but that won't happen. Three Billboards feels more of the zeitgeist and more notable, more talked about. Shape of Water seems to be more the butt of fish-fucking jokes. I don't really think anything else has a chance. What's holding Billboards back may be its racism controversy, but since racism was recently solved in America, that shouldn't be an issue. Just kidding, despite Moonlight of course the Academy is still racist - they'll have no problem with Billboards.

Best Director

Guillermo del Toro, The Shape of Water
Greta Gerwig, Lady Bird
Jordan Peele, Get Out
Paul Thomas Anderson, Phantom Thread
Christopher Nolan, Dunkirk


Predicted Winner: Guillermo del Toro

I am awestruck that this is a category full of first-time nominees, besides Paul Thomas Anderson, who gets his second here. How is that possible at all. Every single one here is deserving, and the lack of Martin McDonough makes the Three Billboards BP win feel like a stretch, but that's actually been a common recent precedent. Guillermo is the no-brainer in that case, and he has the precursor awards to back it up.

Best Actor in a Leading Role

Timothée Chalamet, Call Me by Your Name
Daniel Day-Lewis, Phantom Thread
Daniel Kaluuya, Get Out
Gary Oldman, Darkest Hour
Denzel Washington, Roman J. Israel, Esq.

Predicted Winner: Gary Oldman

I was really torn here. Chalamet / Oldman seems like Redmayne / Keaton all over again. Oldman is definitely due, Oscar loves biopics, he's got all the precursors. But people seem to roundly favor Chalamet, and it's tough to look at Redmayne over Keaton and not accept that the Academy is favoring young talent lately. I think it'd be foolish to not choose Oldman here, because it's so obvious and if I get it wrong it looks a lot less crazy than if I choose Chalamet and get it wrong, but if they read Timothée on Oscar night I'm going to be standing there with my arms folded. At some point you kind of also have to think that the Academy may award Daniel Day-Lewis for his purportedly final performance, right? That's far too crazy. He'll be back making Spring Break videos and hair-plug commercials soon enough.

Best Actress in a Leading Role

Meryl Streep, The Post
Sally Hawkins, The Shape of Water
Frances McDormand, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Margot Robbie, I, Tonya
Saoirse Ronan, Lady Bird

Predicted Winner: Frances McDormand

There's significant buzz for each of Saoirse, Margot, and Sally (Meryl is more of a "Oh, Meryl Streep was in a movie this year, we'd better nominate her" kind of thing)'s performances, so I wouldn't really call McDormand a given, but she's definitely been dominating here. There's not really enough support among the other three, so they effectively cancel each other out. This ought to be a no brainer, but I'm curios if Saoirse in particular surges late.

Best Actor in a Supporting Role

Christopher Plummer, All the Money in the World
Willem Dafoe, The Florida Project
Woody Harrelson, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Richard Jenkins, The Shape of Water
Sam Rockwell, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Predicted Winner: Sam Rockwell

This was once an interesting category. Willem Dafoe is the obvious choice and even seemed like a lock a few months ago, but now long-time character actor Sam Rockwell has beaten him at every turn. But what do you do when you have a category that needs to honor not one but two long-time character actors? Well, you give it to the guy in the more popular movie. Sorry, Florida Project janitor or whatever.

Best Actress in a Supporting Role

Mary J. Blige, Mudbound
Octavia Spencer, The Shape of Water
Lesley Manville, Phantom Thread
Allison Janney, I, Tonya
Laurie Metcalf, Lady Bird

Predicted Winner: Allison Janney

Laurie Metcalf is the Willem Dafoe of this category, but Allison Janney seems to have it locked up. There's not a whole lot of other love for I, Tonya, but this category really likes crazy mom / villain performances like this. Janney has been around for a long time without much mainstream adoration and this is a nice recognition for her work.

Animated Feature Film

The Boss Baby, Tom McGrath and Ramsey Naito
The Breadwinner, Nora Twomey and Anthony Leo
Coco, Lee Unkrich and Darla K. Anderson
Ferdinand, Carlos Saldanha
Loving Vincent, Dorota Kobiela, Hugh Welchman and Ivan Mactaggart

Predicted Winner: Coco

Boss Baby upset? Seriously, what happened to animation this year? Last year we had three or four legit nominees. This year we apparently think Ferdinand is better than The LEGO Batman Movie. Why does the Academy hate LEGO movies? Ninjago! This is maybe Pixar's easiest win ever.

Documentary Feature

Abacus: Small Enough to Jail, Steve James, Mark Mitten and Julie Goldman
Faces Places, Agnes Varda, JR and Rosalie Varda
Icarus, Bryan Fogel and Dan Cogan
Last Men in Aleppo, Feras Fayyad, Kareem Abeed, and Soren Steen Jespersen
Strong Island, Yance Ford and Joslyn Barnes

Predicted Winner: Faces Places

There's a lot of ways this could go. Aleppo, Abacus, and Icarus are all very relevant and timely (dealing with Syria, Banking, and Russian Olympic Doping respectively - that's right. I researched). Faces Places was the one documentary here I had heard of before the nominations came out, and I always take that as a good sign. Maybe other people will vote because it's the one they've heard of as well. I hope that's accurate, but this is mostly a toss-up.

Documentary Short Subject

"Edith+Eddie", Laura Checkaway and Thomas Lee Wright
"Heaven is a Traffic Jam on the 405", Frank Stiefel
"Heroin(e)", Elaine McMillion Sheldon and Kerrin Sheldon
"Knife Skills", Thomas Lennon
"Traffic Stop", Kate Davis and David Heilbroner

Predicted Winner: "Heroin(e)"

So this is definitely the most toss-up category of the year, but "Edith+Eddie" features an old interracial elder abuse couple that seems very Oscar-y. So that's the forerunner I'm curious about "Heroin(e)" which is about the opioid epidemic and available on Netflix. That kind of widely available, timely subject matter ought to do it some favors. Fuck it, let's go with that one. Who cares about this category that does nothing but create minefields.

Foreign Language Film

A Fantastic Woman, Chili
Loveless, Russia
The Insult, Lebanon
The Square, Sweden
On Body and Soul, Hungary

Predicted Winner: The Square

A Fantastic Woman is the obvious choice (so obvious) based on my "I've heard of this movie" rule. The Square, however, is a surreal descent into art and politics and on Netflix. You can watch it right now! Some may say it's too crazy for the Academy, but nothing's too crazy for the Academy. Last year the obvious choice was Toni Erdmann and we all know how that turned out. Oscar seems to not go for the obvious in this category lately. Or this could go to The Insult or something, which sounds like the best of the rest of the lot. The only thing I know for sure is that I researched all these films and their critical reactions for the past ten minutes and I am definitely - DEFINITELY still going to get it wrong. The Square has the longest Wikipedia entry. Let's go by that.

Adapted Screenplay

Call Me by Your Name, James Ivory
The Disaster Artist, Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber
Logan, Scott Frank and James Mangold and Michael Green, Story by James Mangold
Molly’s Game, Aaron Sorkin
Mudbound, Virgil Williams and Dee Rees

Predicted Winner: Call Me by Your Name, James Ivory

This is an easy win for a film that may otherwise walk away empty-handed. I don't think Sorkin dazzled with Molly's Game like he did with his previous win for The Social Network (2010), Logan is cute, but more of a gimmick here than anything (what is it an adaptation of? Old Man Logan? Then where's my venom symbiote Tyrannosaurus? Eh?!). Mudbound and The Disaster Artist are well-liked, but not on Your Name's level. This seems like a gimme.

Original Screenplay

The Big Sick, Emily V. Gordon and Kumail Nanjiani
Get Out, Jordan Peele
Lady Bird, Greta Gerwig
The Shape of Water, Guillermo del Toro and Vanessa Taylor, Story by Guillermo del Toro
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Martin McDonagh

Predicted Winner: Lady Bird, Greta Gerwig

We've seen this a million times - give it to Greta Gerwig for not winning best director. The same could be said for Jordan Peele, but Lady Bird reeks of previous similar winners like Her (2013), Midnight in Paris (2011), Juno (2007), and Little Miss Sunshine (2006). There's no real precedent for Get Out. The last horror film to win this was uh...uh...Ghost (1990)? A win here would be totally deserving and awesome but fairly unexpected. And The Big Sick would also make a very fine winner, but the love for Lady Bird feels so much more potent, especially after it looks like it will get housed in every other category.

Original Song

"Mighty River" from Mudbound, Mary J. Blige, Raphael Saadiq and Taura Stinson
"Mystery of Love" from Call Me by Your Name, Sufjan Stevens
"Remember Me" from Coco, Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez
"Stand Up for Something" from Marshall, Diane Warren and Lonnie R. Lynn
"This is Me" from The Greatest Showman, Benj Pasek and Justin Paul

Predicted Winner: "Remember Me"

I love how The Greatest Showman existed only for this category. Fuck you, let's go with Coco. "Remember Me" is no "Let It Go," hell it's not even "How Far I'll Go" but it's a song that brings meaning to its film and not just played over the credits. Then again, how awesome would it be for Mary J. Blige to somehow bring home both this and Supporting Actor. This is far from a lock like this category has been recently, which is kind of fun, but Coco should do it.

Original Score

Dunkirk, Hans Zimmer
Phantom Thread, Jonny Greenwood
The Shape of Water, Alexandre Desplat
Star Wars: The Last Jedi, John Williams
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Carter Burwell

Predicted Winner: The Shape of Water, Alexandre Desplat

There is some love swelling for John Williams who is like 97 years old and is the most nominated non-Walt Disney dude ever, but there's nothing really notable about The Last Jedi's score and it's not like Williams needs some long overdue recognition. Zimmer did great work in Blade Runner 2049, but the whole point of Dunkirk was practically how little score was actually used. Desplat did JUST win for The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014), but double winners have happened twice in the past 16 years (Howard Shore for 2/3 Lord of the Rings films and back to back Gustavo Santaollala for Brokeback Mountain [2005] and Babel [2006]). Shape of Water has got to walk away with something and if it splits with Billboards, which then picks up the acting categories it should, this starts making a lot of sense.

Cinematography

Blade Runner 2049, Roger Deakins
Darkest Hour, Bruno Delbonnel
Dunkirk, Hoyte Van Hoytema
Mudbound, Rachel Morrison
The Shape of Water, Dan Laustsen

Predicted Winner: Roger Deakins

I thought about this long and hard. This is Roger Deakins' year but EVERY DAMN YEAR IS SUPPOSED TO BE ROGER DEAKINS' YEAR. I almost went Hoyte Van Hoytema, because I think Dunkirk will soundly clean up in technical categories. This should be a crowing achievement for all of Deakins' work, and unlike a lot of categories when this happens (see, Gary Oldman above), this actually stands amidst the best he's ever done. But you just get the feeling he's cursed, right? Like maybe he's actually a huge dick and no other cinematographer likes him. I feel like he'll lose again. But in case he wins I couldn't not be there to celebrate, saying "See, Rog - I knew it all the time! I predicted ya!"

Costume Design

Beauty and the Beast
Darkest Hour
Phantom Thread
The Shape of Water
Victoria & Abdul

Predicted Winner: Phantom Thread

Phantom Thread is a marvelously nominated film that isn't really the forerunner anywhere. My thought here is that costume designers everywhere think "Finally, a film that speaks to ME!" This would typically go to Victoria & Abdul or Darkest Hour or some shit, but the Academy apparently really loved Phantom Thread and its win here seems like a gimme.

Film Editing

Baby Driver
Dunkirk
I, Tonya
The Shape of Water
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Predicted Winner: Dunkirk

This category lately has gone all over the place, from Hacksaw Ridge (2016) to Whiplash (2014). Baby Driver and Dunkirk both seem to fit that mold, with Dunkirk's prestige giving it a slight edge. This would just be too much of a dream for Baby Driver to win. It's one of only three categories it's nominated in, but damn it seems so fitting, doesn't it? Dunkirk has legitimately great editing though, weaving in its three different stories and timelines fairly seamlessly. I wouldn't be too shook up, and it's definitely the safe bet.

Makeup and Hairstyling

Darkest Hour
Victoria & Abdul
Wonder

Predicted Winner: Darkest Hour

There's really good prosthetics at work here, though not as convincing as Bad Grandpa (2013). That's always my high water mark. Nothing else is really buzz-y, and this category needs to jump on high profile, widely seen and respected movies while it can.

Production Design

Beauty and the Beast
Blade Runner 2049
Darkest Hour
Dunkirk
The Shape of Water

Predicted Winner: The Shape of Water

Production Design is low-key one of the loopiest categories we got. On the one hand we have bonkers fantasy stories like Alice in Wonderland (2010) and Mad Max: Fury Road (2015). Then we have standard period pieces with a little flair like Hugo (2011), The Great Gatsby (2013), and The Grand Budapest Hotel but also the totally grounded Lincoln (2012). And then La La Land (2016) for some fucking reason. So are we flair-ish period and go Beauty and the Beast or Shape of Water? Grounded period with Darkest Hour and Dunkirk? Or fantasy with Blade Runner 2049? Best picture doesn't seem to impact the category. When Great Gatsby won, it beat out its four competitors that were all up for BP. I think Blade Runner 2049 was the most impressive, but it was also built upon its 1982 predecessor and looked great more for its cinematography than production. Dunkirk was a boat and a beach, Beauty and the Beast was storyboarded in 1991, and Darkest Hour is more the Gary Oldman show than "Wow, look at that set!" That leaves us with Shape of Water. Good enough. Weird period fantasy seems to be a sweet spot, anyway.

Animated Short Film

"Dear Basketball"
"Garden Party"
"Lou"
"Negative Space"
"Revolting Rhymes"

Predicted Winner: "Dear Basketball"

I'm going with the "Don't underestimate the power of Kobe Bryant in Los Angeles" route. Also "Oscar Winner Kobe Bryant" has an awesome ring to it. "Negative Space" and "Garden Party" seem more interesting and if the Academy is made up more of people who have never stepped foot in the Staples Center in their lives, or are just big Clippers or Celtics fans, it might go south. But then, how could I make all these NBA jokes?! Ugh I hope this wins. Who knows. It's such a damn toss-up. I never doubted you, Black Mamba!

Live Action Short Film

"DeKalb Elementary"
"The Eleven O’Clock"
"My Nephew Emmett"
"The Silent Child"
"Watu Wote/All of Us"

Predicted Winner: "My Nephew Emmett"

So, Gold Derby, in their infinite wisdom, is predicting "DeKalb Elementary," which means that's what most people with blogs on their own time will probably go for. Except that Gold Derby is always wrong about the shorts because they're totally impossible to predict and it's more of a case of the first critic picking one at random, then everyone else falling in line. There's some merit to that, but I'm not picking against an Emmett Till story in 2018, even if we've already cured racism.

Sound Editing

Baby Driver
Blade Runner 2049
Dunkirk
The Shape of Water
Star Wars: The Last Jedi

Predicted Winner: The Shape of Water

Mixing and Editing have only lined up six out of the past ten years, and since Mixing seems like a lock for Dunkirk I'm striking out and saying Shape of Water here. Baby Driver could be a stretch, but that film has just received little to no awards contention. It's clear the Academy really liked this film and it should go into it here.

Sound Mixing

Baby Driver
Blade Runner 2049
Dunkirk
The Shape of Water
Star Wars: The Last Jedi

Predicted Winner: Dunkirk

This gives Dunkirk two out of the five technical awards it's up for and that sounds about right to me. Sound or the lack of sound is so important to this movie, more so than any other film on this list. This is also a rare year where the Editing and Mixing nominees line-up perfectly, so more and more I'm guessing these awards split and love is shared.

Visual Effects

Blade Runner 2049
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
Kong: Skull Island
Star Wars: The Last Jedi
War for the Planet of the Apes

Predicted Winner: War for the Planet of the Apes

How has this apes series never won an award? It's unreal. Hugo? Interstellar (2014)? These piece of shit movies beat out other apes flicks. Well, Interstellar totally deserved it, but fuck off, Hugo. This has kind of been lumped together with other technical categories over the past decade, but notably not in the past two years where it went to stand alone Ex Machina (2015) and The Jungle Book (2016) respectively. This film deserves some credit, although Blade Runner could get it if they feel like turning all the technical awards over.

So, that's it. The Ceremony drops March 4th. As usual I will live-blog the event, although I do not currently own a television. I'll probably just follow twitter or something for three hours. Anyway, these are definitely the best predictions you will ever read. What do yours look like?