Burning Questions from the 2019 Oscars

Is it strange that after watching Bohemian Rhapsody, a "real" Queen performance felt somewhat disappointing?

Can it be a "real" Queen performance with a certain member missing?

Doesn't Adam Lambert have some big shoes to fill?

Was it intentional that the stage look like Donald Trump's hair?

After the first montage, were you worried that that's how they'd fill time without a host?

Were you relieved when Tina Fey, Amy Poehler and Maya Rudolph came out?

Did everyone breath a sigh of Oscar pool relief when Regina King won?

Does it make you (me) feel old that Regina King is now playing a grandmother?

Now that she has an Oscar, do you think she even cares?

Already keeping the censors busy on the second award?

Tom Morello introducing Vice?

Were you thinking Black Panther upsetting in Costume Design an omen for things to come?

Did that feeling double when it won production design?

Surprisingly, are you starting to feel the absence of a host?

But isn't the show moving along for a change?

Isn't that RBG song kind of awful?

Aren't all of Diane Warren's nominated songs?

Serena Williams?

Can we to assume the Academy didn't see last year's U.S. Open Final before inviting her?

Aren't you glad we weren't lectured again on the differences between Sound Editing and Sound Mixing?

8 awards given within the first hour?

This has to be some kind of record, right?

Aren't you just waiting for the show to suddenly come to a screeching halt and drag so it can end after midnight?

Should we start considering now whether Roma winning for Best Foreign Language Film helps or hurt its Best Picture chances?

Does Michael Keaton presenting remind me how he should have won for both Birdman and at least been nominated for The Founder?

Why did I let anyone talk me into to picking Vice for Editing?

How awesome was it that Laura Dern came out to the Jurassic Park theme?

Other than Bohemian Rhapsody, is Spider-Verse the 2018 film that most exceeded expectations?

Isn't that Buster Scruggs song, um, different?

Is it some kind of cruel joke that my power went out before Brie Larson presented?

Is it another cruel joke that Sam Jackson had to present the Original Screenplay Oscar to Green Book?

Didn't he look thrilled when it won?

Is Spike Lee ever going to win an Oscar?

Did they turn that f****ing clock on?

So, was that Gaga/Cooper performance any good?

Was it yet another cruel joke that my power came back in time for the In Memoriam montage?

I didn't miss Mike Myers and Dana Carvey...did I?

Was that the most subdued In Memoriam segment they've ever had?

Isn't that how it should be?

Did you see everyone fly out of their seats when Rami Malek name was read?

Do they like that guy or what?

Doesn't this feel like as much a win for Freddie Mercury as it does for Malek?

Isn't that proof that the right person won?

Think USA is kicking themselves for not ordering more seasons of Mr. Robot right about now?

Shouldn't Rami be glad they didn't?

Olivia Colman???!!!

Would anyone begrudge Glenn Close for being completely devastated?

Was she half out of her seat, paper in hand?

Do I look like a fool now for saying Close had her Career Achievement Oscar all locked up?

Doesn't everyone?

Did this just single-handedly ruin everyone's chances for a sweep in the Oscar Pool?

Honestly, wasn't it ruined way before that?

Best Director, already?

ABC has to be pleased with this abbreviated show, right?

Are you thinking "We'll see when the ratings come in?"

Didn't it just feel like there would be a Best Picture upset before the winner was even read?

Green Book??!!!

Why does it suddenly seem like we've taken a time machine back to 1989?

Do you think Spike Lee threw a tantrum?

If anyone's throwing a fit, shouldn't it be Glenn Close?

Have I ever done this poorly on my predictions?

Does this mean we're in for our annual conversation about overhauling the Academy...again?

Was the show really that short or did it just seem that way because I lost power halfway through?

Does this mean we'll actually get some sleep?

Can this host come back next year?

2019 Oscar Nominations (Reaction and Analysis)

For those wondering whether my recent reviewing inactivity meant I wasn't watching or at least following the films embroiled in this year's Oscar race, it's time to put that theory to bed. I have been and will pretty soon be publishing a single post rundown of at least four of them to avoid things backing up any further. As for Tuesday morning's announcement of the nominations for the 91st Annual Academy Awards (full list here) by Kumail Nanjiani and Tracee Ellis Ross, it went well. Or at least better than last year's farce with every other nominee's name being misprounced by a popular comic actress. While the format was almost too laid back and missing the big press conference atmosphere, both were pros who appeared to enjoy being there doing it. So, considering the Academy's recently abandoned attempt at a "Popular Film" category and having no present host for the show, the nominations basically went off without a hitch.

Let's face it: No one's happy when their favorites are left off or tune in on February 24th to see a handful of films nominated they've never heard of. But the Academy's recent efforts to make the Oscars more "popular" reeks of corporate greed since they're only responding to network ratings pressure. And for the record, the Oscars are annually still the highest rated awards telecast despite the fact that no one even watches broadcast TV anymore. So, sorry, ABC can bite the bullet once a year while hardcore film fanatics enjoy the night, however long it may stretch

Ironically though, with the gap between critics and audiences still growing by the minute, quite a few immensely popular movies got in and the media and public outcry for a more diverse field was heard. We also a have the first superhero movie nominated for Best Picture, as well as Netflix and other streaming services really breaking through for the first time. Me? I just want to see the best work nominated and let the cards fall where they may. It's time to find out how AMPAS did this year, with some of the more noteworthy takeaways:

-  Netflix's Roma and arthouse, um, favorite, The Favourite lead the field with 10 noms a piece and are joined in the Best Picture category by the more popular entries Black Panther, BlacKkKlansman, Bohemian Rhapsody, Green Book, A Star is Born and Vice. We get an 8 film field this year.

-Barry Jenkins' If Beale Street Could Talk and Damien Chazelle's First Man are left out of the Best Picture race, denying us a rematch between the Moonlight and La La Land directors. In the case of the former, it just couldn't pick up enough steam throughout the season outside of Regina King's supporting performance, while First Man was darker and more introspective than anyone expected from a film about Neil Armstrong. On the plus side, it did well in the technical categories and is still highly regarded by many, if not the Academy. Predicted Gosling snub aside, it even failed to snag a supporting nod for Claire Foy.

-What happened to A Star is Born? A month ago it was a lock for EVERYTHING. Now, compared to those (unreasonably?) high expectations, it may as well be considered an awards flop. Plenty of think pieces will surely be written about what went wrong, but Bradley Cooper snubbed for Director? The saddest part is that it isn't even much of a surprise given he hasn't won anything up to this point. While it's hard to call any movie's 8 nomination tally disappointing, Cooper and Gaga look very shaky in their categories and previous sure bet Sam Elliott is quickly losing traction to Green Book's Mahershala Ali in Supporting. The film's expected triumph in Best Original Song with "Shallow" just might be its sole win, assuming that isn't also now in jeopardy.

-Marvel's Black Panther (with its over $1 billion worldwide box office take) becomes the first superhero movie nominated for Best Picture, thus opening the flood gates. Or maybe not. If the quality's there, then fine. But I can't be the only one who's a little nervous they'll start nominating lesser ones. Or, after getting this out of their system, wait years before rewarding another again? Regardless of how many statues it takes home, it has changed the game.

-Bohemian Rhapsody's continued dominance (with 5 nominations) is the biggest movie story of the past year, especially if you know how troubled that entire production was and the road it took to even get to the screen, and successfully no less. Even if we're still not completely sure who directed it. But good for Rami Malek. I'm sure few thought he'd be in this spot right now competing against Vice's Chistian Bale as a frontrunner for Best Actor.

-No slight on him but Willem Dafoe (At Eternity's Gate) clearly got the underdog Best Actor spot so many hoped would go to Ethan Hawke for his critically lauded, career best work as an emotionally tormented minister in First Reformed. Instead, we'll have to settle for a first time Original Screenplay nod for Taxi Driver writer Paul Schrader, suddenly the comeback kid at age 72.

-No supporting or lead nominations for both Timothee Chamalet (Beautiful Boy) or John David Washington (BlacKkKlansman), respectively. But something had to give. There are so many slots and and a certain number of performances that can fill them. Many get left out, and it's rarely a reflection on the work. These are two unfortunate examples of such a casualty.

-Glenn Close has Best Actress locked up, with Lady Gaga, Roma's Yalitza Aparicio, The Favourite's Oliva Colman and Can You Ever Forgive Me?'s Melissa McCarthy sure to be clapping on the sidelines when she wins her career achievement award. It's a narative that's only begun to come into view in recent weeks, with The Wife gaining serious momentum thanks to her rousing acceptance speeches.  Is Emily Blunt's ommisson for Mary Poppins Returns really that much of a surprise? Given the Academy's tastes, it may be. And Elsie Fisher getting recognized for Eighth Grade was always a pie-in-the-sky longshot, mostly due to their aversion to nominating kids in lead categories.

-Spike Lee is finally nominated for Best Director for one of his most commericial and challenging pictures yet, BlacKkKlansman. Except it's starting to feel like 1989 all over again with Peter Farrelly's crowd pleasing race relations drama Green Book playing the Driving Miss Daisy to Lee's Do The Right Thing in the Best Picture Race. With its recent PGA win, it really might be the frontrunner, save for the fact that Farrelly himself isn't nominated. Was recognizing the filmmaker behind Dumb and Dumber and There's Something About Mary too far a bridge for the Academy to cross? More likely, Green Book just seems like less of a director's achievement than the competition.

-They sure do love the polarizing Vice, with Adam McKay sneaking in with a mild surprise nod. Roma's Alfonso Cuarón and Cold War's Pawel Pawlikowski (unseating Cooper in the only real "shocker") become the first pair of directors of foreign language pictures to make the cut in this category, and both for black and white lensed films.

-No documentary nomination for Won't You Be My Neighbor? has to be the most egregious snub of this year's nominations. Hands down. We know they have a history of crazy decisions in this category, but there's just simply no excuse here. The outrage is justified.

-Heading into the show it seems to be a 3-way race between Roma, Green Book and, to a slightly lesser extent, Bohemian Rhapsody. Of course, we also know how that could change.

Oldboy (2013)

Director: Spike Lee
Starring: Josh Brolin, Elizabeth Olsen, Sharlto Copley, Samuel L. Jackson, Michael Imperioli, James Ransone, Max Casella, Pom Klementieff, Lance Reddick
Running Time: 104 min.
Rating: R

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Watching Spike Lee's remake of Park Chan Wook's 2003 South Korean cult classic Oldboy, it occurred to me just how little I remembered about the original. Of course, there's one thing EVERYONE remembers and all eyes were on how Lee would handle or avoid the gigantic, shocking twist that constitutes the core of the story. He's really in a no-win situation. The film can't exist without it, yet if he decides to go there, critics and audiences will call for his head, accusing him of not only remaking a respected classic, but doing so pointlessly by not altering enough of it. Lee handles this thankless dilemma in the best way possible, even if any choice he made would have been wrong in the eyes of the original's rabid admirers. But if that version's so good, why am I having problems remembering it? There's the twist and the famous hammer hallway scene, all wrapped around a story that's fairly unique and daring, not to mention downright disturbing. But I haven't thought of it since. At least until now.

Being no fan of Spike Lee's and counting very few (if any) of his films amongst my favorites, this strangely ranks as one of his most satisfying outings for me. Remakes are a good idea for him since  they're completely out of his comfort zone, reining in his worst tendencies and removing some of the pressure of having his original fingerprints all over it. His creative loyalty must be to the source material rather than his own ideas, which have always been shaky and inconsistent at best.  If the original Oldboy didn't exist, I'm convinced the reception to this film would have been far different. And retaining certain elements from the original doesn't make it "safe, "as its sharp edges remain surprisingly intact. The film definitely won't be confused with your generic, run-of-the-mill sanitized Hollywood thriller, which should have been the biggest fear going in.

It's 1993 and alcoholic ad executive Joe Doucett (Josh Brolin) just lost a major potential client and is arguing with his ex-wife about how little he's been involved in their 3-year-old daughter Mia's life. After arriving in a drunken stupor at the front door of good friend Chucky's (Michael Imperioli) bar late at night, he encounters a woman with a yellow umbrella before being knocked unconscious. He awakens imprisoned in a hotel room with vodka and Chinese food, seeing on TV that he's been framed for the rape and murder of his ex-wife while Mia was put up for adoption. That's all he knows, but it's enough. He quits drinking, starts writing letters to his daughter and gets himself into fighting shape, training for the day he can escape.

Twenty years pass before Joe's let out by his mysteriously deranged captor (Sharlto Copley) whose identity and motives for imprisoning and eventually releasing him remain unknown. But it's a mystery he'll have to solve if he wants to clear his name and be reunited with daughter Mia, who only knows her missing father as a murderer. He gets help comes from Chucky and nurse Marie Sebastian (Elizabeth Olsen), whose own troubled past and weakness for helping tortured souls puts her in harm's way. The clock ticks for Joe, with his only shot at a father-daughter reunion hinging on finding out why this happened, and acclimating himself to life as a fugitive in 2013.

It's easy to forget just how strong a premise this is. While everyone can agree the film's central concept is brilliant and needn't be heavily tampered with, a great deal of suspense comes from speculating just how far Lee's willing to stray from the original film (as well as the Japanese Manga from which that's adapted) when Joe is released. That tension reaches alarming levels in one particular scene, as we're not quite sure yet whether screenwriter Mark Protosevich plans on repeating the shocking twist or going in an entirely different direction.

Without giving too much away, it's almost as if you're watching everything unfold with double awareness, seeing what's actually happening as it is, but with that sick thought in the back of your mind that it may be this other thing that the original pulled. There's legitimate doubt and the movie has fun with this, zigging and zagging in certain ways and offers up a great deal of misdirection to throw viewers off the trail. There's probably no better recent case of a remake actively engaging the audiences' knowledge (or lack thereof) of the original as part of the film experience. It's always arguable whether certain things work or don't, but you can't say it doesn't do so equally for both familiar and uninitiated viewers.

There's a twenty year imprisonment here as opposed to the fifteen year term the protagonist endures in the 2003 version and that's important only in the sense that it brings us into the present time and makes Joe's disconnect to the real world a little more pronounced. The early scenes of Joe's plight are particularly gripping, giving us an even better idea of the passage of time and hammering home key cultural touchstones via the media. It also takes full advantage of the protagonist waking up to a society that's technologically moved past him, as he's forced to adjust to iphones having taken the place of the beepers and phone booths of the early nineties. That he has no idea how to use his means of communication with his captor makes for some funny scenes, making us stop and consider a fairly recent advance that's already taken for granted.

The fight scenes are deliriously entertaining and well choreographed but I'd be lying if I said the big hallway hammer sequence comes off as well as it did in the original. It works on its own terms and Brolin is great at selling it, but there was something about the lighting and cramped corridor that made the staging of the original extra special. Lee was probably wise in not attempting to exactly duplicate it, as Gus Van Sant found out the hard way with his shower scene reenactment in 1998's Psycho. He also makes very clever, original use of flashbacks that could have felt especially tired since it's a story some are already familiar with. He actually has the characters in the present as somewhat active participants in the past events, which often makes for a striking and creepy visual. Cinematographer Sean Bobbit does a great job here, as images linger in the mind's eye long after the credits have rolled.

Brolin was the right choice to play Joe, as he expertly conveys a silent anger befitting a fairly complex character. He's also believably intimidating as a brutish tough guy, despite the quite sadness over his daughter being what stands out most in the performance. Though we know from the original  that Elizabeth Olsen's Marie will likely be important, she would have been anyway since Olsen is so captivating and capable in the role. Clearly nursing some serious emotional wounds from her past, she has her guard constantly up with this guy, yet still can't help falling in. Her involvement isn't a coincidence but just how it isn't keeps you guessing all the way, with Olsen's natural instincts as a performer further solidifying her status amongst the most talented of young actresses.

Sharlto Copley's performance is absolutely insane and next level as far as movie baddies go. There's simply no other way to put it. This is how it's done. Creepy, scary, menacing and dangerous, his character is the most original creation in the film, gloriously hitting his peak in the final scenes when the truth comes out. The screen time may be limited, but he chews up each scene like a madman.  Samuel L. Jackson's presence as the henchman doing Copley's character's bidding is less welcome, if only because it feels like a performance we've seen from him countless time before. It's not his fault he's been typecast in this badass persona but at least he's collecting his paycheck for a quality film this time, in a remake that doesn't feel like a cash-in.

A South Korean film is bound to have elements that appeal primarily to that country's audience and leave us scratching our heads, while the reverse is also true. So adapting a foreign thriller for American audiences is far from "pointless" when considering different cultures. That's true here in a script incorporating media obsession with a late act development that calls to mind something out of The Truman Show. And unless I'm mistaken, it seems we get a closer look at the inner workings behind Joe's actual imprisonment and release, in a way not totally dissimilar to the presentation of the CRS organization in The Game. This is largely one calculated game in which Joe is the playing piece and his unknown adversary controls the board. This is all Lee and Protosevich updating the material just enough to make an impact, while still preserving the creative integrity and themes of the original.  

This couldn't have turned out better, while still representing Spike Lee at the top of his game, excelling in a genre few figured he could. Supposedly, there's an unreleased 144-minute director's cut of this movie that may not see the light of day but it's difficult getting too excited knowing how strong and tight this is in its current state. That Steven Spielberg and Will Smith were originally attached to this project is perplexing, as if either would ever compromise their squeeky clean images or bank accounts by tackling it. But it's even more doubtful they'd be able to read the last few pages without fainting, calling for changes that would neuter the entire project before cameras even started rolling. Nothing Lee does here feels sanitized and the eighty or ninety something percent who haven't seen the original will be shocked out of their minds a mainstream studio released it. For the rest, its biggest crime is being a remake of Oldboy.
           

Inside Man

Director: Spike Lee
Starring: Denzel Washington, Clive Owen, Jodie Foster, Christopher Plummer, Willem Dafoe
Running Time: 129 min.
Rating: R

*** (out of ****)

Spike Lee's Inside Man is a good thriller that could have been great if not for a big surprise that doesn't deliver and an overlong ending in which the movie congratulates itself for a briliant heist. Actually, considering the talent involved, this should have been much, much better. The movie does, however, feature commanding performances from Washington and Owen plus one neat trick never used (at least as far as I've seen) in a heist caper that ends up being the movie's saving grace.

Clive Owen plays Dalton Russell, who has concocted a master plan for robbing Case Bank in Manhattan. He's gathered a group of four masked men dressed as painters and they'll lock down the bank, taking hostages. The big catch is once the they're in, they'll dress all the hostages just like them so the authorities don't have a chance of ever capturing them. Detective Keith Frazier (Washington) is in charge of the hostage negotiations and we are intermittedly shown clips throughout the movie of him and his partner Mitchell (Chiwetel Ejiofor) interrogating all the hostages in the bank when it's over, attempting to discover which of them were part of the master plot. This would be fantastic, except for the fact they make it very clear early who those people are, draining the film of suspense.

Meanwhile, the founder of Case Bank (Christopher Plummer in basically the same villianous role he plays in every movie) has very important interests laying in a safe deposit box inside that must to be protected. In other words, he's hiding a "huge secret." To protect it he calls in Madeliene White (Jodie Foster, great as ever) as his personal fixer. Of course she clashes with Frazier. I'll give you a wild guess if Frazier is eventually taken off the case. If not for the jarring, nauseating camera work you would never know this is a Spike Lee movie. No serious social commentary or big issues here, which I think is a relief for a change.

Lee seems to be aiming to make his own Dog Day Afternoon (that movie's even blatantly mentioned in the film), but this doesn't come anywhere close to reaching those heights. Part of the problem is that the hostages act like complete morons disobeying their crooks left and right so it's hard to feel much sympathy for any of them. Then there's the mystery of the safe deposit box and screenwriter Russell Gewirtz really traps himself in a hole with this one. With all the hype, what's ever inside better live up to it. Needless to say, it doesn't. I think it would have been wiser to not reveal the contents at all, like the briefcase in Pulp Fiction.

As for the ending, there was a perfect point to close, but Lee continues on needlessly, making sure we understand every detail of the plan even though it's plainly obvious. He's also hell bent on making sure we know Detective Frazier "knows what's going on" and he's "going to do what's right." Thanks. I got it. The movie also spends a ridiculous amount of time in the final minutes exploring the possible consequences of Plumer's character's secret being exposed, which was far more interesting to the filmakers than me.

You may be wonder why I'm even recommending this movie and giving it three stars. Well, for one, Washington is excellent as usual when given a role where he's in charge and this is no exception. Clive Owen proves he has the suave charm to alternate between playing the heavy and the hero in any given film. Making his performance here all the more impressive is that he's forced to mumble through a mask the entire movie, yet he somehow still gives us a clear picture of his motivations. Not to mention he's also scary as hell in the hostage scenes. How this movie uses the hostages and makes them suspects is ingenious and all the ingredients were set in place for Inside Man to be a great crime caper. It's too bad the film runs out of gas before it can reach the finish line.