LOUIS HOLDER
  • About Me
  • Biography
    • Editing Influences
  • Production
  • Post Production
  • Rates
  • Contact Me
  • Celluloid Production
  • Photography
  • Other Work
    • Theatre
    • Film & Media Education
    • Podcasts
    • Music & Sound Design
    • Screenwriting
    • Casting
    • Film & Arts Programming
  • Updates
    • Blog
  • The Studio, Royston
  • Equipment & Facilities
  • About Me
  • Biography
    • Editing Influences
  • Production
  • Post Production
  • Rates
  • Contact Me
  • Celluloid Production
  • Photography
  • Other Work
    • Theatre
    • Film & Media Education
    • Podcasts
    • Music & Sound Design
    • Screenwriting
    • Casting
    • Film & Arts Programming
  • Updates
    • Blog
  • The Studio, Royston
  • Equipment & Facilities
Search

oscar 2015: reaction to the winners

23/2/2015

Comments

 
To say The 87th Academy Awards were a shock is a huge understatement, for the big awards - some of the winners were undeserving. Others simply shocked us that they beat the obvious frontrunners to claim the prized statuette. 
As usual, it was the job of host with the most for this year; Neil Patrick Harris to be the biggest arsehole on the planet for a period of just under four hours. Just in case over 20 endorsements of ABC, the Academy broadcaster for the event, wasn't enough - he had to sing at the beginning, turning the show into the biggest musical embarrassment since... Ummm. 
No no, I'm being too cynical, the show was lovely - it was its usual glitzy self and all the better because it was available live on Sky Movies Oscars - delightful! Though the Red Carpet proved disappointing, with a lack of A-List celebrities strutting their stuff, we saw some of our favourite faces in cinema over the past year. Meryl Streep was the only real A-lister there - i suppose in today's climate, what defines the term celebrity? 

The Academy Awards this year were a shocker for two reasons;
  • One: We were not expecting some of the dark horses and non-obvious contenders to take the crown in some of the ceremony's bigger categories.
  • Two: We were disappointed that some of the undeserving winners beat the deserving winners to it. 

On top of an already shocking nominations list prior to the ceremony taking place, with a lack of Teller, Revolori or Oyelowo or Coltrane being at all recognised for their electrifying performances in their respective films, we've got all this to take in now.

For me, the most deserving winners of the night (without question) were;
  • Best Supporting Actor - J.K. Simmons - Whiplash
  • Best Supporting Actress - Patricia Arquette - Boyhood
  • Best Foreign Language Film - Ida - Pawel Pawlikowski
  • Achievement in Sound Mixing - Whiplash

The above were, without question, the obvious winners in their categories and its great to see that they were recognised for it. J.K. Simmons was, at his age, talent and evocative work with Whiplash, the obvious contender for Best Supporting Actor. The same goes to Patricia for Boyhood who gives us her lifetime best performance as the mother of Mason Jr.  in the real-time coming-of-age epic Boyhood. 
I was also pleased to see Best Foreign Language Film go to Ida, in recent weeks, its had the edge against long-running contender - Leviathan and Achievement in Sound Mixing went to Whiplash - for the crispest jazz and for the general classiness. It's a great film.

The most shocking, and thus disappointing, winners on the night in my opinion were;
  • Best Picture - Birdman
  • Best Director - Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu - Birdman
  • Original Screenplay - Birdman
  • Best Animated Movie - Big Hero Six
  • Achievement in Cinematography - Birdman


...and the reasons for them.
Perhaps for The Academy, it was too obvious for Boyhood to get Best Picture. I think in recent weeks Boyhood gained momentum to a point where it was clear to everyone just how much of a monumental production Boyhood really was. The film was actually my favourite to win, but I think the style of Birdman clouded the views of the jury. There is an element of confusion here - its a profound film which focusses on dsyfunctional American family, its a real American film - maybe it was too real? There was hardly any typical 'blockbuster' element about it and perhaps it was too clever for an American audience - this s quite a derogoratory stereotype to make but with every stereotype; there is an element of truth. Boyhood had more of an impact in European Cinema, but this year the Academy has gone too far and they've strayed from honoring the true winners; like The Grand Budapest Hotel, Boyhood, Selma and some would say (I know I would); Nightcrawler.
I'm not saying Birdman didn't deserve to win, it had a good chance of winning right from the start and considering the Academy jury was consisted of older people which would make us think Boyhood would resonate with them more, against the odds Birdman with its stylish cinematography and 'one-take' effect - broke a few technical norms. 
Winner: Birdman
Should have won: Boyhood

Best Director is another huge disappointment, and blow to Boyhood, I even think there could have been the small chance of a sympathy Oscar to Boyhood for either Best Picture or Best Director, I would have been okay with Best Picture going to Birdman (it's still annoying) and Best Director going to Inarritu but the fact that both awards went to the film, something's not quite right. Richard Linklater, director of Boyhood, was the obvious winner from the start, he had spent nearly a third of his life producing the film which required such dedication and integrity to the production that any other nomination is unparalleled. It would only make sense to commemorate arguably the most humanist director of all time with an Oscar, but sadly that was not the case.
Did Win: Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu

Should have won: Richard Linklater


Original Screenplay should've gone to The Grand Budapest Hotel, the outcome of this award is yet another massive shocker. It was witty, funny and exceptionally well crafted as typical in a sarcastic black comedy from Wes Anderson. Birdman had no story, no aim and it might as well have been an observational documentary with some fancy camera work and lighting, with a unpredictable migraine-inducing drum beat. The Academy's reputation may have taken a turn for the worse, I sure think less of it anyway - but I was kind of expecting it too, the reputation part not the award winners!

I don't have much to say about the next award, other than the fact it should been How To Drain Your Dragon 2 (heartwarming, better than the original AND well animated - slightly better than Big Hero 6 in its realism).
Did Win: Big Hero 6
Should have won: How To Train Your Dragon 2

Achievement in Cinematography was a shocker too, though it wasn't as well. It was a shocker because last year Emmanuel Lubeszki won the same award for Gravity - so were were expecting the Oscars not to go all consecutive on this one but it seems that wasn't the case - it should have gone to a more deserving winner; notably Robert Yeoman, Wes' right hand man on every production since, on The Grand Budapest Hotel
The Oscars totally played against their usual tactic of 'getting rid of people without a statue yet' with the exception of Julianne Moore who won Best Actress for her portrayal. 


Comments

OSCARS 2015: BEST PICTURE NOMINEES - IN BRIEF

15/2/2015

Comments

 
Picture
In My Opinion... Best To Worst (Completely subjective - in other words... not tactical whatsoever, though i'd like it to be of course!)
  • Boyhood
  • Selma
  • Whiplash
  • The Theory of Everything
  • The Grand Budapest Hotel
  • American Sniper
  • Birdman
  • The Imitation Game

American Sniper
  • Narrative: One-sided Americanist waste of time. Once again, America is asking for trouble - General Eastwood to the frontline? 
  • Visual: It's an Eastwood alright, War & Westerns are something Clint does very well at. Once again, its a lone gunman tackling a large frontier which puts the protagonist in a very isolated position. 
  • Technical: Things pew-pewing and blowing up are well and good, special effects and sound are the real married couple here. If the production team could focus on the bigger picture such as getting a gripping true story together than perhaps we wouldn't be so worried (or bored).
  • Overall: True story which flopped 10 minutes into its 134 minute running time. Failed to captivate and move, though it did a nice job at stirring some controversy which is largely accountable for its box office takings.

Birdman
  • Narrative: It's a simple idea, taken to another level but that's all it will ever be. It's a good film but not a great one.
  • Visual: The film is stunning, its film noir for a 21st century audience. And by film standards that's very hard to translate such a 'era-stuck' stylistic genre.
  • Technical: If what they say is true about the 'one-take film' then let us all bow down to Inarritu and Birdman's Cinematographer, Emmanuel Lubezki - its a theatrical masterpiece, its a play and a film at the same time - this is something very bold and daring.
  • Overall: Thoroughly overrated, it seems as though it's accolades in visual & technical categories have clouded people's perception of the film. Was disappointed, primarily because it failed to live up to its hype and its lack of originality.

Boyhood
  • Narrative: Who would have thought something so simple as capturing life over a period of time, could be so spectacular. It makes us think - the simple things, life for instance, are spectacular - and so are the moments in between. One of a kind. 
  • Visual: Timeless.
  • Technical: Extraordinary, the dedication and coordination of the production teams on-screen and off-screen is something else. Linklater is a one-of-a-kind filmmaker.
  • Overall: The fact this film hasn't been as widely acknowledged within the public as it should have been (though unanimously acclaimed) is completely beyond me, this is a compelling film that has yet to build a mass audience. Like with many greats, as its already becoming, it takes time for people to see the beauty, simplicity and complexity of this film. This is filmmaking at its very finest.

The Grand Budapest Hotel
  • Narrative: The story is questionable. Why write a good story when there is simply no way it could compete with beautiful visuals and eye candy for sets? Think Gravity. We've seen far better from Wes. 
  • Visual: A film that is perhaps too Wes for Wes himself. It's his most eccentric project to date with his rightman Robert Yeoman, the visuals are just mind-bogglingly beautiful.
  • Technical: Technical stuff is absolutely on point. The Production Design is out of this world and should be highly acknowledged - they've done their job if you don't notice they have. Locations & Props have been well researched and acquired - its all the picky things that are the signature dishes at The Grand Budapest Hotel
  • Overall: Architect & Sculpter not Filmmaker, Wes has outdone himself on the scale front, this is his grandest adventure yet though we miss the old Wes; intimate characters, egocentric protagonists and glimpses of reality in his own hand-crafted worlds.

The Imitation Game
  • Narrative: Disappointed that the film didn't live up to its hype, nor was it faithful to its subject - Alan Turing, whose life goes far beyond the endless possibilities of the Enigma Code.
  • Visual: Visually it was warming, gave a comforting home-like feeling in amongst the stress of time. 
  • Technical: Well crafted, distinctly British film. The bar for production value is set very high here, with Cinematography, Sound and Editing playing key roles here to deliver an authentic thriller-like experience.
  • Overall: A lovely film to have watched, Cumberbatch was perfect as Turing and for the first time, Knightley's performance as his work-wife wasn't as cringe-worthy as we all expected it to be.

Selma
  • Narrative: Bold and passionate. DuVernay stays true to history by capturing the main incidents, and documenting their consequences though its her fictitious twists that are most interesting; Interiors are lit in dark - as if to create this gangster-like thriller, which work to the film's advantage but could potentially work in its disadvantage to the Academy.
  • Visual: Breathtaking cinematography, capturing the vast expanse of influence M.L.K had on his followers; the world. A shocking slow-motion recreation of the 1963 church bombing in Alabama that killed four African-American girls.
  • Technical:
  • Overall: Highly underrated, Brilliantly executed - Oyelowo gives his career-defining performance. its baffling how Spielberg's Lincoln ended up with 12 nominations yet this only managed to grab at 2 - not even a Best Actor nomination. I'm blaming the Academy for this grave error!

The Theory of Everything
  • Narrative: Affecting and captivating (same meaning, both words - best to say it twice!). It's a bumper year for prestigious biopics. One of few biopics to generate real emotion and to explain the concept of pretty much everything.
  • Visual: Well executed cinematography, intimate close up shots of Redmayne & Jones - symbolic of their love though foreshadowing of whats to come at the same time. Delhomme, Theory's Cinematographer, loves a bit of Bokeh and Dutch Angles - at last the French and English come together on something!
  • Technical: Hawking's deteriorating physical state is handled very delicately but truthfully, obvious chemistry between locations and characters. Very well thought out.  
  • Overall: This film is worth watching a second time, it's overrated that people think the acting is overrated!


Whiplash
  • Narrative: An electrifying film full of colour and jazz and exciting stuff. J.K. Simmons is flawless as Mr. Shouty (my name for him), he's an angry music conductor - either he's a perfectionist or a psychopath or the perfect psychopath, we just don't know! The film has you rooting for Teller the whole way as he drums his way to stardom, but things take an unexpected turn for the worse... spoiler alert!
  • Visual: Visually stunning, you are truly immersed amongst the musicians and you really feel it when Simmons verbally devours the shit out of the off-key culprit *takes long gulp*. You're constantly on the edge of your seat.
  • Technical: Young Director Damien Chazelle has really done it here, he's definitely one to watch. 
  • Overall: The Dark Horse of the lot, it's unclear whether Whiplash is an obvious contender - would have liked to have seen more of a development in the narrative, slightly clouded with too much of shine. The film could warrant a longer running time or a shorter time to tell everything. 

On The Whole...
This year - it feels like audiences, critics and academy boards alike have all been clouded with the belief that Style is more important than Substance and have forgotten what film is really all about. We're all automatically more attracted to eye-candy than a story which pulls at our heartstrings. And, we've learnt you can't impress everyone with a biographical film, it is unfortunate that something has to give. Plus, just because they're not actor actors doesn't mean they shouldn't have equal awards opportunities - Oyelowo, Teller, Revolori and Coltrane you're fantastic! It's poignant films like Boyhood and Selma that remind us that we're all still human in this fabricated reality.


Here's all the nominees, a dedicated Sky channel will broadcast the entire Oscars 2015 live as it happens. 'The Oscars 2015: Red Carpet Live' will air from 11:30pm to 1:30am on Sky Movies Oscars and Sky Living, before the 87th Academy Awards ceremony itself will air live on Sky Movies Oscars from 1:30am-4:30am.
Comments

oscars 2015: who will win best picture?

15/2/2015

Comments

 
Picture
And the Oscar goes to... Well we're just not sure. As a filmmaker and filmgoer I've had a very difficult time ordering this year's 8 nominees from best to worst, let alone name my best one. Though I have come to one conclusion - this year has been an extremely tough year for film, as many deciding factors in film have changed - technologies, emerging markets (closing markets even) and competition. Being in the industry and being a regular has to make choosing Best Picture as hard as possible - because you're trying not to influenced by others or by yourself. When making a selection, be tactical - it helps if you have insider knowledge of awards season or are in touch with social media and regularly analyse films write down the very meaning of their existence. What is it that the film sets out to do, or be or give? Forgive me for sounding all Morgan Freeman here but let's be honest - who isn't these days?

In my short-ish post today I'll be writing with my hot summer holiday mindset; laid-back - it's how I prefer to write, when its something as casual as being a film critic. Though on days I would consider myself to be a more serious writer, today's just one of those days... So, sit back and unwind - let me share with you just a few thoughts on my predictions for Best Picture 2015.


2015 has been the hardest year to predict, even more so as of late. Recently, Two groups you can usually count on; The British Academy of Film and Television Arts and the DGAs seemed to disagree with each other - at the BAFTAs, Best Film went to Richard Linklater's Boyhood and it's creator won the award for Best Director. The Director's Guild Award went to Alejandro Inarritu for Birdman. Last year it was clear the two frontrunners in the spotlight were indeed Steve McQueen for 12 Years A Slave and Alfonso Cuaron for Gravity but this year its more unpredictable than ever before - that's thanks to increased competition in film elements - for Style and Substance. What is sad in my opinion is that it seems Style is becoming more important than Substance - people are forgetting that its the story and emotion that a film evokes, to warrant a great film and people are too obsessed with the eye candy of those chocolate box shots in too many a recent film. Fundamentally, This is why Boyhood is my film to win.

The Nominee's for Best Picture, in particular order, are;
  1. American Sniper
  2. Birdman
  3. Boyhood
  4. The Grand Budapest Hotel
  5. The Imitation Game
  6. Selma
  7. The Theory of Everything
  8. Whiplash


This is so difficult because I loved each and every one of those films - so they're all winners, but we have to crack the whip and whittle it down to just one. So in brief, here's why I think each is a deserving winner.

American Sniper was a true story about a Navy SEAL sniper, Chris Kyles, whose skills saved countless lives out on the frontline. He was the deadliest marksman in U.S. military history and an instant legend, though this came at a price. For a time he risked losing his family, the war had gotten to him and he was left a changed man - evidently, for worse - and its a Clint Eastwood film. I liked this film, though I kick myself for not feeling moved by it or loving it. A.S was a gripping film, very tense at times though it didn't do the war justice - it was more just about him. 
I can understand very clearly how the film has gone on to become very controversial - it is a symbol of America. There is no difference between the impact and controversy of this film than with The Interview, except with this - the film is actually semi-decent. I don't want to get into a rant of "Why is America doing this... Yes we know there is Freedom of Speech, Information blah blah, but don't show it off - well you could, but you'd be risking millions of lives and a possible repeat of the cold war if you do". This is no casual statement on my behalf, this is a real possibility. 
The film doesn't dig into The Iraq War, at all. It's not interested in the causes of the war itself, just Kyle within it and as with many autobiographical films, it fails to cover a wide range of issues and content. Filmmakers tend to be one-sided, when attacking this genre, and focus extensively on one particular thing rather than touching a bit of everything - but perhaps its the fear that if they do that instead - they might not be faithful to their mission. Credits to the director of course, this is very clearly an Eastwoodian film, cinematically and narratively. War & Westerns are something Clint does very well at, in front and behind the camera. Once again its a lone gunman tackling a large frontier really which is a shame because I was really looking forward to seeing this film, maybe most if not all films are being hyped up too much. Well that can be answered another time.
It's not all bad though, Sienna Miller plays Chris Kyle's wife ever so well and is probably the best thing about this movie - its about time she's taking on extraordinary roles like her subtle supporting role in Foxcatcher, she's not getting any younger and neither is the film industry by the looks of it.

Good gosh that was a long review, perhaps I was being one-sided there - well I have reason to be. Boyhood 

It's Not Finished :D 










Comments

    Author

    Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.

    Archives

    May 2019
    December 2018
    January 2018
    September 2017
    July 2017
    May 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    October 2015
    April 2015
    February 2015

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

LOUIS HOLDER / Offline Editor & Assistant Editor (Film)

VISIT STUDIOHOLDER.COM
POST PRODUCTION RESOURCES
VISIT PHOTOGRAPHY SITE
TOOLS OF AN EDITOR
CLIENT LOGIN HERE

  • About Me
  • Biography
    • Editing Influences
  • Production
  • Post Production
  • Rates
  • Contact Me
  • Celluloid Production
  • Photography
  • Other Work
    • Theatre
    • Film & Media Education
    • Podcasts
    • Music & Sound Design
    • Screenwriting
    • Casting
    • Film & Arts Programming
  • Updates
    • Blog
  • The Studio, Royston
  • Equipment & Facilities