|
Movie Review - Oscar Edition
Part 2 of 2
By: Caroline Mc Vitty
Mcvittymovies.wordpress.com
Movie Review Oscar Edition –
Last week I spoke about how “Oppenheimer” is likely to sweep the Oscars, which isn’t my favorite outcome. Having seen all but two of the movies nominated in the top categories, I’d like to talk about my favorite picks and why.
Best Picture:
My pick is “American Fiction.” Since it debuted so late in the season, it has little chance of winning – with the top flick going to “Oppenheimer.” But the timeliness of the subject matter of “American Fiction”– racism in the arts - the fabulous cast, and effortless flow of the movie with not a scintilla of dead space make this my top choice among the nominees. Unlike “Oppenheimer,” which is frankly boring in many places, “American Fiction” is engaging every moment.
Best Actress:
Emma Stone is positively mesmerizing in “Poor Things.” It is a rather weird film and what she is called to do in the film is extraordinary. I applaud Carey Mulligan’s performance in “Maestro” because it is often nuanced. But Emma Stone is simply over the top.
Best Actor:
I know Paul Giamatti is a favorite in “The Holdovers,” and I loved his performance, too. Bradley Cooper was fabulous in “Maestro” and his recreation of Bernstein’s style and panache overcome what I believe to be a lousy script which misses the musical genius of Bernstein and merely settles for the the prurient. I also loved Jeffrey Wright in “American Fiction” but the character of Bernstein was more challenging.
Best Supporting Actress:
My hands-down pick is the favorite: Da’Vine Joy Randolph in “The Holdovers.” This is essentially an ensemble movie with only three characters. Randolph’s role as the school’s chef is pivotal and keeps the movie grounded as she espouses the wisdom of the obvious.
Best Supporting Actor:
I love DeNiro in “Killers of the Flower Moon” and Gossling in “Barbie.” Even Downey is mesmerizing in his paranoia in “Oppenheimer.” But Mark Ruffalo’s role in “Poor Things” is memorable as he loses control and slips over the edge. The nominees are a remarkable group of talented men.
Best Director:
My nod goes to Yorgos Lanthimos for “Poor Things” since it is a movie with so many strange characters and moving parts. But the sentimental favorite who has long been overlooked by the Academy is Chrisopher Nolan of “Oppenheimer.” I so wish that Noland had been willing to pare down an over-long script.
Best Original Screenplay:
This has to go to “The Holdovers” when placed against its competition. Had “Maestro” focused more on the musical genius of Bernstein rather than his sexual proclivities, this would have been a winner. But the premise was all wrong.
Best Adapted Screenplay:
This is a toughie. “Barbie” deserved to have a lot more nominations. For that reason, it is my pick.
Best Cinematography:
I’ll pass on this one. If filming the incredible landscape of New Mexico is a major criteria and the “big blast” in the desert, my nod goes to “Oppenheimer.”
Best Editing:
“Oppenheimer” needed to leave a lot more footage on the cutting room floor. I simply have no pick in this category.
Best Costume Design:
I applaud “Barbie” in this area. But Barbie’s clothes were already designed by Mattel. Whereas the mini skirts and knee-highs in “Poor Things” are a standout in what is supposed to be the Victorian Era. Simply too imaginative for words.
Best Makeup and Hairstyling:
If this award were given to the actor most unlike the character he/she plays, it would have to go to Helen Mirren in “Golda” for her portrayal of Golda Meir. While I give high-fives to Badley Cooper for the the hooked prosthesis he wore on his nose, it does not compare to the authenticity the makeup transformation gave to Mirren as Israel’s formidable prime minister.
| 
