Skip to main content

Thank you very much. And I hope, really I don't deserve this, but I hope to win some other Oscars!

Prediction - 2017 Oscars


It’s not as if the Academy Awards aren’t prone to wallowing in a mire of self-congratulatory massaging of the ego at the best of times, as its members flaunt their purportedly progressive consciences, so being thoroughly knee-capped last year over the (lack of) representation of persons of colour must have shaken members up a bit (whether or not the criticism was deserved). As such, only the least cynical would see a subsequent year featuring the most black acting nominees as a coincidence, but since seven minority actors were also nominated in 2007, it may suggest shaming the Academy into nominating is to little overall effect, except that maybe there’s now a hint of “Did they deserve, or were the members pushed?” (of course, the extent to which any selection of contenders is on merit is often moot anyway, it’s just that this way the mechanisms of the process may become more unflatteringly exposed).

But such matters must get in line behind Tinseltown’s almost wall-to-wall loathing (Jon Voight excepted) for the newly-enthroned President, and it will be interesting to see the extent to which a desire to protest his incumbency by voting causes will vie with the more masturbatory wish to shout about how great they are. If in doubt, one is generally wise to bet on the latter.

My guesstimate ratio has fluctuated since I began blogging predictions (I use that word loosely) in 2013 (46%, 66%, 50%, 63%) so I’m maintaining proficiently consistent averageness. This year I’m adding “The Interesting Choice”, to some of the categories, because in an era of over-analysed and scrutinised Oscars, where nothing is really much of a surprise or upset any more, it’s the less likely or more unusual option that deserves flagging.

(That's from Roberto Benigni's Best Actor acceptance speech in the post line, and no, he really didn't deserve it, and no he didn't win some other Oscars. On the other hand, you can't buy lines like "I would like to be Jupiter! And kidnap everybody and lie down in the firmament making love to everybody!".)

Best Picture

Winner: La La Land
I’d like to win: Hell or High Water
The Interesting Choice: Arrival

As of writing, I’ve seen two of the nine Best Picture nominees, so expressing a preference right now would really be frightfully clueless, especially since I wasn’t effusive over either of those two. So, for the hell of it, I’ll pick Hell or High Water (even though I thought its writer, delivered an ultimately hacky script for Sicario). This year, there are a couple of the usual worthy period prestige pics (Fences, Hidden Figures), one of which is a stagy stage adaption (apparently) but will given due respect as it’s courtesy of Denzel.

Arrival is a rare SF nomination (although, to be fair, since the number of potential nominees has increased, that’s been a little less the case), and even less likely than it making the finals is it taking the statuette (which is why I’ve given it “The Interesting Choice”). Likewise, Lion, which is more your Philomena-ish respectable filler rather than anything standing a serious chance (it might have been Florence Foster Jenkins, if it wasn’t taking the piss by being a bit too shamelessly cheerfully Oscar-ish). Manchester by the Sea is much-lauded but has possibly peaked in terms of plaudits; it’s probably regarded as the best of the bunch when all is said and done, but may be insufficiently aspirational to get behind en masse. Hacksaw Ridge did all it needed by getting Mel back into, if not good books, then the “If you don’t say anything, we won’t either” realm of the forgiven, but for all his undeniable talent as a filmmaker it’s likely a bit too thematically rudimentary to have much of a shot.

So, it’s down to La La Land and Moonlight, as everyone seems to agree (it’s much more fun when these things are wide open, but they so rarely are anymore). Which goes back to what I was saying above: self-congratulation or statement for the top award? Which is more deserving is irrelevant, but my suspicion is that, as a low-key winner bagged the big prize last year, and the last big success to win was 2012 (Argo), that the Academy is in the mood for a popular, populist winner, one that effuses about Hollywood itself, and by implication how great the world can be when touched by its majesty.

Best Director

Winner: Damien Chazelle (La La Land)
I’d like to win: Denis Villeneuve (Arrival)
The Interesting Choice: Mel Gibson (Hacksaw Ridge)

Might this be a 2015, 2013 or 2012, where the Best Picture doesn’t yield a Best Director? Mel’s not getting it, although direction is likely Hacksaw’s greatest asset. He’s got one already, apart from anything else, and they wouldn’t risk him on the podium (which makes him The Interesting Choice). Kenneth Lonergan (Manchester by the Sea) lacks pizazz, and Villeneuve, who just needs that great screenplay to make a great movie, is the most accomplished technical talent here but doesn’t have the right picture.

 Which means it’s Damien Chazelle or Barry Jenkins, first timer or second timer. It would be difficult for La La Land to get the top award without recognising everything about its composition (whereas Chicago, even though its win was unwarranted, understandably saw voters failing to appreciate its direction was), so I’m calling Chazelle, even though I think his work on Whiplash was probably better in context.

Best Actor

Winner: Denzel Washington (Fences)
I’d like to win: Viggo Mortensen (Captain Fantastic)
The Interesting Choice: Viggo Mortensen (Captain Fantastic)

The good money is on Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea), although anything could happen in a month – such as the re-reporting of past personal life issues – depending on whether and if who wants to undermine whom for the benefit of whomsoever (it might be the only award Manchester by the Sea sees, which may count for something). What is surely going to happen post-mortem, this time and for the foreseeable, is scorekeeping on the diversity of those who do or don’t win. The way it’s looking this year is that the Supporting Actor categories will see African-American winners, which in its way could be seen as a faint snub itself (doing just enough to ameliorate the matter but no more).

I don’t see Gosling (unless voters are blind to his stiff dance moves) or Garfield (playing a rootable character, but too good to be true, despite being true). Certainly not Hanks (snooze). So, it’s between Denzel and Casey, and since going with the odds on every choice is boring (Tom Hanks boring), and I’ve never truly been that taken with Affleck Jr (by which I don’t mean he’s Ben’s son or anything), I’m going with Denzel bagging his third Oscar. It looks good for the history books too. I’d like Viggo to win, because he’s a cool guy, cooler than Billy Zane even; he’s also the Interesting Choice here, since he doesn’t play by studio rules.

Best Actress

Winner: Emma Stone (La La Land)
I’d like to win: Isabelle Huppert (Elle)
The Interesting Choice: Ruth Negga (Loving)

Wise heads here have Emma Stone and her frog-sized eyes being recognised. I think we can forget about Natalie Portman and Anette Bening (no one cares enough about their movies, and they have Oscars anyway). Meryl is nominated every year she has a film out (which is every year), and she isn’t really trying in Florence Foster Jenkins, so I don’t think she’s getting another Oscar just yet (unless the Academy were really impressed with her trumping at the Golden Globes)

Feasibly, Isabelle Huppert might take it – she took a Globe, after all – but Ruth Negga might be one of those outside chances who gains surprising last minute momentum. Which makes her the leftfield, Interesting Choice; she was in a movie no one much cared for, and has a fairly low profile in her peer group. Ultimately, this is probably Stone’s to lose – young talent, sure to give a memorable acceptance speech – although it feels like, if she’s rewarded, Gosling should be too. In which case, Huppert (wouldn’t it be nice to have Paul Verhoeven given Hollywood money again, to do something lunatic, as long as he doesn’t go and make another Hollow Man?)

Best Supporting Actor

Winner: Mahershala Ali (Moonlight)
I’d like to win: Mahershala Ali (Moonlight)
The Interesting Choice: Dev Patel (Lion)

This is another where you can quickly forget several of the prospects. Jeff Bridges (Hell and High Water) has been rewarded enough in recent years (getting the big one, and getting frequently nominated), and he’s doing that mumble core, marble-mouth voice again. There’s no will to give Michael Shannon (Nocturnal Animals) anything, I don’t think, and Dev Patel would probably give an embarrassingly effusive winning speech, so that might be Interesting.

Which means it’s between Ali and Lucas Hedges (Manchester by the Sea), and it’s looking to be here and in Adapted Screenplay that Moonlight gets recognition. Ali’s a fine actor, so hopefully an award will break him out of sometimes undernourished TV and supporting roles.

Best Supporting Actress

Winner: Viola Davis (Fences)
I’d like to win: Naomie Harris (Moonlight)
The Interesting Choice: Naomie Harris (Moonlight)

Hidden Figures may well walk away from the Oscars empty handed, as I suspect it announces itself as too much of an ensemble for Octavia Spencer to have a chance.
But Davis’ shoe-in for this award guarantees that Fences will have something, even if Denzel misses out. The nods to Lion are all filler, like Nicole Kidman’s botox, while Manchester by the Sea is Manchester by the Sea. Sorry, Manchester by the Sea (and Michelle Williams). I’d like to see Harris on the podium, though, because she’s good even in dreadful parts (like Spectre) and that makes her the Interesting Choice.

Best Adapted Screenplay

Winner: Moonlight
I’d like to win: Pass

I don’t have much of a preference here. Any picture that relies on a Bootstrap Paradox inherently doesn’t deserve a best writing award (Arrival), no matter how good its constituent parts, while Hidden Figures, from the title down, is a deluge of wearily worthy intent. Fences might get it, but the consensus seems to be that its respect for its source material might be too great to consider what actual adaptation was necessary. So Moonlight for the win, probably rightly.

Best Original Screenplay

Winner: La La Land
I’d like to win: Manchester by the Sea
The Interesting Choice: The Lobster

I’ll reserve judgement until I’ve seen it, but given Sicario, I suspect Hell or High High Water had some degree of finessing to make it work on screen, if it’s that good. 20th Century Women would have come up with a better title if its screenplay was all that, and The Lobster is a much better short film than it is a feature (but would make for an interestingly oddball winner). La La Land is pleasant but I don’t think Chazelle’s curious success-fixated psychosis needs any encouragement. Which means he’ll get it, while the more persevering Lonergan gets ignored (alternatively, a screenplay snub could reflect that La La Land is something of a Titanic in terms of massaged clichés, and Manchester by the Sea could come away smiling).

Best Animated Feature

Winner: Zootopia
I’d like to win: Kubo and the Two Strings
The Interesting Choice: The Red Turtle

The money’s on Zootropolis/Zootopia/Zoophilia and I’d be good with that; if it wins it’s the one I can most get behind in this category since 2011’s Rango, but we’ll also have had five years on the trot of Disney/Pixar victories. I’m not that huge on Laika’s previous fare (Boxtrolls, sheesh!) but they’re a very talented crew, and there needs to be a sense that variety of form and style of animation can get a look in (Wallace and Gromit was 11 years ago, Spirited Away 13).

Best Documentary Feature

Winner: O.J.: Made in America
I’d like to win: O.J.: Made in America

Films concerning the migrant crisis (Fire at Sea), autism and Disney (Life, Animated, which certainly gives the Mouse House rosy affirmations it surely doesn’t need – the trailer is almost unfeasibly uplifting), a history of racism in the US as seen via writer James Baldwin (I Am Not Your Negro), a look at race in the US criminal justice system (13th, in respect of the 13th Amendment). The third picture focussing on race in the US, O.J.: Made in America is currently looking the most likely, as the acclaim has been near-universal (100% on Rotten Tomatoes, for what that’s worth).

Best Foreign Language Film

Winner: The Salesman
I’d like to win: Toni Erdmann

No holocaust movies nominated this year, so it’s wide open. The smart money is on German-Austrian comedy Toni Erdmann, in which a father reconnects with his daughter in antic fashion, and it’s certainly something of a breakout from the oft-ignored foreign language niche. However, the Trump travel band, and generally renewed appetite for Iranian sanctions, might elicit voting sympathy, forestalling Toni’s irrepressibility.

Also nominated are Tanna (love against the odds on the titular South Pacific island), Danish Land of Mine (a bit of poor pun, since it’s about German POWs clearing landmines post WWII), the aforementioned The Salesman (a production of Death of a Salesman occupies the backdrop to a couple’s domestic drama) and Swedish A Man Called Ove (the one with all the makeup, in which grumpy, bereaved Ove find something worth living for again, suggesting it’s not just Hollywood that mixes up maudlin treats).

Best Cinematography

Winner: La La Land
I’d like to win: Arrival

However the big night washes out, La La Land will take home the most awards, although Arrival is definitely the better-shot movie (whatever Villeneuve’s faults with narrative, they don’t apply to his visualisations, working here with Bradford Young), and Silence probably is too, but La La has grand design in its favour.

Best Costume Design

Winner: La La Land
I’d like to win: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

This is supposedly another La La win, although I’d be hard-pressed to tell you why (as would most, I suspect, when it comes down to it). Empire says never to bet against Colleen Atwood… No one here is inspired, but her Fantastic Beasts work at least registers in the mind. It comes to something when four out of the five noms are for period pieces (hopefully next year we’ll see Besson’s Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets make the final five).

Best Documentary Short

Winner: Joe’s Violin
I’d like to win: pass

Subject matter includes those making end-of-life decisions (Extremis), a Greek coast guard captain dealing with the migrant crisis (4.1 Miles) a Polish Holocaust survivor’s – what a relief, there had to be a Holocaust piece in here somewhere – violin finds a new owner (Joe’s Violin), the experiences of the children of the Free Syrian Army commander (Watani: My Homeland) and volunteer rescue workers of the Syrian Civil Defence (The White Helmets).

Best Film Editing

Winner: La La Land
I’d like to win: Arrival

One area I can’t fault Chazelle is this category; Whiplash was edited to within an inch of its life, and if La La Land is more sedate in comparison, it’s still very keenly judged. So is Arrival, though, which is why it gets my vote (even if I ultimately prefer the former as a whole to the latter).

Best Make-up and Hairstyling

Winner: Star Trek Beyond
I’d like to win: Star Trek Beyond

Obviously, for making it look like Simon Pegg has hair. Suicide Squad must be getting recognition for deceptively intricate “bad” make-up and hair. As for A Man Called Ove, well the make-up is much better than the 100-year-old Man’s, but it isn’t terribly exciting. Not that make-up is terribly exciting most of the time, outside of select genres.

Best Original Score

Winner: Justin Hurwitz (La La Land)
I’d like to win: La La Land
The Interesting Choice: Mica Levi (Jackie)

No contest, particular since the movie’s non-songs are more impacting than its full-blown numbers. But Mica Levi, who furnished Under the Skin with a masterfully unsettling score, has contributed something interesting, if less disturbing than for that picture, to Jackie.

Best Original Song

Winner: City of Stars (La La Land)
I’d like to win: City of Stars (La La Land)

Another smart pick. I don’t much care for the other La La nominee, the Trolls one can go and do one, the Moana one is Disney Animated Ballads 101, and as for Mr Sting… He was better in Zoolander 2.

Production Design

Winner: La la Land
I’d like to win: Hail, Caesar!

La La Land will win, undoubtedly, but anyone with eyes can see Hail, Caesar! should get it.

Best Animated Short

Winner: Piper
I’d like to win: Pear Cider and Cigarettes
The Interesting Choice: Blind Vaysha

There’s a Pixar guys pic (but not Pixar itself), Borrowed Time, linocut-style abstract piece Blind Vaysha, Robert Valley’s Pear Cider and Cigarettes, Pearl, and Pixar’s Piper. Pixar may well win this, but I’m guessing Theodore Ushev’s acceptance speech for Blind Vaysha would be interesting, as he says he fainted when he heard he made the final five.

Best Live Action Short

Winner: Silent Nights
I’d like to win: Timecode

Terrorism under the spotlight in a police station interview (Ennemis Interieurs), Jane Birkin train whimsy (Le Femme et le TGV), a kids’ choir with a secret (er, Sing), security guards separated by day and night shifts (Timecode) and bittersweet Danish Christmases and illegal immigrants (Silent Nights).

Best Sound Editing

Winner: La La Land
I’d like to win: Arrival

This is between Arrival, La La and Hacksaw Ridge. Mel does good visceral sound effects editing, but do they want to actually acknowledge his movies with a statuette yet? Like Hidden Figures, it may find itself empty-handed at the end of the night.

Best Sound Mixing

Winner: La La Land
I’d like to win: La La Land

These technical categories come down to persuasion much of the time; the man hours on a Michael Bay 13 Hours are probably far greater and more intricate than on La La, but that won’t be reflected in the result.

Best Visual Effects

Winner: The Jungle Book
I’d like to win: Kubo and the Two Strings

There’s no doubt The Jungle Book gets this, although I didn’t care for it, but the achievements of Kubo even getting this far is worth feting. Doctor Strange isn’t outlandish enough for an award, while Deepwater Horizon is probably best forgotten all round. Rogue One has some very lovely work, but also the Phantom Moff Tarkin.

Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Dude, you're embarrassing me in front of the wizards.

Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
(SPOILERS) The cliffhanger sequel, as a phenomenon, is a relatively recent thing. Sure, we kind of saw it with The Empire Strikes Back – one of those "old" movies Peter Parker is so fond of – a consequence of George Lucas deliberately borrowing from the Republic serials of old, but he had no guarantee of being able to complete his trilogy; it was really Back to the Future that began the trend, and promptly drew a line under it for another decade. In more recent years, really starting with The MatrixThe Lord of the Rings stands apart as, post-Weinstein's involvement, fashioned that way from the ground up – shooting the second and third instalments back-to-back has become a thing, both more cost effective and ensuring audiences don’t have to endure an interminable wait for their anticipation to be sated. The flipside of not taking this path is an Allegiant, where greed gets the better of a studio (split a novel into two movie parts assuming a…

I don't like bugs. You can't hear them, you can't see them and you can't feel them, then suddenly you're dead.

Blake's 7 2.7: Killer

Robert Holmes’ first of four scripts for the series, and like last season’s Mission to Destiny there are some fairly atypical elements and attitudes to the main crew (although the A/B storylines present a familiar approach and each is fairly equal in importance for a change). It was filmed second, which makes it the most out of place episode in the run (and explains why the crew are wearing outfits – they must have put them in the wash – from a good few episodes past and why Blake’s hair has grown since last week).
The most obvious thing to note from Holmes’ approach is that he makes Blake a Doctor-substitute. Suddenly he’s full of smart suggestions and shrewd guesses about the threat that’s wiping out the base, basically leaving a top-level virologist looking clueless and indebted to his genius insights. If you can get past this (and it did have me groaning) there’s much enjoyment to be had from the episode, not least from the two main guest actors.

When two separate events occur simultaneously pertaining to the same object of inquiry we must always pay strict attention.

Twin Peaks 1.5: The One-Armed Man
With the waves left in Albert’s wake subsiding (Gordon Cole, like Albert, is first encountered on the phone, and Coop apologises to Truman over the trouble the insulting forensics expert has caused; ”Harry, the last thing I want you to worry about while I’m here is some city slicker I brought into your town relieving himself upstream”), the series steps down a register for the first time. This is a less essential episode than those previously, concentrating on establishing on-going character and plot interactions at the expense of the strange and unusual. As such, it sets the tone for the rest of this short first season.

The first of 10 episodes penned by Robert Engels (who would co-script Fire Walk with Me with Lynch, and then reunite with him for On the Air), this also sees the first “star” director on the show in the form of Tim Hunter. Hunter is a director (like Michael Lehman) who hit the ground running but whose subsequent career has rather disapp…

An initiative test. How simply marvellous!

You Must Be Joking! (1965)
A time before a Michael Winner film was a de facto cinematic blot on the landscape is now scarcely conceivable. His output, post- (or thereabouts) Death Wish (“a pleasant romp”) is so roundly derided that it’s easy to forget that the once-and-only dining columnist and raconteur was once a bright (well…) young thing of the ‘60s, riding the wave of excitement (most likely highly cynically) and innovation in British cinema. His best-known efforts from this period are a series of movies with Oliver Reed – including the one with the elephant – and tend to represent the director in his pleasant romp period, before he attacked genres with all the precision and artistic integrity of a blunt penknife. You Must Be Joking! comes from that era, its director’s ninth feature, straddling the gap between Ealing and the Swinging ‘60s; coarser, cruder comedies would soon become the order of the day, the mild ribaldry of Carry On pitching into bawdy flesh-fests. You Must Be Joki…

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

Ain't nobody likes the Middle East, buddy. There's nothing here to like.

Body of Lies (2008)
(SPOILERS) Sir Ridders stubs out his cigar in the CIA-assisted War on Terror, with predictably gormless results. Body of Lies' one saving grace is that it wasn't a hit, although that more reflects its membership of a burgeoning club where no degree of Hollywood propaganda on the "just fight" (with just a smidgeon enough doubt cast to make it seem balanced at a sideways glance) was persuading the public that they wanted the official fiction further fictionalised.

Well, who’s going to monitor the monitors of the monitors?

Enemy of the State (1998)
Enemy of the State is something of an anomaly; a quality conspiracy thriller borne not from any distinct political sensibility on the part of its makers but simple commercial instincts. Of course, the genre has proved highly successful over the years so it's easy to see why big name producers like Jerry Bruckheimer and Don Simpson would have chased that particular gravy boat. Yet they did so for some time without success; by the time the movie was made, Simpson had passed away and Bruckheimer was flying solo. It might be the only major film in the latter's career that, despite the prerequisite gloss and stylish packaging, has something to say. More significant still, 15 years too late, the film's warnings are finally receiving recognition in the light of the Edward Snowden revelations.

In a piece for The Guardian earlier this year, John Patterson levelled the charge that Enemy was one of a number of Hollywood movies that have “been softening us up f…

Luck isn’t a superpower... And it isn't cinematic!

Deadpool 2 (2018)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps it’s because I was lukewarm on the original, but Deadpool 2 mercifully disproves the typical consequence of the "more is more" approach to making a sequel. By rights, it should plummet into the pitfall of ever more excess to diminishing returns, yet for the most part it doesn't.  Maybe that’s in part due to it still being a relatively modest undertaking, budget-wise, and also a result of being very self-aware – like duh, you might say, that’s its raison d'être – of its own positioning and expectation as a sequel; it resolutely fails to teeter over the precipice of burn out or insufferable smugness. It helps that it's frequently very funny – for the most part not in the exhaustingly repetitive fashion of its predecessor – but I think the key ingredient is that it finds sufficient room in its mirthful melee for plot and character, in order to proffer tone and contrast.

This is no time for puns! Even good ones.

Mr. Peabody and Sherman (2014)
Perhaps I've done DreamWorks Animation (SKG, Inc., etc.) a slight injustice. The studio has been content to run an assembly line of pop culture raiding, broad-brush properties and so-so sequels almost since its inception, but the cracks in their method have begun to show more overtly in recent years. They’ve been looking tired, and too many of their movies haven’t done the business they would have liked. Yet both their 2014 deliveries, How to Train Your Dragon 2 and Mr. Peabody & Sherman, take their standard approach but manage to add something more. Dragon 2 has a lot of heart, which one couldn’t really say about Peabody (it’s more sincere elements feel grafted on, and largely unnecessary). Peabody, however, is witty, inventive and pacey, abounding with sight gags and clever asides while offering a time travel plotline that doesn’t talk down to its family audience.

I haven’t seen the The Rocky & Bullwinkle Show, from which Mr. Peabody & Sh…