Tonight’s the 85th Academy Awards and while 2012 was a pretty terrific year for movies, I hope just one thing–– that Lincoln doesn’t get crowned king.
Yes, Lincoln was a great president but this was not a great movie. It wasn’t bad, mind you, it just didn’t live up to the incessant hype. Let’s just say the emperor has no stovepipe hat and leave it at that.
I still haven’t seen Armour, Beasts of the Southern Wild or Zero Dark Thirty, but have caught all the other nominated films. Of them, I’d pick Silver Linings Playbook for best film. I would also cheer for Argo or Django Unchained as best pic. Just no Lincoln, please!
For best actor, I’d go Joaquin Phoenix in The Master, a desperately under appreciated film. Give me Christoph Waltz for supporting role in Django, and give Quentin his gold statue for writing the original screenplay. For adapted screenplay, David O. Russell deserves the little man for Silver Linings Playbook.
I won’t pick in the other categories since I haven’t seen the majority of the nominees, but please, Academy, let Lincoln be. While this film was not a great moment in cinema, we did have a better time in the theatre than ol’ Abe did.
Like Orson Welles, Quentin Tarantino will live in the shadow of an early masterpiece. His Citizen Kane is Pulp Fiction, a movie that like Kane broke so many rules it will stand as enduring art.
Tarantino’s latest film, Django Unchained, is an incredible film that like Inglourious Basterds, is history re-imagined and staged for maximum entertainment. Whereas Steven Spielberg spent his creative energy this year making Lincoln, a well-acted rather dry history lesson (“Don’t go to the theatre, Abe– the play’s not that good!”), Tarantino goes for a fascinating tale driven by unforgettable characters and riveting plot points.
Yes, there’s gratuitous blood and guts, this is Tarantino after all, but it’s the story that makes Django Unchainedsuch a kick. Jamie Foxx is terrific as Django, the slave who becomes a bounty hunter to gain his freedom, but the film really belongs to Christoph Waltz, the German actor who also played “The Jew Hunter” in Inglourious Basterds. Here, he is a dentist/bounty hunter, and his performance is certainly one of the year’s best. He owns every scene he appears in, resplendent facial hair and all.
You’ll also enjoy Leo DiCaprio as a sadistic Mississippi plantation owner, and oh my goodness golly how Samuel L. Jackson delivers an incredibly fun performance as his sycophantic manservant. Ummm ummm ummm, mighty fine acting.
See Lincoln as your civic duty, then treat yourself to Django and set yourself free.
Julie & Julia meet Inglourious Basterds. One movie features Nazis, the other Beef Bourguignon. One has sadistic scenes, and to stay engaged with the other can be a sadistic challenge at times.
The movie falls flatter than a one egg souffle.I’d heard good things about Julie & Julia, and I always liked watching Julia Child on TV cooking some complex recipe mere mortals would never attempt. So, I walked into the theatre with great expectations. Exiting the theatre, my expectations were crushed like a one egg souffle. Julie & Julia didn’t deliver for me.
Yes, Meryl is phenomenal as Julia, but Meryl is always terrific and this performance is more impersonation than character creation. Stanley Tucci brings a nice performance as Julia’s hubby and Jane Lynch steals every scene as Julia’s sister. But, the story of making a French cookbook for English speaking people is hardly interesting and rarely entertaining.
NOW, gently fold that story in with another story about a frustrated writer who cooks the entire Child cookbook over a one year span and blogs about it, and well, you have an odd stew of a film.
Julie is played by Amy Adams, who is usually fun to watch. Her character here is an insecure narcissist in an apron. She’s married to a milquetoasty guy played by Chris Messina who is supportive but frustrated by the blogging project. Wah wah wah.
The movie written and directed by Nora Ephron, usually a gifted writer. The screenplay was based on two separate books, Julia’s memoirs from 1949 and Julie’s book of recent time recounting her blogging project. But just because the subject matter is common to both, the flavors do not belong together. This movie is like vanilla and vinegar. A disappointment, a bad taste. Pity.
Now let’s cleanse our palates with a sorbet of Basterds. Now look what QT’s got cooking this time around…
Like the Coen Brothers, Quentin Tarantino makes films you have to see for no other reason than to get his unique perspective on whatever the film’s about. This time it’s about Nazis and a history re-write with a band of Jewish American soldiers (Inglourious Basterds) giving the goosesteppers what-for behind enemy lines. Even ol’ Adolf gets his comeuppance.
Like any Tarantino film, the dialogue is terrific in developing memorable characters as plotlines intertwine like origami figures. Like any Tarantino film, there’s tension built to keep your eyes riveted to the screen, followed by hyper-violence that begs you to look away. Like any Tarantino film, it is a celebration of film genres, movie magic, cinematography and interesting camerawork.
Yes, it’s chatty at times, but with Tarantino dialogue you won’t mind. Brad Pitt is wonderful as the Tennessee Basterd leader, Lt. Aldo Raine. He lays on a southern accent thick as cold molasses on dog fur. The powerhouse performance comes from Austrian actor Christoph Waltz as Col. Hans Landa. Waltz may be shaking hands with Oscar for this gem.
While not Tarantino’s best film, the Basterds are worth spending some time with and will give you plenty of images to replay for a long time afterwards.
