Oppenheimer

Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Matt Damon, Robert Downey Jr., Florence Pugh, Josh Hartnett, Casey Affleck, Rami Malek, Kenneth Branagh, Benny Safdie, Jason Clarke, Dylan Arnold, Tom Conti, James D'Arcy, Dane DeHaan, Alden Ehrenreich, David Krumholtz, Matthew Modine, Scott Grimes, Alex Wolff, Michael Angarano, Macon Blair, Jack Quaid, Josh Peck, Olivia Thirbly, James Remar, Gary Oldman
Running Time: 181 min.
Rating: R

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)     

With Oppenheimer, writer/director Christopher Nolan takes what many might consider an unusual route in examining the "father of the atomic bomb." Jumping between timelines, framing the narrative around two significant court hearings and shifting from black and white to color, this isn't your standard historical biopic. And yet it is, surreally using its subject's life to explore deeper, further reaching consequences that linger to this day. Adapted from the 2005 biography "American Prometheus" and clocking in at a gargantuan three hours, Nolan doesn't hold back in examining the string of events surrounding disgraced American physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer's eventual loss of national security clearance in 1954.

While a fair amount of the story's energy is poured into the actual development of Oppenheimer's weapon of mass destruction, it's primarily gripping prologue, preparing us for the controversy to come. It isn't until his idea becomes a reality that he discovers the moral complications and lack of control he'll have over its use. You can chalk this up to hubris or naivety as his concerns aren't merely dismissed, but savagely ripped apart, leaving the renowned physicist's reputation smeared. History may have partially corrected that, but the most unsettling aspect is how it happened to begin with.

It's 1926 when American-born 22 year-old theoretical physics student J. Robert Oppenheimer (Cillian Murphy) studies at Cambridge before completing his PhD in Germany and returns to the states to teach quantum physics in California. While on the West Coast he befriends a group of U.S. Communist Party members, getting entangled in romantic relationships with troubled psychiatrist Jean Tatlock (Florence Pugh) and his eventual wife, biologist Kitty Puening (Emily Blunt). But everything changes once he's approached by General Leslie Groves (Matt Damon) in the midst of World War II.

With the Nazis and Russia suspected of working on a nuclear arms program, Oppenheimer is recruited by Groves in 1942 to lead the Manhattan Project dedicated to developing an atomic bomb. Joined by a team of scientists including good friend Isidor Isaac Rabbi (David Krumholtz) and the brilliant but disagreeable Edward Teller (Benny Safdie), Oppenheimer and his crew work around the clock in Los Alamos, New Mexico to prepare for a dangerous test detonation. As Oppenheimer's consumed with guilt over President Truman's (Gary Oldman) decision to bomb Japan into surrender, longtime rival and Energy Commission chairman Lewis Strauss (Robert Downey Jr.) schemes, pulling political strings to sideline the scientist.  

Non-linear as the film's structure appears, it actually follows a strict chronology that begins with Oppenheimer's academic years and continues through Los Alamos and beyond. There's a lengthy emphasis on his education, marveling under the learning tree of intellectual idols like Kenneth Branagh's Nobel winning physicist Niels Bohr. These early scenes, along with his personal troubles with wife Kitty and unhinged mistress Jean seem off-putting at first, but it adds up, as does his affiliation with communists. Nolan's pretty even handed with this, neither downplaying Oppenheimer's tangential involvement or how that association will be weaponized to later take him down. 

All roads lead to the 1945 Trinity A-bomb test, building up a huge amount of suspense and intrigue for the blast that clears the path for Truman's bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. While the catastrophic event itself isn't depicted, the script doesn't shy away from questioning whether Japan would have  surrendered without such extreme measures. And no one's more ambivalent than the tortured Oppenheimer, who becomes painfully aware of the door he just opened and its horrifying ramifications. 

The film's most powerful scene comes when Oppenheimer delivers a speech to an audience full of scientists and military wildly cheering their hero for ending the war. But what he sees instead are bright, blinding lights and faces of burning flesh in the crowd that will haunt him long after the celebratory magazine profiles fade. Jennifer Lame's editing and Ludwig Göransson's score provide constant, palpable tension throughout, but never more than during this sequence, which signals the psychological battle he'll now be fighting within himself.

Supposedly, the feud between Mozart and Salieri in Amadeus served as Nolan's inspiration for Lewis Strauss's hate and jealousy fueled vendetta against Oppenheimer, which is mostly one-sided. By orchestrating a predetermined sham of a hearing for his opponent, Strauss ends up revealing more about the integrity of those testifying than the accused. But between Oppenheimer's womanizing and communist links, it's not hard to discredit him, even if a worse humiliation comes while meeting with Truman, who mocks his concerns. When given the choice of falling in line or getting out of the way, he picks neither, losing his country instead. 

Cillian Murphy has played his fair share of villains and creeps, but Oppenheimer, while eccentrically flawed and narcissistic, isn't exactly that, if only because his intense regret is enough to qualify him as having a conscience. But he still did what he did and spends the rest of his days grappling with it, leaving the gravest risk to humanity in the hands of a potentially irresponsible government.

Through that lens, it's easy to view Oppenheimer as a hopelessly reckless, but the pull of Murphy's performance is that he plays him as nearly impenetrable and impossible to read right up until the enormity of what's happened sinks in. And with his sunken, hollowed face and darting eyes, the eeriest aspect to his casting is how an actor with such an unusually unmistakable look manages to be a physical dead ringer for the man himself. 

Strauss' 1959 Senate confirmation hearing for Eisenhower's Secretary of Commerce position proves to be a referendum on the former shoe salesman's shady dealings and Oppenheimer's last shot at any kind of redemption. Downey's brilliance peaks here, revealing he was actually this good at being bad the entire time, only now allowing us to catch on. The rest of this loaded cast is packed with big names filling what would otherwise be considered small, throwaway roles under the guidance of a lesser director. Some are seamlessly interwoven into the plot's fabric while others are briefly written off until reappearing later to make massive contributions. 

Matt Damon steals a portion of the film with his gravitas as the hard-nosed, practical Gen. Groves while brief, strong turns also come from Josh Hartnett and Rami Malek as physicists Ernest Lawrence and David Hill, Jason Clarke as hearing attorney Roger Robb, Casey Affleck as military intelligence officer Boris Pash, and most notably, Alden Eidenreich as Strauss' unnamed fictional aide who becomes increasingly disillusioned with his boss. Blunt isn't given tons to do as Kitty, but she nails the heavily factual interpretation, right down to her pivotal testimony ripped directly from the transcripts. Pugh makes an even larger impression with far less screen time, bringing a desperate instability and magnetic seductiveness to Jean, who's constantly a step away from falling off the deep end.

With a fairly restrained use of CGI and an emphasis on more practical effects, the only small complaint is some questionable old age makeup in the last act that's still less distracting than any digitized approach, especially in a period piece. But the film deserves major credit for what's probably the best use of Albert Einstein (magnificently played by Scottish actor Tom Conti) we've seen in a historical drama. There's this clever mystery surrounding the professional bond he shares with Oppenheimer that requires both more and less unpacking than you'd initially assume. And that's especially true of their unforgettable final scene.  

Cold and detached, this is still surprisingly accessible, with everything locking into place for Nolan in ways it hasn't before. Plagued by anxiety and impending doom, we watch the scientist simmer from the inside, realizing his greatest innovation could very well destroy the world. And that enormous weight is thrust onto viewers, making Oppenheimer a challenge to fully absorb in just a single watch, where you can only begin to unravel its numerous implications.

A Ghost Story

Director: David Lowery
Starring: Casey Affleck, Rooney Mara, Will Oldham, Sonia Acevedo, Rob Zabrecky, Liz Franke, Kenneisha Thompson, Barlow Jacobs
Running Time: 92 min.
Rating: R

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)

How often do we hear the obviously discomforting phrase, "Life Goes On" when someone passes away? If David Lowery's haunting and affecting A Ghost Story isn't one the saddest films about loss that's ever been made, then it's certainly among the greatest. It takes that statement and truly gets inside it, offering up a contemplative, poetic meditation on living and dying in this universe that's so important it feels as if we've been given answers to questions we didn't know we needed, or even wanted. And the script never once advertises it's doing that. Lowery just lets his story wash over us, showing what it must be like, to not only live with the grief surrounding a catastrophic loss like this, but be the deceased. It knows that while life does technically "go on" for most, it's nothing but an empty platitude when applied to the person who's gone.

So, how then can this film possibly attempt to articulate the feeling of no longer being alive? It's not as if the deceased can feel or do anything. And that's exactly the point. The entire concept is ingenious in its simplicity, and as you've already likely heard, this is the movie where Casey Affleck stands around in a white sheet with eyeholes and Rooney Mara eats an entire pie. That's the easy description, and on that alone you'll get a handful of people who won't see it, or will, and say they were bored to tears because "nothing happened." That's fine, but a lot happens, just not in the way anyone's used to. Emotionally, it's difficult to get through because it dares to go places that guarantee a lasting experience for those prone to falling under its spell.

Sparse and achingly real, there isn't much narrative to be found because it's interested in ideas large enough to transcend it. What starts as a painful reflection on love and loss gradually builds to more, crossing time, space and existence as it maintains this uncomfortable intimacy with the familiarity and monotony of everyday life. Unbearably depressing and strangely uplifting all at once, it's staying power already seems unrivaled, continuing to grow in my estimation since its initial viewing.

Quiet, sensitive Texas-based musician, "C" (Affleck) lives with his wife, "M" (Mara) in a small suburban home he loves, but she's hoping they can soon move out of. Unfortunately, the final decision rests with neither, as a tragic, sudden car accident claims C's life as he pulls out of their driveway early in the morning. While lying on the mortician's table, his spirit appears to rise from his lifeless body, and wearing a white bedsheet with two eye holes, he returns to their house as a passive, invisible observer of his grieving widow. Watching as C attempts to put the pieces of her now shattered life back together, he takes in the painful realization that things will gradually get easier for her. Soon, he'll be gone a little longer, and as a result, that absence may mean a little less.

C will meet new people and will surely now want to sell a house that contains plenty of warm memories, but stands primarily as a depressing reminder of a future together that's gone. While she can leave, he's trapped, standing on the sidelines long enough to frustratingly witness a new family move in and the house turn over yet again. He stays and waits for her to come back. Will she? When C's journey finally takes him out of the house, he embarks on a transformative trip through time and memory, finding out what it truly means to leave a lasting legacy in a universe where everyone has a history.

Emotional devastation. That's really the only proper description for what Lowery accomplishes in taking a seemingly ludicrous premise of a dead guy walking around in a ghost sheet and wringing such pathos out of it. Even one or two half-steps wrong in the presentation of this admittedly high risk concept could have resulted in disaster, but he somehow successfully walks that razor's edge, delivering this melancholic tone poem that haunts and wonders with each new scene. Much of that comes from the fact that you can sense the presence of C under the sheet.

You can just tell it's Casey Affleck under there rather than some stand-in or double. From the height to the posture and movements, it's definitely him, and you get the impression any attempt at a substitution would negatively manifest itself in a piece built entirely around mood and feeling. He has to move just right for all of this to work and not seem ridiculous, but Affleck goes several steps further with his head gestures, finding ways to convey an entire range of emotions through, yes, a sheet.

Much has been made of Rooney Mara's infamous pie-eating scene, but it seems that audiences are more put off by the audacity of the idea than the actual event, which sees her desperate, grief stricken character ravenously goes to town on this pie all within a single take. It's clear why the scene's here, as it might be the only true release M allows herself in the wake of this tragedy, but what's less obvious is how anyone could have serious thematic issues with it. If they're just bored then that's fine, as the film probably isn't for them anyway since many other scenes feel even longer. But Lowery's not just being pretentious or trying to shock. Rather, it's a deliberate attempt to take us inside the head space of a character who's dying inside, and that it succeeds at it (and much more when factoring in who else is in the room) should be enough to claim it works better than any lines of spoken dialogue could. It also calls to mind an old expression that you'd even watch a certain actor or actress just read the phone book for two hours. This takes less time, but substitute a dessert dish for that phone book and Rooney passes the test.

Possibly from corroborating once before on a Lowery project, Mara and Affleck have this easygoing shorthand as a couple in the early scenes, of which there are surprisingly few. Once the death occurs, most of the remainder belongs to her, carrying those scenes of grieving with expressions and silences that seem unconsciously plugged in to his spectral presence without ever truly being aware of it.
Daniel Hart's unnerving and hypnotizing score also adds to that feeling with invisible subtly, even as the film's loudest proclamation of outright emotion, Hart's band Dark Rooms' "I Get Overwhelmed" exceeds any expectation of a song powerful enough to break down the barriers between life and death.

With long enough stretches of no dialogue to qualify as a silent film, Lowery leans heavily on visuals, sound design, score and the performances to tell the story. The combination of being shot in an extremely boxy aspect ratio and Andrew Droz Palermo's washed out, grainy cinematography recreate the look of a vintage photo, while also serving to enhance the claustrophobia. It's as if we're looking through a peephole or viewfinder into these characters' lives, much like the deceased protagonist.

It's hard to prepare for what you'll experience when a premise this far outside the box lands on your lap. But there's no mistaking that A Ghost Story is, in every possible sense, an experience, albeit one requiring the viewer to enter with an open mind and heart. So many of its scenes are unforgettably haunting. Whether it's a sudden, explosive expression of the ghost's anger directed at strangers who have taken over his home, an unbearably sad, subtitled silent conversation that takes place between apparitions, or time travel trips into the future and past that deliver a cold but somewhat comforting truth: While the world goes on without us, it's entirely possible we each left a mark that made it just a little better for whoever comes next.

Manchester By The Sea

Director: Kenneth Lonergan
Starring: Casey Affleck, Michelle Williams, Kyle Chandler, Lucas Hedges, Gretchen Mol, C.J. Wilson, Tate Donovan, Kara Hayward, Anna Baryshnikov, Heather Burns, Matthew Broderick
Running Time: 137 min.
Rating: R

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Bleak and almost relentlessly dour, Kenneth Lonergan's Manchester by the Sea will undoubtedly be a trying watch for anyone with an aversion to large helpings of depression and hopelessness in their cinematic diet. At over two hours and two tragedies later, you'll be reminded it's Oscar season again, if it wasn't already obvious. It's about real people struggling with real problems, but the plot doesn't always take the easy way out by connecting the dots between point A and point B or offering up a pat resolution. For the character Casey Affleck inhabits, there's no possible resolution available that could redeem him or allow him to look in the mirror in the morning without hating the man he sees. It's clear early on that he was involved in something, but even before we're filled in entirely, it's a given it was catastrophic, not only changing the course of his life, but everyone around him. At first he's quite and unassuming, prone to occasional bouts of rage that only intensify upon discovering the amount of responsibility he'll soon take on. He's not ready for it and may never be, but he's the only option left in a sea of bad choices.

While there's no mistaking that Affleck's lead turn is the big draw here, everyone else isn't just merely tagging along for a ride that can best be described as melancholy. Like the tortured protagonist at its center, it's introspective in a way likely to turn off mainstream audiences looking to escape to the movies for a good time. Usually, I'd scoff at the categorization of any film as being "for critics" but this comes closest to fitting the bill with a loose, free-flowing narrative sure to frustrate some. But unrelenting in its fleshing out of emotional pain, it's also intelligent and observant, taking its time telling a story about grief sure to touch, and possibly disturb, anyone forced to go through something even remotely similar, and the many more who haven't.    

Withdrawn, reserved handyman Lee Chandler (Affleck) is working in Quincy, Massachusetts, arguing with tenants by day while drinking and starting bar fights at night. But when Lee gets word from family friend, George (C.J. Wilson) that his brother Joe (Kyle Chandler) suffered a heart attack, he rushes up to his hometown of Manchester, only to discover he's passed away. Staying a few days to handle funeral arrangements and break the news to Joe's teen son, Patrick (Lucas Hedges), Lee's informed by a lawyer that he's been named by Joe as the boy's guardian.

Unwilling to move back to Manchester and refusing to let Patrick stay with his estranged alcoholic mother, Elise (Gretchen Mol), Lee's insistence on uprooting the teen from his current life and dragging him back to Boston with him causes a contentious rift between the two. Making matters worse is Lee's penchant for acting out and starting trouble, frequently revealing a violent side that clashes with his outwardly quiet nature. Flashbacks to his once happy life with ex-wife Randi (Michelle Williams) and their three children in Manchester reveal a horrifying tragedy that both explains his refusal to return and the sad, bitter man he's now become. Through Patrick comes the opportunity to reconnect with someone who could use a friend and an uncle, as well as possibly reclaim at least a small piece of himself he lost years ago.

Reading only a description of the two main characters, it would probably be difficult to tell the adult from the child in the picture, at least when based exclusively on their behavior. Taking a somewhat different turn from what's expected, Patrick isn't an angry, rebellious kid acting out in the wake of his father's death. If anything, it's the exact opposite, as he's a really good kid who's surprisingly well adjusted and takes the news of his dad's passing as you'd imagine an understandably devastated but mature person would. Most people would probably be lining up to be this kid's guardian, realizing they could easily do far worse. Unfortunately, Lee's a complete wreck and the thought of him raising any child, even if it's just until he turns 18 in couple of years, is scary proposition given his current emotional state.

Lonergan builds up a good deal of suspense by slowly revealing through flashbacks drips and drabs of Lee's previous, more fulfilling life, all leading up to the incident that destroys everything.  Initially, we're given a peek into his relationship with his brother and nephew during happier times, perhaps providing evidence that he was at one point the ideal choice to look after Patrick should something happen to the long ailing Joe. But then it happens. The accident. Without giving too much away, it's just about the worst possible tragedy that could happen, with responsibility for it laying squarely at Lee's feet.

We already have a general idea what the event is, but once we actually find out, everything about his behavior starts more clearly coming into focus. It's a miracle he can even get up in the morning, much less function at all. And often he can't. Every interaction he has with another human being is strained in some way, with the possibility hovering that he could explode at any moment. There's a flashback scene at the police station following the event that's so difficult to get through it's almost unreal, as Affleck plays Lee as being in such a shocked trance that he's barely present. That is until he gets one piece of information that sends him flying off the deep end, as the realization hits that they'll be no one to punish him for his horrifying mistake but him. And if need be, he'll spend the rest of his sad, miserable days doing so. Calling what Affleck does in the film a "performance" nearly fails to do it justice, as this could more accurately be described as a compulsive study of human behavior in the throes of extreme grief.

With a hangdog expression permanently etched on his face, you can literally sense and feel Lee's pain with each exasperated line of dialogue. You're on edge the whole time, wondering when he'll snap next. Lee's truly given up, which is why his relationship with Patrick, is so crucial to both of them. There's the legitimate risk Lee could drag him down the same rabbit hole of grief and depression, if not for the fact Patrick processes things far differently, sharing few of his uncle's worst inclinations. Lucas Hedges brilliantly downplays what would have been your stereotypical "angry teen," understandably saddened and rattled by his father's death and frustrated by his uncle's inability to compromise on any level. Their interactions provide what might be the only levity and humor in the film, as does Pat's attempts at juggling his two girlfriends, Sylvie (Kara Hayward) and Sandy (Anna Baryshnikov), with Lee in the house.

What initially appears to be extreme selfishness on Lee's part gives way to the truth that he'll never be able to live in Manchester with the specter of that life-destroying event hovering over him. In his own words, he just "can't beat it," and as much as he wants to make that sacrifice for his nephew, the guilt's too consuming, swallowing him up from the inside out. When he finally comes face-to face with ex-wife Randi, the result is the film's most emotionally brutal scene, with Affleck and Michelle Williams putting on a clinic of frustration, forgiveness and outrage as their two characters talk and scream over each other, completing each other's sentences and reading minds in the messy way that only two people who have been through what they have could do. While the scene lasts only a couple of minutes it feels like something that's been slowly simmering from the beginning with the payoff proving to be worth the wait, only further solidifying what we've now long known about the level of Williams' talent. 

A script-driven project if there ever was one, Manchester by the Sea is all about the writing and performances, with everything else falling into place to support that, except for maybe a musical score that seems unnecessarily obtrusive at times. Despite not being from the New England area, Lonergan clearly understands the setting and how its chilly, grey atmosphere enhances the visual storytelling, providing the ideal stage for complex characters who make realistic choices that don't seem to hinge on contrivances or obvious creative force pulling their strings. Spending this much time with characters and a subject that's as dark as it gets, it's somewhat of a miracle that it's this engaging. By no means an easy movie to wrap your arms around or even rewatch, it's ultimately a rewarding one, anchored in no small part by Casey Affleck's most complex, nuanced work to date.

Many Burning Questions from the 2017 Oscars

Wouldn't issues with the show's length be helped by starting even just a half hour earlier?

Boy, they're really getting the nominated songs out of the way early this year, aren't they?

Shouldn't we just be happy they're getting performed on the show at all?

Isn't JT's Trolls song annoyingly catchy?

Remember that year the telecast had more musical performances than the Grammys?

Did you totally expect a La La Land opening?

Even though the Globes did it already?

How long did it take Kimmel to make a political joke?

Wasn't his Great Wall dig at Matt Damon pretty funny?

Forget about Trump, wasn't Streep's ridiculous nomination the real elephant in the room?

Didn't the audience actually look like they were having a good time for a change during Kimmel's monologue?

How long did it take you to remember Alicia Vikander won the Supporting Actress Oscar last year?

With that speech, didn't for Mahershala Ali prove he deserved the night's first standing ovation?

Academy-Award winning Suicide Squad?

Did those winners for costume and makeup just drain a whole lot of Oscar pools?

Don't those categories screw everyone each year?

Did you catch Bill Paxton in that Rolex ad?

Were you still holding out hope that they'd get him into the In Memoriam montage?

Was 2016 O.J.'s year or what?

Is anyone bothered that it really isn't a documentary?

It's been brought up before, but shouldn't The Rock host the Oscars?

Isn't amazing that Lin-Manuel Miranda somehow squeezed into the Oscar race also?

And that he's one victory away from the EGOT?!

Aren't the Original Song nominees fairly strong this year?

Isn't it great we actually get to hear all of them?

What happened to that plan to spend less time between awards to speed things up?

When Kimmel talked about food, were you worried Ellen Degeneres would start delivering pizzas?

Um, so what's the difference between Sound Editing and Sound Mixing again?

Over an hour in and no Oscars for La La Land?

Wasn't it nice of Mel Gibson to bring his daughter to the ceremony?

Shouldn't there really be a casting Oscar already?

Aren't the classic clips of previous winners a great idea?

Who can possibly forget Mark Rylance beating Stallone last year?

Don't you wish you could?

How about that Michelle Williams scene?

Is Jeremy The Critic thrilled she keeps repping Dawson's Creek by bringing Busy Phillips with her every year?

Was Viola winning the certified lock of the night?

Did she scare you with all that talk about cemetaries and dead people?

Speaking of death, weren't you just dying to see a short film based on a Walmart receipt?

Who knew Charlize Theron was such a big fan of The Apartment?

Shouldn't they have more segments during the show with actors discussing their favorite movies?

Isn't that better than doing it... during the nominations announcement?!

Should we be happy or disappointed it took this long to get to an overtly political speech?

Didn't you know it would come during the Foreign Film category, no matter who won?

Could Sting's song be any shorter?

After Gael Garcia Bernnal, were you thinking it's now "game on" with the political stuff?

Were you thinking we could have an interesting night on our hands if La La Land doesn't win for Production Design?

When it did, were you thinking the landslide has started?

Wasn't that whole tour bus bit simultaneously disturbing and train wreck entertaining at the same time?

Didn't Kimmel's wisecracks save it?

These tourists sure like sticking phones in celebrities' faces, don't they?

If you're Meryl Streep, Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, or Denzel Washington, are you secretly or (in Jennifer Aniston's case) not so secretly petrified?

How about that guy who fist bumped Mahershala Ali?

Is my night (and entire year) made seeing Michael J. Fox come out of a DeLorean to a standing ovation at the Academy Awards?

Not a question, but you guys better freakin' stand up!

Did you catch how ecstatic Brie Larson was?

Could life get any better for Seth Rogen right now?

Best Editing award isn't the Best Picture predictor it used to be, is it?

Did you catch them openly acknowledging no one's seen any of the nominated short films?

How about that mean tweet about Felicity Jones and Eddie Redmayne having "the same face?"

Or, my personal favorite, Casey Affleck being the real life version of Billy Bob Thornton's character from Sling Blade?

Were you glad Stone and Gosling got to present together since they've been so underexposed these past couple of months?

Even listening to just snippets of those musical scores, isn't La La Land's clearly the best?

Relieved when Jennifer Aniston mentioned Bill Paxton?

If you were told a year ago Carrie Fisher, Prince and Anton Yelchin would be in the In Memoriam montage, would you believe it?

Did Sara Bareilles give the best In Memoriam performance in years, or what?

Wasn't it the perfect match of song and artist? 

Was Kimmel fondly reminiscing about We Bought a Zoo the most hilarious gag of the night? 

Is Ben Affleck really in a position to join in mocking it?

Doesn't Kenneth Lonergan kind of resemble Grumpy Cat?

Wouldn't it kind of be a travesty if Moonlight didn't win that Adapted Screenplay Oscar?

Did you know that Damien Chazelle was set to be the youngest Best Director winner ever until the show ran too long?

Think I waiting all night to see my favorite Academy Award Winner, Brie Larson, take the Oscar stage again?

Even if she looked like she'd rather see any name on that card other than Casey Affleck's?

Did you see Ben struggle to keep it together after his brother's speech?

Did you remember Leo (finally) won the Oscar last year?

Just based on the clips, doesn't something seem horribly off with Natalie Portman as Jackie Kennedy?

Didn't Streep appear to be embarrassed by that clip?

Can you really blame her?

Doesn't it seem harder than ever for one movie to sweep, even with 14 nominations?

Aren't there too many Best Picture nominees?

Isn't it great to see Faye Dunaway and Warren Be.....

WAIT...WHAT THE HELL JUST HAPPENED!!!!!???

Warren Beatty read the wrong winner?!!!

How is that even possible?!!

Didn't you just know something was wrong when you saw that guy with the headset scrambling on stage?

How could they give him the wrong envelope?!

Didn't La La Land producer Jordan Horowitz handle that entire situation better than anyone could be expected to?

Could he have possibly shown any more class in that moment?

Did that make more of a point than any political statement all night could have?

Jimmy Kimmel's speech at the show's start about being kind to each other doesn't seem so silly now, does it?

Aren't you glad someone took charge of that situation before it got even more awkward?

Wouldn't Moonlight winning Best Picture be shocking enough on its own?

Didn't Kimmel handle also handle that about as well as any host could?

Did you like Kimmel's shout-out to Steve Harvey?

Even after Warren explained it, did you still not understand how that could possibly occur?

Do two Best Picture speeches mean we won't finish on time?

Does this mean we can go back to liking the now suddenly underrated La La Land again?

So, does this mean we have to hate Moonlight now?

Did La La Land just score a victory that means more than a Best Picture Oscar?

Was this actually the best possible thing that could have happened to that movie?

Doesn't that and the growing resentment toward La La Land's many nominations prove how much of an albatross winning Best Picture can be?

How does it feel to witness history?

Aren't you glad you stayed up?

Was going to bed early the Oscar equivalent of turning off Game 6 of the 1986 World Series?

So wait, this means I got Best Picture wrong AGAIN?

Would I be satisfied if I kept missing categories under circumstances this thrilling?

Is Kimmel the only Oscars host of the past decade who's truly earned a permanent invite back?

Does this mean I now have to eat my words after initially complaining he was selected?

Do PricewaterhouseCoopers wish they could take that DeLorean back to about 10 minutes before the Best Picture envelope was opened?

How could THIS possibly be the lowest-rated Oscar telecast in 9 years?

Flubs aside, wasn't this actually a really well-produced show?

Wasn't this the Oscars we were all hoping we'd eventually get?

2017 Oscar Predictions

First, the good news. As is usually the case, the Academy did admirable job highlighting the best in motion pictures this year with their nominations, shining a spotlight on lesser known films that would otherwise go overlooked by the general public. Sure, you'll always have some casual viewers tuning in who haven't heard of most of the nominees but there's just no way around that. You have to reward quality and hope after Sunday's show more people come away interested in these movies and commit to seeing them since they're really great. I'd rather the telecast lead with that story rather than issues related to politics or the diversity of nominees. The former I'm just plain tired of while the latter already took center stage last year, and honestly, was never the Academy's problem to solve. It was the industry's. While I don't anticipate either of those topics taking the night off, I just hope it doesn't unnecessarily usurp the primary objective: Celebrating the movies and worthy work of the nominees. It should be their night, even if I'm cringing at the thought of what they'll possibly say when they get to the podium. 

As for the new host, I don't have strong feelings either way on Jimmy Kimmel, but can conclusively condemn the laziness of the selection, which just reeks of shameless corporate synergy. I expect that from the other awards telecasts but (perhaps naively) regarded the Academy Awards as being above that, or at least doing a good enough job pretending to be. Part of the fun each year was guessing who would be a worthy choice as host and now that's apparently out the window in favor of making sure ABC gets free advertising for their talk show. Combine that with the mishandling of the nominations announcement, and I'm less than optimistic about a telecast that could still surprise under the best of circumstances.

What won't be a surprise is the La La Land taking home the lion's share of these awards. Tying Titanic and All About Eve in total number of nominations with 14, it won't win them all, but it should win at least 9. That's enough to make the evening a certifiable sweep. There just isn't a single emerging challenger strong enough to give it trouble and my predictions below reflect that. The best case scenario is that they at least spread the wealth a little bit to keep it interesting and the telecast stays under 5 hours. Unlike last year, when I had a horse in the race with Room, I can't say I'm as personally invested in Sunday's outcomes. If anything, that may be a plus and bode well for my predictions, sparing me an embarrassment like missing Best Picture. All my picks are below, along with some comments on the major categories. And as usual, I'll reserve the right to make adjustments right up until the show starts.

*Predicted Winners

Best Animated Feature
Kubo and the Two Strings, Travis Knight and Arianne Sutner
Moana, John Musker, Ron Clements and Osnat Shurer
My Life as a Zucchini, Claude Barras and Max Karli
The Red Turtle, Michael Dudok de Wit and Toshio Suzuki
Zootopia, Byron Howard, Rich Moore and Clark Spencer

Best Animated Short
Blind Vaysha, Theodore Ushev
Borrowed Time, Andrew Coats and Lou Hamou-Lhadj
Pear Cider and Cigarettes, Robert Valley and Cara Speller
Pearl, Patrick Osborne
Piper, Alan Barillaro and Marc Sondheimer

Best Documentary Feature
13th, Ava DuVernay, Spencer Averick and Howard Barish
Fire at Sea, Gianfranco Rosi and Donatella Palermo
I Am Not Your Negro, Raoul Peck, Remi Grellety and Hebert Peck
Life, Animated, Roger Ross Williams and Julie Goldman
O.J.: Made in America, Ezra Edelman and Caroline Waterlow

Best Documentary Short Subject
4.1 Miles, Daphne Matziaraki
Extremis, Dan Krauss
Joe’s Violin, Kahane Cooperman and Raphaela Neihausen
Watani: My Homeland, Marcel Mettelsiefen and Stephen Ellis
The White Helmets, Orlando von Einsiedel and Joanna Natasegara

Best Live Action Short Film
Ennemis Interieurs, Selim Azzazi
La Femme et le TGV, Timo von Gunten and Giacun Caduff
Silent Nights, Aske Bang and Kim Magnusson
Sing, Kristof Deak and Anna Udvardy
Timecode, Juanjo Gimenez

Best Foreign Language Film
A Man Called Ove, Sweden
Land of Mine, Denmark
Tanna, Australia
The Salesman, Iran
Toni Erdmann, Germany

Best Film Editing
Arrival, Joe Walker
Hacksaw Ridge, John Gilbert
Hell or High Water, Jake Roberts
La La Land, Tom Cross
Moonlight, Nat Sanders and Joi McMillon

Best Sound Editing
Arrival, Sylvain Bellemare
Deep Water Horizon, Wylie Stateman and Renee Tondelli
Hacksaw Ridge, Robert Mackenzie and Andy Wright
La La Land, Ai-Ling Lee and Mildred Iatrou Morgan
Sully, Alan Robert Murray and Bub Asman

Best Sound Mixing
Arrival, Bernard Gariepy Strobl and Claude La Haye
Hacksaw Ridge, Kevin O’Connell, Andy Wright, Robert Mackenzie and Peter Grace
La La Land, Andy Nelson, Ai-Ling Lee and Steve A. Morrow
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, David Parker, Christopher Scarabosio and Stuart Wilson
13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi, Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers, Jeffrey J. Haboush and Mac Ruth

Best Production Design
Arrival, Patrice Vermette, Paul Hotte
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Stuart Craig, Anna Pinnock
Hail, Caesar!, Jess Gonchor, Nancy Haigh
La La Land, David Wasco, Sandy Reynolds-Wasco
Passengers, Guy Hendrix Dyas, Gene Serdena

Best Original Score
Jackie, Mica Levi
La La Land, Justin Hurwitz
Lion, Dustin O’Halloran and Hauschka
Moonlight, Nicholas Britell
Passengers, Thomas Newman

Best Original Song
“Audition (The Fools Who Dream),” La La Land — Music by Justin Hurwitz; Lyric by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul
“Can’t Stop the Feeling,” Trolls — Music and Lyric by Justin Timberlake, Max Martin and Karl Johan Schuster
“City of Stars,” La La Land — Music by Justin Hurwitz; Lyric by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul
“The Empty Chair,” Jim: The James Foley Story — Music and Lyric by J. Ralph and Sting
“How Far I’ll Go,” Moana — Music and Lyric by Lin-Manuel Miranda

Best Makeup and Hair
A Man Called Ove, Eva von Bahr and Love Larson
Star Trek Beyond, Joel Harlow and Richard Alonzo
Suicide Squad, Alessandro Bertolazzi, Giorgio Gregorini and Christopher Nelson

Best Costume Design
Allied, Joanna Johnston
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Colleen Atwood
Florence Foster Jenkins, Consolata Boyle
Jackie, Madeline Fontaine
La La Land, Mary Zophres

Best Visual Effects
Deepwater Horizon, Craig Hammack, Jason Snell, Jason Billington and Burt Dalton
Doctor Strange, Stephane Ceretti, Richard Bluff, Vincent Cirelli and Paul Corbould
The Jungle Book, Robert Legato, Adam Valdez, Andrew R. Jones and Dan Lemmon
Kubo and the Two Strings, Steve Emerson, Oliver Jones, Brian McLean and Brad Schiff
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, John Knoll, Mohen Leo, Hal Hickel and Neil Corbould

Best Cinematography
Bradford Young, Arrival
Linus Sandgren, La La Land
Greig Fraser, Lion
James Laxton, Moonlight
Rodrigo Prieto, Silence

Best Adapted Screenplay
Arrival, Eric Heisserer
Fences, August Wilson
Hidden Figures, Allison Schroeder and Theodore Melfi
Lion, Luke Davies
Moonlight, Barry Jenkins

*This is Moonlight's to lose and it isn't out of the realm of possibility that it does. A really strong category where really anything (yes, even Arrival) could sweep in and take it. Fences, Hidden Figures and Lion are all based on highly respected source material many could claim were improved upon or at least equaled by their cinematic adaptations. As tempted as they'll be to give a posthumous Oscar to August Wilson for Fences, more tempting will be rewarding Moonlight in a major category besides Supporting Actor since it's likely to lose both Picture and Director. While Barry Jenkins' script feels the least "adapted " of the five (controversially placed here due to it being based on an unproduced play) and Lion is really on an upswing, that shouldn't be enough to slow its momentum. Plus, everyone wants to see Jenkins make it to the podium at least once. Barry, that is. Not Florence Foster. 

Best Original Screenplay
20th Century Women, Mike Mills
Hell or High Water, Taylor Sheridan
La La Land, Damien Chazelle
The Lobster, Yorgos Lanthimos, Efthimis Filippou
Manchester by the Sea, Kenneth Lonergan

*Another loaded category where they'll again want to go with a highly respected film not likely to win many other awards due to La La Land's expected dominance. Lonergan's Manchester by the Sea is the most writerly of these, with its observant script tying the gut-wrenching performances as its strongest aspect. For Hell or High Water and especially The Lobster, their nominations are reward enough. Same for Mike Mills' 20th Century Women. The only remaining threat is La La Land and believe me it's a major one. If Chazelle takes this, watch out, since his screenplay is widely regarded as the film's weakest link. But when you're talking about a story that directly speaks to most of the Academy's voting body and their own perceived life experiences, anything's possible. It's a movie that's quite literally hitting them where they live. I'm still picking Manchester, but using a pencil.       

Best Supporting Actress
Viola Davis, Fences
Naomie Harris, Moonlight
Nicole Kidman, Lion
Octavia Spencer, Hidden Figures
Michelle Williams, Manchester by the Sea

*Viola Davis has this in the bag in a race that may be the closest thing we have to a sure bet all night. Of course, that category is still Supporting Actress, which is historically known for major, shocking upsets. I don't foresee that this year, with Davis' biggest challenge coming in the form of Michelle Williams, whose devastating few minutes in Manchester by the Sea is exactly the kind of cameo-like performance the Academy can sometimes like to reward. Just not this year. Naomie Harris feels next in line, followed by Davis' The Help co-star Octavia Spencer and, in distant last, Nicole Kidman. There's still this feeling Viola is owed an Oscar after losing to Streep a few years ago, so the fact that she's deserving and basically carries the film in a role she already won a Tony for on Broadway, is just icing on the cake. The potential roadblock would be category fraud, as many see it as a lead rather than supporting performance. But it won't matter.    

Best Supporting Actor
Mahershala Ali, Moonlight
Jeff Bridges, Hell or High Water
Lucas Hedges, Manchester by the Sea
Dev Patel, Lion
Michael Shannon, Nocturnal Animals

*Imagine the possibility of Dev Patel's name being announced as the winner. With the steam Lion's been gaining, it could easily happen. But it won't. I'm writing off Mahershala Ali's Golden Globe loss to Nocturnal Animals' Aaron Taylor-Johnson as a complete fluke because he's winning this. He's likable, respected, humble and gave the performance of his life (and one of the best of the year) in Moonlight. His biggest threat is Patel, an actor few thought would ever see an Oscar ceremony again after starring in and seemingly peaking with Best Picture winner Slumdog Millionaire nearly nine years ago. Jeff Bridges' Texas Ranger in Hell or High Water is supposedly too reminiscent of other recent curmudgeonly roles he's had, there's a feeling Lucas Hedges still "has time," and as much as everyone loves Michael Shannon, this doesn't feel like his Oscar-winning part. We'll definitely know when it gets here. Expect the speech of the night from Ali.  

Best Actress
Isabelle Huppert, Elle
Ruth Negga, Loving
Natalie Portman, Jackie
Emma Stone, La La Land
Meryl Streep, Florence Foster Jenkins

*As much as prognosticators have tried to hype this up as a tight race, it isn't. At least not anymore. It's all about Emma and at this point there's absolutely nothing standing between her and a statue that's coming a lot sooner in her career than many expected. Even those who don't care for La La Land (yes, there are some) have a hard time denying that she's undoubtedly the best thing in it. But it's definitely a different kind of Best Actress victory than Brie Larson's last year for Room, which was probably my favorite Oscar-winning performance of the past decade. It doesn't reach those raw depths, nor it is meant to, instead falling more on the entertainment side of the fence. So while comparisons will exist because of their ages and similar career trajectories up to this point, this strangely feels like a "one for us, one for them" type of win for Stone that's a return to how we perceive the Academy thinks after backing Larson last year.

Streep's annual token nomination is turning into such a bad joke I could actually see this harming her legacy if it continues. "It's a thrill just to be nominated" may actually be real statements uttered by Isabelle Huppert and Ruth Negga. The former has a much better chance based on a career of outstanding work and it was nice to see the latter sneak in, as her nomination for Loving was far from a sure thing. In fact, at one point it was a real long shot so it's great her career gets the bump. Speaking of bumps, that leaves us with Stone's biggest concern: Portman.

As a film, the character-driven Jackie just was just never received as a top tier player going into Awards season against the likes of heavier hitters like La La Land and Moonlight. She needed it to be to get the win. Combine that with having already won for Black Swan, her pregnancy preventing her from doing much promotion and the fact that Stone is untouchable right now, and it becomes an even steeper climb. Her only hope is that they make a political vote based on the subject matter, but if that were the case her film would have been nominated for more, including Best Picture. Mostly middle to older aged white males still comprise much of the Academy and we know how they love to vote for the hot, young ingenue. That only tips the scales further in Stone's favor.        

Best Actor
Casey Affleck, Manchester by the Sea
Andrew Garfield, Hacksaw Ridge
Ryan Gosling, La La Land
Viggo Mortensen, Captain Fantastic
Denzel Washington, Fences

*The tightest contest of the night. while I wouldn't go as far as saying it could tilt either way, Denzel and Affleck are pretty close right now. Still, I'm favoring Affleck, if only because I can't imagine voters seeing that police station scene and not giving it to him based on that alone. And despite their fondness for actors who direct, Washington isn't exactly widely loved within the industry and hasn't stacked up the impressive number of notices and awards Affleck and Manchester has over the past few months. If Andrew Garfield wins, Adrien Brody will be somewhere cheering.

Mortensen really stands out as the most adventurous nomination here, but a very unlikely winner considering how Captain Fantastic was ignored in all other categories. Gosling's performance is La La Land is underappreciated and taken for granted, if only because his co-star's so good. But the best work he did over the past year was in The Nice Guys. The safe money's on Casey, but i wouldn't be completely shocked by a Denzel upset.  

Best Director
Damien Chazelle, La La Land
Mel Gibson, Hacksaw Ridge,
Barry Jenkins, Moonlight
Kenneth Lonergan, Manchester by the Sea
Denis Villeneuve, Arrival

*I still contend Damien Chazelle should have won Best Director for Whiplash a couple of years ago (when he went criminally un-nominated) so I'm completely fine with the foregone conclusion that he's getting this. La La Land is a far cry from that film, but he's deserving nonetheless, as his direction is the main reason a concept that had no business working at all ends up working magnificently. To pull that off is an achievement in itself, speaking to his talent and proving he's more than worthy of the statue, which could be seen as an investment in his bright future. Jenkins and Lonergan are his strongest competitors with the former having a legitimate chance if the voters don't feel like granting La La Land the sweep that's expected. Historically, Picture and Director rarely split, but it's been happening more in recent years (including last) so anything's possible. Arrival's Villeneuve feels like the odd man out here, while just seeing a nominated Mel Gibson at the Oscars and speculating on the reception he'll get, is reward enough for viewers and movie fans everywhere. He doesn't need the win and won't get it. Chazelle has this in the bag. 

Best Picture
Arrival
Fences
Hacksaw Ridge
Hell or High Water
Hidden Figures
La La Land
Lion
Manchester by the Sea
Moonlight

*Since we already know La La Land is winning, let's try speculating on potential alternate scenarios, most of which seem illogical or ridiculous. That's how you know this is over. But it's here where we can start to factor in the cultural and political climate of the past year into the Oscar race. Perhaps sensing the frontrunner is too slight a choice, not diverse or "important" enough to represent 2016 as its Best Picture, voters look elsewhere. The most viable alternative would be Moonlight, a selection that would squash most criticisms leveled at the Academy through the years, such as their alleged slights against minorities and that Brokeback Mountain debacle from over a decade ago. Those aren't good reasons to reward a film with the industry's top prize but it's unfortunately the only scenario I foresee where they would. To rehab their image. What's unfortunate about their mindset is that the film is deserving on its own merits, even if history has proven something like this is just too challenging for them to endorse. They'll think the nomination is enough.

Lion fits more squarely in their wheelhouse and if there's an upset it would be a rousing, inspiring internationally flavored adaptation like this that spoils the party. But as much momentum as it's picked up, it's just not enough, peaking maybe just a little too late. There's some truth in that "Hidden Fences" joke since in voters' minds the two films will probably be interchangeable on their ballots, splitting votes and cancelling each other out. Manchester By the Sea has held strong but it's a depressing wrist-slitter, and no matter how well written and acted, the Academy rarely rewards those with Best Picture.

Hell or High Water, Arrival and the more respected Hacksaw Ridge are considered genre pictures that are well liked, but may not have gotten in without an expanded field. Even by process of elimination it would still be La La Land, if it didn't already have enough going for it. Universally beloved, unmatched technical prowess, gigantic scope, the comeback of the musical, well-liked actors, and a theme, story, and setting that's instantly relatable to the entire Academy, it can't possibly lose. It's their movie and they'll be tripping all over themselves to reward it. But you already knew that.        

2017 Oscar Nominations (Reaction and Analysis)

Changing things up a little, The Academy this morning revealed their nominations for the 89th Annual Academy Awards, not at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater in Beverly Hills in front of media and publicists, but using a live stream on their website and digital platforms, along with satellite feed. I actually detested this approach as the "big event" feel of the announcement was completely lost in favor of impersonally finding a video online, entirely diminishing the spectacle and pageantry surrounding the nominations. They tried something new and it failed. And I hope they never do it again, especially if the primary motive was letting everyone know that the now digitally hip and connected Oscars have maybe moved into this century. But we'll look no further than the actual nominations to determine that, as the duties were handled bright and early by my favorite Academy Award Winning Best Actress, Brie Larson, Jennifer Hudson, Emmanuel Lubezki, Jason Reitman, Ken Watanabe and AMPAS President, Cheryl Boone Isaacs. Many were elated, some were disappointed, and a few less than usual were left wondering what on Earth the Academy was thinking. So, that's a plus.  Let's see how it all played out, running down some of the shocks, snubs and surprises from the morning's announcement. The full list of nominees can be viewed here.

-The big story is obviously La La Land tying Titanic and All About Eve's all-time Oscar record of most nominations with 14. This isn't entirely a surprise given the steam it's picked up and at this point it would be a shock if it doesn't win on February 26th. Universally beloved, it just doesn't have anything working against it other than the potential backlash of it being TOO successful, which is ridiculous.

-Most of the nominations shook out exactly how most thought they would across the board, as many of the acting nominees seemed locked in months ago. There weren't tons of options from the get-go and it was pretty clear who was and wasn't getting a nod, with very few exceptions.

-Didn't think Arrival would get in for Best Picture knowing the Academy's historic bias against sci-fi. But I should have known better. With anywhere from five to nine slots (and lately it's been nine) available, what else would make it? I still say they should go back to the traditional five, which would make each nominee mean more.
   
-I was right that Amy Adams wouldn't get in for Arrival. It was just too crowded a category, and if any actress could afford to be left out, it's her. 

-The highly respected Annette Bening's absence for 20th Century Women (which did earn a screenplay nod) might be the closest thing we have to a snub here. Depending on your perspective, either Ruth Negga (Loving) or Meryl Streep took her spot. I'd prefer to point the finger the latter.

-These Streep nominations for whatever she happens to appear in that particular year has now officially crossed the threshold into a running joke with Florence Foster Jenkins. I'm sure she's fine in it, but give it a break already. Even she must be laughing at this now.

-The thought that Emma Stone could very well win Best Actress is undeniably thrilling, especially for anyone who suspected such a feat was possible since Easy A. 

-Mel Gibson is back. No one ever questioned the talent but the Academy finally forgave and forgot, welcoming him back into their good graces with Hacksaw Ridge after nearly a decade in Hollywood purgatory. Nods for Picture, Director and Actor (Andrew Garfield) indicate they feel he served his sentence. Now we'll see what he does with his second chance.

-The Best Actor field turned out exactly as expected, with maybe Viggo Mortensen for Captain Fantastic the only question mark going in. And even that was kind of a given. Casey Affleck is basically a lock to take this. 

-Did anyone really think Deadpool would be nominated for anything substantial knowing voters' tastes? Sorry, but that was real long shot.

-Count me among those who don't feel O.J.: Made in America should be eligible as a documentary. It's great, but an 8-hour episodic series for TV. And it's probably winning.

-Thought Hidden Figures may have peaked a little too late in the race to get in for Best Picture, but it did, with Octavia Spencer also earning a Supporting nod. She'll be competing against her former The Help co-star, Viola Davis, the likely winner in this category for Fences.

-Was really hoping for that surprise Kevin Costner supporting nomination but it just didn't materialize. Too bad. That would have been something if it did.

-Speaking of comebacks, did anyone think we'd again be talking about Slumdog Millionaire star Dev Patel in relation to the Oscars this year? Lion slowly built momentum and overperformed considerably this morning with a nomination haul of 6 (including a Supporting nod for Nicole Kidman and Adapted Screenplay). Not bad for a movie few have heard of and even fewer have probably seen.    

-After last year's #OscarsSoWhite controversy, 2017 boasts a record six nominations for black actors, which will no doubt raise the question as to how much of an effect that had, if any. The Academy wasn't racist so much as not afforded the opportunity to nominate minorities based on a problem much larger and more systemic within the studio system. Whether that's changed at all remains to be seen, but we can agree that one year doesn't make a difference either way. This year or last. And simply counting nominations won't be indicative of that change.

Interstellar

Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, Ellen Burstyn, John Lithgow, Michael Caine, David Gyasi, Wes Bentley, Bill Irwin, Mackenzie Foy, Casey Affleck, Topher Grace David Oyelowo
Running Time: 169 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Well, at least we can't continue claiming there aren't any fresh, original ideas left in movies. Christopher Nolan's gigantic sci-fi think piece, Interstelllar, is full of them. Whether I could explain them or decipher what they all mean is another issue entirely but no one could leave the film disappointed that it didn't have enough to say. Every time a space-set sci-fi entry is released, inevitable comparisons to the trailblazing 2001: A Space Odyssey are made, whether warranted or not. Here, they are, and not just visually either. With an overreaching ambition that spans across time, space and humanity, Nolan hasn't just swung for the fences, he's run right through them. If someone asked me to explain what exactly occurs in the film's final hour, I'd give it a decent shot, but would likely fail. But it is surprising that many of these scientific facts do hold up to logical scrutiny even when the actual plot's gone too far off the deep end.

At times, you'll be wondering if this has anything to do with science at all or co-screenwriters Christopher and Jonathan Nolan are just making this up as they go along. It turns out they're not, as Caltech physicist Kip Thorne actually consulted on the film and it's at its best when playing in those waters, which is luckily 80 percent of its running time. Faltering only when awash in Spielbergian sentimentality that's partially earned, the whole thing is kind of unprecedented terms of the number of influences it draws from. If Kubrick, Spielberg and Shyamalan raised a cinematic child, it would be called Interstellar, so it's easy to understand how it's garnered such polarizing reactions.  It may take years to calculate or comprehend its creative worth, but any picture aiming this high had little chance at achieving perfection. Instead, it's Nolan's most gloriously imperfect endeavor, and one sure to be discussed and analyzed for a while to come.

In the near-future on a resource-depleted Earth, former military pilot and NASA astronaut Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) is struggling to run the family farm the midst of a crop blight that's slowly destroying civilization. His 10-year-old daughter Murph (Mackenzie Foy) is not only struggling in school in the wake of her mom's death, but claims her room is being haunted by poltergeists. But these "ghosts" are really unidentifiable intelligence leaving coordinates to a secret NASA facility being overseen by Professor John Brand (Michael Caine).

Brand's discovered a wormhole by Saturn leading to three potentially habitable planets in the galaxy that could offer a chance for humanity's survival. Cooper joins Brand's daughter, biotechnologist Amelia (Anne Hathaway), scientists Romilly (David Gyasi) and Doyle (Wes Bentley) and a pair of robots named TARS (voiced by Bill Irwin) and CASE (voiced by Josh Stewart) aboard the Endurance shuttle in search of a new home. But the clock keeps ticking faster, as Cooper's torn between reuniting with his family on Earth and insuring the future of the human race. 

The opening hour of the film is confounding, with the viewer dropped into this post-apocalyptic wasteland without much of sense of time or location. Nolan trusts us to figure it out  Everything that happens initially becomes clearer by the end, but what a strange trip it is getting there. With depleted resources and the crop crisis, the biggest fear early on is that we're heading into Shyamalan territory. The mention of poltergeists and the appearance of a rogue NASA unit operating as covertly as the CIA, does little to quell those concerns. Fortunately, the explanation of the mission doesn't involve aliens or Twilight Zone twists, but a very real mission more rooted in scientific fact and placed into fantastical fiction. It's when the crew takes off and enters that wormhole that the craziness begins and the story starts to peel its many layers.

Rarely has a space epic been so thoroughly concerned with the passage of time and all the consequences surrounding it.The realization of a massive gravitational time dilation ends up being the foundation on which all the film's most powerful themes rest, with one hour on the surface equivalent to seven years on Earth. It is a "race against time" in the strictest, most literal sense, as each minute Cooper spends investigating could represent a birthday missed or a wedding passed. And the more details we learn of Professor Brand's plan, the less likely Cooper's reunion with his kids seems, especially considering they're now adults his age.

The moment Jessica Chastain takes over for Mackenzie Foy as Murph is emotionally brutal, if not only for the transmissions Cooper sees from home, but the moral quandary the screenplay presents, testing the boundaries of sacrifice and selflessness. It's the ferry boat dilemma from The Dark Knight taken to a cosmic scale with the fate of humanity hanging in the balance. Well suited to their roles, Chastain and Casey Affleck are completely plausible as the adult counterparts of Cooper's kids 23 years later, with Murph still harboring a grudge against her father for abandoning them. When their story of trying to survive on an inhabitable Earth starts to take center stage, Nolan juggles it well with the ongoing space mission, which quickly deteriorates from a potential return home to a race against the clock.

For the first time since 1997's largely underrated Contact, McConaughey finds himself in a giant sci-fi space epic, and while he was clearly the weak there, he's now entering this project as not only an recent Oscar winner, but ten times the actor he used to be. Much more relaxed and confident as a performer compared to his rookie years, he must this time carry the entire load of this movie on his back, appearing in every scene and selling some pretty heady stuff in the third act. He's a farmer, father, pilot and equally adept at playing each and all in a role that actually earns him all those Paul Newman comparisons that have been made over the years.

Anne Hathaway joining McConaughey enables us to watch two of the best at the top of their game, feeding off each other with their characters' differing philosophies toward the missions' ultimate purpose and steps toward fulfilling it. The biggest discussion point isn't whether Hathaway's more believable as an astronaut and scientist than Sandra Bullock was in Gravity (hint: she is), but just how much she manages to do with Brand's eyes and subtle facial expressions. That's why it's disappointing whenever Nolan gives her too much to say about feelings that should be demonstrated rather than discussed. There's a cringe worthy speech she has in the vessel about that would have been unbearable had any actress but Hathaway delivered it. In a way, when given clunky dialogue she proves just how good she is, as this deserves to rank amongst her most rewarding performances.

There's also a third major name uncredited the film whose identity has been concealed in the advertising for mostly valid reasons. It's not a well kept secret, but I was still completely taken aback by the magnitude and importance of the part, which heavily informs the film's themes. Again taking from the Spielberg playbook, it can't be a coincidence that the character is named "Mann" given the nature of the role, which is fleshed out to perfection by the star playing him.

Viewers wouldn't even need to be told that this project forgoes the use of CGI in favor of practical effects and miniatures since it's plainly obvious just watching it. Or maybe I should say it's not obvious at all, since the effects sequences don't call attention to itself like green screen work so often does. If ever there was a case not to use it, Nolan wisely knew it was here, as a hard science fiction tale with big ideas is basically begging for a traditional approach that's the antithesis of what's in theaters now, making it easy to see why he rejected a 3D release. While there were supposedly numerous complaints from those who saw it on the big screen about the sound drowning out dialogue, the only sound-related issue that caught my attention was Hans Zimmer's score, which seemed to be constant in every scene, as rarely a minute passes without it. 

It's questionable whether the ending's a complete success. It is somewhat incomprehensible and gutsy, not to mention the closest mashup of the 2001 "stargate" sequence and the final scenes of A.I. as we're going to get, strangely without cribbing either. There's again probably a bit too much discussion about what Cooper's experiencing to reach the transcendent heights Nolan's aiming for, but we could only hope an eighth of the movies released each year had as much ambition as this picture's final hour. It isn't strictly a survival story set in space, as Gravity was, but a hardcore sci-fi fable hinging on thoughtful ideas  As if it wasn't already apparent, Nolan solidifies his status as a visionary storyteller whose decision to leave the Batman franchise is justified by just how much he has to say outside of it. While many currently rank this effort among his least and most flawed, I'm not entirely sure whether that assessment will stick. Ironically enough, that's something time will have determine.       
       

Gone Baby Gone

Director: Ben Affleck
Starring: Casey Affleck, Morgan Freeman, Ed Harris, Michelle Monaghan, Amy Ryan, Amy Madigan, Titus Welliver
Running Time: 114 min.
Rating: R

***1/2 (out of ****)

Everyone loves a comeback and very few comebacks these past couple of years have been as sweet as Ben Affleck's. His Academy-Award winning script Good Will Hunting (which co-wrote with buddy Matt Damon) vaulted him to the top of Hollywood's A-List in 1997, an honor he did his best to erase from our collective memories in the decade that followed. After starring in a series of truly awful big-budget flops and one disastrous celebrity engagement his talents as an actor and a writer began taking a backseat to his penchant for cashing big paychecks. He even starred in a (terrible) film called, appropriately enough, PAYCHECK.

The kid from Boston who finally got his break was gone, and in his name was placed was alongside other far less talented stars that let fame go to their heads. Then…something happened. He actually apologized. He admitted the choices he made were wrong and would now be concentrating on his work. Like many, I didn't believe him. After a strong supporting turn as fallen Superman star George Reeve in last year's Hollywoodland, we were forced to pay attention.

Maybe there was something to this "new" Ben Affleck after all. And now with Gone Baby Gone, which he both co-wrote and directed, the transformation is finally complete. I can't say it's a film that will stay with me forever but for a first-time director, or any director, it's a great achievement and requires multiple viewings to truly be appreciated And for Affleck it's the antithesis of all those other empty-headed big budget movies he starred in the past decade, during which he must have paid very close attention…to what NOT to do for his first feature.

Set in Boston, the film (adapted from Mystic River author Dennis Lehane's novel) centers around private investigator Patrick Kenzie (Casey Affleck) and his girlfriend and partner Angie (Michelle Monaghan) are hired to look into the disappearance of a little girl, questioning locals in the neighborhood who are reluctant to open up to the cops. This doesn't sit well at all with Boston Police Captain Jack Doyle (Morgan Freeman) and Detective Remy Bressant (Ed Harris) who don't want two gumshoes jeopardizing their case or the welfare of a small child. The girl's mother, drug addict Helene (Best Supporting Actress Oscar nominee Amy Ryan) isn't thrilled about it either, as it brings to light a lot of her shady activities with local thugs and exposes her incompetence and carelessness as a parent. The investigation also causes an even greater rift in her relationship with her sister and brother-in-law (played superbly by Amy Madigan and Titus Welliver).

The first hour of this film plays like a procedural. No, it is a procedural. So much so that I was wondering what all the hype was concerning a movie that's really just unfolding like a good episode of Law and Order, only with bigger stars. Most of it concerns Patrick and Angie gathering clues from and having (sometimes very heated) confrontations with the local riff raff while Freeman and Harris' characters complain about it. As I looked down at my watch though I noticed things were moving abnormally fast for a crime drama. It seemed as if they had burned through this really standard, unimaginative crime procedural in 60 minutes flat. I also asked myself why this movie was asking us to feel so sorry for this reckless, uncaring parent. Little did I know.

Then exactly half way through the film a shift occurs. I can't dare say what nor would I probably even be able to explain it, but let's just say the wool was completely pulled over my eyes and the story went places I never imagined it could. The layers of all the characters you met will be peeled away and the film will reveal itself as anything but a routine police drama. The twists and revelations just keep coming to the point that I had to throw my hands up in the air and admit that Affleck got me. The first hour can't be judged on it's own terms, something I wish I had known while watching it. There's no way I could have though because the script conceals its tricks so slyly and brilliantly, despite the fact they're all right there in plain view and make perfect sense. When it ends you think to yourself, "How could something that started like THAT, end like THIS?" Nothing is what it seems at first. No situation. No character. Everything is more complicated, and tougher. This isn't about just a missing girl or a grieving mother. Not by a long shot. Scenes that could be written off as throwaways in the first hour have a way of coming back and haunting you in the second, particularly a philosophical argument Patrick and Angie have in the car about the case.

I always love it when movies treat morally complex situations intelligently, without insulting the audience, but instead engaging them. At one point during the film one of the characters tell Patrick he has to "TAKE A SIDE." That could very well sum up the film as we're asked to take a side and you'll be flabbergasted at the depth and complexity of the question that's asked of us. And just think how many movies these days refuse to take a side and bail out. This one doesn't. It's possible you may not agree with the side the film or the main character takes but you have to give them credit for taking one and standing firmly behind it. You may even be angry with that stance, but you'll still be thinking about it days after the final credits role. It's a movie that understands that sometimes people do the right things for the wrong reasons or the wrong things for the right reasons. And that the line between right and wrong is often thinner than anyone believes it is.

It seems as if every year there's one Oscar nominated performance (usually in a supporting category) that has me scratching my head wondering what the Academy saw that I didn't. Upon first viewing I thought that performance belonged to Amy Ryan. Don't get me wrong I thought she did fine, but at first just didn't see anything that was especially worthy of a nomination. And considering she isn't in the film any longer than a total of 15 minutes I found myself even more perplexed than usual. I was all set to write this nomination off as just another case of an actor being given a ridiculous amount of hype and accolades for just doing a good job in a small role (think Geoffrey Rush's overrated Oscar-winning turn in 1996's Shine).

But then, hours later I realized all the scenes that stuck with me were hers. She's given a line very late in the film that must be the most offensive remark I've heard in a movie in the past year. That it even made the final cut is enough for my jaw to drop, but the way Ryan delivered it was such that I thought that yes, that was exactly the kind of stupid, insensitive thing this woman would say. It showed just how dumb she really is and what little grasp on reality she has. She isn't a bad person. That would be way too simple. She's just a woman who because of her station in life and lack of education can't improve her situation for herself or the daughter she loves. There's a subtle but important difference in playing the character like that and playing her as a total careless bitch, which would undercut the effectiveness of the entire story.

Ryan succeeded where so many other actresses would have failed and her performance ends up being the glue that holds the entire moral center of the story together. It isn't a huge role, but it's a crucial one. Affleck's script also has to be praised for adding those shades of complexity to the character Ryan played so brilliantly. And it's always great to see an actress who has been working hard for years finally get their big break and a well-deserved opportunity for bigger, better roles in the future.

If there's anyone else that could be singled out it's Casey Affleck who before this I seriously doubted had the goods to carry a film. Going in I chalked up his casting to nepotism but he's very effective and miles away from his Oscar- nominated supporting turn in The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford. Watching him here I think I gained a new appreciation for what he did in that film because the roles are as drastically different and diametrically opposed as can possibly be. There isn't a wimpy or cowardly bone in Patrick Kenzie's body. Ed Harris and Morgan Freeman electrify, personifying men of duty who are completely sure every step they take is just and right, even when there's heavy doubt that it is. You could make a strong case that Harris should have also earned a supporting nod for his complex portrayal in a very tricky role.

The opening shot of Gone Baby Gone is of the streets of Boston with everyone in the neighborhood going about the regular business of their day. At the end of the film we see basically the same scene again, but this time everything looks and feels different after what's unfolded. The streets. The sidewalks. The kids playing. Simple everyday life almost appears to have more value to it after watching and experiencing this ordeal. You could discuss and analyze the ending with friends afterwards but it wouldn't be long before that discussion became a heated argument. The movie polarizes its characters and us.

Comparisons will undoubtedly be made between this and the other Lehane adaptation, Clint Eastwood's inexplicable 2003 Best Picture nominee Mystic River. While that film contained a twist ending that elicited giggles, this contains one that's heartbreaking, right down to the final scene, making a profound and intelligent statement about our flawed nature as human beings. As a whole this work is far superior and I can see it holding up even better on repeated viewings. It'll be interesting to put in perspective just how effective this film is when contrasted alongside the other heavy-hitters of awards season. Gone Baby Gone could prove over time to be a film with strong staying power. And it means that Affleck guy can finally quit his day job if he wants. He just might have a real future behind the camera.

The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford

Director: Andrew Dominik
Starring: Brad Pitt, Casey Affleck, Sam Rockwell, Sam Shepard, Paul Schneider, Jeremy Renner, Mary-Louise Parker, Zooey Deschanel Running Time: 160 min.
Rating: R

*** (out of ****)

Yes, the title's too long. And yes, so is the film. And it isn't even the best Western released in 2007, as that honor still belongs to James Mangold's remake of 3:10 to Yuma. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is everything its lengthy title implies it is. It's epic, sprawling and at times self-indulgent, but contains a story too deep, acting too strong and is shot too beautifully for me not to praise it. But those who can't stand Westerns would be wise to stay far away from it and even those who admire the genre may find it keeps them too far at arms length for their taste. Despite the presence of history's most famous outlaw in the story this isn't a shoot 'em up with good guys and bad guys and non-stop excitement. It's justifiably drawn comparisons to Robert Altman's McCabe and Mrs. Miller and you could even argue it has a feel and style very similar to the work of Terrence Malik or early Clint Eastwood. This is a Western epic in the most traditional sense.

Whereas 3:10 To Yuma provided instant gratification this lingers in the mind's eye after it's ended and over time may prove itself to be, for better or worse, the film that stays with you longer. It also, probably more than any other film this year, makes a case of how important it is to end strong. Just when the film should be running out of gas and winding down in the last half hour it does just the opposite and fascinatingly explores the two main characters deeper, even though one is deceased.

I always thought the most effective endings of films ask us to go back and re-evaluate everything that has come before it and readjust our thinking, opening up new possibilities for further viewings (although I don't know of many who'd have the patience to watch this film repeatedly). If you don't want to see this film I understand. A nearly three hour Westerns may not be your cup of tea. But please don't avoid it because you already know that Robert Ford winds up killing Jesse James. That isn't the ending, nor is it what this movie is about.

19 year-old Robert Ford (Oscar nominated Casey Affleck) was someone who we'd affectionately refer to nowadays as a "fanboy." The subject of his adulation (or rather, obsession) is the outlaw train robber Jesse James (Brad Pitt), whom he idolized all through his youth. After constantly bugging James and his older brother Frank (Sam Shepard), Ford, along with his brother Charles (Sam Rockwell) are taken as a part of his gang in Missouri even as the walls slowly seem to slowly be closing on the reckless and paranoid James' operation. Joining them are James' first cousin Wood Hite (Jeremy Renner) and hanger-on Dick Liddel (Paul Schneider). Troubles begin immediately as James lacks the capacity to trust anyone and his explosive, unpredictable behavior induces severe agitation and fear in nearly every person he comes in contact with, friend or enemy.

Ford's relationship with James is a peculiar and complex one. While he idolizes him for his exploits and would want nothing more than to follow in his footsteps, he also deeply resents him because he's a manipulative bully who could care less about his feelings. That this surprises Ford is a tip-off as to just how weak and naïve he really is. His obsession with James also causes him great embarrassment and humiliation at the expense of his brother and his peers who view him as nothing more than a pathetic, whiny little boy who would do anything for his hero. They're right, and Ford's resentment over the situation slowly builds throughout the picture, leading him down a moral path he didn't think he was ever capable of traveling. Bob Ford eventually kills Jesse James but the "how" and the "why" are much more complicated than they seem on the surface and even after the deed is done we're still asking questions about how it could have possibly ever come to that and whether it's fair for Ford to really be considered a coward.

Despite how wildly different both films are, it's interesting to compare and contrast Pitt's portrayal of Jesse James in this film with Russell Crowe's equally excellent work as the villainous outlaw Ben Wade in 3:10 To Yuma. Both men are dangerous, but Crowe presented Wade as fairly even tempered, sly and systematic in his approach. That's not the case here with Pitt's take on James, who is actually the more dangerous of the two because he's unpredictable and inconsistent, with no one, including himself being aware of what he'll do next. Pitt has come so far as an actor improving it seems with every role and it scares me to think, the more experienced he continues to get, just how much deeper he's capable of going.

Casey Affleck does a fine job as the wimpy, cry baby Ford but it's Pitt's magnetism as James that pulls us into the film and makes us understand how so many would worship and fear him at the same time. The irony that one of our biggest celebrities is playing (and owning) this role of the biggest celebrity of the Old West doesn't come into full focus until the final half-hour, but when it does the notion grabs hold and never lets go. The casting of Pitt was genius. So was the selection of Affleck. I couldn't help but laugh when the narrator remarked that after killing James the previously unrecognizable Ford couldn't go anywhere without being noticed. Since he's played by Affleck this becomes doubly ironic because besides being one of our most nondescript looking actors, he was always better known as being someone's little brother. After the year he's had that shouldn't be a problem much longer.

The most glaring flaw of Andrew Dominik's film (adapted from Ryan Hansen's 1983 novel) is that it could have benefited from some serious cutting in the editing room. It is very much a piece of literature adapted for the screen and gives off the impression little was excised in translation. This is especially true of the problematic middle section, which gets sidetracked with various supporting characters, none of whom are as engaging as James or Ford. It also gets preoccupied with James' double-crossings and betrayals involving these characters in scenes that at times seem to linger on minutes longer than they should.

Dreamy soft-focus photography and voice-over narration is employed during scene transitions, the latter sometimes irritatingly giving us information that's plainly obvious in Affleck's performance. On the heels of Todd Field's Little Children, this method (which was previously frowned upon) has become more popular than ever recently, but here it's abused a little and isn't all that necessary. At points it even gives off the wrong vibe making the film feel more like a History Channel documentary. When the concentration is on Ford's hero worship of James the story crackles and when it's not there are points where I was just waiting impatiently. Luckily, while I was waiting I had Roger Deakins' gorgeous cinematography to keep me company. With Canada standing in for the Old West his is probably the best looking film of the year and Deakins deserves to take home the gold on Oscar night for his efforts. He's one of the few directors of photography (along with Harris Savides) whose look and style is so instantly recognizable you know it's his film without ever glancing at his name on the closing credits.

Names you'll have to check twice for in those credits are Weeds co-stars Mary Louise Parker (as James' wife Zee) and Zooey Deschanel (as Ford's girlfriend Dorothy Evans) who both put in appearances you'll miss if you happen to blink. Parker does have one big scene but wouldn't it have been nice to know what Jesse James' wife thought about his "career?" Or more importantly, how she really felt about him? While I'm not thrilled about it, I can get over them wasting Parker, but doing nothing with the talents of Deschanel is a crime against humanity when you have 160 minutes to work with. But at least she got in on the end, which is where this movie really soars, turning the camera on us and exploiting our culture's obsessive fascination with celebrity.

It's in the aftermath of James' death that Dominik reverses viewers and Ford's expectations. In doing so he shows us that this story reverberates every bit as much today as it did then, if not more. That's why, despite its flaws, it works. If Jesse James were around today you get the impression he'd be just as popular, despite being a murderer. America loves a bad guy just so long as they're charismatic and entertaining. What we'd say about Ford today I have no idea, but it probably wouldn't be all that different than what they said then. And that's the big trick this film pulls out of its hat. In telling us about the assassination of Jesse James, what the story says about us ends up being just as revealing as what we learn about the two men involved.