Best Actor

Nominees: Javier Bardem, Jeff Bridges, Jesse Eisenberg, Colin Firth, and James Franco
My pick: Colin Firth for “The King’s Speech”
Prediction: Same

Why? Because his performance was head and shoulders above the rest of the group. (sidenote: did Jeff Bridges really have enough screen time to have a chance here?) Firth made stuttering look natural. I’ll let the oddness of that statement sink in.

Best Supporting Actor

Nominees: Christian Bale, John Hawkes, Jeremy Renner, Mark Ruffalo, Geoffrey Rush
My pick: Geoffrey Rush
Prediction: Christian Bale

Why? Geoffrey Rush played the part so skillfully that I hardly noticed he was a movie character. For me, the only issue is why Andrew Garfield isn’t in this list. That guy was awesome in The Social Network. As for the prediction going to Bale, I think Hollywood has a tendency to give awards to people with crazy characters. It’s a bias they can’t seem to get over. I hope they prove me wrong.

Actress in a Supporting Role

Nominees: Amy Adams, Helena Bonham Carter, Melissa Leo, Hailee Steinfeld, Jacki Weaver
My pick: Hailee Steinfeld
Prediction: Hailee Steinfeld

Why? I think the Academy is dying to hand an award out for True Grit and one of the few ways it actually has a chance to happen is if Steinfeld brings it home. She did a thorough job and had enough of the screen during the movie for this to be a possibility. I give it to her simply because she was the only reason I liked True Grit at all from a story standpoint (cinematography was good – which I’ll get to soon).

Animated Featu

Toy Story 3…. enough said, moving along now.

Visual Effec

Inception.. keep going..

Original Score

Nominations: How to Train Your Dragon, Inception, The King’s Speech, 127 Hours, The Social Network
My Pick: Tron: Legacy
Prediction: The Social Network

Why? How on earth did Daft Punk not get some credit at least for Tron? I mean, really? That movie was a giant music video. Anyway, my next choice is also my prediction. Well done Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, you had me at the title sequence.

Art Direction

Nominees: Alice in Wonderland, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, Inception, The King’s Speech, True Grit
My Pick: Harry Potter
Prediction: Alice in Wonderland

Why? Here’s an award that is too much of a wild card for me. Every year it’s something I don’t necessarily expect. I think Harry Potter deserves it, but it’s too much of a blockbuster… Plus Sweeney Todd won in 2007…

Cinematography

Nominees: Black Swan, Inception, The King’s Speech, The Social Network, True Grit
My pick: The Social Network
Prediction: The King’s Speech

Why? Probably the single, most difficult decision in this entire list. I went back and forth between The Social Network and The King’s Speech.. and then from time to time would want to throw True Grit into the mix.. However, The Social Network gets my vote and here’s why: I’ve watched it three times now, and it wasn’t until the third time that I even realized some of the cinematography aspects existed – they blended seamlessly into the movie despite my constant look at movies through a “how did they do this?” perspective. The King’s Speech was good, don’t get me wrong – but the rowing scene with In the Hall of the Mountain King playing… dang.

Best Director

Nominees: Darren Aronofsky, David O. Russel, Tom Hooper, David Fincher, Joel and Ethan Coen
My pick: Tom Hooper
Prediction: David Fincher

Why? The King’s Speech had the best acting, hands down. I know he was working with the best overall actor group of the bunch, but if your movie has the best acting across the board then I give you the Oscar…. But I think Fincher wins for The Social Network because he didn’t win for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Seriously. Also – Christopher Nolan deserved at least a nomination… come on now.

Film Editing

Nominees: Andrew Weisblum (Black Swan), Pamela Martin, (The Fighter), Tariq Anwar (The King’s Speech), Jon Harris (127 Hours), Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter (The Social Network)
My pick: Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter
Prediction: Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter

Why? I could probably write a while here, but let’s just put it this way: yes.

Original Screenplay

Nominations: Another Year, The Fighter, Inception, The Kids Are All Right, The King’s Speech
My pick: The King’s Speech
Prediction: Inception

Why? The King’s Speech’s script was near flawless. I can’t imagine the difficulty in writing for a stuttering man. However, I think enough people will get on the Inception bandwagon to bring it home (this is a gut feeling, the smart money is probably on The King’s Speech).

Adapted Screenplay

Nominations: 127 Hours, The Social Network, Toy Story 3, True Grit, Winter’s Bone
My Pick: The Social Network
Prediction: The Social Network

Why? I want to be Aaron Sorkin, that’s why. The man is a genius. If the two categories were combined, Sorkin still wins.

Best Picture

Nominations: Black Swan, The Fighter, Inception, The Kids Are All Right, The King’s Speech, 127 Hours, The Social Network, Toy Story 3, True Grit, Winter’s Bone
My Pick: The King’s Speech
Prediction: The Social Network

I’ll begin by listing off my top five favorite movies of the year:
5) Inception
4) Shutter Island
3) Toy Story 3
2) The King’s Speech
1) The Social Network

Why? I’ve decided that just because something is my favorite, doesn’t necessarily make it the best. The King’s Speech was a darn near perfect film from a technical standpoint. It was also a fantastic story. That’s why it was this year’s best film in my opinion. However, my favorite was The Social Network because of why it will end up winning the actual award: It perfectly combined an important, relevant and culture-changing event with a fantastic script, good acting and superb cinematography. Plus, I’m a web/film junkie so it was like the perfect mesh.

As for the rest of the nominees and other movies I mentioned, I could blog for days about it probably. But you wouldn’t want to hear it now would you?

What do you think?

- Ted

*EDIT: No Best Actress Pick from me because I didn’t know what call to make yet.. I’ll add it later*

Anyway, I circumvented my OS’s feeble attempt to keep me from screen capturing with the DVD player open and got 8 frames that I think really sum up the move nicely. (Click here for the movie synopsis)

The first frame is John Wayne’s character Sean Thornton and Barry Fitzgerald’s character Michaleen Oge Flynn. The frame sums up both of their on screen persona’s nicely.

The second depicts the beginning of the rivalry between Thornton and Danaher who is Mary Kate’s (The lead actress and Wayne’s crush in the movie played by Maureen O’Hara) brother.

The third is of Mary Kate (Will your 1950s self please marry me?).

The fourth and fifth sums up Sean and Mary Kate’s relationship quite nicely. One second it’s great and passionate, the next it’s gone and confusing.

The sixth sums up Sean Thornton’s masculinity – he’s just struck his match on the crossbeam above his head in this frame and he is about to put Mary Kate in her place. This was my favorite scene in the movie.

The last two are of the gigantic boxing scene at the end which alone makes the movie worth watching.

Hope you enjoyed this! Let me know if I should do more “movies in 8 frames” (I’ll probably go into more detail in the future as well)

- Ted

Akira Kurosawa is a Japanese filmmaker who directed films in the 40s, 50s and 60s. The clips from above are from one of his more famous films, Rashomon. Kurosawa basically puts on a school for shot composition and texture throughout every scene I have watched of his so far. I love the way he uses the camera narratively and the overall look of his movies. His movie Seven Samurai is incredibly long, but definitely worth the watch if you are ever feeling like a black and white movie night.

As a random tidbit: George Lucas was influenced by Kurosawa. Something about Samurai swordsmen perhaps?

- Ted

No. Don’t read this yet. Watch the video above first.

Alright now that you’ve gotten that out of the way:

I mentioned on Twitter the other day that I’ve noticed a recent trend in video/film in the emphasis of ordinary sounds – taking normal, minute sounds and making them the most audible parts of the clip.  Now I may be wrong, but I honestly think this is partly due to the way we currently like to participate in media. We expect response when we engage and so when we see visuals of earthy things, we expect an overly earthy response (such as the beginning of the video above) and we are able to attain this if the sound matches the engagement.

The film I noticed it in most recently was Shutter Island, which I saw over the weekend. Martin Scorsese used a very intricate interaction between imagery and sound in the direction of this film. Robert Richardson also did an absolutely incredible job with the cinematography as his images made the emphasized sound relative.

Anyway, I’m interested in trying this in the next short I make. What I’m going to make – don’t ask me yet.

As I’ve watched clip after clip of his comedy remaining relevant to this day, and after being frequently amazed by his ability to set up comedy, I’ve begun to really appreciate what Chaplin contributed to film development. I’ve also begun to appreciate the liberties he took within the creative process. He was producing movies in a time when people were still acclimating to shot sequences with multiple edits rather than just one shot takes, but managed to create complex humor based off of complex editing that controls what the audience is viewing and understanding. It’s incredible to me that his ingenuity and creative ability propelled him into his now American icon status (even though he is British). Charlie Chaplin new that moving pictures moved people.

Maybe not quite on the same scale as Chaplin (haha), but hopefully I can do the same at one point or another.

Here is a Desktop Wallpaper that I created, feel free to download it if you would like: click here to download (1680×1050)

How many times have you said or heard someone else say this? Personally, I have heard this so many times that it makes me sick. Before you go novel-elitist on me, let me explain.

Books are not better than movies. Books are different than movies.

When reading/viewing:

Books are more engrossing. The take more time, they take more energy, and they take more imagination.

Movies are less engrossing. They take less time, they take less energy, and they take less imagination.

Now some of you are saying, “exactly, books are better than movies” and are missing the point: you can’t compare them. You have to compare movies with other movies and books with other books (there is a well known cliché that I could easily throw in here, but I prefer bananas and pineapples). You cannot be upset when your favorite 400 page book does not fit perfectly in a two hour movie, and then be upset when Peter Jackson’s latest adaptation is “too long.” There are so many ironies in that previous sentence that it might make your head explode.

Look, I love books, and like most of the world I wish I read more. However, I also love movies, and I love movies adapted from my favorite books. I just recognize that they are different mediums of entertainment, not to be confused as the same. I judge the movie on its own merit, and the book the same way.

When you say that the book is better than the movie, you are saying that your own idea of something is better than someone else’s. Now, there is a shock.

Next time, when you go to ramble about the movie not living up to the book, please, think again.

This “movie review” is coming from someone who has absolutely no authority whatsoever to critique or analyze a movie, I am simply a movie-lover, in college, studying film, who hoped Avatar might be like it was cracked up to be.

People who know I was one of the nerds who waited up until midnight to then watch a 2 hour and 40 minute movie, have pestered me with questions, asking what the movie is like and the best answer I can come up with is as follows:

You know that dream you always wish you could have had when you were a kid? The one where you hit your pillow and find yourself to be 10 feet tall, a different color, you can jump higher and run faster, you can connect with animals and then ride them, then plants interact with you, and you made friends and then got to fight something? – Well maybe that wish was just mine… but that was Avatar.

Before I get any further, I have to suggest to you (yeah you, the person reading this right now) to see it in 3D – the 3D experience in this movie is comparable to the first time you happened to see High Definition TV after years of standard definition.

The 3D takes a solid 15 minutes to let your eyes and brain adjust to it. In real life you get to choose what to focus on in your own 3D environment but in the movie the focus is done for you, so it isn’t until you sort of “give up control” of your eyes’ depth of focus that you begin to feel like you are the camera and you get to fully take in the new world James Cameron created.

The only downside to the movie is the unabashedly political undertone in which Cameron and his team entirely oversimplify the War in Iraq that he obviously criticizes throughout the film. If the circumstances in Iraq were the same as they are in the human’s assault on the Na’vi in Avatar, then even the farthest right wing conservative would be in agreement on who the protagonists are (Jake Sully and the Na’vi) and who antagonists are (us greedy humans). This however does not inhibit the story-line which is good enough to stand alone (without the special effects, I mean) and only further proves Cameron can simply make a good movie.

All in all, I was blown away. I began to halt my anticipation a couple of days prior to the movie’s release just in case it was a huge flop as some had anticipated, but I do not see any glaring signs of a budding box office dud. It’s one of those movies that people will talk about and refer to for quite sometime and you will find yourself the outsider if you have not seen it.

Go see it, and be prepared to suspend reality – a lot.

- Ted