The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - Review

There was a time in my life where I would have been overjoyed at the thought of a new Spider-Man movie. After all, I've been a massive Spidey fan since... well, pretty much as long as I can remember. I have fond memories growing up of collecting the comics, had tons of Spider-Man action figures, played pretty much every video game based on the character, and woke up every Saturday morning to watch the newest episode of the Fox Kids cartoon series. I still even vividly remember back when I was 13, seeing for the first time, one of my lifelong favorite characters being brought to life on the big screen in such awesome fashion by one of my all-time favorite directors, Sam Raimi. When the 2004 sequel hit theaters, I was pretty much on cloud nine. To this day, Spider-Man 2 is one of my all-time favorite movies and a strong contender for best superhero film ever made. The much-derided Spider-Man 3, however... while a far weaker follow-up to it's two predecessors, I'll forever maintain is a much better movie than for which it's given credit. It's flawed, messy, and uneven for sure, but it's positive traits are good enough to make it a decent film and certainly not the disaster people make it out to be. Then... the folks at Sony Pictures decided to hit the reboot button and Spidey got a massive overhaul. The result was 2010's The Amazing Spider-Man, a film that I labeled as "average at best." Actually, I took a lot of flack for giving that film such a lukewarm review, more than I expected. I didn't think it was terrible, but rather was just a generally average and soulless movie (mainly since it was rushed into production so Sony wouldn't lose the film rights). Still, a lot of people liked it, so I recently re-watched it to see if my opinion might have changed. To my surprise, it did! A film I once derided as mediocre, flat, and uninspired I now consider... pretty bad actually. The cast tries hard, but their efforts are ruined thanks to a half-assed retelling of Spidey's origin, non-existent character development, hit-and-miss special effects, misguided direction, and one half-decent action scene among a collection of terribly shot and erratically edited sequences that should have been exciting. So yeah... my expectations for the inevitable sequel were not so high, despite my love for (almost) all things Spider-Man. How does The Amazing Spider-Man 2 fare??? Well, let's just say that the true Amazing Spider-Man 2 already came out 10 years ago.

After graduating from high school, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) attempts to live a double life as an average college student and the web-slinging crime fighter, Spider-Man. Living this double, however, becomes difficult when he reluctantly breaks up with his loving girlfriend, Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) after the death of her self-sacrificing father at the hands of the Lizard in the previous film. They both try to make a relationship work, but difficulties present themselves in the form of Gwen considering moving to London to attend Oxford and Peter facing a number of new deadly foes. The first of which is the nerdy Spidey-obsessed electrical engineer Max Dillon (Jamie Fox), whom after experiencing a near-fatal electrocution becomes Electro. Also present is Peter's former buddy, Harry Osborne (Dane DeHaan), heir to the Oscorp legacy who in a search to cure himself of a rare and fatal disease, becomes the Green Goblin (or is just a goblin... they never really say who he is). Also making a short appearance is Russian mobster Aleksei Sytsevich aka The Rhino (Paul Giamatti). Peter also digs deeper into his parents' mysterious disappearance, looking to discover what led to their tragic deaths and the research his father risked his life to keep hidden. Meanwhile, Peter's supportive Aunt May (Sally Field) struggles after Uncle Ben's death from the original while trying to keep up financially to support Peter and... OH MY GOD IS THIS PLOT CONVOLUTED!!! You know, people complained about Spider-Man 3 having too much going on (and it did, don't get me wrong) but AT LEAST you could follow what was happening. Why the filmmakers thought they could stuff so much into one movie is beyond me. This is easily the most difficult plot description I've ever written since there's simply so many barely (or not even) connected storylines with little resolution or development that it becomes an absolute mess. Ugh!

Okay... so yeah, the movie's not that good, just going to get that out of the way first. It's not terrible in the sense that it's at least a SLIGHT improvement over the last film and it does have a few standout moments... but yeah you can add this one to another let-down in the Spider-Man film series. I was pretty heavily criticized for my negative comments toward the last film (which is fine, everyone's entitled to their own opinion) but what I didn't get was when people accused me of not giving these ones a chance simply because I'm a big Sam Raimi fan. I'll admit, yes I love most of Sam Raimi's movies, I'll admit that I think he did a better job directing the Spider-Man films than Marc Webb, and it's true that I didn't exactly go into this or the last one with particularly high expectations... BUT that doesn't mean I was hoping this one would be bad!!! On the contrary, I don't like seeing one of my favorite superheroes getting shabby cut-rate movies, and there's nothing more I'd love to see than another worthy live action Spidey film, so I can once again revel in that feeling of nostalgia-based glee of seeing some of my favorite childhood characters being brought to life on the big screen! But I'm sorry, seeing boring re-imaginings of Spidey's rouge's gallery of villains, turning Parker into what it essentially a Edward Cullen-knockoff, and rushed and convoluted narratives just doesn't do it for me. That doesn't mean there's nothing about this series I don't like, there are a few bits and pieces that I did find myself embracing, but not enough to come around.

Like I said, there are a few things I did like about the movie. Once again, the cast is the main thing that holds the films somewhat together. Andrew Garfield is a damn good actor and there are times in his performance as Peter Parker/Spider-Man that you can see his natural range shine through. I still don't really like the way his character has been written in this series, but this time, it ALMOST works. Where in the last film, he was basically a one-note douchebag with little to no character development, here they try to show him grow as a character, are there are times it actually adds some legitimate drama, and Andrew Garfield generally delivers. Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy is once again the standout, both as an actress and as a character (as in, she's the only person in this movie to have some element of depth) also bringing her natural dramatic and comedic abilities to the part. Plus, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone do have a genuine chemistry, and that is a big help. Dane DeHaan's intense performance as Harry Osborne is another standout, conveying some truly intense dramatic weight to a surprisingly emotional character... though by the time he makes his Green Goblin transformation, he feels a little out of his element. Jamie Foxx tries hard as Max Dillon/Electro, but because of the questionable script choices and direction for the character, most of his efforts are completely wasted. Sally Field is at her Sally Field-est as Aunt May, which is mostly a good thing, even though she's basically pushed aside for most of the film. Paul Giamatti as The Rhino could not have been more enjoyable, but the massive disappointment stemming from him basically being a glorified cameo to setup future sequels pretty much ruined any potential there. I might have been more forgiving if he had SOME relevance to the story, but like I said, he was there only to tease future sequels, and that was a cheap, shallow, and lame use of an enjoyable character and actor. So yeah... it's a generally good cast, even if the script lets them down.

As for the look and feel of the film... actually it's not that bad this time around. Most of the effects are an improvement this time around and Marc Webb has gotten slightly better at directing action. The web swinging scenes are easily the best the series has ever had, with some really fast paced and thrilling sequences that are a total rush. I didn't see the film in 3D, but I kind of wish I did just for those sequences. Plus, the first Spidey vs Electro fight scene was another highlight for the series, featuring some creative staging, effects, and tricky camera moves that were admittedly quite awesome. Nothing in the series has topped the outstanding train scene from Spider-Man 2 yet, but there were times that the Electro fight could have offered some decent competition. The actual finale itself isn't exactly groundbreaking, but it works. Unfortunately, I could not have been more disappointed with the look of these characters. Taking a comic character as unique and creative (look-wise anyways) as Electro and basically turning him into homeless Doctor Manhattan is a disappointing re-imagining. The look of Harry Osborne's Green Goblin manages the impossible of looking even sillier than Willem Dafoe's plastic costume from the first film. Finally... the Rhino suit (for the brief moments it appears on film) being re-imagined as a generic mech suit just left me saying, "Were the filmmakers not allowed to express ANY creativity?" At least the new Spidey costume was admittedly awesome, possibly even the best for the whole series.

Unfortunately, despite the obvious efforts of a good cast and a (seemingly) interested director, it's the script that ultimately brings everything down. There's so much going on that character development comes off as forced, rushed, and sloppy. Electro's storyline in particular is the main casualty, as the film was setting him up as the main villain but instead just rushes through forced and confusing character beats, ignores him for most of the second act, and has him return for a underwhelming closing. His character was basically stolen from The Riddler in Batman Forever, only even more forced and non-nonsensical (honestly, when Batman Forever did something better than your film, you know there's a problem). The Harry Osborne plot has it's moments, but some confusing plot-holes and unexplained character decisions kind of ruined it. Gwen Stacy's main dilemma in the film could have been a genuinely emotional and moving bit of storytelling but the foreshadowing is so heavy-handed that it will surprise absolutely nobody. The bits involving Peter's disappearing parents are basically thrown in as an afterthought and culminate to a revelation that also had little to no surprises. Even Peter's basic story arc, while having the right idea, competes with so many underutilized subplots that it doesn't come together all that well in the end. It has trouble finding a proper tone as well. It appears to try and go for a more realistic and down-to-earth vibe (which is fine), but with villains this over-the-top, it feels sloppy. I'm not saying that campy or scenery-chewing characters don't work (the original trilogy is proof that they do), but it's best to choose a tone and stick with it. My main problem, however, is that film's main purpose felt like less to tell a story, but rather to set up a shit-load of sequels and spin-offs. There are SO many shout-outs and set-ups for the recently announced two more sequels and a Sinister Six spin-off (a Venom spin-off is apparently in the works too). I don't mind sequel foreshadowing, but it shouldn't be the sole purpose of the film.

So it should go without saying, but The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is not even close to amazing. Despite some decent effects, action, and actors, the sloppy and poorly conceived screenplay ruins any chance of the film coming together. If there's one thing the film wants me to take away from it... it's that I should be excited for the inevitable sequels... can't say I am though.

My Score: 2.5 out of 5!

X-Men: Days of Future Past - Review

I have kind of a love/hate relationship with the X-Men film series. On one hand, the films generally average out to be pretty good. You have your good ones (X-Men, X2, The Wolverine), your not-so-good ones (Last Stand, Origins: Wolverine), and your sole great one (First Class). So yeah, for the most part, good films. Even the bad ones aren't totally without any merit (Last Stand at least has some decent action). Yet, I can't help but feel like they've kind of been jogging in place since this series began. They've basically been telling slight re-iterations of the same story (protecting those who fear them). Don't get me wrong, that's generally been the basic premise for the comics as well, but the comics did manage to throw some curve-balls to the general formula once in a while. Still, I guess it's a reasonable concept on which to base a franchise, and at the very least, none of the films have been generic re-stagings, so that's got to count for something. The newest entry, X-Men: Days of Future Past, represents three things... a loose adaptation of one of the comic's most well-known story-lines, a coming together/reunion of First Class's characters/actors and the original cast, and finally to ret-con the faults and lame endings of The Last Stand and Origins. Plus, it features the return of X-Men and X2's original director, Bryan Singer. I'll admit that I had some reservations about this one, but I won't say that I couldn't help but buy into the hype. How did it turn out?

The year is 2023, and the world has become a complete apocalyptic wasteland. Those born with mutant abilities (as well as those who aid mutants) are being hunted down by advanced machines known as Sentinels, robotic weapons created in 1973 to destroy mutants after their existence became public knowledge and led to mass paranoia. With the existance of mutants (and humanity) on the line, Professor Charles Xavier aka Professor X (Patrick Stewart) and Erik Lehnsherr aka Magneto (Ian McKellen) have once again joined forces with a small group of remaining X-Men to fight the Sentinels. In a last ditch effort to prevent this dark future before it even starts, Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page) uses her abilities to send Wolverine's (Hugh Jackman) consciousness into his body from 1973, where he then will attempt to stop the chain of events that lead up to the dark future. To do so, he must not only stop Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from killing the Sentinel's creator, Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage) but also reunite the young Charles (James McAvoy) and Magneto (Michael Fassbender) when they couldn't be further apart. With time running out, Wolverine must act quick or the future of the mutant and human race could be wiped out forever.

So like I mentioned, I had some reservations going into this film, even though I generally thought it looked pretty good. It's just coming off the excellent X-Men: First Class, it was definitely a bummer when I heard that Matthew Vaughn had stepped down as director. When it was announced that Bryan Singer would return to the series, my thoughts were mixed. I still think the first two X-Men films hold up pretty well, especially X2. It's just that superhero films have improved significantly over the years, and I was concerned that Days of Future Past would repeat some of the more forgettable qualities of the first two films that were acceptable at the time, but harder to accept now. For instance, the black leather costumes of the first three X-Men films is boring and uninspired, some of the action doesn't really hold up in the first two, and with the exception of Wolverine, Magneto, Professor X, and Mystique, character development was pretty limited. Still, the cast was (generally) spot-on, some of the action was passable, and the scripts of the first two, for the most part, understood the source material... at least enough to make them passable movies. Though in case your wondering, here are my thoughts on all the films... X-Men (good), X2 (quite good), The Last Stand (some decent action, but overall not very good), X-Men Origins Wolverine (pretty bad), First Class (awesome), and The Wolverine (decent). So with all that said, where does Days of Future Past sit... we're right back where we started with just "good."

So yeah, the film is good. It's not great, it's not amazing, but it's not bad by any means. If all you want to know is whether the film is worth watching, I can confidently say that the movie is worth watching once in theaters. That said, it's by no means great and has some noticeable (and in some cases pretty massive) flaws. Script-wise is where the film really drops the ball. The basic premise is fine and leads to some very entertaining scenes, but by the time the film finished, it became clear that the time travel based storyline was chosen less to actually tell a story but rather as a means to ret-con and do-over the faults of the previous films and to set the stage for future sequels. Almost every one of the events from the previous films has been done over, namely the God-awful ending Last Stand. Now, I'll admit that's kind of a cheap way to undo the faults of it's predecessors, but since The Last Stand really bit the big one with such a shitty ending, I can let that slide. Though what's harder to let slide are some massive gaps in logic and storytelling. For instance, where the hell did Kitty Pryde get time travel powers??? Her basic power is to walk through walls, and there was never an instance where her new powers were hinted or explained in either this film or any previous films. Plus, like many time travel movies, the actual timeline of events is so convoluted and confusing that my brain hurts every time I try to understand it. Also was a little irritated with the way they just did away with many of the mutants from First Class (what the hell was up with that). With that all said, the basic premise is an interesting setup, there are some stand-out scenes, and the pacing couldn't have been better. Like any movie an ensemble cast, some of the supporting characters get the shaft, but the main figures get enough to do to make the film work. The script is flawed, no question about that, but works well enough to support such an ambitious premise.

Once again, like all of the (good) X-Men films, the movie finds it's true success based on the strength of it's cast. It's kind of annoying that all the X-Men films (minus First Class) are so Wolverine-centric, but there's no denying that Hugh Jackman is still so perfectly cast in the part, that I'm willing to overlook that. It was also nice to see Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen return for what's probably one more outing as Professor X and Magneto respectively. James McAvoy is the true stand-out as the young Charles Xavier, running away with nearly every one of his scenes in both dramatic, and at times, heartbreaking manner. Michael Fassbender continues to show off his natural acting skills as the young Magneto, which is no surprise because he's awesome. Jennifer Lawrence phones it in a little bit as Mystique, which is a bit disappointing after her great performance in First Class (as well as her very impressive filmography) but she's got enough natural talent to make the character passable. Peter Dinklage is solid as the villainous Trask, but the script barely gives him anything to do and as a result, he's little more than a one-note villain. This was probably the most disappointing part of the film, since a more well-rounded character would have given Dinklage a lot to work with and could have made the film truly special. One of the other newcomers is Evan Peters as Quicksilver, a mutant with super speed. I will that, while his character is kind of annoying, he gets a pretty cool action scene and only appears in the film briefly, so no huge complaints there. Everyone else is, overall, pretty solid. Whether they're a newcomer to the franchise or a returning character, I have no real complaints.

As for the visual/action elements... well, like pretty much everything else, I have some mixed feelings. Bryan Singer's trademark dark, gritty, and drab visual aesthetic returns to the series, and once again I'm somewhat let down. I can generally get behind it for the post-apocalyptic scenes, though even those could have been a bit better shot. Though what I really missed was the Fleming-inspired aesthetic from First Class. The classic 007 inspired cinematography and art design from First Class gave that film a really unique quality that found that middle ground between comic book visuals and a retro film vibe. For Days of Future Past... that's sorely missed. The futuristic scenes work, but they feel more like a generic run-of-the-mill post-apocalyptic world you see it many sci-fi films while the scenes in the 1970s are decent enough but could have been great with a bit more stylish flair. Fortunately, Bryan Singer has greatly improved in his ability to direct action since X2. Even though the opening scenes are terribly underlit, the action is fast-paced, well shot, and creatively realized. It's not the most original or unique, but I won't deny that most of the action scenes are usually pretty awesome. Whether it be a fight, a chase, or an all out attack, they work. Oh and a little fanboy aside... THE SENTINELS WERE AWESOME!!! I have been waiting for the Sentinels to show up in an X-Men film for ages (no that stupid Danger Room cameo in The Last Stand doesn't count) and just to see them on the big screen in live action was enough to make my inner fanboy giddy! If nothing else, the film works strictly as an action film, and for most people that'll probably be enough.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, X-Men: Days of Future Past is not a great movie, but it works. It's a thoroughly entertaining movie despite having some glaring script and tone issues. I'd say it's about on par with the first film, though not quite as good as X2, and certainly doesn't hold a candle to First Class. Though it's a huge improvement over The Last Stand and Origins, and an improvement over last year's Wolverine movie. If you're an X-Men fan, you'll probably leave satisfied. For everyone else... you'll get your money's worth.

My Score: 3.5 out of 5!

American Hustle - Review

Now that the 86th Academy Awards have come and gone, I realized that I never reviewed any of the Best Picture nominees. Don't really have any excuses this time, just kind of dropped the ball. Well, now that I know who won and lost, I don't have to make any pleas about who I hope will win, instead I get to complain about the films that took home awards they didn't deserve and the more deserving films that went home empty handed. So, first up is American Hustle, director David O. Russell's crime thriller/drama/comedy (it has bits and pieces from many genres) and what I consider the most overrated film of 2013. I already discussed this one a little bit in my Oscar predictions stating that despite receiving critical praise and ten Oscar nominations (though it didn't win any), I was somewhat befuddled by the film's immense acclaim. I know I'm in the minority here, but despite the efforts of a talented cast, a previously successful director, and worthy subject matter, there was just something missing from American Hustle and as a result, it failed to click. Maybe there's some irony in that title, because after watching it, I genuinely felt hustled by the filmmakers.

In a a loose dramatization of the real-life ABSCAM scandals, the year is 1978 and Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale), while nothing particularly impressive to look at, is one of the best con-artists in the game. With a number of seemingly legitimate businesses, Rosenfeld is an expert at the craft of scamming, whether through counterfeit art deals, illegal merchandise, shady loans, or many other means. While attending a friend's party, he meets the sultry Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams), a stripper/business clerk who takes an interest in Rosenfeld's business. The two form a partnership in Rosenfeld's con-games and start a casual relationship (despite Rosenfeld being married to a woman who, even though she hates him, refuses a divorce). When Rosenfeld and Sydney are caught by FBI agent Richie DaMaso (Bradley Cooper), he offers them a chance to avoid a prison sentence if the two cooperate with the FBI to help them track down and catch some other big-name criminals and con-artists. What follows is essentially a clusterfuck of mishaps involving cons, scams, swindling, friends becoming enemies, enemies becoming friends, the mafia, corrupt politicians, and shady FBI agents.

Now, American Hustle is not necessarily a "bad movie" but after watching it, I couldn't deny the fact that there was just something missing from it, and for a while, I couldn't put my finger on what that was. It certainly wasn't for lack of ambition, effort, talent, or decent subject matter. On the contrary, with a director like David O'Russell, subject matter as interesting as the ABSCAM scandles, and a cast consisting of immense talents like Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Jennifer Lawrence, Bradley Cooper, and Jeremy Renner selling the hell out of their roles, I had pretty high hopes for this flick. Maybe it was the raised expectations that killed this one's potential for me, but even after a second viewing, my thoughts hadn't changed. It's hard not to draw comparisons to Goodfellas while watching American Hustle, as it seemed like O'Russell was going for the style of "bleak/dark drama with comedic undertones" that Martin Scorsese has made a career out of. While there's nothing wrong with a filmmaker drawing inspiration from a near-perfect masterpiece like Goodfellas, American Hustle ultimately feels like an average imitation of a quality product, a thought only supported by the fact that there actually was a Scorsese film in 2013 with similar themes. It's like David O'Russell showed Martin Scorsese his film, and Marty responded by saying, "Nice try kid... but let me show you how the pros do it" and then proceeded to show him The Wolf of Wall Street.

With all that said, it's not fair to criticize a film for not being as incredible as Goodfellas (few are) or to throw David O'Russell under the bus for not being Scorsese (again... very few possess even a fraction of Scorsese's filmmaking talents). I will say this much, there are a few things about the movie that I like. With David O'Russell's sharp eye for visuals, the filmmakers did a commendable job recreating the 1970s. Everything from the outfits, the sets, the soundtrack, the makeup, and the hair (actually the hairstyles are probably the best part of the film) are accomplished with some stylish flair and a nice attention to detail. The actors are generally well-cast too, with the standouts being Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence (though both have done far better work in previous films). At the very least, you can't deny the absolute commitment each actor brought their respective role. The same could be said for director David O'Russell, who clearly put every once of his energy and talent into trying to deliver a quality product. Plus, the pacing is generally solid, the film finds a decent rhythm, and the script manages to throw in a chuckle-worthy scene once in a while. At the very least, the film isn't without any merit.

So like I mentioned before... I was originally quite perplexed as to why a film with so many positive elements could feel so unfulfilling. The cast, the direction, and the concept are, for the most part, generally solid. So what happened??? Well, despite the good individual parts, nothing really comes together all that well. It tries to be three things at once, a dramatic character study, a screwball comedy, and a heist/grifter film (with some socio-political undertones). Unfortunately, it doesn't really get any of those three parts right. The comedic elements are the only parts that come close to working, as I did get a few chuckles out a couple scenes, despite the humorous moments being very hit or miss. The characters, however, are probably the most disappointing part of the film, because they come close to working but not quite. They're mostly just comedic archetypes with little depth or personality that fail to rise above generic cliches. I won't dock the film points for it's characters not being likable or for being egotistic, narcissistic, or shallow (since that was clearly the point), but I will dock them for not being interesting. The basic set-up and heist story starts with promise but it culminates throughout a confusing and convoluted narrative yet still in ends with an outcome that I predicted five minutes into the damn film. Plus, the tone is all over the map and the style is never consistent. Because the film tackles so many ideas and stories, it continuously looses focus and by the time is over over... it just felt lifeless. A film with multiple plots and stories can work, but it takes one hell of a filmmaker to make it work... clearly David O'Russell was not up to it. The main problem, however, despite it's sheer energy, is that it lacks bite. It doesn't really much to say about the insanity of it's story aside from "we live in a messed up world", which is true but I was expecting more.

As I've mentioned, I know I'm in the minority here, but no matter how I look at American Hustle, it just doesn't do much for me. Maybe it's because I've seen so many films do exactly what American Hustle was trying to do, only so much better. If the movie sounds like it's up your alley you could check it out, or you could watch similar yet far more compelling films like Goodfellas, or more engaging movies like The Sting, or funnier flicks like A Fish Called Wanda... all of which are similar to American Hustle just better. If you're looking for a more recent film, then watch Scorsese's The Wolf of Wall Street. I wish I liked this movie, I WANT to like this movie, but no matter what American Hustle is nothing more than mediocre.

My Score: 2.5 out of 5!

Oscars 2014 - My Picks and Predictions

Normally every year, I'm pretty good about posting my picks and predictions for the annual Academy Awards at least a few days before the show... I kind of dropped the ball on that this year. Unfortunately, both life and time got the best of me and I've fallen a bit behind with my usual Oscar viewings/posts, though I did see all the Best Picture nominees, as well as all the nominees for the acting categories and a few others. So, while this post won't be as comprehensive as they usually are, here are my picks and predictions for this year's Oscars.

Best Actor in a Leading Role
Christian Bale in "American Hustle"
Bruce Dern in "Nebraska"
Leonardo DiCaprio in "The Wolf of Wall Street"
Chiwetel Ejiofor in "12 Years a Slave"
Matthew McConaughey in "Dallas Buyers Club"

It still astounds me that a thuddingly mediocre film like American Hustle was showered with so much praise from critics and the Academy. I mean, Christian Bale was good in it, but nowhere near as good as Tom Hanks in Captain Phillips, Robert Redford in All Is Lost, Michael B. Jordan in Fruitvale Station, or Joaquin Phoenix in Her (and I'm sure there are a few I'm probably forgetting). Granted, this was a crowded category this year and there was bound to be a few snubs, but Bale is definitely the weak link in the category (and make no mistake, I do generally really like Christian Bale). The buzz surrounding the picks this year, however, have been pointing to McConaughey as the likely victor. It's just a performance and role typically awarded by the academy, a previously heartthrob-turned-serious actor giving a deeply committed performance, and who lost considerable weight no less, in a true story role about a bigot-turned-hero to the battle against AIDS (ie a film that tackles some hot-button issues). Is it Oscar bait? Yeah... for the most part... but I won't say that McConaughey isn't genuinely great in the part, and the film is a generally solid movie that serves a good purpose. My personal choice would be either Leonardo DiCaprio or Bruce Dern, but Bale excluded, these would all be worthy victors.

Who Will Win: Matthew McConaughey
My Pick: Leonardo DiCaprio

Best Actress in a Leading Role
Amy Adams in "American Hustle"
Cate Blanchett in "Blue Jasmine"
Sandra Bullock in "Gravity"
Judi Dench in "Philomena"
Meryl Streep in "August: Osage County"

I'm about to type something that I never thought I would ever say, type, or even imply. I'm wondering if I might come to regret this later on, but right now, if I'm going to be totally honest, objective, and un-biased, this is how I truly feel. So with that said............ Sandra Bullock should win the Oscar. I know! I know! It's not that I dislike Sandra Bullock, as she has been in some films I've liked, but nearly every time she's broken away from her usual shtick (the cute if not a bit klutzy but lovable romcom leading lady), the results have usually been awful. Yes, that does include her Oscar-winning role in the very overrated sports drama, "The Blind Side" (she was just okay in that). So yeah, while that might make her the least deserving two-time Oscar winning actress ever, I won't deny that she was genuinely excellent in Gravity. Taking on such a physically and emotionally demanding role, mainly in front of a green screen with few other actors to act off of... yeah that would be a challenge for everyone, but she nailed it! Probably won't matter though, as Blanchett seems like she's got it this year. The only thing keeping me from calling her a sure thing, however, is the recent controversies surrounding Woody Allen, and if that does cost Blanchett the award, it will probably end up going to Amy Adams (the only one of these actresses who has not won already). Still, if you want the safe bet, go with Blanchett. Also... why the Hell was Emma Thompson not nominated for Saving Mr. Banks??? If they had replaced Meryl Streep from the seriously overrated and actually pretty bad "August: Osage County" with Thompson, this would have been a perfect lineup.

Who Will Win: Cate Blanchett
My Pick: Sandra Bullock

Best Actor in a Supporting Role
Barkhad Abdi for "Captain Phillips"
Bradley Cooper for "American Hustle"
Michael Fassbender for "12 Years a Slave"
Jonah Hill for "The Wolf of Wall Street"
Jared Leto for "Dallas Buyers Club"

Pretty good choices this year... except for Bradley Cooper. Could we have replaced him with Daniel Brühl from Rush or Tom Hanks from Saving Mr. Banks? Oh well, can't win them all. This award seems to have Jared Leto's name all over it as the AIDS-positive transgender woman in Dallas Buyers Club. There has been some minor controversy regarding whether an actual transsexual actress should have been cast in the part, but since Leto has been racking up pretty much all the other awards for this role, he's the likley contender. I'm okay with that, Jared Leto has always been an underrated actor and I'm glad he's finally getting some recognition. Personally, I'd love to see Barkhad Abti win this one, as his debut performance as the complicated and threatening Somali pirate leader in Captain Phillips was nothing less than captivating. If Leto doesn't win, he'd be the most likely to sneak in and take the award.

Who Will Win: Jared Leto
My Pick: Barkhad Abdi

Best Actress in a Supporting Role
Sally Hawkins in "Blue Jasmine"
Jennifer Lawrence  in "American Hustle"
Lupita Nyong'o in "12 Years a Slave"
Julia Roberts in "August: Osage County"
June Squibb in "Nebraska"

This award has come down to a two-way race between Jennifer Lawrence and Lupita Nyong'o. While Lawrence is good in American Hustle, I'm really hoping she doesn't win this year. I like Jennifer Lawrence, don't get me wrong, but there was never a point in American Hustle where I felt her performance was even remotely Oscar worthy. Lupita Nyong'o, on the other hand, gave such an emotional, heartfelt, and tragic performance in 12 Years a Slave, that it was impossible to not be moved by such dedication. For such compelling work in such a heartbreaking film, I'm going to be pissed if she doesn't win. Fortunately, it seems like Nyong'o is going to be taking the award anyways, so that would be just fine by me.

Who Will Win: Lupita Nyong'o
My Pick: Lupita Nyong'o

Best Director
David O'Russell for "American Hustle"
Alfonso Cuarón for "Gravity"
Alexander Payne for "Nebraska"
Steve McQueen for "12 Years a Slave"
Martin Scorsese for "The Wolf of Wall Street"

There was once a time I thought David O'Russell was one of the most promising filmmakers working today... I no longer subscribe to such sentiment. It's not that he's a bad filmmaker, it's just that for a director who once showed promise by taking chances with risky ideas or at least putting interesting spins on well-established tropes, his last two films have been hurt by tonal inconsistencies, questionable storytelling, and an willing embrace of the overdone Hollywood cliches he once managed to avoid or subvert. Fortunately, four out of five of these directors are very well deserving of this award, though it will probably go to Alfonso Cuarón. My personal choice would either be Martin Scorsese or Steve McQueen, but Cuarón's sure hand as a director and incredible vision was ultimately what made Gravity such a success. So yeah, that's totally fine with me if Cuarón wins.

Who Will Win: Alfonso Cuarón
My Pick: Martin Scorsese

Best Makeup and Hairstyling
Dallas Buyers Club
Jackass Presents Bad Grandpa
The Lone Ranger

There has been a bit of commotion and tons of jokes surrounding the fact that a Jackass film was nominated for an Oscar. I'll admit, just saying that is kind of hilarious. That said, and I swear this is dead serious, I think it should win. Dallas Buyers Club would seem like the likely victor, as it's the sole prestige film nominated in this category, but the aging effects used to turn Johnny Knoxville into an 80-year-old man were damn good and even Oscar-worthy. Of course, I have to ask.... WHAT THE HELL IS THE LONE RANGER DOING ON THIS LIST??? Jackass has taken most of the heat for this category, but the Lone Ranger is the true wtf nominee. I mean... giving Johnny Depp the means to go redface is offensive and disgusting, and even if that wasn't bad enough, I don't see how smearing war paint and putting a dead bird on his head equals Oscar nominee. Ugh! Honestly Academy, couldn't you have nominated The Hobbit instead? That film's makeup was way more impressive... and far less racist too.

Who Will Win: Jackass Presents Bad Grandpa
My Pick: Jackass Presents Bad Grandpa

Best Film Editing
American Hustle
Captain Phillips
Dallas Buyers Club
Gravity
12 Years a Slave

As an editor myself, I always insist on commenting in this category. As far as snubs go, I would have liked to have seen Rush or Her on this list instead of American Hustle or Dallas Buyers Club. Though it seems like this award is going to go to Gravity (as will most of the tech awards). I'd prefer to give it to Captain Phillips personally, but Gravity is just fine too.

Who Will Win: Gravity
My Pick: Captain Phillips

Best Original Song
"Happy" from "Despicable Me 2"
"Let It Go" from "Frozen"
"The Moon Song" from "Her"
"Ordinary Love" from "Mandela: The Long Walk to Freedom"

The buzz surrounding this category has mainly been centered around the previously nominated "Alone, Yet Not Alone" nomination being revoked. I personally could care less, it wasn't a very good song anyways and I've heard the film in which it was featured is supposedly awful. Not that it had much of a chance anyways, since "Let It Go" is going to win this award. Frozen's big musical number and song has struck such a chord with critics and audiences that there's little chance of it not getting the Oscar. I have no problem with that whatsoever.

Who Will Win: "Let It Go"
My Pick: "Let It Go"

Best Animated Feature
The Croods
Despicable Me 2
Ernest & Celestine
Frozen
The Wind Rises

I didn't do a very good job this year seeing 2013's animated fare. It wasn't a great year for animated features to begin with, despite a few hidden gems. The one I'm most disappointed to miss was The Wind Rises, the final feature to be directed by Japanese animation legend Hayao Miyazaki. With an extensive filmography of incredible anime features, it's admittedly pretty sad that his long and amazing career has come to an end. I haven't seen The Wind Rises yet, so I can't comment on it, but I might write a review down the road when I do finally see it. The only films I saw this year in the category were The Croods and Frozen, and between the two, Frozen is clearly the better film. I might change my opinion later on when I see the rest of these flicks, but at the moment, I'm set on Frozen winning the award... which it probably will.

Who Will Win: Frozen
My Pick: Frozen

Best Visual Effects
Gravity
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
Iron Man 3
The Lone Ranger
Star Trek Into Darkness

If it's a technical award, there's a strong chance that Gravity will win it. Would have preferred to see Pacific Rim on this list instead of the reprehensible Lone Ranger, but these choices are overall pretty good I suppose. Doesn't matter though, Gravity is going to win this award, I'll be shocked if it doesn't.

Who Will Win: Gravity
My Pick: Gravity

Best Picture
American Hustle
Captain Phillips
Dallas Buyers Club
Gravity
Her
Nebraska
Philomena
12 Years a Slave
The Wolf of Wall Street

I know I skipped a ton of categories, but time's a factor and I don't have much to say about the rest. So, here's the Best Picture lineup. It seems like it's come down to a two-way race between Gravity and 12 Years a Slave... though many are speculating that The Wolf of Wall Street and American Hustle are strong contenders for an upset. I'll admit, it's a tricky one to predict this year, and there's no obvious victor in sight. 12 Years a Slave would seem to be the more "Oscar-ish" film to win such an award, but Gravity has struck such a chord, that we might actually see an effects-driven blockbuster take the prize (that rarely happens). If you want to play the odds, 12 Years a Slave is the safest bet, but don't be too surprised if the presenter announces Gravity as the winner. For me, The Wolf of Wall Street is who I'm rooting for, but 12 Years a Slave or Gravity would suit me just fine... so would Nebraska or Her as well... actually if any of these films won instead of American Hustle, I'd probably survive. Seriously though American Hustle... please Academy don't give the award to a shallow Goodfellas-wannabe, especially where there's an actual Scorsese film among the nominees.

Who Will Win: 12 Years a Slave
My Pick: The Wolf of Wall Street

Below are a list of my predictions, though not necessarily my personal choices, in the previous categories as well as the awards I didn't mention. Who will win? We'll find out tonight!

Best Picture: 12 Years a Slave
Best Director: Alfonso Cuarón
Best Actor: Matthew McConaughey
Best Actress: Cate Blanchett
Best Supporting Actor: Jared Leto
Best Supporting Actress: Lupita Nyong'o
Original Screenplay: Her
Adapted Screenplay: 12 Years a Slave
Animated Feature: Frozen
Foreign Film: The Great Beauty
Costume Design: American Hustle
Makeup: Jackass Presents Bad Grandpa
Production Design: The Great Gatsby
Editing: Gravity
Cinematography: Gravity
Sound Editing: Gravity
Sound Mixing: Gravity
Visual Effects: Gravity (Like I said, if it's a technical award, go with Gravity)
Original Song: "Let it Go"
Original Score: Gravity
Live Action Short: The Voorman Problem
Animated Short: Get A Horse
Documentary Feature: The Act of Killing
Documentary Short: The Lady in Number 6

Harold Ramis, 1944 - 2014

Sad day today, Hollywood lost another true talent and dare I even say legend. Harold Ramis, the actor, writer, and director who had a pivotal role in developing (or in some cases creating) comedy classics like Ghostbusters, Groundhog Day, Caddyshack, Animal House, Meatballs, Stripes, and others has died today at the age of 69. I know I don't normally do these blog tributes very often, but Harold Ramis is a special case. Not only was he one of those rare exceptions of Hollywood figures who not only made me laugh time and time again, but since Ghostbusters was such an integral part of my childhood and upbringing (and a movie that even after seeing it 100+ times is just as entertaining as ever), Ramis' passing managed to hit me pretty hard. Whether it be the awkward antics of Dr. Egon Spengler in Ghostbusters, the existential hilarity he brought to Groundhog Day, or just his spot-on comedic timing in Stripes... he was a true comedic genius.

If there's one silver lining to this sad news, it's that he has left behind quite a legacy, and if nothing else his talents and spirit will live on in his array of hilarious movies and shows. RIP Mr. Ramis.

Top 10 Best Movies of 2013

Alright! This post is also way overdue. Nonetheless, here are my favorite films from 2013.



Agree or disagree with my list? Leave a comment and let me know.

Top 10 Worst Movies of 2013

Alright! This is long overdue, but here are (in video form) my choices for the Top 10 Worst Movies of 2013!



Stay tuned for my choices for the Best of 2013 and more video reviews.