Nightmare Alley

Guillermo del Toro’s follow-up to his Oscar-winning Best Picture and Best Director “The Shape of Water” felt like two separate, incomplete movies meshed into one, resulting in slightly underbaked character developments especially for Bradley Cooper’s protagonist and rushed narratives.

However, what worked fantastically well was del Toro’s amazing visuals and world building. The cinematography by Dan Laustsen and production design by Tamara Deverell and Shane Vieau were stunning and absolutely deserved their Oscar nominations.

Unfortunately, that led the story itself and the characters to take a back seat. Cooper was not doing his best work here. His silence in the first half lacked gravitas and dimension. There was no discernible hunger or passion or self-serving interest behind them. Which then made the later half’s metamorphosis seemed unearned. It was not hard to understand, just undeserved.

Rooney Mara and Toni Collette were also both underserved by the script. Collette especially, though great in the role, ended up being rather one dimensional. Mara fared a bit better, being ostensibly the female lead, she had a bit more depth but ultimately only served to extend Cooper’s character’s arc rather than a fully fleshed out character in her own right.

And what a waste of actors like Willem Dafoe, Mary Steenburgen, Richard Jenkins and David Strathairn.

The one character that worked well was Cate Blanchett’s noir-drenched femme fatale (gosh, the camera sure loved her and she looked amazing in that look!). Although she only appeared in the second half, Blanchett absolutely owned the screen, acting circles and chewing the scenery. A pity she did not get a Best Supporting Actress nomination, though, granted the weakest two were Jessie Buckley and Judi Dench (though Caitriona Balfe would have deserved it over Dame Dench).

The film’s best chances for Oscar glory will be for the under-the-line categories. But even then, it will still be a long shot.

Spencer

A near 2 hours mood piece reflecting the frenzied, paranoid, mess, seemingly fractured mind of Princess Diana over those three days during Christmas at Sandringham estate in 1992. Kirsten Stewart was amazing. Together with director Pablo Larraín and writer Steven Knight, Stewart was lost in her portrayal of a princess that vacillated between fragile and on the verge of breaking apart, to strong and sure-footed of what she wants.

The film was undoubtedly excessively and somewhat self-possessed, but like what Larraín did with Natalie Portman in “Jackie”, this was a psychological profile of a famous female at a precarious point in their life as they navigated expectations both from themselves within and from the people - public and private, perceived and assumed - without.

In “Spencer”, dramatically and narratively, nothing much happened. It was a series of moments and vignettes that Larraín et al had crafted to highlight and heighten the inner workings of Diana’s mind and feelings.

And Stewart absolutely nailed it.

Stewart’s mannerisms and voice were similar to Diana, but what made the accolades well deserved was her full bodied immersion into the role. Stewart the rising star was gone, instead we are left with this complicated, fragile, unstable princess yet undeniably strong and loving mother. Her performance was nuanced at the quiet scenes but when the moment required more drama and more frenzied emotions she never overplayed it but raised the heightened display to meet Larraín’s equally discomforting camera work as assisted by cinematographer Claire Mathon.

Mathon’s lensing here was as stunning as her work on the gorgeous “Portrait of a Lady on Fire”. Just as apt was the brilliant, dissonant, disorientating score by Jonny Greenwood.

This film can be divisive because essentially it was a mood piece. More an art installation rather than a true cinematic narrative. Nonetheless, Stewart definitely deserved her Best Actress Oscar nomination and can truly be a dark horse to win the statue.

Belfast

 A feel-good but very superficial crowd pleaser. Kenneth Branagh’s semi-autobiographical was pleasant enough but lacked depth and heart. And for a story told from a child’s point of view, it also lacked a child’s innocence and naïveté (thank “Jojo Rabbit”).

The filming was too deliberately organised and ordered that at times it felt emotionally sterile despite what was happening on screen. The most resonant scenes were those set in the theatre, the big dance moment (that was brilliant!) and the final parting shot with Dame Judi Dench. I can see why she was nominated but in all honesty, if only one actress was to be nominated, Caitríona Balfe, should have had the edge.

Balfe was the emotional heart of the film, whereas Dench was more the soul. Ciarán Hinds’ nomination was well-deserved, and although Jamie Dornan got the least recognition, he was actually quite good here too. He definitely looked the part, all 40s Hollywood suaveness.

At a brisk 90-odd minutes, the story went by easily but not always briskly. Branagh’s direction was just too deliberate and mannered, and although Haris Zambarloukous’ black and white cinematography was pretty it was kind of missing the artistic styling of films like “The Tragedy of Macbeth”, “Cold War” and “Roma” which then begged the question, did this film really need to be in black and white? Music was by Van Morrison and the closing, Oscar-nominated, song, “Down to Joy” was lovely, but the needle drops throughout the film was just a tad too frequent and too much.

The film was enjoyable enough and it would definitely strike a chord with most people for its easily relatable relationships, but ultimately I would not have been too upset if Branagh’s Best Director nod had been snubbed for Denis Villeneuve instead.

Benedetta

Paul Verhoeven’s French lesbian nun biopic was equally riveting as it will - was - undoubtedly be divisive. The fact that the film was based on real events makes it even more fascinating. Although the film ran rather long - 131 minutes - most of it was interesting except for a meandering second act where Verhoeven needlessly focused too much on the sapphic aspects instead of deepening Benedetta as a character. We understood her purely on a superficial level but what led her to make the choices that drove the final act was never fully explored. As a biopic, the central character remained as much an enigma in the beginning as in the end (Wikipedia offered more insight).

Virginie Efira definitely had screen presence but her Benedetta lacked that enigmatic charm to fully sell her as a mystic with a personality cult. Daphne Patakia as her lover, Bartolomea, had little to work on, despite a tragic back story, only acting as the narrative demanded it with no consistency or substantive reasons.

Charlotte Rampling was the highlight, a delight to watch as she stole the scenes with each pursed lips and clasped hands, and a slight nod or shake of the head. Verhoeven should put Isabelle Huppert and Rampling together and watch them both chew the sceneries - and hopefully each other - apart.

“Benedetta” was an interesting film for its historical context and entertaining for what it may or may not have been.

Tick Tick...Boom [Netflix]

Tick, Tick…Boom!: Andrew Garfield was infinitely charismatic and magnetic, and is emerging as the true black horse in the Best Actor race. Garfield’s performance anchored the film and it was a mesmerising and emotional showcase for him, and this was crucial to hook in the audience as Lin-Manual Miranda’s directorial debut was uneven. Like most actor-turned-director debuts, the film was visually derivative and unexciting, the predictable story by Steven Levenson did not help too which also led to a pacing issue.

Thankfully, the main cast was stellar. Garfield can consider doing more musicals, and with his raised profile from “Spider-Man”, is definitely a strong contender for Best Actor. He was fascinating to watch with such a range of facial emotions that it was not difficult to empathise with him fully.

Robin de Jesús as best friend Michael had a strong presence and it would have been better if his storyline was reworked more to reflect the contemporary moment. Alexandra Shipp was illuminating and her chemistry with Garfield was palpable. Lastly, Vanessa Hudgens had really good hair (and a good voice).

This film was made for Netflix and hopefully it gets lots of views. However, that also means its Oscar chances are limited. Likely only Garfield with a long shot for Costume, and Hair and Makeup.

Red Rocket

Red Rocket: Sean Baker’s slice of American life was an interesting watch populated by fascinating characters led by a surprisingly effective Simon Rex. However, at 128 minutes it was a tad too long with a middling late first act and repetitive second act, and the story was essentially too thin to hold the audience for that long. It did not help that after a while, Rex himself became rather one note - until the slightly rushed third act. The buzz around him was definitely worthy, but his chances for an Oscar Best Actor nod will surely be slim. The other (mostly) first-time actors that Baker found for the film were quite good but rather inconsistent which sometimes brings you out of the film.

Baker’s direction remained grounded and gritty which suited the rural Texan landscape the film was based in. However, the main story as written by Baker and Chris Bergoch was just slightly too icky especially as they just kept going on and on about it with nary any sort of moral reckoning. Although granted it suited Rex’s character but the girl in question - as played by Suzanna Son - deserved more depth and development to make the plot stronger and more convincing.

Regardless, Baker’s films have always been interesting and generated conversation and “Red Rocket” was no exception. It has a chance for a Best Picture nomination and maybe an Original Screenplay, but it’s greatest awards play will be at the Gothams or Spirits.

King Richard

A crowd pleasing sports biopic by Reinaldo Marcus Green about the little known man behind the two greatest female tennis players of all times. The dramatic irony that Venus and Serena Williams will eventually be the GOATs also helped to propel the screenplay by Zach Baylin especially as their father appeared so entirely unconventional and erratic.

Will Smith, in the title role, gave a fully inhabited performance that was possibly his best in his career, and that will surely careen him to the front of the Best Actor race. However, it was really Aunjanue Ellis who was the unsung hero/star of the film and story. She held the edges of the film together and melded the family with the man. Also, she was so fascinating to watch. The two girls playing Venus and Serena Williams were also equally compelling and seemed to embody their grace and ferocity.

The movie ran slightly long at 145 minutes but the tennis matches were exciting and the family drama done just right for the necessary cinematic pathos and dramatics, hence the length was not often felt. The score by Kris Bowers was also effective in moving the narrative forward, stringing the tension and stirring the emotions during the more dialogue-free moments. That too helped the film to not feel too draggy.

But, the biggest complaint of the film is that, even though it was ostensibly about Richard Williams, an overbearing, eccentric and unconventional coach/father, it ended up belittling the inherent greatness and fortitude of the Williams sisters whilst lifting their father up who was portrayed without any major blemishes or personal faults (alluded to but never really touched on). This ended up making the film a feel good crowd pleaser with no real character depth.

This was a great contrast to Jane Campion’s “Power of the Dog” which was a slow burning, emotionally dense film. Similarly, Smith had the much showier role whereas Benedict Cumberbatch’s performance was a lot quieter but more nuanced.

“King Richards” has the legs for a couple of Oscar nominations, in particular Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Song (Beyoncé!) and Best Screenplay. Hopefully, also Best Supporting Actress for Ellis.

The Power of the Dog (Sydney Moonlight Cinema)

The Best Director race is Jane Campion’s to lose. Although this film was a Netflix release, it really should be watched on a big screen. The cinematography by Ari Wegner was breathtakingly beautiful with stunning New Zealand representing Montana. However, it was Campion’s storytelling that elevated this film to greatness.

The film was essentially a three-handed character drama led by a stellar Benedict Cumberbatch and supported by strong performances from Kirsten Dunst and Kodie Smit-McPhee. Campion’s direction was as assured as it had always been. There was nary any fats through the 2 hours run time with Campion taking a nuanced and thoughtful approach in exploring the inner lives and complexities of these three characters. Every scene and moment served a purpose either as foreshadow or as a voyeuristic dive into the characters’ thoughts.

Cumberbatch gave a powerful performance, intense and fragile at the same time. He gave a highly complex character who could have easily been construed simply as a hypocritical villain such depth and nuance that it was almost natural for us to end up feeling sympathy for him in the end. A sympathy that was laced with empathy, shame and regret.

Dunst also gave one of the best performance of her career. Her character’s evolution was a slow and purposeful development with small, particular changes at each moment - the facial expressions, the body language, the costuming and hair, etc - and Dunst was captivating throughout.

However, the breakout star would be Smit-McPhee. With this role, he had truly proven that he is a young leading man in waiting. In someone’s else hand, his character could easily have been a caricature or a stereotype, but Campion and he have crafted a character that was complicated and complex in his apparent simplicity.

Campion’s partnership with Wegner yielded gorgeous and poetic screen imageries that helped tell the story and set the mood. Coupled with another haunting score by Jonny Greenwood, this film was a feast for the senses.

This film will surely sweep the Oscar nominations and is a sure frontrunner for the Big Three - Picture, Director and Actor.

Don't Look Up (Sydney Moonlight Cinema)

To be honest, the fact that I watched this on a large screen with an audience in an outdoor cinema, under a clear summer night with stars, definitely played a part in the surreal enjoyment of this extremely Adam McKay satirical film. It was the most McKay-ish of his recent films, and he kept the level up throughout the whole 2hours-plus film. That could have been a bit too much. The jokes and gags just kept coming on one after another, and ran again and again. The ridiculous satirical nature of deniers and right-wing ideologists, though rang true and funny in the first half, was exhausting and draining towards the back half.

That said, the ensemble cast was excellent. I forgot what a good actress Jennifer Lawrence used to be when she first started before she got distracted by mediocre-to-bad, Hollywood fluffs. Her comedic timing was brilliant as well her meme-able facial reactions. Leonardo DiCaprio too was refreshing and could be a long shot for a Best Actor nomination. Everybody loves him and he genuinely looked like he was having fun.

Other big-named standouts included Meryl Streep and Cate Blanchett, both actresses looked great and really just embraced the satirical hamminess of it all. And Mark Rylance was a treasure as the deadpanned technocrat. Even Jonah Hill and Timotheé Chalamet were acceptably funny as McKay dished Hill out sparingly and kept Chalamet’s peacock showiness to a minimum.

Linus Sandgren’s cinematography and Nicholas Britell’s music were beautiful, with the latter a strong contender for an Oscar nomination.

Editing and original screenplay nominations are almost a sure bet too. Also a top 10 Best Picture nod, buoyed by the amazing cast and the Hollywood-approved, politically correct message.

House of Gucci

There was a good story and film somewhere inside this bloated mess, but it was not what we got. Its historical inaccuracy can be overlooked since it was a movie. However, it was grossly inconsistent in terms of character developments - or lack thereof - and overall tone of the film.

Ridley Scott’s directing remained assured, but he seemed to have lost control with the purpose of the film. Did he want this to be a campy thriller or a serious dramatic biography? Who/what was the focus of the film? Lady Gaga’s Patrizia Reggiani, Adam Driver’s Maurizio Gucci or the House of Gucci itself? This film was utterly confused.

You know you are in trouble if mid-way, I begin to think a Ryan Murphy limited series might have served the story better.

The odd song choices and needle drops also added to the layer of confusion. The songs were either of the wrong period and most times did not suit the tone of the scene, or they were such clichéd choices that it brought you out of the moment.

And to make things worse, we had to content with over 2.5 hours of ridiculous, all-over-the-place, wildly inconsistent accents from all the main actors. Lady Gaga sounded more Euro-Russian with the occasional accent sneaking in; Driver was more consistent with a somewhat Italian accent; Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons were not even trying, with the latter sounding positively British most times; and Jared Leto was just a joke.

Sadly, the acting was also about the same. It was practically like watching different movies. Driver was the only one who seemed to think he was in a serious Oscar-contending drama. Lady Gaga was all gloriously camp and vacant eyes. She had a few good scenes, but only seemed to embodied her character superficially. That could be the fault of Scott and the writers, but was she really Oscar worthy? Pacino and Irons, like their accents, were just phoning it in. Someone really needs to rein Leto in and set him some boundaries.

With ten Best Picture nominees this year, “House of Gucci” might just sneak in, and Lady Gaga might also get a Best Actress nomination. But in my opinion, both do not deserve it.

The Tragedy of Macbeth

Joel Coen’s adaptation of this Shakespeare classic was a stunning study of monochrome cinematography and brutal architecture production design. Led by a stellar Denzel Washington, this was a rather faithful literal translation of the play to the screen. As usual, the Elizabethan English may be challenging to some, but after a few beats you will get into the rhythm, and Shakespeare’s powerful use of the English language still never ceased to amaze. The metaphors, allusions, foreshadowing, alliterations and flow of words were masterful, and the cast did it proud.

Washington was magnetic. His Macbeth embodied a man, perhaps just passed his prime, that had so many layers and contradictions. His fears, ambitions, tyranny, delusions, love for his wife were all on display, and Washington flipped through all the emotions effortlessly as we witnessed the rise and fall of Macbeth. Is he a Tragic character? Or just a victim of his own Hubris?

Frances McDormand as Lady Macbeth was a slightly more mixed bag. Her early portrayal of an equally ambitious Queen-in-waiting was more convincing, but her devolution to fear and doubt seemed less natural (especially if one is not familiar with the original text). But, boy, can McDormand serve a look!

The biggest standout was Kathryn Hunter as the weird sisters. She was phenomenal. Although only appearing briefly, her witchy portrayal was utterly terrifying and memorable. Every enunciation of Shakespeare’s famous lines echoed with purpose. And those bodily movements. Brilliant.

Outstanding cinematography by Bruno Delbonnel (pay attention Wes Anderson!). The use of lights and shadows were outstanding. Paired with the gorgeous production design by Stefan Dechant - sharp, angular, brutal and Tadao Ando-esque - the whole Macbeth castle seemed like a whole character unto itself.

“Macbeth” was a challenging film. Enriching and gorgeous, but definitely appealing to a niche audience. Washington may get a Best Actor nomination and the film a Best Picture nod, and hopefully at least two more for Delbonnel and Dechant.

 

Titane

What an exhilarating and exciting film. No wonder it won the Palme d’Or. It was audacious, outrageous, provocative, original, freh, unpredictable, visceral, sympathetic, uncompromising, repulsive, engrossing, challenging and so much more.

It was a cinematic experience.

With a bare minimum of dialogue, director/writer Julia Doucournau crafted an immaculate journey that one never knew how it was going to end; and whether it will end or not.

Leading lady Agathe Rousselle was phenomenal. The make-up team definitely helped, but Rousselle fully inhabited her role. She was haunting and scary and terrifying, but yet beneath that cold, hardened exterior was was a child-like innocence that just needed to be loved. And you believed that.

Coupled with Vincent London who came in at the half-way mark, they made for a fascinating pair. Both so similar in what they desire and they need, but yet possibly so dangerous together.

Kudos to Ducournau for always keeping us guessing as to how the film will end, and when it finally arrived, it was as haunting and tender as when the film started.

The score by Jim Williams echoed the hauntedness of the cinematography by Ruben Impens. Lots of stark contrast juxtaposed with softness, in particular by the repeated motif of flames and fires. Death, destruction and rebirth. The allegories were not subtle.

Regardless, “Titane” absolutely deserved its accolades. However, my Best International Feature Film Oscar vote still goes to “Drive My Car”.

Licorice Pizza

The closest we will get to a Paul Thomas Anderson rom-com. An almost perfect love story with two amazing leads in their feature film debut.

Alana Haim was fascinating. She was irresistibly magnetic and charismatic, effortlessly lighting up the screen and drawing our focus. Cooper Hoffman - so like his father - was perfectly cast as the young charming hustler, exuding an equally effortless screen presence. The chemistry between them was electrifying and absolutely worth the ticket price.

The first 2/3 of the film was brilliant, near perfect. It was funny, smoothly paced, sweet and emotional and so worth the journey. However, the third act was meandering and slightly loses focus. Haim’s character suddenly loses her agency and Hoffman’s character devolved to unlikeability. Thankfully, PTA managed to wring it back at the final moments.

Regardless, the film was beautifully shot as usual by PTA himself and Michael Bauman, and excellently scored by Jonny Greenwood. Both of which were surely going to get Oscar nominations. On top of the likely Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay and maybe even Best Director; Haim will be a long shot for Best Actress.

The Worst Person in the World (Verdens Verste Menneske)

Norwegian’s Oscar entry for Best International Feature Film and Cannes’ Best Actress winner was a dark romantic comedy that succinctly captured the wistful, fleeting, uncertainty and unmoored fragility of the Gen Z/Millennials and broadly - albeit sometimes blatantly - juxtaposed it with the more grounded yet still wishful sensibility of the Gen X/Y-ers.

We followed the intriguing and arresting and infinitely charismatic Renate Reinsve through the years, or as Joachim Trier stated in the opening, through 12 chapters, a prologue and an epilogue, as she attempted to discover herself. Inherently, this was a film about her love story to herself. It masked itself as a love story between Reinsve and the men in her life - key of whom was played by Anders Danielsen Lie - as Trier played and mixed with generational expectations, but truly, in the end, we were on a journey hoping that Reinsve’s character figures out what she wants in her life before she fully becomes “The Worst Person in the World”.

Kudos to Trier and Reinsve for managing to tell a story and creating a character who could have been loathsome and unlikeable but ended up being so realistic, relatable and empathetic to. We never really wanted her to fail. We hoped she succeeds. But through the two-hours runtime, we do sometimes wonder if she was worth it. Was this person - this character - worth rooting for? And I think they had achieved it, although the last act may have been too manipulative to feel organic. But, hey, this is a fictional film after all, no?

A stronger contender to make it as one of the nominees come Oscar time. But unlike “Drive My Car”, I doubt it has a chance in the other categories.

West Side Story

 

Never doubt Steven Spielberg. What a stunning remake of the classic. Undeniably gorgeously shot by Janusz Kamiński and expertly updated and adapted by Tony Kushner, this musical film remained emotionally heart wrenching and indescribably catchy. Spielberg captured the electrical energy of the Jets and the Sharks without ever seeming goofy or unrealistic, but at the same time also creating an undercurrent of emotional tenderness that swelled and crested as Tony and Maria’s story threaded through the rhythms and rhymes of Leonard Bernstein and Stephen Sondheim.

And someone give Ariana DeBose her Oscar nomination…or better still, the Oscar…now!! Her “America” was a show-stopping showcase and if Jennifer Hudson and Anne Hathaway can win Oscars, so can DeBose.

Rachel Zegler was a wonderful discovery, all bright-eyed and innocent naïveté. Ansel Elgort had a good singing voice and was a decent Tony but he lacked that dangerous edge; more dreamboat than edgy catamaran. Their chemistry though palpable was not electrifying as it could be.

Mike Faist as Riff and David Alvarez as Bernardo were the other standouts, and Rita Moreno would be another potential oscar nominee just because of nostalgia and she got to sing “Somewhere”.

“West Side Story” is surely going to be another Spielberg Oscar juggernaut, but whether it will do a “The Post” and “Lincoln” and pick up none to a few wins, or hark back to the days of “Schindler’s List” and sweep will be hard to say. Without much acting support, it might end up doing a “Mad Max: Fury Road” and sweep the technicals, although “Dune” might give it a run for that honour.