Vladimir Rakhmanin
Staff Writer
Ah, the Academy Awards, arguably the most important awards show in the film industry, the Oscars have been capturing our imagination for over eighty years, honouring outstanding achievements in what is, perhaps, the most influential art form of the 20th century.
To prepare for the awards, I have written short reviews for all the films that were nominated for Best Picture. In Part 1, the films to be reviewed are The Artist, The Descendants, Hugo, Midnight in Paris and The Tree of Life.
The Artist
At first, it seemed impossible. A film that is not only in black-and-white, but also silent. In 2011. I was intrigued, not least because of the hype coming from Europe – Jean Dujardin had already won the prize for Best Actor at Cannes – but mostly because I love films that try to replicate an already established genre (Super 8, for example, with its brilliant homages to early Spielberg films)
When The Artist finally made its way over to Ireland, I was truly amazed – not only does it succeed as a director’s experiment, but it also manages to recapture the glamour and feel-good feel of early cinema. The film work perfectly in the silent format – certain scenes which I will not spoil, the climax in particular, could only work without sound. Jean Dujardin is also magnificent – his face is unbelievably expressive. It really is a credit to his acting how we can feel so many of his character’s emotions without the need for dialogue.
The Academy loves feel-good films, making this a very strong candidate for Best Picture – with 10 nominations in the bag, expect great things from The Artist at the ceremony.
The Descendants
I’m not sure why this film is described as a comedy – while you will definitely laugh during it, those few moments are mostly comic relief. What we have underneath is a genuinely sincere and moving drama about a man trying to find his way in life.
Beautifully shot in leafy Hawaii, George Clooney stars as Matt King, a man whose wife has been left in a coma after a sports accident. With the mother figure out of the picture, Matt now has to step in to take care of his two dysfunctional daughters, all the while attempting to decide whether or not to sell the land that has been in his family for generations.
All actors shine in the film – George Clooney, in particular, is incredible. His character visibly matures as he rises to the challenges that life throws at him. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he wins the award for Best Actor this year. While the ending descends (no pun intended) into melodrama, it is clear that everyone involved genuinely believes in the story that they are telling. While it would be surprising if this wins Best Picture, it is absolutely worth seeing. A real emotional roller-coaster.
Hugo
Aren’t we all fed up with 3D at this point? Ever since Avatar released in 2009, the 3D revival has been pushed down our throats. The worst part of this whole fiasco is that films that have 3D added to them, as opposed to being filmed in 3D, look terrible, with the colours being significantly duller than in their 2D counterparts.
Enter Hugo. Scorsese is responsible, for the first time since Avatar, for inspiring in me a sense of wonder in the format. Not only is it filmed in 3D (praise the Lord), it also uses it in a proper way, to evoke emotion. The story itself has a Dickensian feel to it, with a cinematic twist; it involves a street urchin’s encounter with a Metropolis-esque robot, which eventually leads him to one of the world’s first great directors, Georges Méliès. In 2D, this is merely a good film. In 3D, it becomes a great film.
Scorsese uses the 3D as a tool to evoke emotion – many moments that would have been forgotten in 2D live on in my memory because of the wise choice of format. An angry police inspector, peering through the screen, a moving speech by Méliès, which is underlined by making him stand out on the stage, a vertigo-inducing flight through a Parisian station… The list goes on and on.
I think you had to be psychic to predict that it would receive a whopping 11 nominations – I wouldn’t have expected it to make such a big splash – but now, it has become the underdog candidate for Best Picture. Hollywood really hopes that 3D continues to enjoy success. With Hugo, it might just do that.
Midnight in Paris
It’s crucial that you go in to see Midnight in Paris without any idea of the plot – therefore I will try to speak of the film in very vague terms.
What I can say is that Woody Allen has succeeded in making yet another quirky comedy, this time set in Paris, as opposed to his native New York. Themes of nostalgia and alienation really play into this year’s longing for the early 20th century (War Horse, The Artist, Hugo). The film is even more of a delight if you are acquainted with the creative elite of that era – again, it is almost impossible to review this film without giving away its main gimmick.
This gimmick, in my opinion, will make sure that the film receives an award for Best Screenplay – it really is that great. I’m not so sure about Best Picture though – although the Academy might feel the need to honour Woody Allen once more. To be fair, though, he definitely deserves it.
The Tree of Life
I cannot give this film enough praise. The Tree of Life is hands-down my favourite film of the year, and it pains me that it cannot win Best Picture. The Academy is not really one for art-house films, and I was surprised enough when it was actually nominated.
The Tree of Life, at its simplest, is a story of a man remembering his childhood. If we look further, though, we can find an incredibly sincere and insightful analysis of humanity. The beginning of the film, which shows the creation of the universe, and the ending, which is laden with all kinds of imagery, has much in common with the ending of 2001: A Space Odyssey in its ambiguity and cosmic philosophy; those two sequences are brilliant in their scope and ambition.
The middle section of the film, which consists of the main plot, serves as a shockingly realistic portrayal of memory. Terence Malick (director) knows which images stick out in a child’s mind long after he has become a man, and uses them to tell his story. Every frame from the film could be made into a painting – the film was in production for an extremely long time, and you know what? It was worth it.
No matter who wins Best Picture at the Academy Awards, it is this film that will be remembered after fifty years. This is true art. This is cinema.
