There will be no sandbox Detrius 2011 thread.

Nothing by Greenaway is anything like the Descendents – just discussed in similar wine-affecting circles

affectationing? ehh, screwit

Caught Young Adult this morning - admirably grim and, for Cody specifically, self-effacing. (Key scene near the end fails to deliver the goods, though.)

― Simon H., Sunday, December 18, 2011 2:07 AM (2 days ago) Bookmark Permalink
fwiw it doesn't resemble the other Reitman flicks much at all. it's pretty close to a no-frills character study.

― Simon H., Sunday, December 18, 2011 4:00 AM (2 days ago) Bookmark Permalink

and appropriately it will probably earn fewer accolades than all his other flicks.

― Simon H., Sunday, December 18, 2011 4:02 AM (2 days ago) Bookmark Permalink

this is all otm and i will push and shove to the front of the line of previously despising reitman

http://www.grantland.com/blog/hollywood-prospectus/post/_/id/39591/oscarmetrics-the-case-for-brad-pitt-plus-six-questions-that-could-reshape-the-race

6. Does the fact that this wasn’t a great year for movies affect the race? I know the premise of this question is a fight-starter, but look at the films. To choose two recent points of comparison: 2011 is not 2009, which featured in its Best Picture contest a blockbuster that was also a groundbreaker (Avatar), an instant classic about war (The Hurt Locker), a high-water mark for Pixar (Up), a Sundance breakout that dwarfed any this year (Precious), a rare studio movie that tapped into the economic zeitgeist (Up In the Air) and a major Tarantino comeback (Inglorious Basterds). 2011 is also not 2007, a year in which There Will Be Blood, Michael Clayton, No Country for Old Men, Into The Wild, and The Diving Bell and The Butterfly seemed to herald a renaissance of American directing.

This year was, relatively speaking, a tentative and uncertain one for American movies. What this Oscar contest offers is a series of choices between the good-but-not-great and the great-but-flawed. The reason that matters is that masterpieces raise our standards and sharpen our thinking. A year in which three or four all-out great movies are at the center of the race raises the bar in every category because they remind us that there’s a difference between the merely good and the truly outstanding.

2011 is a year with a different complexion—one in which voters will have to decide what matters to them most. Those who go for the just-good-enough (“I liked it,” “it made me smile,” “I thought it was sweet,” “It was nice to escape for a couple of hours,” and so on) have plenty from which to choose. But there are other voters who prefer to champion filmmakers who take bold leaps even if the results are imperfect. Those voters constitute enough of a coalition to defy, usually once a year, the predictions of those who say that a movie is too dark, arty or alienating to be recognized by the Academy. That’s one reason I think The Tree of Life is still in the hunt for a Best Picture nomination. But it’ll be interesting to see if that odd, loose voting bloc — which can include, at various times, New Yorkers, Brits, Europeans, writers and directors, younger members and recent inductees — is powerful enough to unite around any other film or performance. What will they champion? Drive? A Separation? Shame? Take Shelter? Or will 2011 go down in Oscar history as a year in which “good enough” was as good as it got?

guy is daft about '09

and 2007...

Otherwise Harris' essays have been as much a pleasure as Oscarbuzz crap can be.

Thought that would get a few scoffs. I will say all the movies in my top 4 right now would've been easy #1's for the last two or three years running.

tis true for me, but I don't think any of mine except Of Gods and Men, maybe, are eligible for the Best Picture Oscar.

Then they don't exist.

Also, Certified Copy is eligible, et al.

not always sure what runs in LA

funniest top-10 critic pitch for Tree of Life, by Stephen Holden: "You couldn't accuse Terrence Malick of having a sense of humor...."

I mean, I've only been to Texas once, but Texas is funny.

Not sure anyone besides Eric H. will care, but here's the good old FCF's* top 10:

1. The Tree of Life
2. Drive
3. Melancholia
4. The Descendants
5. Warrior
6. The Interrupters
7. Moneyball
8. The Artist
9. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
10. Super 8

*I haven't even seen this guy in a while; he's probably more like an acquaintance than a friend at this point.

he really likes subtitles

FCA

Of what I've seen on the list, half really good, half mediocre. Is The Interrupters' presence a little residual Roger Ebert syndrome?

just watched Drive, about as expected, cept for the hilariously bad music.

The music roolz

yah sure

I thought I was back in fucking 1986

exactly

(speaking of the needledrops more than the Cliff Martinez score, which still wasnt as good as his Contagion stuff)

I assumed so. The Martinez score doesn't really draw attention to itself whereas the songs are incredibly self-conscious. They're a huge part of the movie though, it's pretty close to turning into a musical at times

the dumbest musical since Lost Horizon.

I thought I was back in fucking 1986

..but back then you would have just called it "European".

oh hey i saw 'shame' last night and it sucked

in all kinda of ways!

btw Albert Brooks was entertaining, but I didn't believe a thing he did or said even on a dumbass thriller level bcz, u know, Albert fucking Brooks.

Scotty boy likes Albert Nobbs.

can anyone recommend any good essays on margaret? none of the reviews i've read really satisfied me. and also, your own thoughts? i saw it y'day and was kind of blown away

Is The Interrupters' presence a little residual Roger Ebert syndrome?

Could be. Also a fair amount of Chicago pride.

Try Glenn Kenny's review, lex.

thanks! yes, that is good.

http://www.villagevoice.com/filmpoll/

Comments
Critics elaborate on their votes, favorite movie moments of the year and OK OK WE GET IT YOU LIKE MARGARET

Morbs, your taste in music couldn't be less relevant to me.

I thought this was an interesting comparison of Margaret and Bridesmaids, editing-wise:
http://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2011/12/12/not-in-theaters-kenneth-lonergans-margaret

(The writer is the second-stringer at the Chicago Reader, a fairly sharp critic who apparently had a big crush on my wife years ago. She said he resembled Woody Allen.)

i'd also like to read any particularly good eviscerations of tree of life if you know any. god just remembering that film exists makes me angry.

Start with the Film Comment Cannes report by Amy Taubin.

And then get your mind right and start loving the film.

I'm off today. Should I watch Tintin or catch up on The Muppets?

I slept in the morning I was supposed to see Tintin. I'd still recommend it over the new Muppets.

Morbs, your taste in music couldn't be less relevant to me.

I know; we're past the point where you have to comfort me by saying so.

David Edelstein's half-and-half review of Tree probably approximates my own feelings.

Tintin has many more 'filmic' qualities, but tho it's uneven I think Muppets has a couple bigger laughs. I guess it depends what you want.

and I'm almost swayed by some of the praise for Young Adult...almost enough to forget the credits.

I will probably see that at some point for P Oswalt.

and I'm almost swayed by some of the praise for Young Adult...

I was too. Buuuut.... consider me a leeward wind blowing against the praise.

Hoberman's top ten.

interested, hoberman is my reliable personal opposite, ordinarily

though p reasonable in this case

VV's poll:

Best Actor: Michael Shannon
Best Actress: Anna Paquin
Supporting Actor: Albert Brooks
Supporting Actress: Jeannie Berlin

do i even bother watching melencholia at this point?

everyone seemed to love it?, like it seems as weirdly constant as anything, #3 in most polls or w/e. i thought it was p uninteresting