Author: Jon The Blogcentric

2019 FIFA Women’s World Cup Group E Focus

Jon The Blogcentric2 Comments

Of course the group I’m most interested in is the one which Canada’s in. And Canada has some strong challengers like Cameroon, New Zealand and the Netherlands. Just because Canada comes as one of the top-ranked teams, it doesn’t mean they will waltz their way to the Round of 16. However many players of Team Canada are saying they believe this to be their best team ever. Midfielder Desiree Scott agrees: “You’re always going into these major tournaments wanting to win the World Cup, I think all teams want to say that. I can say, personally, I know this World Cup we say we want to win, but it’s the first time in many years that I truly believe we can.”

Whatever the situation, Group E promises excitement as the other three teams have pulled upsets before and are capable of pulling an upset here in France. So without further ado, here’s a look at 2019 WWC’s Group E:

Canada-Canada (5): It was losing all three games at WWC 2011 that really changed the Canadian team. In came coach John Herdman who helped them all become better players and even won Olympic bronze in 2012. They had continued success at the 2015 Women’s World Cup where as host nation, they made it to the quarterfinals and even delivered Canada’s first WWC win of a knockout match since 2003 (which I saw live). At the 2016 Summer Olympics, Canada won bronze again. Canada also won the Algarve Cup that year and last year, they finished second at the CONCACAF championships.

In 2018, John Herdman was moved to the Canadian men’s national team. taking his place is Danish coach Kenneth Heiner-Moller who was assistant coach the previous five years and even coached Denmark’s national team at the 2007 Women’s World Cup. The team has a mix of young and experienced players like captain Christine Sinclair, midfielder Sophie Schmidt, defender Kadeisha Buchanan who won the Best Young Player award at the last WWC, midfielder Julia Grosso, and goalkeeper Stephanie Labbe. Canada has not has a single loss in 2019 accumulating wins against England, Scotland and Norway and drawing against Sweden, Switzerland and Spain. However in 2018, they did have losses to the United States, Germany and France. If Canada’s on here in France, they could  just get Canada’s first Top 3 finish, or even a win!

Cameroon-Cameroon (46): Cameroon come as underdogs to the tournament, but don’t be fooled. Cameroon qualified for the 2012 Summer Olympics and at the previous Women’s World Cup in Canada, they progressed to the Round of 16! At the last three Women’s Africa Cup of Nations, Cameroon has had two runner-up finishes and their most recent being third.

In Cameroon’s games this year, they won against Croatia, but lost to Spain and China. Most of the team’s play has been against Cameroonian clubs and Spanish clubs. Despite being unknown how well they do, Cameroon could pull an upset in France. Plus you can trust the Cameroonian communities in France giving them a big boost in the crowds.

NZL-New Zealand (19): New Zealand is a team that should not be taken lightly. Sure, they have it easy in qualifying with getting the Oceania berth ever since Australia transferred to the AFC. However they’re more capable than you think. They may have never won a game at the Women’s World Cup, but they have won two games at the Olympics and even qualified for a quarterfinal in 2012. They’ve also made the Top 4 of three of the last four Algarve Cups.

These past twelve months, New Zealand has had some good key wins against England, Mexico, Norway and Argentina. However they’ve also had losses to Japan, Australia, South Korea and the USA. However don’t count New Zealand out as a possible contender here in France. They may try for their first WWC win here, but they can achieve a lot more too.

Netherlands Fixed-Netherlands (8): If there’s one team that can prevent Canada from topping Group E, it’s the Netherlands. Netherlands surprised everyone at the previous Women’s World Cup when they not only qualified for the first time, but made it to the Round of 16. At the Women’s Euro in 2017 which they hosted, they won. This was one of only two times Germany didn’t win the Women’s Euro. And to boot, they made it to the final of the 2018 Algarve Cup.

In the last twelve months, the Netherlands has continued to play well. They’ve had wins against Mexico, Australia, Switzerland and Denmark, even draws against China and Switzerland. They’ve also had losses to Spain, Poland and Norway. 2019 can be a new chapter for the Dutch team.

MY GROUP PLAY PREDICTIONS:

I have to go with my best hunches here and pick Canada to top the group with the Netherlands second. The way things look right now, I’m picking New Zealand for third.

And that’s it for my look at Group E. One last group to review before the 2019 Women’s World Cup begins!

WORK CITED:

van Diest, Derek. ‘Canada bringing its best to FIFA Women’s World Cup in France.’ Toronto Sun. 3 June 2019. <https://torontosun.com/sports/soccer/van-diest-canada-bringing-its-best-to-fifa-womens-world-cup-in-france>

2019 FIFA Women’s World Cup Group D Focus

Jon The Blogcentric2 Comments

Group D makes for an interesting lot: England and their opponents. First Scotland because I’m sure there’s some rivalry. Plus there’s talk of a possible Great Britain team for women’s football at the 2020 Summer Olympics. But before any talk of possibility, one of the two teams will have to be among the Top 3 UEFA teams at this Women’s World Cup in order to earn an Olympic berth. Then start talking! Also the opponent of Argentina, mainly because of the ‘hands of God’ goal. Hmm. Do qualms of men’s football get transferred to women’s footfall? I can’t say. Then there’s Japan. If you remember at the semifinals at the last WWC, defender Laura Bassett accidentally scored a last-minute own goal in the English net to send Japan to the 2015 final. Bet that still bites.

Anyways it could turn out Group D is not all about England. All four teams have their own qualities. Here’s my review of Group D:

England fixed-England (3): England is a country that has long seen football as a man’s game. The women’s team is changing that and they have made a lot of improvements in recent years. At the last Women’s World Cup, despite Laura Bassett’s costly fumble, they won the bronze-medal match. They made it to the semifinals of Euro 2017 losing to eventual champions Netherlands. This year, they won the She Believes championship in the United States.

The Three Lionesses have had a lot of ups and downs since March 2018. They’ve won matches against France, Spain, Brazil, Denmark and Japan. However they’ve also lost to Sweden, Canada, United States and New Zealand. 2019 could end up being their best Women’s World Cup ever if they deliver each and every time.

Scotland Flag-Scotland (20): Scotland is a team that is just starting to get experience and starting to make a name for themselves. However there are a lot of signs that bigger and better is yet to come. This may be their first WWC, but they had their first Euro in 2017. They didn’t advance past the Group Stage, but they did beat Spain. Also they finished 5th in this year’s Algarve Cup.

Scotland even topped their WWC qualifying group, beating out Switzerland who qualified for 2015. These past twelve months Scotland have had losses to top teams like Canada, Norway and the United States, but they’ve also had wins against Iceland, Brazil and Jamaica. Scotland could end up being one of the surprises of France 2019.

argentina-Argentina (37): Argentina may have one of the most legendary men’s team but football for women is slow to progress. They’ve only been in two Women’s World Cups, 2003 and 2007, and lost all their games. They also lost all their games at their only Olympic appearance in 2008. Argentina’s first win of the Copa America Feminina was back in 2006. There are signs of future improvement as Argentina finished 3rd at the Copa Feminina last year.

In the last twelve months, Argentina’s wins have all been against national teams from South America. They’ve had losses to Australia, South Korea and Brazil. Argentina comes as one team with low expectations. This Women’s World Cup could be a learning experience for them, or they could pull some of the biggest surprises this WWC. Only time will tell.

Japan-Japan (7): A lot of the talk in this group is about England. You should not ignore japan. Japan won the 2011 Women’s World Cup and was a finalist at the last WWC. They also won Olympic silver and two straight Women’s Asian Cups during that time. However they did have some setbacks as they failed to qualify for the 2016 Olympics.

In the past twelve months, Japan’s play has had a lot of ups and downs. They won matches against Brazil, Norway, New Zealand and South Korea. They even had draws against Spain, Germany and the United States. However they’ve also had a loss to the United States as well as to Brazil, Australia and France. This Women’s World Cup will be a chance for Japan to add another chapter to their team’s story.

MY GROUP PLAY PREDICTIONS:

This was not an easy guess. I predict England to top Group D. Second will go to Japan. Third is tough to decide but I feel I best go with Scotland.

And that completes my look at Women’s World Cup Group D. Just two more groups to review. I guess I’m doing better than I thought!

 

2019 FIFA Women’s World Cup Group C Focus

Jon The Blogcentric2 Comments

You can’t talk about the Women’s World Cup without bringing up the state of women’s football and its participation levels around the world.

We all know that in international football, men’s football is dominated by countries from Europe and South America with the occasional African surprise while most North American teams (except Mexico) and Asian teams struggle. In women’s football, it’s the opposite. It’s where the North American and Asian teams have their day in the sun while the teams from Europe, South America and Africa are working to catch up. FIFA is putting in the effort to increase participation in women’s football, especially in those countries. I remember during World Cup 2015 there were a lot of exhibits and booths promoting women’s football and aiming for an increase. A country like Canada is an excellent place to promote this because North American and many Asian countries promote football to girls as much as they do to boys. In the future, I think more girls from developing countries will be able to have access to playing football. Also who knows? Maybe Europe and South America will someday reach the standards of Canada, USA, China and Japan? And don’t forget Africa. They could have a WWC breakthrough soon.

Moving on, here’s my focus on the teams from Group C. I find it interesting that two teams that met in a Round of 16 match at WWC 2015 — Australia and Brazil — are meeting this time in the group stage!:

Australia-Australia (6): If there’s one team that knows how to show improvement, it’s the Matildas. In fact they showed it at the 2015 World Cup by beating Brazil in their Round of 16 match: their first ever knockout-game win. Australia made it to the quarterfinals at the Olympics too with their best scoring result. They’ve also been runners-up at the last two AFC Women’s Championships.

Australia has been getting better at dealing with their opponents. In the past twelve months, they’ve won against top ranked teams like Brazil, Japan and South Korea and even drew against England and the US. They’ve also had a loss to the US as well as the Netherlands and France. Australia has a lot to prove and they could just do it here in this World Cup.

Italy ficed-Italy (15): The Azzurre have a long way to go to catch up with the legacy of the Azzuri. They’ve never qualified for the Olympics and the last time they competed in a Women’s World Cup was in 1999. On top of that, the last time they qualified for the quarterfinals of the Women’s Euro was back in 2013. 2017 was a case of out in the Group Stage.

Since qualifying for the WWC, Italy has made a lot of improvements as a team. In fact in 2019, they have not had a loss. They’ve amassed wins against Chile, Mexico, Hungary and Switzerland and draws against Poland and North Korea. Italy is another team whose potential is unknown but could surprise us in France.

Brazil-Brazil (10): Brazil is a team that has experienced a lot of ups and downs over the years. Back in the previous decade, they showed themselves to be a nation on the move by being a finalist at the 2003 World Cup and winning Olympic silver medals in 2004 and 2008. However things have gotten to a downturn. They were eliminated in the quarterfinals of the 2011 WWC and in the Round of 16 in 2015. At the Rio Olympics, they looked like they were well on their way to gold in the Group Stage, but finished fourth.

Even Brazil’s play record in the last twelve months has been questionable. Their only win outside of South American teams has been to Japan. They’ve endured losses to big-name teams like Australia, USA, Canada, France, England, Spain and Scotland. This could mean they’re going through a troubling time right now, or maybe they’re ‘playing possum.’ That will all be decided in France very soon. Also this looks to be Marta’s last Women’s World Cup. Hopefully she’ll have a good ‘last hurrah.’

Jamaica-Jamaica (53): The Reggae Girlz are coming here for their very first World Cup. Remarkable because there have been many years Jamaica wouldn’t enter a women’s football team for the Women’s World Cup, or not even the CONCACAF Women’s Championship. The women’s team have shown a lot of improvement lately as they finished third at last year’s CONCACAF championships.

In the last twelve months, Jamaica has won against Colombia, Cuba, Costa Rica and Chile. They’ve drawn against Panama and South Africa, but they’ve had losses to Scotland, the US and Canada. Whether they go far or lose out in the Group Stage, this Women’s World Cup will be a great place for experience and development of the Jamaican team.

MY GROUP PLAY PREDICTIONS:

I’m tempted to go with my best instincts and pick Australia to top this group, but a surprise as Italy to come in second with Brazil third. That’s how it looks right now. We’ll see how it turns out very soon.

And there you have it. Those are my predictions for Group C of the 2019 Women’s World Cup. Hard to believe I’m halfway done. And I didn’t even publish my first Focus until Friday! What a relief I’ll be completed before the start.

2019 FIFA Women’s World Cup Group B Focus

Jon The Blogcentric2 Comments

One thing about football is that there is normally a lot of foregone conclusions on who will win the Cup and who don’t have the best chances. Those are not all guarantees. Even the best teams can bomb out sooner than anyone expected. And I will be getting to that very shortly in my blog. In the meantime, I will be focusing on Group B today. It’s easy to assume one team will win the Cup, but upsets are bound to happen. So without further ado:

Germany fixed-Germany (2): Germany has been seen as one of the best women’s teams consistently. They’ve been in all seven previous World Cups and won twice. In 2016, they won their first Olympic gold medal after three bronzes. They’ve been in the Women’s euro all ten times and won eight. However it’s not to say they’ve had some inconsistencies too. The last World Cup where they finished in the Top 3 was their winner in 2007. Also a year after winning Olympic gold, they were beaten in the quarterfinals of Euro 2017 by Denmark. Even the best have an Achilles heel.

If there’s one thing, Germany has been consistent in play in the last twelve months. They’ve won against Canada, Italy, France and Sweden. They’ve also drawn against Japan and Spain. Chances are if Germany’s on target, they can make this World Cup #3.

China–China, People’s Republic of (15): China is another team that experienced big success when women’s football started establishing itself in the 1990’s. They dominated in the 90’s, but have been set back in recent years. There was even a brief time at the beginning of this decade, they didn’t qualify for either the World Cup or the Olympics. Recent years have shown an improvement with China as they made the Round of 16 at the last World Cup and the quarterfinals at the 2016 Olympics.

China’s last twelve months have had a lot of ups and downs. They’ve had wins against teams like South Korea, Cameroon and Russia. They even tied the Netherlands at the Algarve Cup. However they’ve also had losses to France, Denmark, Norway, Japan and the United States. France 2019 will be the place for them to show the world what they’re made of.

Spain Fixed-Spain (13): Spain’s women’s team is a team just starting to enter the stage of women’s football. In fact their appearance at Canada 2015 was their very first WWC. It was a learning experience for them as they left with two losses and a draw. In the women’s Euro, they did have one semifinals appearance all the way back in 1997. They were able to qualify for the last two Euros and finish in the quarterfinals both times. However the most recent Euro was another case of scraping by as their only win came against Portugal.

In the last twelve months, Spain has shown that they’ve made a lot of improvement. They may have lost to Poland, England and the United States, but they did achieve draws against Canada and Germany, and they also won against Finland, The Netherlands, Switzerland and Brazil. France is the arena for them to prove themselves once more.

South-Africa-flag.jpg-South Africa (49): South Africa is one of four teams making their Women’s World Cup debut. South Africa has competed in the Olympics twice in 2012 and 2016. South Africa has also been runner-up five times in the CAF Women’s Championship.

South Africa will be coming to France with a lot to prove. They’re one of the lowest ranked teams in the world competing in France. In 2019, they have yet to win a game, enduring losses to the United States and the Netherlands. However they did draw against Jamaica and Sweden. It’s quite possible South Africa is just a team that hasn’t proved themselves and France 2019 could be the domain to show how much they can do.

MY GROUP PLAY PREDICTIONS:

This is one of the easier ones to predict. I’ll have to say I predict Germany to top with China in second. I anticipate Spain to take third.

And there’s my take on Group B. I aim to have all my takes on the groups completed by Wednesday. Which means I’m planning Group C’s focus tomorrow. Stay tuned.

2019 Women’s World Cup Intro and Group A Focus

Jon The Blogcentric2 Comments

Womens Cup

It does seem like yesterday when Canada hosted the Women’s World Cup. It was the most attended and most viewed Women’s World Cup ever. I also had fun in seeing the exhibits and even a Round of 16 game.

Now it’s France’s turn to host the Women’s World Cup. The television audience is expected to be bigger, the crowds at the stadiums are expected to be bigger, and women’s football as a whole is expected to be bigger. Eighteen of the 24 teams at this year’s World Cup played in 2015 and four will be making their debut this year. Lots of excitement is expected to happen. As for hosting, France has nine stadiums set to contest the matches. All of them are over 20,000 capacity. Three of the stadiums contested matched during the 1998 World Cup and three during the 2016 Euro.

So without further ado, let’s focus on World Cup Group A. FIFA rankings of teams as of March 2019 are in brackets:

France fixed-France (4): France is a team waiting for their first ever major international moment. Their best Olympic finish is fourth in 2012, their best World Cup finish ever is fourth in 2011, and they’ve never made it past the quarterfinals of a Euro ever!

France appears ready to deliver a strong result here in WWC 2019. For their Group A teams, France has won against South Korea and Nigeria in the past, but never played Norway. France however has delivered some excellent results in recent months with wins against top-contending teams like Australia, USA, Japan, China and Brazil. Their only loss this year came to Germany. It looks like France is ready to show the world and this could finally be their chance!

Korea-South Korea (14): South Korea is a team not to be underestimated. Sure, they’ve never qualified for an Olympics, but they did achieve a Round of 16 result at the last World Cup and they have had a third-place finish at the Women’s Asian Cup.

South Korea has had an uneven play records these past twelve months. They’ve endured losses to China, Australia and Sweden. However they’ve had wins against New Zealand, Argentina and Romania. Expectations are low for South Korea here, but don’t underestimate them. They could be one of the big surprises in France.

Norway-Norway (12): Norway was one of the great teams when the Women’s World Cup was starting. They won the second WWC back in 1995 and the second-ever Olympic gold in women’s football back in 2000. Returning to their glory days has been a struggle. The last Olympics they competed in was in 2008. They have finished runner up in the 2013 Women’s Euro only to lose out in the Group Stage in 2017.

Norway has a record these past twelve months of ups and downs. The lost to Australia, Sweden, Japan and Canada, but they’ve also won against China, Scotland, Denmark and 2017 Euro winners The Netherlands. Norway even won this year’s Algarve Cup. Norway could just well be on their way to a comeback.

Nigeria-Nigeria (38): Nigeria leads the pack in terms of African teams in women’s football. They’ve won the CAF Women’s Championship all but two times. Nigeria is searching for its first major international breakthrough. The best they ever did at a WWC was a quarterfinals finish 1999. Their best Olympic finish was the quarterfinals of 2004.

Nigeria has had a challenging year losing to Canada and China, but they’ve also had wins against Slovakia and Romania. Nigeria could be one team that can pull an upset.

MY GROUP PLAY PREDICTIONS:

France looks to be the top team of the group. They will qualify strongly. Norway looks to be the team to come in second. As for third, I’m thinking of going with Nigeria. This can be anybody’s to take.

And there’s my first take on the teams of the 2019 Women’s World Cup. There’s still more to come as we’re leading up.

My Predictions For The 2018 Academy Awards

Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment

Chocolate Oscar

Holding this year’s Academy Awards has been a load of chaos going even as far back as August. The struggle had as its focus the record-low ratings of last year’s Oscars. Hey, when they keep on giving Best Picture to films with low grosses, they have that struggle coming. First there was an attempt to include a new category: Best Popular Film. Derision from critics, filmmakers and the public quickly rose and the category was dropped within a week. Then there was having Kevin Hart as the host. That seemed like a good idea, until he said something homophobic in his comedy. He apologized and even some celebrities came to his aid, but the hostility did not die. That meant no host this year: only the second Oscars to be hostless. Then came the procedure two weeks ago of four categories to be awarded during commercials with the presentation broadcast on livestream. Filmmakers and fans shouted their derision online and that led to the categories assigned back on broadcast.

All I can say about the ceremonies is what a headache for the organizers. The big question may not be ‘who will win what’ but ‘can they do a winning Oscars without a host?’ There has been one hostless Oscars in the past — the 61st in 1989 — and they went off very well despite the highlight being an unforgettably cheesy song-and-dance number with an awkward Snow White singing and dancing with Rob Lowe. This year’s hostless Oscars have yet to bee seen, but there have been other awards shows where there wasn’t a host.

The surprises weren’t just about the ceremony itself. The surprises were in the awards race too. One big shocker was a NetFlix film being a heavy favorite. Another was most of the Best Picture nominees snubbed in at least one category that effects their Best Picture standing: like in acting, directing, writing or film editing. Only BlacKkKlansman had nominations in all. Another was the double-snub of Emily Blunt in both acting categories to actresses of Roma that didn’t have as big of awards clout. Another was films with outside chances like Cold War and The Ballad Of Buster Scruggs garnering nominations. Guild awards provided other lopsided results too like SAGs giving snubbed-out Emily Blunt the Best Supporting Actress award, and the Writers Guild of America giving Bo Burnham the Best Original Screenplay award. With only days to go there’s still no clear favorite for Best Picture. Not even The Favourite!

However the awards results and the pictures themselves do give a good sense on who just could win. So without further ado, here are my predictions for who Will Win the Oscars as well as a Should-Win pick where I feel necessary. Also hyperlinks to my reviews are included.

BEST PICTURE

This year’s eight-pack of Best Picture nominees are quite unique and exhibit a lot in diversity. One is a film predominantly in Spanish. One is a superhero movie. Two are music-based. Three begin with the letter B. Three have African-Americans as their dominant or central characters. Five have some reference to LGBT people. All have a lot of awards clout and have paved their way successfully to their nominations. So here is my rundown of the Best Picture nominees:

Black Panther – The 21st Century is best remembered so far as the heyday of the superhero movie. For so long, people have waited for a superhero movie to get nominated for Best Picture. In fact the number of Best Picture entries was expanded past its traditional five when The Dark Knight didn’t get nominated. Finally a superhero movie is nominated. I can’t think of a better choice than Black Panther. It has all the qualities of a Best Picture contender — acting, directing, writing, and a lot more — but its buzz fell fast when its only other nominations were technical ones. I don’t think it will win.

BlacKkKlansman – Isn’t it something how Spike Lee went from boycotting the Oscars three years ago to becoming a nominee this year. Spike Lee has had a career with a lot of ups and downs. Ever since Do The Right Thing, he has struggled to get his greatness back. His success however has paved the way for other African American directors. BlacKkKlansman brought him back into major action. I consider this a top contender for the Best Picture award, but not necessarily the winner.

Bohemian Rhapsody – This film has all the ingredients of a Best Picture contender, especially a performance by the lead that will blow you away. The film also has a very critical weakness. That being the original director is an alleged sex offender. That may not hurt Rami’s chances for Best Actor, but it robs any and all chances of a Best Picture win for this film.

The Favourite – What’s the Oscar race without a timepiece set way back being a top contender for the Best Picture award? The Favourite is just that movie, and one of only two movies with ten nominations. The film has the ingredients to win Best Picture. However some may find the story too tempestuous and the film too eccentric to win the biggest award of the night.

Green Book – Overcoming racism has been a central theme in many a film in this year’s Oscar race. This is a film that may not be historically accurate, but it does make for a good film from start-to-finish with a good message. Much of it is true as Tony Lip’s son was the scriptwriter. It’s tight but I give this my Will Win pick.

Roma – This film is a thing of beauty. I can sum it up like that. For the record, no film predominantly in a foreign-language has ever won the Best Picture Oscar. I have a feeling that could rob Roma of the biggest award that night. However this is a close race and anything can happen. That’s why I give it my Should Win pick.

A Star Is Born – When the Oscar season began, this film had the biggest buzz. Especially with it being Lady Gaga’s big screen breakthrough. The film has all the ingredient for a Best Picture winner. However, this is a film that’s been done three times before. I don’t think the Academy is willing to give the Best Picture Oscar to a reboot.

Vice – If you remember The Big Short, you’ll see how Adam McKay lampooned the banking system and the games they were playing just as they were about to lead the US to its biggest recession since the Great Depression. Here McKay lampoons the American political system and how Dick Cheney played a major role in the political climate we have today both as Vice President and while holding other office. It’s as entertaining as The Big Short, but not as good. That’s where I feel Vice falls short in the Best Picture race.

BEST DIRECTOR

Should Win and Will Win: Alfonso Cuaron – Roma

If you see Roma, you will see it’s more than just two women transformed in a changing time in Mexico. You will notice it’s a piece of Alfonso Cuaron’s childhood. He creates a masterpiece so beautiful and intimate, not even the images of the dog droppings can ruin its beauty. It’s a masterpiece of a film and I feel Cuaron deserves to win again.

BEST ACTOR

Should Win and Will Win: Rami Malek – Bohemian Rhapsody

Thirteen of this year’s twenty acting nominations are for performances of people that exist or have existed. In no other category is that best represented than in the Best Actor category. Bradley Cooper’s is the only nomination of a fictional person here. It’s a tough call between Christian Bale as Dick Cheney or Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury. I have to go with Malek because his performance was more dead-on while Bale’s was intended to be cartoonish in the way Adam McKay wanted it. Besides those that saw Bohemian Rhapsody will say Malek got the spirit of Freddie to a tee.

BEST ACTRESS

Should Win and Will Win: Glenn Close – The Wife

How far back was Glenn Close’s first Oscar nomination? Back in 1982 for her performance in The World According To Garp. Her performance in The Wife is her seventh nomination. Many people will claim that she will win the Oscar on career culmination. I’m sure Lady Gaga fans will have their own trash-talk on social media for her when she wins (Monsters indeed!). However those who have seen The Wife will admire her acting for how her character hides her true intentions and true feelings and you can see it. As expected, Glenn delivers.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Should Win and Will Win: Mahershala Ali – Green Book

Ever since he stunned audience in Moonlight as the crack dealer with a soft spot for the young boy, Mahershala Ali has been on a roll. I still remember in his acceptance speech, he said the advise his teacher taught him: “It’s not about you. It’s about the character.” He delivers again as Don Shirley. Another winner.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Should Win and Will Win: Regina King – If Beale Street Could Talk

This is a category with jam-packed with top contending performances. It’s tough to pick a favorite. However I have to go with Regina King for playing the mother in Beale Street who goes all out for her son-in-law’s innocence.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Should Win: Alfonso Cuaron – Roma

Will Win: Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara – The Favourite

The originals have the edge over the adapted this year, but the results are all over the map. Green Book has the Golden Globe, First Reformed has the Critics Choice, The Favourite has the BAFTA, while the Writers Guild award went to Eighth Grade which was snubbed out. This must be the major category that’s hardest to predict. I was tempted to go with Roma, but I have to pick The Favourite.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Should Win: Barry Jenkins – If Beale Street Could Talk

Will Win: Charlie Wachtel, David Rabinowitz, Kevin Willmott & Spike Lee – BlacKkKlansman

In all frankness, I think If Beale Street Could Talk was the best film by an African American director this year. James Baldwin would have been proud of Barry Jenkins’ adaptation. However I think the major buzz is for the four writers of BlacKkKlansman for creating a clever story that’s very thought-provoking.

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

Should Win and Will Win: Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse

This year, animated movies continued to draw crowds and families. However it was once again another year that couldn’t compare to 2016. Near the end of the year, the two biggest movies were sequels: Incredibles 2 and Ralph Breaks The Internet. Just when it seemed lackluster, Spider-Verse came and was more entertaining than the others. Deserves to win here.

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

Will Win: Alfonso Cuaron – Roma

BEST COSTUME DESIGN

Will Win: Ruth E. Carter – Black Panther

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE

Will Win: RBG

BEST FILM EDITING

Will Win: Hank Corwin – Vice

BEST FOREIGN-LANGUAGE FILM

Will Win: Roma (Mexico)

BEST HAIR AND MAKE-UP

Will Win: Greg Cannom, Kate Biscoe and Patricia Dehaney – Vice

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE

Will Win: Nicholas Britell – If Beale Street Could Talk

BEST ORIGINAL SONG

Should Win and Will Win: ‘Shallow” from A Star Is Born

BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN

Will Win: Fiona Crombie and Alice Felton – The Favourite

BEST SOUND EDITING

Will Win: A Quiet Place

BEST SOUND MIXING

Will Win: Bohemian Rhapsody

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS

Will Win: Avengers: Infinity War

BEST ANIMATED SHORT FILM

Click here for reviews and predictions.

BEST LIVE-ACTION SHORT FILM

Click here for reviews and predictions.

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT

Will Win: Black Sheep

JUST ONE MORE – TOP OSCAR UPSETS

Here are the six upsets I feel are most likely to occur. In category order:

  • Roma wins Best Picture
  • Spike Lee wins Best Director for BlacKkKlansman.
  • Christian Bale wins Best Actor for Vice.
  • Amy Adams wins Best Supporting Actress for Vice.
  • Łukasz Żal wins Best Cinematography for Cold War.
  • Cold War wins Best Foreign-Language Film.

And there you have it. My predictions for the winners, and possible upsetters of the 91st Academy Awards. The end result of a hostless Oscars has yet to be seen, as well as the ratings results. But the winners have yet to be seen too, and that should be the most important thing. It will all be decided Sunday night.

Movie Review: The Wife

Jon The Blogcentric2 Comments
The Wife
Joan (Glenn Close) may appear to be the happy wife of author Joseph (Jonathan Pryce), but The Wife will slowly expose the truths.

The Wife is another summer release I missed out on seeing at the box office. Ever since its Oscar chances for Best Actress, it sparked my interest. I’m glad I saw it.

The film begins in 1992 with Joan Castleman and her husband Joseph just waking up. Joan appears to be the happy wife of a renowned author. They receive the news that Joseph has won the Nobel Prize for Literature. Both are overjoyed, at least on the outside. At the party to celebrate, their daughter Susannah, who’s having a baby, is happy, but son David is less so. David has desires to be a writer, but seems to consider his talent inferior to his father’s. Especially since he’s hesitant about hearing his father’s critique of his short story. As Joan and Joseph fly to Stockholm, a reporter named Nathaniel Bone tries to congratulate Joseph. That only causes discomfort for the two, but you notice a certain bitter feeling in Joan. A bitterness that grows even further whenever he acknowledges Joan in public.

The film goes frequently from 1992 to the past to back to 1992. In the flashbacks starting in 1958, Joan Archer is a writing student at her university. Her writing and her looks have impressed a young Joseph Castleman who’s a college professor. Joan refutes his advances at first, but things change when she works at a publishing company and hears from her boss Elaine Mozell that female writers don’t have a chance at competing against men. Joan continues to attend more classes with Joseph teaching and his encouragement wins her love to him. Joseph tries to make it as a writer while Joan just wants to be a housewife. But when Joseph’s writing is declined by publishers, Joan starts tutoring him. By 1968, it’s a case where Joan ghostwrites novels Joseph is to be credited with while he plays ‘househusband’ to the kids. Over the decades after many novels, and adulterous affairs, the narcissistic Joseph has become a Nobel Prize winner.

Back to Stockholm, Joseph and Joan are put in a hotel with all of his books present. Joan appears to be excite over seeing all of his books published in other languages. Later, Joseph meets with many important people leading up to the Prizes ceremony. Joseph has a heart condition that comes without notice and requires medication, as noticed during the ceremony rehearsal. One night, Joseph is lured away by a young female photographer named Linnea. Joan leaves, unhappy with what she saw. Nathaniel notices an unhappy Joan in the hotel lounge and invites him to drinks. Nathaniel reveals he’s been studying up on Joseph and has gotten the sense that it was Joan who was doing all the writing. Joan tries to call them lies and tell him to go away. Meanwhile Linnea comes onto Joseph. Joseph accepts, but his heart condition acts back up. Both confront each other about what was going on, but the heated argument ends when they receive a phone call learning of their newborn grandson.

The night of the ceremony occurs. before the Awards, David arrives. He confronts the two about what he heard from Nathaniel Bone. The two deny everything. As Joseph receives the Prize, Joan’s bitterness grows first at the Prizes ceremony and then at the dinner banquet. In the limo to the hotel, they get into a heated argument which causes Joseph to give the prize to Joan, only for her to refuse it. The argument continues on as Joan throws books at Joseph and tells him she’s divorcing him. Joseph goes into a heart attack. It’s apparent it’s fatal. As Joseph is dying awaiting paramedics, Joan tells Joseph she loves him. Joseph’s last words to her are “You’re such a good liar.” On the airplane home with David, Nathaniel Bone acknowledges the loss, but Joan’s response, and the film’s ending, will surprise you in a subtle way.

This year’s Oscars appear to be full of films with social messages. This film has a message about sexism in the arts. We have Joan who wants to write, but it’s Joseph who takes the credit for it. It’s not that uncommon as I once read a 1975 book called The People’s Almanac and they had an article in their chapter on literature titled “She Wrote It, He Got The Credit.” We shouldn’t forget that the time Joan chose to ghostwrite for Joseph was back in the early 1960’s. Female writers may have better chances not, but it’s still hard. Don’t forget J.K. Rowling went by her initials instead of Joanna Rowling with that belief she won’t be taken seriously as a writer. The story is very similar to Big Eyes as Margaret Keane ‘ghostpainted’ under the name Walter Keane because of the sexism in art. I think that explains why Joan was very willing to ghostwrite for Joseph back then. Because she felt the only way she can show her writing to the world was under a male name.

Nevertheless the film is more about the story and the woman rather than the social message. Joan is a woman who appears to be happy on the outside and very in love with her husband. However as each passing moment and instance comes up, Joan’s hidden anger of being the true writer and the wife of an adulterous man becomes more obvious in her silence. You had the feeling that Joan would explode any minute and her true feelings would show. It happens right there after Joseph wins the big prize. However the thing about Joan is that she is willing to keep her peace after his death and make the truth known to just David and Susannah, but hidden from everyone else including Nathaniel Bone. It takes a person of that much self-control underneath the hidden rage to have that much strength to let things be.

The story itself is pieced together very well. We have that moment in 1992 in the days from when Joseph’s award is announced to his eventual death. We also have the past where Joseph and Joan meet, and then become the ‘writing pair’ over time. We also have Joseph being lured to Linnea which would unravel another dirty secret. The film does a good job in moving scenes from 1992 to back in the past to returning to Stockholm to returning to the past and so on. The quality is that it keeps the audience in the wonder. You have the audience thinking one thing at first, sensing something’s wrong later on, and then finding out the truth near the climactic end. That’s an excellent quality because it provides the film with the mystery to keep the audience intrigued.

This is the first English-language film directed by Swedish director Bjorn Runge. He does a very good job of directing the film and the story. I have never read the novel The Wife, but scriptwriter Jane Anderson does a very good job in adapting Meg Wolitzer’s novel into a story to keep the audience intrigued. The highlight of course is Glenn Close’s acting. The best thing about the performance is not just how she delivers, but how she’s able to keep so many things hidden in her character only to come out at the right time. You could see the hidden hurt and disappointment in her character and that was the best quality. Acting is more of what’s unsaid than said. However the film is not only Glenn’s. Jonathan Pryce also delivered well as the husband who can’t confront his problems right. Annie Starke, daughter of Glenn, did a very good job of playing the younger Joan. She did a good job of showing Joan’s disappointment that early in her life, but mix it with her willingness. Max Irons, son of Jeremy Irons, played David very well, butI was not happy about seeing him have a role where he appears like he’s always hurting.

The Wife is more about the character than the social message. However it’s also about the story that makes it so intriguing to watch.

Oscars 2018 Best Picture Review: BlacKkKlansman

Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment
blackkklansman
John David Washington (right) and Adam Driver (left) play a pair set out to stop a racist bomb attack in BlacKkKlansman.

I admit I missed BlacKkKlansman when it first came out. Actually I saw very few movies in the summer of 2018. I finally had the chance to see it this week, and I was very happy with what I saw.

The film begins in 1957 with Dr. Kennebrew Beauregard speaking for a propaganda film for the KKK about the ‘terrible dangers’ of desegregation. The film then proceeds to the early 1970’s in Colorado Springs. Ron Stallworth is being interviewed for the police force by a white cop and a black consultant. Through the interview process, Stallworth becomes the first black police officer for the city, but is given marginalized duties like file and document retrieval. Stallworth then decides he wants to do undercover work.

His first operation is for a rally of an African American activist Kwame Ture, whom the police view as a threat. Stallworth poses undercover with a hidden microphone to record the rally. There he meets Patrice Dumas who heads the black students union at the local university. The words of Kwame sound threatening to the ears of the white policemen. Patrice then goes with Kwame to a hotel where they’re stopped by racist white patrolman Andy Landers. At the arrest, Landers threatens Kwame and gropes Patrice. After the arrest, Ron meets Patrice at a club and they dance their cares away.

Stallworth is soon transferred to the intelligence division. One day he learns of a local chapter of the Ku Klux Klan. Stallworth decided to investigate by posing as white on the phone to chapter president Walker Breachway and having his Jewish colleague Philip ‘Flip’ Zimmerman pose as him whenever meeting the Klan in person. Zimmerman reluctantly agrees at first. He goes to the first meeting where he meets Breachway, the more hostile Felix Kendrickson and Ivanhoe, who subtly talks about an upcoming attack.

Zimmerman signs up for Klan membership under Stallworth’s name and Stallworth calls Klan headquarters to expedite his membership and speaks to Grand Wizard David Duke. The next meeting is at Kendrickson’s house. We learn that Felix’s wife Connie is just as racist. However Felix, being the loose cannon that he is, senses Zimmerman to be Jewish and tries to get him to pass a lie detector test. Before Zimmerman submits, Stallworth, who’s listening into everything with Zimmerman wired, smashes a window. Later on, the romance between Stallworth and Patrice heats up, but he doesn’t tell her he’s part of the police because of her anti-police attitude.

Stallworth is getting more active in his searching results. He learns two men of the KKK are in a branch of the US Air Force. In the meantime, Stallworth’s name is growing with the KKK. Zimmerman, while attending a shooting practice, learns of an attack planned at a student rally; the rally Patrice plans to attend. Zimmerman knows an explosion is planned as he knows Breachway makes bombs. Meanwhile David Duke travels to Colorado Springs to be at his induction and Breachway is willing to transfer his leadership to Zimmerman posing as Stallworth. Zimmerman declines, but his swearing in ceremony, along with other new members, goes as planned. However not without a KKK member noticing Zimmerman from an arrest years ago. He even remembers his nickname ‘Flip.’

As the swearing in is taking place, the attack at the student rally however does not because Connie noticed the huge police attendance. After the rally, Patrice learns the truth about Stallworth. Stallworth admits the truth and leaves Patrice in a question of principles. Her association with her anti-police group or Stallworth. With the attack at the rally botched, Connie wants to take the bombing to Patrice’s house. Connie can’t put the bomb in Patrice’s mailbox while Stallworth tracked Connie and tries to save Patrice by stopping Connie. However two policemen, who don’t know about the planned sting, think Stallworth is an attacker. It’s not until Zimmerman and another police ally arrive that they learn of the truth. Breachway sets the bomb off, but Breachway, Felix and Ivanhoe are the only fatalities.

It’s not over yet. Stallworth and Patrice are in a bar with other cops. Along comes Officer Landers. Patrice tries to get Landers to confess, which he brags about with no remorse. He tries to attack Ron and Patrice, but the police arrest Landers. With the sting over, and Connie a widow behind bars, the police order to burn all records. Stallworth makes one last call to David Duke to deliver him the shocking truth! The story ends with Ron and Patrice contemplating their future, but are interrupted by an image of a burning cross. The film, however, ends with images of the Unite The Right rally in August 2017 and Donald Trump’s lack of action to it.

There’s no doubt the object of the story is racism. Spike Lee has used racism as a theme of focus, if not the prime theme, in his films. The best example is Do The Right Thing. Spike has always maintained his films are about ‘being black in White America.’ However the film tackles the subject of hate groups. He focuses on how they don’t just have a message of racial superiority to promote. They also promote a false sense of fear and a hostility to prove their point. The groups may claim to be non-violent or not one to attack, but that’s further from the truth. That’s made most obvious when Stallworth examines the shooting targets and they’re the images of running African-Americans. The fact that they practice shooting and making bombs shows the evil behind their agenda that they try to make to look friendly. Lee makes that point in that film rehearsal at the beginning of the film. Lee shows of all the falsified news of the surrounding events the Klan deliver to their members before the bombing. Lee also shows that in the Unite The Right footage, that it’s a battle that still continues today. They may have overcome a lot, but there’s still much more to overcome. In the story, Lee sends the message that the Colorado Springs Police may have won this battle, but they didn’t win the whole war. Not while the KKK is a nationwide brotherhood.

The film obviously has a message to send, but it doesn’t forget that it’s a film that has a story to tell. It’s a good intriguing cat-and-mouse story about a local group of the KKK planning a bombing of a group of black students and the black detective who brings them down along with his Jewish guise. It has a good beginning, middle and end that will keep the viewer intrigued. It also incorporates a lot with the entertainment of African-Americans, like the music and the ‘blaxploitation’ films of the 70’s, into the story. It also includes a lot of references to entertainment that send a racist message like Tarzan and The Birth Of A Nation as to why the problem of racism still exists today. However his use of entertainment for thematic purposes doesn’t cause the film to lose its focus. Lee also mixes in another message he appears to question. At a time like where the Black Lives Matter movement has arrived, it appears Lee is critical of a lot of anti-police attitudes of these groups. The police do have history of racism, but what are they to think when the police come to their rescue? That poses as the moral question for Patrice at the end, especially since it could affect her love for Ron. I think Lee was trying to place his own viewpoint here.

No doubt about it, the top accomplishment is that of Spike Lee. Lee has had a mixed career. He’s had accomplishments like Do The Right Thing and Malcolm X, but he’s had many duds too. I still consider Do The Right Thing to be his best work, but this is an excellent story that he made work. The story he co-wrote with Wachtel, Rabinowitz and Willmott is a good complex story with a lot to say. The messages Lee tries to put in the story does not take away from the story itself. It actually adds. However it also succeeds in being a comedy with a lot of humorous moments. I think Lee also wanted to show off the stupidity of these racist groups too.

The top acting comes from John David Washington. The son of Denzel, John David delivers an excellent performance that he can rightfully call his breakthrough. He delivers the right acting for the right film. Also excellent is Adam Driver. In playing Stallworth’s Jewish partner, Driver delivers his role well while revealing the personal insecurity inside his Jewish character. I think Lee’s message was also to send how white superiority doesn’t only affect blacks. There were also a lot of excellent supporting performances coming from the likes of Laura Harrier as Patrice, Jasper Paakkonen as the walking time-bomb Felix, Topher Grace as David Duke and Ashlie Atkinson as the hyper-hostile Connie. The films inclusion of music from the past and original score from Terence Blanchard also adds to the film.

BlacKkKlansman obviously has a message to say. However it still succeeds in being a film with a thrilling plot, which makes it a winner of a film.

And there you go! This makes it the eighteenth straight years I’ve seen all the Best Picture nominees of the year before Oscar night. My predictions for the Oscar wins coming soon.

 

Oscars 2018 Best Picture Review: The Favourite

Jon The Blogcentric2 Comments
Favourite
Abigail Hill (played by Emma Stone) competes for the title of lady-in-waiting from Queen Anne (played by Olivia Colman) in The Favourite.

With this year’s crop of Oscar contenders, there are many biopics. The Favourite is not so much a biopic as it is a fictional telling of a rivalry in history.

Usually around this time, there are films that often serve a message or have a specific point relevant to the times. Even in a case of a timepiece, one is shown to show how what happened in the past is very similar to what’s happening today. The Favourite didn’t appear to show what’s happening in our world now, at first. I was left so confused after seeing it the first time, I had to see it again to make better sense. It does make better sense, especially after seeing Vice. In Vice, we see how very often the president doesn’t always make decisions on his own. He is often persuaded by others including former presidents before he makes his final decision.

Here, the Queen can’t make her decisions on her own. It’s a tough time for England as they’re at war with France. Both Thomas Harley and Lady Marlborough are trying to compete for the queen to side with their ideas and carry it out as the decision. Lady Marlborough has the advantage as she’s able to tend to the Queen’s every need, despite her annoyance, and she has the added advantage of being very knowledgeable about what’s happening. Harley however has the advantage through his coaxing of the Queen through becoming the Prime Minister. Another thing I just recently researched is that this was a unique time in England as the influence of the Crown was decreasing and the influence of ministers was increasing.. Some say it was because of Queen Anne’s insanity that led to the decrease of the power of the Crown.

The film also presents another unique outlook. In an interview, Deborah Davis said it took 20 years for the script to finally become a reality. Davis composed the script from reading over some of the memoirs of Sarah Churchill (Lady Marlborough). Much of it was organized and compiled by Winston Churchill in his lifetime. It was especially noteworthy of the female power triangle. That’s the unique thing the film presented: the female power triangle. There’s the mentally-ill Queen who’s more interested in racing ducks and spending time with her rabbits (representing all 17 of her deceased children), but still has some desire to lead. There’s Lady Marlborough who’s always been her adviser and always tended to her, but has a lust for control of her own.

Then there’s Abigail: the poor cousin of Lady Marlborough who is clever enough to win the Queen and even overtake Lady Marlborough as the Queen’s favorite. Abigail was very naive at first, but once she learned she could win the Queen with her smarts, she worked to overtake Lady Marlborough as the lady-in-waiting. She was a good reader, she took to the Queen’s rabbits better, she willingly participated in giving sexual favor to the queen, she even married the courtier to the Queen’s delight (whom she did have affection to). Abigail however did not know at the time her win over Lady Marlborough would have consequences. As the Lady was dismissed from the court, the Queen would start hating Abigail. As Abigail tried to send a message of power through hurting one of her rabbits, it would be the Queen who would give Abigail a lesson on who holds the power.

The film also gives an interesting depiction of the Royals at the time. The mental illness and victim mentality of Queen Anne is possibly the most noticed aspect. However it does give a lot of notice of what happens behind the closed doors of the palace. Queen Anne was an interesting character as she was often confused of her power. Ministers were gaining more power, but the Queen wanted to reassure herself even more than the others that she had the highest power. She would get mad at the simplest thing, even music being played in the court. She would continue eating cake even after vomiting. However the palace and those inside also provided a lot of intrigue. We have a place where a lot of debauchery takes place. We have an arena for competition of political power. We also have a place where a lot of secrets are to be kept from the public. It is questionable whether Queen Anne was a lesbian or had same-sex attractions. I’m sure documentation may support it or oppose it. However it’s interesting that the Queen being seduced by Lady Marlborough and then by Abigail was happening around a time homosexuals were put in prison. Interesting.

Another thing that got me with this film was the frequent violent ways of treating others and the way insults were hurled at each other. Frequently you heard people of the court, both male and female, call the women ‘cunt’ in their face. In addition, the foul languages used by those in the court and from the Queen really left you wondering if that was how the royals were like? We are all taught to think the Royals were the definition of etiquette. However the biggest thing that got me was the use of violence on others. We first saw it when Abigail was pushed out of her carriage. We saw it in how Harley would simply push Abigail any which way. We saw how Lady Marlborough would use violence on queen Anne when she asks for Abigail instead. We even see it used by Abigail as her lust for power grows and she has an unconscious Lady Marlborough dragged by a horse. Really makes you think of the times back then. I know it was a fictional depiction of the power triangle back then, but it still makes you wonder.

The film is another achievement for Greek director Yorgos Lanthimos. It seems like with each film he directs, he creates a new milestone. This film he directs is an excellent work of how he takes a fictionalized depiction of a real situation in history and turns it into the story of madness and competition that it is. The screenplay by Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara makes a lot of creative choices like giving some details that were taboo at the time and even making this film an eight-chapter story. It makes for a very intriguing story with a lot of eyebrow-raising scenes. It also makes you want to look up the history behind it.

As for the acting, it’s a wonder why the ensemble was not nominated for the SAG Award for Best Motion-Picture Ensemble. This year’s awards season has had a lot of notable snubs and lopsided victories. The combined acting of the major actors in this film are among the best of the year. However the performances of the three major roles have received individual praise. The best of which has to be Olivia Colman as Queen Anne. Olivia has been able to embody the madness and lust for control of Queen Anne with excellence. Definitely one to steal the show this year. Emma Stone also does an excellent job of scene-stealing as Abigail Masham: the one who starts out naively as a minor servant but soon learns to fight dirty for the role of the favorite. She is possibly the biggest comic relief of the film. Rachel Weisz is less comedic, but her stoicism in her role as Sarah Churchill and her own lust for control did steal the show and garner a lot of intrigue. Outside of the ‘main three,’ Nicholas Hoult also stole many a scene as Earl Harley who has a liking for Abigail, but has a knack for treating her like dirt.

The film also has a lot of excellent technical merits too. The Cinematography from Robbie Ryan was very fitting for the film. Yorgos Mavropsaridis delivered the right editing choices. The production design was also excellent in recreating the castle, but it did make me wonder how the castle didn’t look at all like Buckingham Palace. I admit I didn’t know British history well and learned only recently that Buckingham Palace housed the British Royal Family in 1761. The recreation of Kensington palace in its 18th-Century form was excellent. The costuming was also excellent as it fit the right times. Sandy Powell is today’s Edith Head. The music with its mix of classical symphonies fit the film excellently.

The Favourite is a story that many might not take an interest in seeing at first, but it’s worth seeing. It’s a story that will catch your intrigue and tells a story with a lot of validity for today.

Oscars 2018 Shorts Review: Animation and Live-Action

Jon The Blogcentric1 Comment

Cinema

I’m good at keeping count of all the years I’m able to see all the Best Picture nominees, but I don’t know how many consecutive years I’ve seen the shorts. However I did it again this year. I lucked out and saw all the shorts for this year’s Best Live-Action Short Film and Best Animated Short Film categories. There were a lot of differences of the films, but a lot of similarities too. Here’s my review of the films:

LIVE-ACTION SHORT FILMS:

The col thing about this year is that two films — Fauve and Marguerite — come from Canada. More specifically, Quebec. The five films nominated are very different in genre and story, but all are deserving of their nominations:

Detainment: dir. Vincent Lambe – This is the most controversial of the five films. February 12, 1993 started off as a day in which two 10 year-old boys named Jon Venables and Robert Thompson simply played truant from school and stole items from nearby stores. That all changed when they saw 2 year-old James Bulger standing outside the butcher shop unattended. The film focuses intensely on the police interrogations. Both Thompson and Venables are interrogated separately. Both boys’ parents are in the room listening in, and in complete paralyzing shock.

The film is based off of some of the recorded interrogations of the two boys. The film appears to be a character study of the two individual boys. Thompson appears defiant and remorseless while Venables is constantly lying and frequently cries, even hysterically. The film also relives the moments such as when adults butt in and how they walked Bulger the long distance to the track where he died. It becomes gripping without getting too disturbing.

NOTE: The film has attracted a lot of controversy because of its subject matter. The James Bulger murder is a murder that still upsets the UK, especially Liverpool, to this day. The mother has gone on BBC speaking her anger and demanded the film be removed from the list of nominees. That’s why even though I think it’s the best film of all five, I feel it should not win the Oscar. I don’t see it trying to bring any sympathy to the two boys, but it still upsets many from the UK to this day.

Fauve: dir. Jeremy Comte – Two boys, Tyler and Benjamin, are playing an innocent power game. They first do it around an abandoned train. However they decide to take their game to a surface mine for a concrete factory. Then the game becomes deadly as Benjamin finds himself sinking in the wet cement. Tyler tries to help, but to no avail as it stops him too. Any help from Tyler helps to no avail. Then the aftermath as a woman offers a ride home tells a lot.

The film is a good short story. The story starts off as simple fun and games, but then turns to a dark tragic drama when you least expect it. Even the ending leaves you asking questions at the end. Very good short.

Marguerite: dir. Marianne Farley – Marguerite is an elderly lady nearing the last years of her life at home. She is nursed on a daily basis by a young nurse named Rachel. One day, she overhears a phone conversation between Rachel and another woman. It sounds romantic. Later, Marguerite notices Rachel’s phone in the bathroom and sees romantic photos of Rachel and the other woman. One day, Marguerite unearths a photo album. The photos are back in the 1960’s and are of her and another woman named Cecile. It brings back memories of the two. Cecile would later marry a man. After being put to bed early because of a fall, Marguerite confesses in her bed to Rachel of Cecile and why she never ‘loved’ her.

This is a story that is slow, but it tells a lot. It’s about two women, both lesbians, who are a product of their times. One couldn’t love a woman because it was considered a ‘mortal sin’ and was criminalized. The other is free to love another woman without guilt. It’s there where they share their special bond at the end. That’s why I declare this my Should Win pick.

Mother: dir. Rodrigo Sorogoyen – Marta is relaxing at her place with her mother around. Her son Ivan is on the coast of the French Riviera with his father on vacation. Soon Marta receives a phone call from Ivan. Ivan is alone on a remote area of the coast. The father abandoned him. Nobody except a strange man is around. The battery in Ivan’s phone is dying. Soon Marta calls the police, but the police have no way to locate Ivan as Ivan doesn’t know where he is. Then a second phone call from Ivan happens. That leaves Marta even more frightened and causes Marta to rush out.

The film’s best attribute is that it captures the moment. It’s between cellphones and Marta’s domain. The qualities are what we know and what we don’t know and it builds on the suspense. The weakness is that it appears to be part of a film rather than a full film. It feels like it has a beginning and a middle, but no end. I’m sure the purpose of the director was to give us a film that leaves us in suspense, but it leaves you wondering what was the point of this partial-film? Social message? Suspense story? What?

Skin: dir. Guy Nattiv – Troy is a ten year-old boy growing up in a remote area of the southern USA. The father, Johnny Aldd, is bringing him up to be rough and tough. The father even teaches Troy how to shoot a real gun with the help of his neo-Nazi friends. One day at a supermarket, Troy smiles at an African American man just simply buying groceries. Johnny gets angry and shouts racist slurs, but the black man walks off calm, collect, but angry and lets him know it. Johnny response by getting his friends to rush over and beat the black man up near his van while his family watches in horror, and Troy watches on.

Days later, Troy and Johnny go out somewhere, but the father is captured by a van of African American men. They put a sleeping injection in Johnny and a tattoo artist goes over his racist tattoos, leaving you wondering what will come. After eleven days, Johnny is dropped back at his home. The tattoo artist completely covered him in black, to Johnny’s horror. As Johnny tries to come home, his wife and son react in fear. It ends with a surprise ending.

No question the main theme of the film is about racism. However the film is also about cliques and breeding fear into people. The film can say that the culture of fear can also be why the United States has a gun problem. Seeing how neo-Naziism exposed its face in the Unite-The-Right rally in August 2017, this is a film very relevant to our times. Even with its bizarre story and surprise ending. That’s why I pick it at my Will Win pick.

ANIMATED SHORTS:

This makes for a very eclectic five films chosen for this year. One of the films is from a Canadian animation company. However there are two American films that hint they may have some Canadian ingredients:

Animal Behaviour: dirs. Alison Snowden and David Fine – Various animals walk into a psychology group meeting with a dog doctor leading the meeting. All have a problem to confess. However problems arrive when a gigantic ape with an anger problem comes in. He doesn’t want to be helped. The pig, the leech and the moth are all cooperative, but the ape is disruptive. Then the ape confesses his problem, but also throws a fit in the process and all havoc is wreaked. Right at the end, and with all the damage done, the ape appears helped and will be back next week.

This is some clever 2D animation that may appear simple and crude by most, but fits the story well. Also the whole story of all the animals involved and their problems makes for funny hilarity.

Bao: dirs. Domee Shi and Becky Neiman-Cobb – A Chinese-Canadian woman makes dumplings for her busy husband, but one comes alive. She raises it to be like her own baby. She mothers it with her caring nature, but the son grows up out to be rebellious and even leaves to marry a white woman he loves. She can’t handle it and eats him. Heartbroken after ‘eating’ him, she wakes up to find out it’s just a dream. She’s a mother going through empty-nest syndrome and the child dumpling in her dream was mirroring her own son’s life. It ends on a happy note.

This is the short shown before Incredibles 2. Once again, Pixar adds another excellent writer to its dream team. Director Domee Shi started as a storyboard artist for The Good Dinosaur and Inside Out. Here she has a chance to let her creativity flow with a charming story which transcends race and delights people of all ages and backgrounds.

Late Afternoon: dirs. Louise Bagnall and Nuria Gonzales Blanco – Emily is an elderly woman who is constantly tended to by Kate. Frequently Emily’s memory goes back to her past from moments in her childhood and her carefree nature and then to moments in her young adulthood. Her memory keeps going in and out. Then at the end, she’s reminded Kate is her daughter.

This does seem like a heavy short as the story appears to be either about Dementia or Alzheimers. The use of animation helps with the drifting of Emily’s mind from the present to the past back to the present again. A very good short, but it may be too deep for some.

One Small Step: dirs. Andrew Chesworth and Bobby Pontillas – Luna is a Chinese-American girl with dreams of becoming an astronaut. She lives with her father, a shoe cobbler. He has always let Luna know how much he loves her with the shoes he crafts for her and with his business. He uses his money to promote Luna’s dream. As a young child, Luna cherishes every minute of her father. As she grows up, she becomes more distant from her father and even too busy with her college work. Things take a turn for the worse as she starts failing courses and is denied acceptance into astronaut training. Then one day she comes home and learns that her father has passed. Heartbroken, she then turns her life around and starts a new ambition. This leads to the happy ending we all want.

The story is a very good story as it deals with a common theme of father-daughter relationships. The story may appear heartbreaking, but ends with the positive energy it began with. The animation was excellent and the story, with no dialogue at all, told us a lot. I call this my Should Win and Will Win pick.

Weekends: dir. Trevor Jimenez – A young boy living in downtown Toronto in the mid-1980’s is divided between the time between the homes of his father and his mother. The father is more playful with an imagination into samurai swords. The mother is more serious while she’s dating a man who doesn’t take well to the boy. As the stories shift between the two world, they become intertwined with the boy’s dreams and the dreams tell a lot about the realities of the home lives he’s going through.

Trevor Jimenez has been a storyboard artist for Pixar films and has his chance at doing his own short film. It’s all hand-drawn which adds to the effect of the story. The point of this story was to mix the eerie dreams with the boy’s unfriendly reality. It does a great job in creating the right environment for the film and the drama.

And that’s my look at this year’s Oscar nominated short films. Last year I was better at predicting the shorts winners, but this year looks to be very open. There are some that look like clear winners, but anything can happen in these categories. It will all be decided on Sunday the 24th.