2023 Oscars Best Picture Review: The Zone Of Interest

Sandra Huller plays the wife of a top Nazi in Auschwitz in the haunting The Zone Of Interest.

It would be naturally impulsive to dismiss The Zone Of Interest as ‘another Holocaust film.’ If you watch it, you will see it’s about more than just the Holocaust.

Many people will say that Holocaust films have done countless times before. Even if it is true, there are many angles one can see the Holocaust. This is a story of a different kind. There are a lot of things that will remind people of certain overlooked aspects of the Holocaust that will also disgust them further. First is the Höss’ house built just outside the walls of Auschwitz. I don’t know if there were ever houses built just outside the walls of Auschwitz, but having such in the film is very representative of the two worlds of Germany in World War II. There were the Nazis who had their day in the sun at the time and the Jews and other people Hitler deemed inferior being killed, tortured and even made slaves for the high-ranking Nazis.

Second is the Nazis lived very comfortably. What you see in the film is the Hoss family living their daily home life like a common family. You also see General Hoss following his genocidal Nazi orders and planning out methods and arrangements of the deaths of millions as your common “business as usual.” Seeing that in the film will bring back your feelings of disgust seeing people live “the good life” at the cost of human torture. Seeing how the Höss family sleeps comfortably while the sounds of gunshots and screaming coming from the behind the walls shows how close but far apart those two Germanys were. Even seeing how Hoss and the Nazis treat their genocidal plans to look like a simple day at the office shows the insensitivity at the time and how the Nazis felt that’s how it should be. Making all this destruction of a continent and the planning for genocide look like simplicity is all it’ll take to want to infuriate you.

Additional scenes include the train coming in and out of Auschwitz to drop new prisoners off, the smoke coming from the camp’s gas ovens and crematoriums, and the Höss’ ordering the prisoners they use as slaves around will add to your anger. We forget that the Nazis intended for most prisoners to be killed and a small percent to be used as slaves. Even seeing Hedwig threaten one of her servants to have her gassed will remind you of how remorseless they were.

Despite the Höss family representing the comfortable live from the torture of the War, there are signs of humanity still happening. The most notable is the two scenes of the Polish girl sneaking out and giving food for the prisoners to eat. It’s a reminder that even in the times of the worst of human activity, the values of humanity still existed. They were often hidden or done so at the risk of one’s life, but they did make themselves present at that time.

SPOILER PARAGRAPH: Another thing that will make some people made is that the film doesn’t have an ending with the Hoss’ and all the other Nazis get their day of reckoning. That’s frequently the case in Holocaust movies and that’s normally the ending we want in such a movie. Even though the ending of the Nazis getting a brutal defeat, there are signs on Rudolf that their comeuppance is looming. That the separate worlds of the Nazis living the good life and the torture at Auschwitz will collide. The first scene is when Rudolf and the children are swimming in the river. Soon they’re dirtied by the flow of bones and ash thrown from the camp into the river. Another sign comes when Rudolf gets a female prisoner to perform a favor of a fellatio on him. The third being right after Rudolf speaks to Hedwig after a phone call in Berlin and he gets sick in the empty hallways. Then as it fast forwards to the present where the cleaning women in the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum clean the gas ovens and the windows of displays, that scene shows the fate Rudolf sealed for himself. A fate of an executed criminal after the war ends and a name that will live in infamy.

Top respect should go to director/writer Jonathan Glazer. The film is based on a 2014 novel of the same title. Interestingly, the novel features the first half of an unnamed Nazi meant to mirror the life of Hoss and his family. In the second half, it’s the aftermath set in 1948. Here it appears the film is based completely on the first half. Nevertheless, it is a telling tale of a Nazi and his family living a normal daily life, making his work look like a typical day at the office and a feud between him and Hedwig about his promotion to Berlin look like a common husband/wife feud. Also raising eyebrows is how it mirrored Hoss’ life well from fathering five children, the last born in 1943, his orchestration in Auschwitz and even the months he was away in Berlin. It’s obvious in doing so, Glazer wanted to send a message about how people, especially the Nazis, can live next door to the evil they’ve created and live comfortably. He does an excellent job in doing that with the story and the various camera effects.

One thing about the acting is it’s very low-key compared to most of the acting in the other Best Picture nominees. The standout of this film is the storytelling. Nevertheless, the acting in the film is still very good. Christian Friedel did a very good portrayal of Rudolf Hoss. Despite his performance not being too showy, his acting added to the storytelling. Also great is Sandra Huller as Hedwig. Although her performance pales in comparison to that of Anatomy Of A Fall, she also does a good job in making a hateful Nazi seem like an everyday person and even a common wife. She’s even able to get you thinking at times the film is more about Hedwig than about Rudolf.

The technical elements of the film also add to the story and the message to get across. The cinematography from Lukasz Zal really added to the theme of the film. He features many scenes with unorthodox imagery in the film. Most noteworthy, the scenes of the Polish girl giving prisoners food done looking like a film negative added to the statement Glazer intended to make. The music from Mica Levi helps create the atmosphere for this dark subject matter. The sound crew have to have delivered possibly the most profound contribution to the film. The mixing of sounds like the gunshots and screaming mixed with scenes of the Hoss’ living the comfortable life serve as a reminder of the hidden things that are happening.

This film has had a lot of awards buzz in 2023. It first gained notice at the Cannes Film Festival. Although Anatomy Of A Fall won, this film was a nominee and director Glazer won the Grand Prix and the FIPRESCI Prize. How about that? Two films starring Sandra Huller at the 2023 Cannes Film Fest and both were the most lauded! Interestingly, this film is the UK’s third Oscar nomination in the Best International Feature Film award. It does seem odd for the UK to even have a submission, but Jonathan Glazer being British and the film being in German, Yiddish and Polish, the UK can submit I as their entry. Those other two nominations were back in the 1990’s and were for Welsh-language films. At the time, entries had to be in a language native to the nation. Not anymore. It’s now more about the citizenship of the director. Oscar rules are interesting, aren’t they?

The Zone Of Interest is not the Holocaust film you expect it to be. It’s a film about the Holocaust which Glazer has something to say and is often told through sights and sounds.

And there you go! That’s the last of my reviews of the ten Best Pictures nominees. My blog of my predictions for the Oscar wins coming soon!

2023 Oscars Best Picture Review: Anatomy Of A Fall (Anatomie d’Une Chute)

Sandra Huller plays writer Sandra Voyter suspected of killing her husband in the courtroom thriller Anatomy Of A Fall.

DISCLAIMER: This is from a blog of four reviews I originally posted on March 2, 2024. The original blog has been removed.

Anatomy Of A Fall first appears to be a common courtroom drama with a story of intrigue. Over time, you’ll learn it’s a film that’s a lot more.

Courtroom dramas have caught our intrigue time and time again. We’re presented with a criminal scenario or a legal scenario, but it’s up for us to decide whether they’re guilty or innocent or who to side with in a dispute. We learn the verdict and we’re left to decide if it’s the right verdict or not. This story is a unique story. It presents a case of a death from a fall. The deceased is the French husband of a German novelist. The fall happens from a chateau in a remote mountainous area of Grenoble. The first to notice the fall is the seeing-eye dog of the blind son. Questions arise. We learn of the troubled marriage. People turn against the woman. The prosecutor is determined to prove her guilty. The son watches despite his blindness, and seems like he doesn’t know what to think. Could he hold the truth? Could his seeing-eye dog also provide clues to the truth?

This isn’t simply a story of whether Samuel’s death is a murder, a suicide or an accident. It’s a story that develops over time with each new fact exposed, opinions from people in the story coming about, and your own opinions being formed. As we learn of Sandra Voyter, her turbulent marriage, and her recent liaisons, some of us are tempted to look down upon her and even suspect her of possible murder. As we learn about Samuel and his immaturities and later of his depression over the last few years, will that change our mind? The film is as much about how we see things and see people as it is about our story itself. Even possibly exposing sexist attitudes we didn’t think we had. There’s even the angle of the trial as seen through Daniel: the child caught in the middle. A blind boy, he has the biggest sense of the friction his parents have been going through. He lost his father and he’s at risk of losing his mother if she’s found guilty. During the time, he doesn’t know what to think of his mother and often feels lonely. Almost as if Snoop, his seeing-eye dog, is the only one who loves him and he can trust. Sometimes your concern shifts from how Sandra will be found by the courts to what will happen to Daniel. It’s like the film is two stories in one. Even Daniel’s testimony at the end will make you reconsider your stance in the case.

Top respect goes to director/writer Justine Triet. Triet has become only the eighth female director to be nominated for the Best Director Oscar. This film is actually a project she co-wrote with Arthur Haran for actress Sandra Huller to star in after the two worked together in 2019’s Sibyl. She creates a great story that presents a death and the question if it’s an accident or a murder. She presents it as a story of a French-speaking wife and a German-speaking husband who use English as a common ground to sort things out, but it adds friction. The death, the courtroom drama, the turbulent marriage, the communication barrier, and the son caught in the middle adds to the story. Even the ending which allows you to draw your own conclusion of the incident adds to the film.

Along with Triet, there was great acting from Sandra Huller. Her acting in this story helps create the character along with the actions and allows the audience to make their decisions in the case. Huller is as much of a storyteller as Triet herself. Also great is the performance of Milo Machado-Graner: the son caught in the middle. There are many times in the story, some thanks to camera shots of the courtroom drama, where one can think the film is as much about Daniel as it is about Sandra. He’s trying to make sense of what is happening. He is suspicious of his mother but is scared he will lose it all. There are times he tries to be tough with him teaching himself piano by sound clips, but you can tell he could break down. It seems like the dog Snoop is his one friend, especially with his sheltered upbringing. Graner makes him a boy you want to hug. Adding to the film is Messi The Dog as Snoop. Through Messi, we see Snoop is more than Daniel’s seeing-eye dog and best friend. He’s also one that hold clues to what could expose the truth. Additional great acting performances include Samuel Theis as Samuel Maleski, the husband that struggled with mental illness whose struggles threatened the family, and Antoine Reinartz as the prosecutor who will get you wondering if he wants justice done or simply to have Sandra found guilty.

This film has been lauded with buzz since the Cannes Film Festival. The film won the Palme d’Or at the and Triet became only the third female director in history to win. You know how I talked about Messi The Dog adding to the story? At Cannes, Messi was even given the Golden Dog Award for his efforts! Even after Cannes, film festival after film festival it was entered in would have this come away as the big winner. The film also won six European Film Awards. The film was not France’s official submission in the Best International Feature Film category. I assumed it’s because there’s too much English in the film, but other articles are suggesting there may be politicking.

Anatomy Of A Fall is a great legal drama that tells the story of a death in question and doesn’t only leave its fate to the juries, but for the audience to decide for themselves what they believe to be the truth. Even Triet herself won’t say if Sandra is guilty or not. All your call!

Golden Globes 2018: My Predictions

Golden Globe

This year’s Golden Globes will be hosted by Andy Samberg and Sandra Oh. I’ll admit it’s awfully late for me to post my Golden Globe predictions, but I have been lacking the drive this holiday season. A late-minute alerting made me get myself into action. To start things off, here are my predictions for both the winners and their respective most likely upsetters in the film categories:

FILM:

Best Motion Picture, Drama
Winner: 
A Star Is Born
Most Likely Upsetter: BlacKkKlansman

Best Motion Picture, Musical or Comedy
Winner:
 The Favourite
Most Likely Upsetter: Green Book

Best Actor in a Motion Picture, Drama
Winner:
 Bradley Cooper, A Star Is Born
Most Likely Upsetter: Rami Malek, Bohemian Rhapsody

Best Actor in a Motion Picture, Musical or Comedy
Winner:
 Christian Bale, Vice
Most Likely Upsetter: Viggo Mortenson, Green Book

Best Actress in a Motion Picture, Drama
Winner:
 Lady Gaga, A Star Is Born
Most Likely Upsetter: Glenn Close, The Wife

Best Actress in a Motion Picture, Musical or Comedy
Winner:
 Olivia Colman, The Favourite
Most Likely Upsetter: Emily Blunt, Mary Poppins Returns

Best Supporting Actor in a Motion Picture
Winner:
 Mahershala Ali, Green Book
Most Likely Upsetter: Richard E. Grant, Can You Ever Forgive Me?

Best Supporting Actress in a Motion Picture
Winner: 
Amy Adams, Vice
Most Likely Upsetter: Regina King, If Beale Street Could Talk

Best Director
Winner: 
Alfonso Cuaron, Roma
Most Likely Upsetter: Peter Farrelly, Green Book

Best Screenplay, Motion Picture
Winner:
 Alfonso Cuaron, Roma
Most Likely Upsetter: Nick Vallelonga, Brian Currie & Peter Farrelly & Vanessa Taylor, Green Book

Best Foreign-Language Film
Winner:
 Roma (Mexico)
Most Likely Upsetter: Shoplifters (Japan)

Best Animated Feature Film
Winner:
 SpiderMan: Into The Spiderverse
Most Likely Upsetter: The Incredibles 2

Best Original Song, Motion Picture
Winner:
 “Shallow”, A Star Is Born
Most Likely Upsetter: “All The Stars”, Black Panther

Best Original Score, Motion Picture
Winner:
 Marc Shaiman, Mary Poppins Returns
Most Likely Upsetter: Marco Beltrami, A Quiet Place

Those who know me well enough know I will predict the winners for the television categories but not predict the most likely upsetters. Especially since this year’s crop of nominees come mostly from new shows for this season. So my predictions for the winners:

TELEVISION:

Best TV Movie or Miniseries: American Crime Story: The Assassination Of Versace

Best TV Series, Drama: The Americans

Best TV Series, Comedy: The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel

Best Actor in a TV Series, Drama: Matthew Rhys, The Americans

Best Actor in a TV Series, Comedy: Bill Hader, Barry

Best Actress in a TV Series, Drama: Sandra Oh, Killing Eve

Best Actress in a TV Series, Comedy: Rachel Brosnahan, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel

Best Actor in a Miniseries or TV Movie: Darren Criss, American Crime Story: The Assassination Of Versace

Best Actress in a Miniseries or TV Movie: Regina King, Seven Seconds

Best Supporting Actor in a Series, Mini-Series or TV Movie: Henry Winkler, Barry

Best Supporting Actress in a Series, Miniseries, or TV Movie: Thandie Newton,  Westworld

And there you go. Those are my predictions for tonight’s Golden Globe awards. Winners to be revealed starting 8pm EST. That’s less than an hour!

Double Movie Review: Inside Out and The Minions Movie

You saw I did a triple-movie review yesterday. That’s what I plan to do as far as reviewing summer movies. Review two or three summer movies that are in the same genre. Yesterday was a review of three summer comedies. Today is the review of the two hit animated movies of the summer: Inside Out and The Minions Movie. Both were two of the biggest hit movies this 2015 and both were different but both also had their own qualities.

Inside Out features five characters of human feelings and takes one to an amazing world of the subconscious.
Inside Out features five characters of human feelings and takes one to an amazing world of the subconscious.

INSIDE OUT

This is actually Pixar’s first original movie since Brave. It’s been awhile and it was commonly assumed that the buzz of Pixar–the buzz of quality and creativity–was fading with movies like Cars 2 and Planes. They also had to face the fact in recent years they were no longer alone at the top with Illumination Entertainment emerging and Walt Disney Studios returning to their winning ways. However Pixar did come back with a vengeance this year with Inside Out.

Pixar went once again to its dream team with Up director Pete Docter doing the direction as well as co-writing the script with Josh Cooley and Meg Le Fauve. Michael Giacchino returns to do the music and vocal talent comes from the likes of Amy Poehler, Lewis Black, Diane Lane, Bill Hader and John Ratzenberger.

The biggest achievement of the film is that it doesn’t just simply deliver a great story that can keep the audience intrigued but it creates a unique and dazzling world of the human mind. Here they invented the world of the human brain called Headquarters, creates characters related to human emotions, creates a system where emotions are delivered by Headquarters subconsciously via a control console that any of the five emotions can control, has memories kept in colored orbs in its own storage system and has islands that reflect the most dominant aspects of a person’s personality connected by the train of thought which is an actual locomotive.

That already looks like creative stuff on pen and paper. However it took Pixar’s animators to make this world come alive. If you’ve seen Inside Out, you too would be dazzled to see the world inside the mind of Riley Anderson, the main character. It’s one thing to think up this world. It’s another thing to have this world come alive on screen and be good enough to dazzle and even mesmerize the audience. Were you mesmerized? I was.

However despite the mesmerizing world, it still had to have a solid and entertaining story to go with it. The story consists of five characters representing the five core emotions. Those emotional characters are inside the mind of Riley Anderson: a hockey-loving 11 year-old girl who is trying to adjust to a move from Minnesota to San Francisco. Promising enough. However it also took the right juggling of the story to go from focus on Riley to focus on the emotions and their world inside Riley’s head. It was a balancing act.

The story had to make Riley a likeable and identifiable character. It also had to make the emotions likeable characters too. Like it couldn’t make Anger as an abusive brute or Sadness into a manic depressant. C’mon, this is a family film for people to enjoy rather than see characters that cut deep. I’ll admit I did find the story rather confusing at first. However it starts to make more sense over time long after you leave the theatre. Inside Out is like a lot of Pixar movies where the focus is more on the story or the world rather than it being too character-driven or too entertainment-driven. That’s how Pixar has created some of the best animated movies of the past 20 years and that’s how they succeed here again.

Inside Out isn’t simply another charming animated story from Pixar but an escape to a world that will leave you dazzled. The ending will even get you thinking you have five characters in your head just like them!

The Minions movie is about Stuart, Kevin and Bob searching for a master of evil to serve.
The Minions movie is about Stuart, Kevin and Bob searching for a master of evil to serve.

MINIONS

Without a doubt, this decade’s top movie stars are not of flesh and blood but yellow and pill-shaped. Yes, the Minions who have been the aces at stealing the show from Gru in all the Despicable Me movies. Their popularity over time made the possibility of their own movie eventual. However it was to be a big question of The Minions Movie. Yes, they can steal the show from Gru but can the hold their own? Or will people become sick of an hour and a half of Minions?

Firstly in order to do a 90 minute-long film about Minions, one should have a solid but entertaining story to go with it. Interestingly enough they didn’t pick Despicable Me writers Cinco Paul and Ken Daurio to write the story. It went to newcomer Brian Lynch who actually wrote for the Minions Mayhem short three years ago. Despicable Me co-director Pierre Coffin returns to direct this but his co-director this time is Kyle Balda, who co-directed The Lorax with Despicable Me co-director Chris Renaud. Renaud is Executive Producer of the Minions movie. Hmmm, looks like Pixar’s not the only animation team in town.

The story does seem a bit formulaic as they try to look for a master of evil to serve. The master they think they found turning on them isn’t that original either. Even the ending where they eventually find themselves the master of Gru was not unexpected. The strength of the story was for it to have a decent plot but put major emphasis on the entertainment factor. Let’s face it, people are in love with the Minion characters. If one writes a story that’s very plot-centred like most Pixar movies, the flavor of the Minion characters would be lost. People love the goofy nature of the Minions. They story could not be two plot-centred if the Minions had to have their hyper but cute charm maintained.

Nevertheless they had to have a good story not just to keep it going to a feature-length but to entertain as well. That was achieved well with the story of Scarlet Overkill having them under their wing. Sandra Bullock made Scarlet fun to watch. Even if you knew the Minions would turn out okay with whatever Scarlet plotted against them, the movie still kept you wondering and hoping that they’d come out alright.

I give the writers and directors credit to writing and directing an entertainingly good story of how the Minions found Gru. However like most other movies, I usually question the choices made or if it could have been done better. Sometimes I wonder was it a good idea to pick three Minion characters as the lead Minions instead of maybe more? Was there too little time spent on how they met Gru at the end? Was Bob more idiotic than he should be? Actually I can’t really judge because I’m not a Hollywood writer. However I do feel that the ‘Hair’ number shouldn’t have been the only Minion musical number.

Minions is a mission accomplished: making a feature-length film of the top scene stealers in Hollywood right now. However it is imperfect and can make some people think it could have been done better.

As for the two movies, they both turned out to be the two biggest money makers of the year. Sure, Jurassic World is #1 but both are comfortably in this year’s Top 5 with Inside Out grossing $352.8 million and Minions grossing $332.8 million. It looks like animated movies are among the strongest films out there right now. Often they’re better at making favorite characters than most live-action movies. What Pixar and the other animation teams have up their sleeves has yet to be seen.

Inside Out and Minions are two of the biggest winners of the summer. they not only entertained but they also showed why animated movies are one of the tour de forces in moviemaking right now.

Movie Review: Gravity

Sandra Bullock plays a rookie astronaut who struggles to survive in space after a freak accident in Gravity.
Sandra Bullock plays an inexperienced astronaut who struggles to survive in space after a freak accident in Gravity.

DISCLAIMER: Okay, I know Gravity has been out in theatres for weeks. Even I saw it almost a month ago. But as you can tell from my VIFF writing, I lacked the ambition to write for weeks. It’s only until now I’m getting it back. So I hope you understand. Also I hope you like my review.

Gravity is a movie that promises not to be like your typical outer space movie. The trailer also promised a thrill ride. The question is does it deliver?

The film shows a space shuttle mission commanded by two people: Dr. Ryan Stone and Matt Kowalski. This is Ryan’s first journey. She receives guidance from Matt: a veteran on his last shuttle trip. It is while they both service the ship’s hubblescope that they learn the Russians did a missile strike on a defunct satellite. It appears to be no big deal until the debris comes straight to their spaceship. The debris detaches Stone, damages the shuttle to the point it’s unusable and leaves the rest of the crew dead. Fortunately Kowalski is able to catch Stone before she flies away into oblivion.

Stone and Kowalski are the only two survivors left. They know they have to make it to the International Space Station (ISS) within 90 minutes to avoid the orbiting space debris. The two talk. Stone admits she hasn’t had a happy life since her young daughter died. They approach the ISS finding many of the Soyuz models inoperable. Kowalski finds one still operable and suggests it be used to travel to a Chinese space station to return back to Earth. However the force of weightlessness becomes too much for the two to travel to the Soyuz together. Kowalski leaves Stone to the Soyuz despite her protests and floats away.

Stone is left on her own in the ISS trying to get to the one safe Soyuz even as there’s a fire in the ship area. Fortunately she finds her way there in time as the debris make a return orbit to commit further damage. Stone tries to communicate with the Chinese ship only to come across audio of a Greenlandic fisherman cooing his baby. Stone turns off her oxygen resigned to giving up. She receives a change of heart from Kowalski where he scolds her and tells her to go on and she receives instructions.

Stone immediately realizes that her conversation with Kowalski was a dream but she develops the will to go on. She directs herself to the Chinese capsule only to learn that it’s been damaged too. She immediately has to find her way to land back to Earth. She has to do it and time is running out. Nevertheless the movie ends as many believe it will but actually not as many originally though the ending would be.

This is one of the best and one of the most unique against-all-odds stories I’ve seen in a long time on the big screen. If you’ve seen it, you’ll know everything was against Ryan. She suffered tragedy in her life and made a loner of herself. She was completely inexperienced in space travel and nothing disastrous was expected to happen. The debris of the satellites leaves the ship damaged and the crew dead. Then Matt Kowalski, her partner in need, floats off into oblivion. She’s left all alone to fend for herself, try and work two damaged spaceships she has no clue how to operate and with broken communication and bring herself back to Earth. Being in the theatre will leave one at the edge of their seat not knowing what will happen next. I myself remember feeling the intensity of the moment during its high-tension scenes. Once you thing something is solved, it turns out that it isn’t and a new decision has to be made.

The best thing about this movie is that it’s not just and outer space thrill-ride. It’s a thrill-ride that’s able to keep its focus on one main actor practically throughout the whole movie and it succeeds in being both entertaining and thrilling. Even having it almost completely in space without ever really focusing outside of it during the space scenes also adds to it being an accomplishment. I remember 127 Hours attempted to focus on one person and their story but there were a few times it shifted away in flashbacks or other scenes. Gravity was better at the focus. It was almost like watching a moment in real-time.

Without a doubt, Sandra Bullock was the performance of the movie. She was the lead role and it was her movie technically from start to finish but she did all the right moves. She succeeded in making her character not just a player in the action but a three-dimensional person with deep feelings. That’s what made the movie more. George Clooney also did well in his supporting role. His role didn’t include the depth or range as Bullock’s but he succeeded with his presence and playing an experienced astronaut who’s cool under pressure.

The big accomplishments go to Alfonso Cuaron and his son Jonas. Alfonso directed it. Alfonso and Jonas both wrote it. Alfonso also co-produced and co-edited it. They took a story one normally could not create a good box office-winning movie with. Trying to turn a story like that into an eye-catching movie would take a huge amount of effort and may needs the right effects to be added to it to make it work. But they made it work. The cinematography from Emmanuel Lubezki and the music from Steven Price also added to the excellence of the movie.

Gravity is a sci-fi movie that goes above and beyond what one would expect from a space movie. No big space wars. Just one person and their struggle to stay alive and make it back to Earth. A tough job to turn into a winning picture but it succeeds brilliantly.

Oscars 2011 Best Picture Nominee: Extremely Loud And Incredibly Close

“If things were easy to find, they wouldn’t be worth finding.”

I know many of you would be nervous at first of attending a movie like Extremely Loud And Incredibly Close. 9/11 films aren’t exactly crowd-winners. Ever since United 93 and even up to now, it still isn’t. It’s still a tense topic to this day and doesn’t make for good subject matter for people to see a movie about. Nevertheless Extremely Loud And Incredibly Close is a good film of its own, if imperfect.
 
Oskar Schell is a young boy who’s a smart but fearful and eccentric brainiac often mistaken for having Asperger’s. However he’s dealing with an inner pain. His father Thomas died in the Twin Towers on 9/11, a day Oskar refers to as ‘the worst day’. His father was a jeweller who spent a lot of time with Oskar nurturing his creative and eccentric quest for knowledge. He would create puzzles, help him develop his own business cards (which lists him as inventor, Francophile and pacifist), have oxymoron challenges while practising karate, and even have scavenger hunts. You could tell Oskar is still very much an intellectual now. He keeps his collection of butterflies. He has his collection of facts and figures. He’s even intellectual in his lewd talk: “Succotash my Balzac, dipshiitake!” Yeah, real charming.
 
However his father’s death still upsets him. He died in the first tower and his body was never found. His mother held a fake funeral with an empty coffin in hopes that it would help them both heal. But Oskar is still hurting and lonely to the point he has distanced himself from his mother and even hurts himself physically. He still has the answering machine of the last six messages his father left before he was killed and replays all but the sixth and last one often, something he has hidden from his mother and replaced with a new answering machine on ‘the worst day’. The only person he talks to regularly is his grandmother who lives in an apartment next door..He feels that the missing ‘puzzle piece’ from the last scavenger hunt he had with his father could keep him from losing the spirit of his father altogether. The quest is to find out what to search for and find it.
 
One year later while Oskar goes through his father’s clothes and olf belongings, he accidentally breaks a vase. In it is a key inside a small envelope with the name black. Oskar believes this key may be the clue to the last scavenger hunt. He looks in the phone book for all the people in New York named Black: over 400 in total. He vows to search every Saturday for the person with the last name Black who knew his father and refuses to quit until its done. He won’t take any public transit, has a camera to keep a scrapbook of all the Blacks he sees, and he walks shaking his tambourine to keep his sanity while dealing with the world.
 
The first Black he sees is Abby Black, a woman just recently divorced form her husband. She says he doesn’t know his father. He visits other people named Black who don’t know his father but reach out to him: one hugs, one offers her prayer group to pray over him, another is a cross dresser, another gives him a ride upon her horse. One day, Oskar goes to visit his grandmother but meets the man his grandmother refers to as ‘the renter’.’The renter’ doesn’t talk because of witnessing a bombing during his childhood. The two become friends in the search and he learns from the man when to intervene and how to face his fears. Oskar stars to sens that the man is in fact his grandfather. Oskar even plays the messages from ‘the worst day’ for the stranger but he cannot bear to hear and demands it to stop before hearing the sixth and last message. The renter than moves out and begs Oskar not to search anymore.
 
When all seemed lost, Oskar notes a phone number on the newspaper clipping his father left a hint. It returns him to Abby Black. It turns out her ex-husband, whom she was divorcing the first time she met Oskar, may know about the key. He does meet with Mr. Black and learns about the key only to learn it’s not for Oskar at all. Disappointed and disheartened, Oskar destroys everything from his search until he learns that his mother was secretly helping him all along and even contacted all the Blacks even before Oskar had visited. Oskar compiles a scrapbook of his search and is able to find the last link of the scavenger hunt in the most overlooked of places. His fears had been conquered.
 
One strength of the movie is that it uses a creative puzzle and the Oskar’s intellectual way of thinking to help Oskar through the healing process and conquering the simplest of his fears. The scavenger hunt becomes like the journey to healing and along the way the healing comes in the moment he least expects it. The scavenger hunt is also that connection where Oskar searches for that connection that keeps him from being completely lost form his father. He finds it and learns that his bond with his father is still alive and something that ‘the worst day’ can never take away. Another thing Oskar receives is the love and care from people he never met before. It was all the people with the surname Black he encountered that shares some amount of care for him from the start of his journey to the end. It was also where his relationship with his mother heals. It was her own help with Oskar’s mission that showed the bond between the two never died. It also helped her heal too.
 
One glitch with the movie is that it doesn’t make the best of efforts of being watchable. Yes, the movie has the theme of healing but many times it focuses on the pain Oskar and his mother are going through. Especially the scenes where Oskar is shown with self-inflicted scabs. There were many times I was sitting there feeling that there would be many movie audients turned off this movie. People who have lost loved ones in 9/11 may themselves find the movie uncomfortable to watch too. Another glitch is that many feel this is a flawed look at autism. There’s no mention of autism in the movie but it has been sensed by many critics.
 
Tom Hanks did a good job of character acting as Thomas Schell, the intellectual father who always taught in character. Sandra Bullock was also very good as the grieving wife and mother. Max von Sydow was the biggest standout amongst the supporting actors playing the mute renter. Interesting how silence can make a role more that dialogue in a lot of cases. Without a doubt, the movie belonged to young Thomas Horn. This is his first ever acting role and he shines as the boy who’s both brilliant, puzzled, grieving, driven and eccentric. He doesn’t play a sugar-coated child character but one who’s very three-dimensional. Stephen Daldry is one lucky director. Ever since his first feature Billy Elliot, each of his four feature films have earned him either a Best Director Oscar nomination and/or receive Best Picture nomination. This is his fourth feature but the first one where he wasn’t nominated for Best Director. Nevertheless he does another excellent job in directing. Eric Roth does and excellent, if not glitchy, scriptwriting effort that makes this story as much our puzzle as it is Oskar’s puzzle. The score from Alexandre Desplat also fit the movie well.
 
Extremely Loud And Incredibly Close is a good adaptation of a 9/11 novel but it’s not the best at being a watchable 9/11 movie which has always been a difficult task. The effort to create a mostly watchable 9/11 movie continues.
 
And there you have it. I have now finished reviewing all the Best Picture nominees of 2011. My Oscar predictions are coming Friday.