dws1982 wrote:I will say, as much as I am a non-fan of Jojo Rabbit as a movie, some people consider Caging Skies, the novel it's based on, one of the great novels published since 2000. It's on my to-read list.
I read that Waititi didn't finish the book, so the film has little to do with it.
I like his previous movies and he seems a genial guy, but everything about his Oscar win makes me like him less.
Parasite and Little Women (any other year, it's The Irishman in adapted)
Little Women is one of the all-time great screenplay adaptations, in my opinion, one that not only adapts the source faithfully but exists in dialogue with the source novel. We may not have "needed" another adaptation of Little Women, but this one understands it and thinks more deeply about it than any other adaptation. I will say, as much as I am a non-fan of Jojo Rabbit as a movie, some people consider Caging Skies, the novel it's based on, one of the great novels published since 2000. It's on my to-read list.
While I need to watch Little Women again, I don't have much hesitation in giving it my vote because it has so many ideas about the text. The ending is such a satisfying thing to experience. Also, Greta Gerwig certainly deserves an award for writing and knowing that she can be freely honored here makes it easier to give it to Get Out in 2017.
I admire The Irishman as piece of writing. It's pretty incredible how it wraps up some half a century of American history into one narrative. And yet I find myself thinking of it as an achievement and less something I'm gobsmacked over. I'm most impressed with how they manage to create what feels like a canon explanation for the killing of Jimmy Hoffa, painting the picture of a guy who becomes so reckless he almost makes the decision for them. And it deserves some kind of credit for being the fastest three-and-a-half hour film in history. As I write this, I wonder if I'm underrating it a bit in this contest and perhaps if on a third viewing it might be a stronger contender in my mind for the win.
Jojo Rabbit is another film I'd like to see again. I possibly underrated it a bit because I've thought about it quite a lot since its release. I really do love the idea of a young Nazi with Hitler as his imaginary friend and eventually must be de-radicalized is a really wonderful pretty daring idea. And while I don't think his relationship with Thomasin McKenzie in the attic works quite as well as it should, it's a sweet idea. As I've written, I take some issue with the fact that Jojo turns away from Nazism largely due to the fact that he sees them lose as opposed to truly having a change of heart. I can only assume this is because Taika Watiki wants Jojo to kick Hitler out the window with a climactic "Fuck you, Hitler!" Which gets into the film's larger problem. With the exception of the macabre jokes about Jews, the humor is broad and lame. But I find myself admiring it from a distance.
I think Joker is more despised by those in my life than those on this board. I don't really know why. It's such a striking piece of filmmaking even if its derivative. I mean, I do know why. It was a movie everybody decided to hate very early on. It is very easy to find holes in the plot of this film. I'm just not sure how much I care because the narrator is so unreliable. I think I've observed this elsewhere on this board but Jonathan Rosenbaum likes it quite a bit because the movie never really asks us to identify with Arthur Fleck in anyway. It just wants us to observe him like a rat in a cage. That's certainly how I felt during the film and I wasn't put off as much as I thought I would be. But that doesn't change the fact that it's more of a visceral, emotional experience than anything else. The writing gets the job done in stringing together stuff that Todd Phillips wants to show us.
The Two Popes isn't in contention for me in the slightest. I'm not convinced it's really a story but a filmed incident desperately stretched out to film-length. There are some nicely observed moments between the two popes, mostly in the first third.
As is always the case, the later entries in the decade take a moment to settle in before they're acknowledged on Best of Decade lists. Do the Right Thing stands out as another example. Would anyone argue with its placement as one of the best of the 1980's? I have no doubt that in a handful of years we'll see Parasite near the top of more and more lists. I don't know who said it here (maybe it was elsewhere) but the key to its loyal fandom is that while it tackles timely subject matter (class disparity) it's such a great work of entertainment. It's class warfare made fun. I'll concede two plot twists that I wasn't in love with (letting the former maid in; Mr. Park's untimely end still feels unearned) but a great film and a great win.
And then a massive gulf to the next in line, which I suppose is... Knives Out? Rian Johnson's movies are weird. They always end up feeling like grab bags of nerdy influences he's stringing out into a story. The film's politics are excellent but the second act is a lame mystery. I bailed on the prospect of greatness with the film (and Johnson) early on and once that happens it's a pretty good time.
Or is it Marriage Story? Noah Baumbach's Academy breakthrough was a giant personal letdown for me. Increasingly, his films are detective stories examining rifts between relationships (siblings, parent-child, relationships, friends), so it's only fitting his divorce was mined at some point. Noah Baumbach remains one of my favorite filmmakers whose films I rarely love. I love the way he directs a film and there's always really great, beautiful writing (including here) but I rarely love the story. There are moments in Marriage Story that are incredible (especially Adam Driver's scene with the social worker) but I was largely un-devastated. Kramer vs. Kramer may not stand the test of time for its sexual politics but it packs a stronger emotional punch.
Or is it Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood? I've seen it two or three times now. I'm never going to love it. It's never going to happen because I hate Spaun Ranch. It's long, boring, and it lacks the punchline that Burt Reynolds' casting would have supplied. I'm not even in love with Margot Robbie's scenes as Sharon Tate going to see a movie of her own. Only Leonardo DiCaprio's disastrous-turned-miraculous day on set gave me what I wanted with surprise moments and genuine redemption. There's a lot to like in the film and DiCaprio and Pitt's on-screen friendship is very charming and in the end fairly moving, but I actively check out during 25% of the film.
It's not 1917. Can we all agree that Parasite's win would be less of a shock had this branch passed over this nomination for... well, then it becomes tricky. The WGA and BAFTA nominated Booksmart which I think has wonderful moments and a great spirit to it but doesn't have enough real conflicts for my taste. Pedro Almodvoar has been here before with Pain and Glory but it didn't quite prove to be a breakthrough for him. I still have yet to see it. Uncut Gems sadly didn't really cross over. What else?
Anyway, there's nothing to say about 1917's script besides it does a mostly fine job of maintaining tension, setting things up and paying them off... A friend once referred to it as "It's the best film I've ever seen where I couldn't tell you the characters names with a gun to my head." I'm very glad 1917 didn't win Best Picture but of its 10 nominations, this is probably the last one it deserved to win.
I saw Knives Out in the theater and enjoyed it. However, I think that all of the other movies listed above (in either category) are better than Knives Out, except for The Irishman.
OscarGuy wrote:Ugh do I dislike Knives Out. Everyone who fawned all over it has never read an Agatha Christie novel. It's the kind of plot she would have rejected because it's cheap and easy.
I’m 100% with you on this. Everyone I know loved it whilst I thought it was a very mediocre and predictable film.
While I agreed with all the year's acting awards, I was less cool with the awards handed out in other categories.
I voted for Sam Mendes and Kristy Wilson-Cairns' under-appreciated screenplay for 1917, and Steven Zaillian's complex screenplay for The Irishman, his best since Schindler's List.
How strange that a film like 1917, which won so many awards including 3 Oscars out of 10, should have its screenplay all but ignored. BAFTA, which nominated it for 9 awards and gave it 7 including Best Picture and Director, failed to even nominate its screenplay.
The Irishman, an early awards favorite, seemed to be nominated for everything but win practically nothing. Thelma Schoonmaker got a couple of minor awards for her always brilliant editing, but that was about it.
So, a toast to the underdogs in the writing categories.
Ugh do I dislike Knives Out. Everyone who fawned all over it has never read an Agatha Christie novel. It's the kind of plot she would have rejected because it's cheap and easy.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Share your thoughts on the screenplays nominated last year.
If that's fine on Wednesday I'll post Best Cinematography and on Saturday Best Picture and Director, in order to wrap up these categories for once and for all. Next Monday we all know that Oscar nominations are going to be revealed, so I wouldn't like to hold that conversation up with these categories that already feel a very distant past, so I think it would be more appropriate to close the race this week before this year's announcement.
"Rage, rage against the dying of the light". - Dylan Thomas
