OSCAR 2012: Calling all potent telecast directors!

Mary Poppins' abound in the Danny Boyle
produced Olympics opening ceremony

We're likely just on the outside of people starting to wonder when the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences are going to pick out their producer(s), and then subsequently host, for the 85th Annual Academy Awards telecast. Usually the latter is the talk of the net, but equally, and actually even more important is the producer behind the show. We all know the kerfuffle that ensued last year on behalf of Brett Ratner's ill-timed comments that forced him and Eddie Murphy out of proceedings. It is kind of a shame, because I would have liked to see what Eddie Murphy would have done with that opportunity. Less interested in Ratner, but that thing passed for a reason.

Brian Grazer and Don Mischer produced this past year's show, which wasn't really that unpleasant a thing if we're to be perfectly honest. A bit predictable, corny, and safe even, but it was still a brisk and enjoyable night of celebration, and the only major letdown had to do with somebody winning an award which rightfully belonged to another. Billy Crystal was the right choice for where the Academy was at that point in time, calling back to its past in an exuberant manner, and making us all feel generally at home. It was, or at least it should be, a gentle goodbye to what was difficult time in the history of the awards ceremony.

Quick Takes: "Alien", "Elena", "Mulan", "Minority Report"

"Alien" (**1/2)

Directed by Ridley Scott

This could very well cause to enrage people, and it already has if you follow my actions on twitter, but the moment I sat down to take on "Alien" for this week's TOP 10 SHOTS column, I realized it couldn't possibly work. Why not? Because there is so desperately little going on in this film. Ridley Scott is devoted to creating an intense horror aesthetic, and there's some truly honest effort there. But it only works, in this case, if we care about why this is happening, and who it is happening to. The characters are etched so thin as to offer nothing distinct about them. Them being there is a product of happenstance, like any other horror flick. There's just not that much cinematically to dig into. Don't worry, though, since you'll still have your share of Ridley Scott in this Friday's TOP 10 SHOTS column. It just won't be in the same vein as what Ridley's up to this year.

"Elena" (****)

Directed by Andrey Zvyagintsev

Russia seems to carry with a heap of apocalyptic baggage that it just cannot seem to get rid of. Even in a film that holds absolutely no apocalyptic subject matter, the grim specter of massive and inescapable death looms heavy over. That's the definitive stroke that makes Andrey Zvyagintsev's third feature, "Elena", so much more than the chilling character study that it already is. Though the first ten minutes lull you into the belief that you're in for a contained story comparable to that of Chantal Akerman's "Jeanne Dielman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles", it really expands to being something rather more maniacal. It's Zvyagintsev's analysis of family boundaries that truly piques the interest.

TOP 10 SHOTS from "A.I. Artificial Intelligence"

In searching for a film to tackle cinematically for this week's segment, I kept running into road blocks. Seeing as "The Hunger Games" is arriving to much anticipation this weekend, it felt necessary to find something that ties into it, which is easier said than done. At first my mind went immediately to "Winter's Bone", also from Lionsgate and also starring Jennifer Lawrence. But once I got into it, I realized that the film isn't visually all that intriguing. As impressive a film as it is, it gets of by the grit of Debra Granik's teeth and the performances from John Hawkes and Jennifer Lawrence. More of the latter actor in my book. Lawrence's performance is undeniably tough, but sadly overrated.

Moving on from there, I went to Gary Ross' prior filmography for inspiration. No vein in my body wants to see "Seabiscuit" ever again. That film has caused me too much grief already. I do, however, have a compulsion to revisiting "Pleasantville" at some point, either for this segment or not. If nothing else, I remember the film being quietly arousing. With Ross out of the way, I looked briefly at cinematographer Tom Stern, but most of his experience comes from dreary and repetitive work on Clint Eastwood's body of work. No luck there, and I leave everyone involved in the film in the dust.

Film Review: "The Adventures of Tintin"

Let it be known, that the Spielbergian adventure flick has not gone out of style. Three years after he stained his career image permanently with "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull", Spielberg puts out two films this year. One of them is the Oscar play, as much expected and maligned by myself. But to be perfectly honest, it's always been his more commercial plays that caught my attention, which is an ironic reversal of how things usually work. It's when he's not searching for meaning, and rather searching for thrills, that he strikes his strongest films, and also his weakest, but they are anything but banal. How is he the exception to the rule? An experience in cinema that is both his gift and his bane.

"The Adventures of Tintin" isn't an explosive return to greatness for Steven Spielberg, but it is a rollicking ride of a film. Based on the Herge comic series, the first film in Spielberg and Peter Jackson's co-operative film trilogy spends no immense amount of time establishing the Tintin character. From the first minute after the uppity animated opening, he's shown as eager, ambitious, and pretty much your zero qualms protagonist. Does he need to be a lot more? No, but we would damn sure like him to be. If Herge never gave him ample dimension, writers Steve Moffat, Edgar Wright, and Joe Cornish could have taken a bit of license with this one. But it's never really distracting, so there's that.

For Your Anticipation: Why Do You Ask?

It's a touch of irony that Spielberg's strongest film this year is the commercial play, but also well in keeping with the times. "The Adventures of Tintin" is a far cry from Spielberg's opposing film "War Horse", as well as an hour shorter. It's big. It's adventurous. And it's using the emotion diluting efforts of motion capture, which still don't quite work. All the same, I don't think I ever said that this was going to be anything other than fun, which it still seems to be.

"The Adventures of Tintin" Trailer

In the wake for its London premiere, "The Adventures of Tintin" has come out as the oddest little delight. Sure, it's easy to undercut its merits with things like its Spielbergian heritage and the reprehension to motion capture, but it's always looked like decent fun. And reviews have certainly helped form that persona, and what was once a skeptical effort is now gaining a great deal of clamor and appreciation. There's a likelihood that this probably will be the best Spielberg film this year, much to the fall of "War Horse".

"War Horse" Theatrical Trailer

There's a lot more of the same in the new trailer for Steven Spielberg's "War Horse", and why the hell shouldn't there be? After all, the teaser trailer played brilliantly with pretty much every demographic, and even those who weren't quite so taken with it could still admire it as a trailer. But, it's still all there in the trailer. It's a war film. There's a devoted horse trying to get back home. There's a boy who loved the horse, though NOT in the same way as "Equus". And there's that Niels Arestrup line, which got people illogically pushing for a Supp. Actor nod, even though his presence in the film is likely confined to that scene. And somewhere along the way there are cameos from Emily Watson, Peter Mullan, David Thewlis, Benedict Cumberbatch, and Tom Hiddleston. What more do we need to know? We'll see it. That will certainly happen.

The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of The Unicorn" Trailer

I guess it was silly to get my hopes up for this one based on that teaser. Yes, there were a few overtly evident lines, but it looked pretty exciting. This more entire look is still pretty, but it's drowned out by the murky and all too self-important dialogue. I guess this one is playing to the kiddie crowd first and foremost, and that leaves me dissatisfied. So it was fun while it lasted, but The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn is now largely dismissive. 

What A Piece of Work is "A.I."

It came upon me, completely by accident, that this weekend celebrates the 10th anniversary of Steven Spielberg's 2001 science-fiction feature A.I. Artificial Intelligence. As the years have come and gone, many have talked about the film's numerous merits and pitfalls, and I admit to trepidation of my own. To this day, I still can't quite embrace what Spielberg and the late great Stanley Kubrick have come together to create, but that's not to say that I can't appreciate it. An earnest supporter of creative and outstanding science-fiction, as evidenced by my constant backing of Fringe, A.I. still maintains a sort of heightened excitement for me.

What pushes me back is the central discomfort of the fusion of robot and child, as the two have time and time again proved a lethal combination. I fear to reference recent science-fiction short Blinky, as it still is fighting its way into my nightmares. To that affect, A.I. is something of a sweet refresher, but still greatly disturbing. In the first forty minutes of the film, David, played by Haley Joel Osment, is as stale, creepy, and uncomfortable a child as possible. In truth, that's by complete intention. The real standout is the eighty minutes that follow, and the journey David undergoes.

There is quite a bit of this film that is kind of ridiculous and over-the-top, but doesn't that usually come of even the best science-fiction? The world painted in the film is a deeply cynical one, and while many would like to contribute that as Kubrick's last brilliant move, much of that came from Spielberg. At the turn of the millennium, Spielberg was at the top of his game. He contains a near seamless array of science-fiction ideas, whilst most films buckle under the rules of their own sci-fi concept. I may never be able to embrace this as a work of true genius, but I am able to acknowledge it. Janusz Kaminski's beautiful cinematography help aid Spielberg in his most expressionistic and ambitious of works.

"War Horse" Teaser Trailer

Certainly looks to me like Spielberg has got an Oscar in the bag on this one, and you can take that as either a compliment or a rejection. This film looks to have pretty much everything that the Academy looks for, with all the sentimentality that sold them on The King's Speech. If we're going off of what they recently did, War Horse is a lock for a nomination. Yes, you could say that I'm making the call a bit early, but this is the sort of phony prestige that they fawn over. Yes, it's pretty, but I can't imagine there being much more to it. I know it's Spielberg, but he hasn't made anything really great, or that good, for nearly the past decade.

Film Review: "Super 8" (**1/2)

Looking back on the triad of decades from the 1970s to the 1990s, many people do call to mind Steven Spielberg amongst the more defining directors. He's made a great many high impact films such as E.T., Jaws, and Close Encounters of the Third Kind, but he's had a bit of a dry spell recently. Films like Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and War of the Worlds have given him something of a negative  reputation lately. So much can go right with a film like Super 8, and it does its best to be its own thing. While it doesn't hurt to have such a great director as inspiration, the films is a homage to the wrong sort of Spielberg.

The film opens on a sign listing days gone by since the last accident at a mill, and before the fact, I knew they were going to set it back to one. So no, the film gets no points for subtlety on this one. It then cuts to the wake for young Joe Lamb's mother, and we get the idea through dialogue that she did not go out well. It's at this point, with Joe sitting alone on the swing outside, I got the idea that Abrams was crafting a sibling to Matt Reeves' film adaptation Let Me In. In fact, I was beginning to expect the film to be something more than I expected.

Then the stray plot strand invades the film, and it is of course the main thing that has drawn audiences in to see this film. The main group of kids, working to make their own zombie film, shoot at a train station one evening just in time for a truck to derail an oncoming train. This particular sequence is where the film reaches its experiential high, because even if they don't build up the event quite as much as they should, the train wreck is a beauty to behold. It's an immediate onslaught of fire and terror, and while we know that the train has to stop blowing up at some point, we really wish it wouldn't.

For Your Anticipation: I Think You Should Look at This First

J.J.'s back in town with another film of his, and I know by now to stop and pay attention when Abrams has something to say. His influence has brought us fantastic films like Star Trek and Cloverfield, as well as lasting television epics like Lost, Fringe, and a few coming this fall. His latest film is an "original" effort, but it's really Abrams' encapsulation of his childhood more than anything. That includes inspiration from the films that he grew up with, not just Spielberg but mostly Spielberg. I can rely on Abrams delivering an authentic feeling 1970s atmosphere, but I have some narrative fears going into Super 8. I'm excited, but I can't help but expect something a tad bit disappointing.

"The Adventures of Tintin" Teaser

Apparently there are a lot of people who are extremely excited for The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn. The title is enough to make me question that, even if it is from one of the books the film is based on. Furthermore, I'm not at all a fan of motion-capture. I think it's a costly method of animation that fails at conveying further emotion. A $50 million animated film renders more success than a $150 million motion capture flick. That being said, it might well suit this particular film, and the trailer is enough to get me somewhat excited. It's only a teaser, so what more can we expect?

Film Review: Paul

Not exactly the Steven Spielberg tribute people had in mind heading into this year, with Super 8 still three months away, but Paul offers us purely and organically what most films this years have failed at. This isn't exactly a great piece of filmmaking, but for once we can't really mark that against it. Most times this year, films set the bar way too high for itself, like going for an epic gritty war film with Battle: Los Angeles, or a stylistic twist on the superhero genre with The Green Hornet. Both of those films overreached and failed, but Paul sets readily achievable goals for itself and deliver an enjoyable science fiction confection for those looking for some fresh entertainment.

The film follows two British comic book geeks, Clive and Graeme, who are on holiday in America checking out comic con and famous UFO hot-spots. En route to Area 51, they witness a horrific car accident, and out of the wreckage comes Paul, a gray-green alien whose stay on earth has gone beyond what he payed for. The two nerds team up with Paul to get him to the rendezvous point where his race is waiting to pick him up, and along the way they pick up Christian fanatic Ruth, played with gleeful abandon by Kristen Wiig. Even further complicating matters, they are sought after by two rookie FBI agents, Ruth's crazy father on "a mission from God", and the mysterious Lorenzo Zoil.

This is a fun science-fiction road trip film about a group of people thrown into a situation where they become great friends. Nick Frost and Simon Pegg play the main duo, so they have the best friend chemistry locked firmly down for any adventure they partake in. Seth Rogen's voice is strangely perfect for the titular character, offering a sort of charisma that usually goes beyond voice acting. Jason Bateman actually comes off as a believable bad-ass in the role of Agent Zoil. The true gem of this film is Kristen Wiig, who is always in a position to steal the show from her fellow actors. This film offers the perfect catalyst for her crazy adorable brand of humor. Of course, some may say this feature lacks something, but only because it doesn't reach out for anything more than it gets.

Frost and Pegg also wrote the film, and there's a certain intelligence to their brand of humor, bringing in the religious implications of an alien encounter without coming off as pretentious or radically offensive, but still never quite sticking the landing. Composer David Arnold is second to none when it comes to scoring action sequences, as he established in the underrated Quantum of Solace. Not to say he's amongst the greatest composers, but he's well suited to a specific style, and he just scrapes below his regular work here. I should also say that the visual effects on Paul were pretty great without being quite photo-realistic. It's less a Spielberg tribute than you might think, but Paul is an earnest entertainer, even if it fails to impress on more than a few aspects.

C+

Theatrical Trailer & Poster: Super 8

It's been a solid month since the Super 8 TV spot managed to stay on the minds of every viewer of the Super Bowl, and now we've finally got a full trailer for the film. In very much J.J. Abrams style, it answers a few questions and raises far more, but not without forgetting the heart. This film seems so elaborately steeped in old-style Spielbergian filmmaking, with a bunch of kids taking center stage to solve the problems the adults can't, an army take over of a small town, and strong themes of family troubles. What this monster looks like, we still don't know, and that's assuming it has a corporeal form. In any case, weird shit is happening in this town, and while some may gripe at the capability of the young actors, I find it a welcome return to the old days of the 1980's. As for the poster, it's honestly the most innovative thing I've seen in a while. Click on the image provided for a larger version!

Oscar 2010: Presenters Go In Pairs

From the way this looks, I'd say we're looking at a decent stab that the shortest Oscar telecast in a while. Perhaps it won't actually put people to sleep. On the other hand, this is an odd bunch, completely devoid of Tina Fey or Steve Martin. Such a shame, but there's that open space for Best Supporting Actress. Maybe they'll make a surprise appearance, but nothing is set. I just know that this will be a difficult ceremony to sit through if The King's Speech sweeps as many believe it will. I'm praying for an upset.

1. Art Direction (Tom Hanks)
2. Cinematography (ditto)
3. Supporting Actress (?)
4. Animated Feature (Justin Timberlake, Mila Kunis)
5. Animated Short Film (ditto)
6. Adapted Screenplay (Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin)
7. Original Screenplay (ditto)
8. Foreign Language Film (Russell Brand, Dame Helen Mirren)
9. Supporting Actor (Reese Witherspoon)
10. Original Score (Nicole Kidman, Hugh Jackman)
11. Sound Mixing (Matthew McConaughey, Scarlett Johansson)
12. Sound Editing (ditto)
13. Makeup (Cate Blanchett)
14. Costume Design (ditto)
15. Dcumentary Short Subject (Jake Gyllenhaal, Amy Adams)
16. Live Action Short Film (ditto)
17. Documentary (Oprah)
18. Visual Effects (Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law)
19. Editing (ditto)
20. Original Song (Jennifer Hudson)
21. Director (Hilary Swank, Kathryn Bigelow)
22. Actress (Jeff Bridges)
23. Actor (Sandra Bullock)
24. Picture (Steven Spielberg)

Welcome to "Terra Nova"

First Look: Adventures of Tintin

At this point, I can't help but beg such filmmakers as Steven Spielberg and Robert Zemeckis to just stop making animated films 100% from motion capture. Not only does it drain the characters of any emotion whatsoever, but it costs more than to make a simple Pixar/Dreamworks style animated feature. All this money is going towards a film that will likely feel too strange for audiences to truly embrace. I must admit, I was kind of looking forward to seeing what Stephen Spielberg and Peter Jackson would bring to The Adventures of Tintin, but I'd much rather see a couple of live actors do their best with the work than a few puppets made out of moist CG-clay. It pains me to see once great directors brought down to such a demeaning form of filmmaking. Anyway, here's your first look at Stephen Spielberg 2011 animated adventure, The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn. Yes. That seriously is the title of this film.