Well, the Oscars are over.  I was right about a few things, wrong about some others (I knew The Social Network wasn’t actually going to win Best Picture, but the bragging rights of being right would have been more powerful than the mild embarassment of being wrong).  But with that comes the end of the awards season.  The annual vaulting of a handful of films, many of which will be hence forgotten.  And now it’s just a waiting game until late spring when the blockbusters come out and we can forget our troubles.

But I don’t want to!  So I’ve decided to do something a little different around here.  I am officially instating Adventures in Pop Culture’s first ever theme month!  And what better theme to come off the tail of the Oscars than horrible, horrible movies?  All this month, I will be watching and reviewing films of varying degrees of ill repute.  From camp classics, glaring examples of sheer ineptitude, and films that are hyper-focused on non-discerning demographics.  I will subject myself to them all (well, 13 of them anyway, I’m not actually getting paid for this, you know).

Here’s the schedule:

• March 1st: Plan 9 From Outer Space
• March 3rd: Jennifer’s Body
• March 7th: The Wicker Man (Nicholas Cage version, obviously)
• March 9th: Meet The Spartans
• March 11th: The Room
• March 15th: Troll 2
• March 17th: Twilight
• March 21st: Battlefield Earth
• March 23rd: Gamer/The Ugly Truth (Gerard Butler Double Feature)
• March 25th: Remember Me
• March 29th: The Happening
• March 31st: Manos: Hands of Fate (MST3K Edition [for catharsis])

So stay tuned all this month.  It should be… interesting.  If nothing else, it will give me ample opportunities to unleash some vitriol, which may not be conducive to open discussion, but sure is a heck of a lot of fun.  And keep coming back to Adventures in Pop Culture in the future, because depending on how this goes, theme months may prove to be a more common occurrence around here.

Posted under Kyle's Adventures in Pop Culture

It’s almost here!  The day that non-cynical (or mostly non-cynical) movie lovers the world over look forward to all year!  The 83rd Academy Awards air on Sunday (on WQOW, can I get a raise now?) and given that there have been 82 of these, I’m going to assume you’re familiar with the process, and I’m just gonna jump right into it, mmm-kay?  Right, let’s begin.

Best Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

Nominees:

• 127 Hours: Danny Boyle, Simon Beaufoy
• The Social Network: Aaron Sorkin
• Toy Story 3: Michael Arndt, John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton, Lee Unkrich
• True Grit: Joel Coen, Ethan Coen
• Winter’s Bone: Debra Granik, Anne Rosellini

Who will win?

There is no scenario in which Aaron Sorkin doesn’t walk away with the statuette on Sunday.  His motor-mouthed screenplay made The Social Network crackle, he has been rewarded with pretty much every writing award there is, and there is no reason to believe the Academy won’t do the same.  It will be a well-deserved victory for a tremendous script.

Who should win?

Aaron Sorkin deserves to win this award, however if it turns out that the Academy lost it’s mind and didn’t vote for Sorkin, I’d be okay with it as long as the Oscar went, instead, to the team behind Toy Story 3.  With a screenplay that alternates between moments of unfiltered joy and heart-wrenching despair (in a kids’ film, to boot!), Lasseter and Co. continued to prove why nobody can match Pixar at what they do.

Best Writing (Original Screenplay)

Nominees:

• Another Year: Mike Leigh
• The Fighter: Scott Silver, Paul Tamasy, Eric Johnson, Keith Dorrington
• Inception: Christopher Nolan
• The Kids Are All Right: Lisa Cholodenko, Stuart Blumberg
• The King’s Speech: David Seidler

Who will win?

I have a horrible sinking feeling that David Seidler may walk away with it for The King’s Speech, given that everybody (me included) loves that film, but if Christopher Nolan doesn’t win for his deftly labyrinthine script for Inception, I will probably throw something at my tv.

Who should win?

See above.

Best Supporting Actress

Nominees:

• Amy Adams: The Fighter
• Helena Bonham Carter: The King’s Speech
• Melissa Leo: The Fighter
• Hailee Steinfeld: True Grit
• Jacki Weaver: Animal Kingdom

Who will win?

This is, by far, the most interesting category of the year.  Literally all five of these women gave astonishing performances that are all equally deserving of awards.  The frontrunner is Melissa Leo, who absolutely disappeared into her role in The Fighter.  She’s been cleaning up this awards season, and I predict that an Oscar-sized void on her mantle will soon be filled.

Who should win?

The only thing that could potentially derail a victory for Leo is the sudden presence of newcomer Hailee Steinfeld, who, up until the Oscar nominations, had been recognized for a leading role (because, you know, it was).  And her powerful performance in True Grit, plus the heftiness of a leading role could potentially make for an upset victory.  And quite frankly, it wouldn’t be undeserved.

Best Supporting Actor

Nominees:

• Christian Bale: The Fighter
• John Hawkes: Winter’s Bone
• Jeremy Renner: The Town
• Mark Ruffalo: The Kids Are All Right
• Geoffrey Rush: The King’s Speech

Who will win?

For undergoing a physical transformation, portraying a real-life person, and adding humanity to a larger-than-life character, Christian Bale has this in a lock.  After a decade of dark, introspective roles, it was incredibly refreshing and an absolute joy to behold the natural charisma that Bale displayed in The Fighter.

Who should win?

The popular opinion on this one would be Geoffrey Rush for The King’s Speech, and while he was terrific in the film, it’s the kind of performance an actor of Rush’s caliber could give in his sleep.  No, instead if I were handing out the awards, I’d give this one to dark-horse candidate John Hawkes for his chilling performance in Winter’s Bone.  As the gruff uncle who’s family obligations finally overwhelm his self-preservation, Hawkes proved a powerful force, and it would be a thrill if the Academy recognized it.

Best Actress

Nominees:

• Annette Bening: The Kids Are All Right
• Nicole Kidman: Rabbit Hole
• Jennifer Lawrence: Winter’s Bone
• Natalie Portman: Black Swan
• Michelle Williams: Blue Valentine

Who will win?

For a shocking teeter-totter act that found her character veering wildly between chilling precision and unhinged instability, and for feeling natural throughout all of this, Natalie Portman absolutely deserves to (and will) win an Oscar for Black Swan.  Despite favoring roles slightly on the fringe of normality throughout her career, with this film Portman plumbed depths that I don’t think anybody thought she had.  Her natural pixie-ness is perfectly at odds with her role, and for as shocking as it was, it’s nice to see her getting the accolades she deserves.

Who should win?

I suppose I could talk about how powerful Annette Bening was in The Kids Are All Right, and she was, but that doesn’t change the fact that Natalie Portman absolutely deserves the Oscar this year.  Sorry Annette.

Best Actor

Nominees:

• Javier Bardem: Biutiful
• Jeff Bridges: True Grit
• Jesse Eisenberg: The Social Network
• Colin Firth: The King’s Speech
• James Franco: 127 Hours

Who will win?

This one’s a no-brainer, because there is no way that Colin Firth doesn’t win for The King’s Speech.  Let’s look at the facts, he portrayed a disability with dignity, he was playing somebody from real life, and he was (quite frankly) really freaking good.  Displaying a vulnerability at odds with his position of power, and for making us feel the devastation that that caused his character, Firth completely deserves this one.

Who should win?

Again, the person who should win is the person who will win.  The only possible contender, I think, is James Franco for 127 Hours, but that movie didn’t make nearly as much noise as the producers wanted, and as such he doesn’t stand a chance.

Best Director

Nominees:

• Darren Aronofsky: Black Swan
• Ethan Coen, Joel Coen: True Grit
• David Fincher: The Social Network
• Tom Hooper: The King’s Speech
• David O. Russell: The Fighter

Who will win?

This is where things get interesting, again.  There isn’t exactly a clear frontrunner in this category, however, since I’m making predictions, and “Mm… I dunno” isn’t a prediction, I’m going to say David Fincher will win for The Social Network.  Fincher stepped outside his comfort zone a bit, but still managed to provide a distinct visual style and rhythm to the film which went a long way towards endearing it to audiences.  However,  keep an eye out for Tom Hooper, who managed to take what could have been a very typical costume drama, and imbued it with a unique atmosphere and a dynamic visual style.

Who should win?

Well, if the question is which director in 2010 further proved himself a master technician and an expert story teller, that’s easy.  Unfortunately Christopher Nolan wasn’t nominated for directing Inception, which is a travesty that will forever live in infamy (a slight exaggeration, sure, but don’t underestimate nerds).  So of the nominated directors, who provided the most unique and well-executed vision?  Well, in those terms, the clear winner is Darren Aronofsky, who’s Black Swan proved to be the most shocking and viscerally exciting films of the year.

Best Picture

Nominees:

• 127 Hours
• Black Swan
• The Fighter
• Inception
• The Kids Are All Right
• The King’s Speech
• The Social Network
• Toy Story 3
• True Grit
• Winter’s Bone

Who will win?

The smart money is on The King’s Speech.  I admit that.  It’s the odds-on favorite, and in all likelihoods it will probably win.  HOWEVER!  I’m going against the grain, and I’m going to predict that The Social Network will take the top prize.  I know the Academy loves a costume drama, and The King’s Speech offered a unique take on an old formula, but I feel like the Academy (in it’s never-ending bid to seem hip) will jump at the chance to bestow the award to the cool internet movie.  I could be wrong though.

Who should win?

As I’ve said before, my pick for the best film of 2010 is Black Swan.  I know that the sensibilities required to thoroughly enjoy this film are much different than the ones that go into voting for Best Picture, but to me, no film captured my interest and held it for it’s entire runtime better than Aronofsky’s masterpiece.  Well… that, and Toy Story 3, that could win, too.

Miscellaneous

The engravers can probably just go ahead and get a head start on the award for Best Animated Feature, because Toy Story 3 has it in a lock.  I’d like Dogtooth to win Best Foreign Language film just because it might inspire some people to seek it out, and their reaction to the inherent weirdness of that film would be delightful.  And I hope Exit Through The Gift Shop wins Best Documentary, not only because it was the most entertaining documentary I’ve ever seen, but also because I want to see what Banksy will do for his acceptance.

Posted under Kyle's Adventures in Pop Culture

Being Human airs Mondays at 9/8 central on SyFy

Being Human has what, in a pre-Twilight era, could be considered a genius premise; a vampire, a werewolf, and a ghost share a house.  The problem is, though, that we are post-Twilight and you really need to come up with a new spin on the material to make your efforts worthwhile.  And the fact that Being Human is a remake of the British show of the same name is not exactly a great place to start.

I haven’t seen the original show, yet from what I hear, the American version is trying too hard to stay faithful and find it’s own voice, a tricky (and inadvisable) tightrope to walk.   From what I gather, it’s essentially finding different spins on the same storylines, rather than coming up with new storylines.  However, there’s also an air of the show just finding it’s footing, and using pre-established plots as a way of parcelling out the necessary exposition before moving on and doing it’s own thing.

From a creative stance it’s not the best start to a new show, but I’m pretty sure The Office went through the exact same thing, and look how that worked out.  So for now, I’m willing to give it the benefit of the doubt and see where it goes from here.  Because quite frankly, besides some unevenness, it’s actually a remarkably entertaining hour of television.

As alluded to, the show concerns a vampire named Aidan (Sam Witwer) and a werewolf named Josh (Sam Huntington) who have a friendship likely based mostly on the fact that they’re both monsters.  In a move that could help them feel more normal (Being Human, get it?) they decide to move into a house together.  But what the landlord didn’t tell them was that the house was already occupied, albeit not by someone the landlord could actually see.  The third housemate is Sally (Meaghan Rath), ghost.

Sally is newly dead and hasn’t spoken to anyone since her demise.  This is in stark contrast to Aidan who’s pushing two centuries of monster-dom and Josh, who’s got about two years under his belt, enough to get past the intial shock and come to terms with what he is.  Their experience with being other-worldly will help Sally get used to her new way of “life,” whereas Sally’s still fresh grip on humanity might just pull them out of their respective existential funks.

You see, there is some thick ennui going on up in here.  Being Human carries on in the Buffy tradition of treating the afterlife (and other supernatural conditions) as something to be mourned by those that aren’t indisputably evil.  After Josh was turned, he left school and everyone he loved without a word for fear of them getting hurt.  Sally was engaged to the love of her life when she was shuffled loose the mortal coil.  Aidan’s backstory hasn’t been filled in yet, but the guilt over all the bloodshed he caused has driven him to a diet of blood bags and angst.

All the actors play their parts well, Sam Witwer being the weakest link (in my opinion, anyway) solely because right now, his character is very similar to Angel from Buffy The Vampire Slayer (and, subsequently, Angel, of course).  And while Witwer is intriguing as Aidan, he lacks David Boreanaz’s natural charisma.  The important distinction to make between the two characters is that while Angel’s murderless “life” was thrust upon him (by Gypsies [darn Gypsies]) Aidan chose it himself.  Apparently in this world, the violence loses it’s luster, and all that remains is remorse.

Though not for all.  Still antagonizing Aidan is Bishop (played with wonderful malevolence by Mark Pellegrino), a leader of an as-yet-unspecified network of bloodsuckers.  Bishop was the vamp who initially sired Aidan and showed him the ropes.  It’s been less than subtly hinted that Aidan had a rather illustrious career as a demon before the grief took hold, and Bishop has been trying to bring him back into the fold ever since.

Here’s where my worries about the show come in.  With all three characters, it’s gradually being revealed that they are very much not alone in their, let’s say, conditions.  The vampire network, especially, has been conveyed as being rather large.  The problem: Being Human‘s budget is prohibitively small.  They can’t even afford high-quality digital effects to realistically portray Josh’s transformations (a big part of the show so far), so a mounting antagonism between Aidan and Bishop and his implied vampire army leads me to believe that at some point that will come to a head, and the resulting conflict could potentially be laughable in presentation.

But I must applaud the showrunners on their ambition.  Despite an obvious budget issue, they have still provided the show with a dynamic visual sense and a genuinely spooky atmosphere.  That, combined with compelling performances and a necessary sense of humor gives me hope that this show will carve out it’s own niche.  I don’t exactly expect it to reach a Buffy-level of quality, but if it keeps improving, I could see myself having a stake in it’s outcome.  Vampire puns, love it.

Posted under Kyle's Adventures in Pop Culture