In Contention

Tag: Biutiful

  • OFF THE CARPET: ‘Inception’ to the rule?

    As I look over the last week of activity, believe me, I’m as over-inundated with “Inception” talk as the next guy. But it is the film that captured a collective imagination throughout the country this weekend and, therefore, it has been a mainstay on the front page.

    I purposely held the latest Oscar column until today because I wanted to see how profound its release would truly be. I wanted to know what kind of a mark it would make at the box office, how the masses would react, how the critics would leverage it this way or that. And I haven’t come up with anything more or less definitive, in my mind, than what I’ve already mapped out.

    In the world of Oscar, there might just be three Best Picture nominees already in the marketplace, as Nathaniel Rogers shrewdly noted in a recent column. That’s actually kind of a miracle this early in the season. But it’s also interesting to note that each film — “Toy Story 3,” “The Kids Are All Right” and “Inception” — probably needed the extra five slots to make it in (assuming they all do get in).

    (more…)

  • OFF THE CARPET: Taking the temperature

    Now that we’re on the other side of Cannes, I felt it was a good time to put a finger to the wind, stare into the tea leaves, shake the magic 8-ball and basically just take stock of where we’re at roughly three months away from the start of the 2010-2011 film awards season.

    The festival, covered diligently by Guy Lodge around these parts (we thank him), brought little to write home about where Oscar potential is concerned.  The truth is, it rarely does.  But as the year takes shape, things start to linger.  A film like “Inglourious Basterds” can transform muted if appreciative response on the Croisette into a foaming-at-the-mouth bid for a surprise upset in just a few months’ time.

    The big narrative stand-outs for most were Alejandro González Iñárritu’s “Biutiful” and Mike Leigh’s “Another Year.” Perhaps the latter has an easier Oscar path ahead, given that it was more unanimously accepted and could ultimately be a soft lob for Academy types.  Sony Pictures Classics swooped in and nailed down domestic distribution, so I think we’re looking at a bona fide Best Picture nominee to go along with likely bids for Best Actress (Lesley Manville) and the usual expected tip of the hat from Leigh’s fellow screenwriters.  Maybe even a Best Director nod, too.  And yet the film didn’t win a single festival prize.  See how this works?

    (more…)

  • CANNES: What will win… and what should

    Okay, so that took longer than I expected. I had hoped to get this post up last night, but instead got quite easily talked into a night on the tiles with a band of merry Film Dweebs led by James Rocchi — not the wisest idea with a morning flight to catch, but by the time we found ourselves in a friendly 3am chat with Atom Egoyan about our respective issues with the ending of “Chloe,” that hardly seemed important. (Name dropped and duly picked up. Apologies.)

    Anyway, after a smooth morning’s traveling, I am now writing to you from my North London living room — not quite as glamorous as the Croisette, though surprisingly, just as sun-splashed.

    In a few hours, Cannes 2010 will come to a close as Tim Burton and his fellow jurors reveal their selections for the best of the fest, perhaps shedding some light on the burning question I’ve asked myself after every Competition screening: “But what does Kate Beckinsale think?”

    (More analysis, and full list of predictions and preferences, after the cut.)

    (more…)

  • Letters from Cannes

    Today’s Cannes schedule has only allowed for one-and-a-quarter films, which at least means I’ll be able to catch up on yesterday’s review backlog later. For now, though, it’s off to one function I didn’t have to work very hard to get invited to — the London Film School (my alma mater) reception, with Mike Leigh as guest of honor.

    Then it’s a dip into the Edinburgh Film Festival party — which can be counted on for good chat and free whiskey — before I get myself all tuxed up and hit the red carpet for tonight’s gala screening of “Certified Copy.” (Yes, I’m seeing it twice in two days — it’s that good.) So I’m afraid there won’t be more reviews for a good few hours, though you can catch my Twittered thoughts on Sundance-to-Cannes indie hit “Blue Valentine.”

    Two things to plug before I go, however. One disadvantage about being on the ground at Cannes is that I haven’t the time to read and round up fellow critical reactions, so indieWIRE’s criticWIRE Cannes Guide, collecting the scores of a wide range of critics and bloggers, is something of a godsend.

    (more…)

  • Dweebs vs. Hot Dog Eaters

    (UPDATE: While he’s good and fired up, Jeff takes the opportunity to slam the “effete critics” who don’t like “Biutiful” as “coming from a stifled and constipated place.”)

    Hot dog eaters? Hey, you asked for more double entendres, though I’m guessing Jeff Wells doesn’t quite mean it that that way.

    I’ve been a fan for many years of Hollywood Elsewhere’s energetic, unguarded and often unhinged Cannes coverage, even — no, especially — when I suspected I’d eventually disagree with him on the films, once I saw them. Actually being at the fest, however, affords me the chance to disagree with him both immediately and in person — as we did last night, on Abbas Kiarostami’s rapturous Competition standout “Certified Copy.” (More on that anon.) What I like about Wells is that he’ll cheerfully join you for a drink mere minutes after posting this:

    Abbas Kiarostami’s Copie Conforme (a.k.a., Certified Copy) is what most hot-dog-eating humans on the planet earth would call a “dead movie” … However, if you’re a member in good standing of Film Dweeb Nation, a presumably human but possibly alien culture which tends to favor and in some cases worship the imaginations of sunlight found in anal cavities, you’ll stroll into the Orange press cafe just after the screening of Copie Conforme, like a certain British journalist did 20 or 25 minutes ago, and go “oh, I loved it!” I looked at this guy incredulously and said, “Hold up, let me get this straight. You didn’t like the Inarritu [i.e., Biutiful] but you liked Copie Conforme?”

    I can’t imagine which journalist he’s talking about … any ideas?

  • SHORT TAKE: “Biutiful” (**1/2)

    Cannes Film Festival

    “How much does life weigh?” asked Alejandro González Iñárritu’s sophomore feature “21 Grams” – and while the literal answer was there in the title, it’s been clear from the rich buffet of human suffering in his films thus far that he believes it weighs rather a lot indeed.

    Brace yourselves, then, for “Biutiful,” an effortfully solemn amalgamation of personal crises and social concerns from the director’s previous films that might consider going by the tagline: “Life’s about to get heavier.”

    If that’s an overly glib response to an evidently considered and compassionate personal statement on González Iñárritu’s part – it’s his first feature to spring from his own (co-written) screenplay, after all – I apologize. There’s nothing like bleary-eyed festival fatigue to shorten one’s patience with films that fall a little short of either potential or expectation.

    But it takes more than undisputed sincerity to make a film that resonates, and “Biutiful” paints from too limited an emotional palette for its high-stakes story of parental duty, in the face of hovering mortality, to hit home the way it should.

    (more…)

  • ‘Biutiful’ reactions reflect a tale of two movies

    Guy hasn’t pulled his full review of Alejandro González Iñárritu’s “Biutiful” together yet, though he will shortly.  Directly after this morning’s Cannes screening, he Tweeted that the film was “critically unfocused and emotionally muted,” and that “Inarittu clearly needs to kiss and make up with Arriaga.”  And judging by some of the reactions coming out of the theater, he wasn’t alone.

    MSN’s James Rocchi, always a tough sell on films of the Iñárritu breed, mind you, called the film “[m]oving, yes, but I’m unsure about what it’s moving for; Bardem superb, but morally murky melodrama’s depression lacks direction,” while Variety’s Justin Chang wasn’t that far behind: “The grinding arthouse equivalent of ‘The Pursuit of Happyness,’” he called it.

    Chang has one of only three full reviews I’ve come across so far.  The other two come from Sukhdev Sandhu at London’s Telegraph (a pan), and Kirk Honeycutt at The Hollywood Reporter (a rave).

    (more…)

  • First images, teaser poster for ‘Biutiful’

    As I mentioned in my Cannes preview, Alejandro González Iñárritu’s “Biutiful” is the director’s first Spanish-language effort since his 2000 debut “Amores Perros.” That, combined with the star power of Javier Bardem, means more eyes on this one than most of its Competition rivals. Thanks to D*Hollywood for the film’s Cannes poster. Two stills after the cut.

    (By the way, the third and final part of my Cannes preview will go up tomorrow. Apologies for the delay.)

    (more…)

  • CANNES PREVIEW: Sizing up the Competition, part one

    (This is the first of three Cannes preview pieces we’re running before my festival coverage begins on Wednesday. The first two will break down the 18 films in the running for this year’s Palme d’Or; the third will comb through potential highlights that lie outside the Competition, as well as listing my own most anticipated titles of the festival.)

    The groans were almost audible from across the Atlantic as Cannes festival director Thierry Frémaux unveiled this year’s Competition lineup, unusually trim at 16 (eventually 18) titles, and shorter than expected on big-ticket auteurs. Where was Terrence Malick, journos wailed. (Not yet ready, ran the simple answer.) Where were Julian Schnabel, Olivier Assayas, Darren Aronofsky? (Not wanted, not eligible, and not ready, respectively.)

    As they looked down the very global-flavored list — only two English-language films, only one of them American — more than one blogger suggested that Cannes may not be worth the trip this year.

    I say it’s too soon to be disappointed. Frémaux and his team have hardly been obscure in their choices: the list abounds with esteemed critical pets ranging from Mike Leigh to Abbas Kiarostami, Alejandro González Iñárritu to Apichatpong Weereasethakul. It is perhaps a more granola selection than last year’s all-star lineup of Almodóvar, Haneke, Campion, Von Trier, et al, but that one drew just as many accusations (justified, I think) of being too insular and unadventurous — 19 of the 20 directors chosen had been in Competition before. Frémaux, it seems, can’t win.

    (more…)

  • Cannes official selection unveiled, includes Leigh, Iñárritu

    Okay, before you ask, “The Tree of Life” is reportedly not ready — though the Cannes selection has apparently seen a cut, so never say never. Four slots in the competition lineup have yet to be filled.

    That aside, many of the expected names are present and correct, including former Cannes champs Leigh, Kiarostami, Mikhalkov, Tavernier, Weerasethakul and González Iñárritu. (Beefing up the veteran auteur quotient, Jean-Luc Godard shows up in the very appetizing Un Certain Regard strand, as does 101 year-old Manoel de Oliveira.)

    On paper — which is all we have at the moment, after all — it’s the first two of the aforementioned directors that I’m most excited to see in competition: “Another Year” will mark Leigh’s first trip to Croisette since the undervalued “All or Nothing” in 2002, and boasts the almost unfeasibly Leigh-ian cast of Imelda Staunton, Jim Broadbent, Phil Davis and Lesley Manville.

    Meanwhile, Kiarostami’s “Certified Copy” — a romantic drama starring Juliette Binoche, and the director’s first film to be shot outside his native Iran — has had me curious for the better part of two years now. I sensed this might be afoot when Binoche was revealed as the official face of this year’s festival.

    (More thoughts, and a complete list of films in the official selection, after the cut.)

    (more…)

  • TECH SUPPORT: Best Film Editing — Volume I

    (from left) Leonardo DiCaprio and Michelle Williams in Shutter IslandBest Achievement in Film Editing.  It’s a difficult phrase to define.  To a large extent, excellence in film editing can be editing which blends into the film, allowing the director’s vision, screenwriter’s story and actors’ performances to shine without interference.  But equally, a film that stands out as a showcase for flashy but motivated construction deserves recognition as well.

    What is certain, however, is that in the absence of editors, our films would all be more than three hours long, largely incoherent and/or tremendously boring.

    This category has historically displayed a strong correlation to the Best Picture line-up.  Last year marked a return to a typical situation – four of the five films nominated for Best Film Editing were also nominated for Best Picture, with the fifth being an action film.

    From 2005 through 2007, however, things were a bit shaken up with a two-to-five ratio.  At the end of the day, however, Best Picture contenders, thrillers and actions films always do quite well here.

    The other genre that frequently finds a home in this category is musicals.  Cutting dance numbers coherently and blending between dialogue and songs consistently clearly impresses this branch.  In light of this, I’d call “Nine”’s Claire Simpson the early favorite.  A past winner for “Platoon,” she returned to the game after a 19 year absence two years ago with “The Constant Gardener.”  Barring the film flopping, I’d say Simpson is good to go.

    (more…)

  • TECH SUPPORT: Best Cinematography – Volume I

    Saoirse Ronan in The Lovely BonesLIGHTS…CAMERA…you were probably waiting for the word “action,” no? Action is, after all, what many individuals go to a film to see. But the “lights” and the “camera” in this classic phrase bring a film beyond a book or a radio show…and capture the “action.”

    The individuals who paint the images of cinema with light and composition are rewarded in the Oscar category of Best Cinematography. Cinematographers are pivotal in the making of any film and it is thus unsurprising that directors often continuously work with the similar camera heads.

    Like many cinephiles, I must say this is my favorite of the so-called “technical” categories and I eagerly anticipate the race every year.  This year is no exception.

    Australian D.P. Dion Beebe might seem to be leading this year’s lenser race with his third collaboration with Rob Marshall, the musical adaptation “Nine.” Despite not being cited by the Academy for some of his more innovative work (see Michael Mann’s “Collateral”), Beebe has been previously nominated for 2002’s “Chicago” and won the Oscar in 2005 for “Memoirs of a Geisha.” “Nine” will give him the opportunity to pay homage to Federico Fellini while also capturing sprawling musical numbers, a feat this category tends to reward.

    (more…)

  • Mendes hiccup

    (from left) John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph in Away We GoI’ve been on board for most every Sam Mendes film since the director made his heralded debut in 1999.  Even “Jarhead,” which was a big disappointment, had a lot of interesting ideas concerning the alienation of war and its effects on soldiers.

    I still think  last year’s “Revolutionary Road” (DVD coverage from John here) was a sublime work of art, but “Road to Perdition” probably remains his best work to date.  It’s an intriguing portfolio.  But “Away We Go” has been a troubling speed bump for me.

    I saw the film weeks ago and wanted to give it another go before committing to an opinion, but I don’t know.  The desire to wallow in its stereotypes and weirdly skewed view of the world just hasn’t been there.

    Variety’s Dennis Harvey has written a review that kind of sums up my feelings, for the most part.  I might not have been as harsh, but I understand feeling the need to do so:

    …the protags are essentially blank slates, despite the skill and charm Krasinski and Rudolph bring to the roles. It’s their job simply to represent “normal” against so many illustrations of bad parenting, worse marriages and damaged adulthood. But given they’re such harmlessly pleasant folk, why don’t they have any non-messed-up friends?

    Because that would un-stack the deck in a script that needs to paint them as two lonely souls in a hostile world. But in positing normal as special, the pic requires caricaturing almost everyone else.

    While handled by resourceful actors, the foibles of the supporting characters are less funny than they are forced and unpleasant. Janney and Gyllenhaal in particular play figures venomously conceived.

    Meant to amp up the pic’s indie-quirky cred, the soundtrack, papered with lyrically trite soundalike cuts by Scottish singer-songwriter Alexi Murdoch, instead makes progress seem more meandering and monotonous. Other design/tech contributions are solid. Still, this alternately condescending and hazy material doesn’t trigger the kind of sharp aesthetic choices Mendes and collaborators made in response to past projects from “American Beauty” to “Revolutionary Road.”

    (more…)

  • OFF THE CARPET: Handicapping 2009 a year in advance!?

    Ewan McGregor and Hilary Swank in AmeliaAhh.  The dust is settling.  And on the horizon, just visible through the mist and waiting to drive us all up the wall once again: the 2009 Oscar season.

    I’ve been writing this year-in-advance column for probably six years now, and I always look forward to gazing ahead.  No one dives in so pathetically deep this far out as yours truly, but in exchange for not having a life for the past few months, I get to unload this burden the day after our annual season’s peak and forget about little gold men entirely for a few months.

    It’s quite liberating.

    The most interesting thing about the season to come, from my vantage point, is the lack of a dreaded “frontrunner status” for any of the contenders.  Some might say Clint Eastwood’s Nelson Mandela project (which is not called “The Human Factor,” mind you — the director says the film is currently untitled and is based on John Carlin’s book “Playing the Enemy”).

    Others might say Rob Marshall’s “Nine” (coming from a money-tight company hoping to avoid echoes of “Memoirs of a Geisha”).  But I don’t see a “Geisha” from here, or a “Charlie Wilson’s War,” expected heavies waiting to miss the mark.  The field is curiously flat, and as a result, excitingly broad.

    Let’s get to it, shall we?

    (more…)