A Big Fucking Deal!

The profit motive has not been removed from America's Healthcare system. We haven't instituted single-payer, or even a Public Option to compete with insurance companies, which would have tempered that profit motive in the marketplace. Not only are Insurance Companies still in place, able to continue to chase profit, but they've been given 10's of millions of new customers to reward them for their opposition. Even though the insurance companies' "loss" was the kind of "loss" that any of us would take, this is a big fucking deal. It's a big fucking deal because there are some new rules of the road for insurance companies in exchange for all that new business. I'm sure you know the drill by now; no yearly or lifetime caps, no pre-existing conditions, free preventative care and no dropping coverage when you get sick etc. But the fact that this year plus healthcare debate culminated with President Obama signing a Healthcare bill into a Health Care law is a big fucking deal for so many more reasons.

This was a big fucking deal because President Obama achieved success where so many others have failed. Both Roosevelt's, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Clinton, even Nixon attempted to deal with Health Care in a way that made it a right and not a privilege. Barack Obama, through all of the missteps, compromises, false starts and changing deadlines, eventually accomplished what the others could only attempt. This accomplishment will be cemented into the legacy of the Obama Administration, with 2 ½, and probably 6 ½ more years (yeah I said it…) to add to a mighty strong headliner.

This was a big fucking deal because Democrats showed spine to pass a law that had become politically unpopular. They didn't let losing the Massachusetts Senate seat turn their 60-40 "supermajority" into a 59-41 "minority." They rolled up their sleeves, cleaned up their act and went to work thru the Republican howls about process, tyranny and unconstitutionality. They didn't scapegoat their differing factions, and continued confidently forward. They will be rewarded for this. While it's unlikely that they can hold off a loss of Congressional seats this mid-term election, mid-term election history and the fact that Dems won some districts and states that they had no business winning in '06 and '08 makes some loss likely, they should hold off the landslide the Republicans giddily predicted just a few weeks ago. The 2012 "bounceback" will be stronger as well, with a Base fired up by a significant, if flawed, accomplishment to look to for inspiration.

Now, the Republican Base was fired up by the Healthcare debate as well; the anger and fear that they operated off must be given credit for stoking doubts amongst Americans about the intentions and consequences of the Bill. I wonder though, which Base would be more persuasive knocking on an undecided's door, one that defends what's been done and explain what their candidates want to do to fix the mess largely caused by the other side's control, or the one that doesn't know exactly why they hate "Obamacare," besides it leading us to SocialistNaziIslamoFacistTyrranny?

This was a big fucking deal because passing Healthcare reform, even in this very moderate form, was a realization of a goal born from Liberalism. It won, eventually, because the government "doing something" was better than the government "doing nothing "or "doing very little," which was as close as the GOP came to a real counter-proposal on Healthcare. Ronald Reagan, whom Obama described as a president that "changed the trajectory of America," was able to make the conservative belief that "government is the problem" the common wisdom in the political debate. With this Healthcare debate won, and if more of these "do something vs. do nothing" debates are won by the "do something" crowd, the narrative that government can come up with solutions might begin to take hold as the common wisdom, changing America's trajectory away from the course that Reagan laid out.

This was a big fucking deal because we took an imperfect, but clear and sure step forward towards declaring that Healthcare is a right and not a "product". The end of this debate coming to this conclusion is a new starting point for dealing with the issue of Healthcare in America; the debates been redefined; the first of many that can, and I believe will be, by the Obama Presidency…

Oscar Predictions Pt. 3- Best Picture

Didn't get the ball rolling on these blogs early enough to dig into all of the categories that I wanted to. So I'll just give my writing picks:

Adapted-Precious (Predicted winner Up in the Air)

Original- Inglorious Basterds (I think it's gonna win too…)

 

Best Picture

The field for the Best Picture Oscar was expanded to 10 from 5 this year, to give more films exposure, and to open things up for more "big" films. I don't think Avatar needed the help this year, and I'm mixed on whether the expansion was a good thing…

Why the field shouldn't have expanded:

The Blind Side- I saw ten minutes of this, and will not watch more…

A Serious Man- I was amused, the acting was good, interesting story structure, but one of the best movies of the year? Nah…

An Education- This was a very good movie with some very good (and one great) performances, but I didn't think that there was enough "there" there to put the movie in the class of the following flicks…

 

Why the field expanding was a good thing:

Up- I'm not a Pixar fan, but I am an Up fan. The first 15 minutes that tells the life story of one of the protagonisthttp://thescorecardreview.com/review/film-reviews/2009/06/12/up-disney-digital-3d/3910 was brilliant and the most touching scene I've seen all year. What comes after is fun, funny and has something to say. Up is a clearly deserving nominee that may not have made it with only 5 available slots.

District 9- This was my favorite movie of 2009 until the fall movie season came along. It was fresh, original, had a story that was timely and profound and the effects were pretty damn cool. It would not have made my final five though…

 

And the Final Five:

The Hurt Locker- I was all set to make this my predicted winner. My case was strong, high critical praise, a long list of previous awards, the historical factor, and the "Blockbuster Backlash" that Avatar might get . The fact that Avatar doesn't have a writing nomination looked like a strike against it too. But then I realized that Titanic didn't have a writing nomination either and it cleaned up. This would be the lowest grossing Best Picture winner ever if it won; if it couldn't really find an audience in the market, I don't think that it will find enough of an audience, even in the Academy, to overtake the biggest movie ever. I would fall into the "uncaptured audience" category; the movie was well acted, written and directed, had tension and something to say, but it just didn't resonate deep down with me. It's probably no better than 6^th on my list of these nominees, and I think more people agree with me than we realize…

Up in the Air- It was refreshing to see a movie that was really just about how we relate to each other, and what we expect from each other. How often those expectations aren't met, by your job or the people that you want more (or less) from than they want from you gets explored with skill by all involved. This movie is Oscar worthy, I just liked a couple of nominees even more…

Inglorious Basterds-It took the second viewing of this one before I realized how great this movie was. There were all of the Tarantino flourishes, the dialogue, the insane violence, the extreme scenarios. It was a WW II movie for our times, with Americans cast as the righteous "terrorist," illustrating that there may just be such a thing. I've already talked about Christopher Waltz, and about Tarantino's directing; add to that Tarantino's script that created this whole three ring circus, and kept things straight enough to make it all work as a cohesive story. Still, it didn't make the impact on me that the two films I put above it made on me…

Precious- Man, it felt like some seriously hard work getting through this movie, and I'm not so sure that I want to go thru seeing this movie again, but it was a great film. I was drained by the end because I was so drawn in by an emotionally immersive experience. The situations that Precious lived through were so unreal, but were delivered by such authentic performances that what was going on on the other side of the screen from me felt real. Precious felt like a real person that you wanted to help but couldn't because of the barrier between you and the reality on the other side of the screen. It was unbelievable to be totally depressed and uplifted by the same movie, but I was by Precious, my favorite movie of last year, until I was immersed by another movie going experience, this time even more fully (and more enjoyably)…

Avatar- (predicted/my winner) My favorite movie of the year, and the best movie of the year. There were better scripts out there, and the story wasn't the height of originality, but like a fresh new singer that breathes brand new life into an old jazz standard, Cameron takes this age old story into a whole new world. The literal new world is Pandora, but the new world for us is a 3D experience that is not focused on the "gotcha" moments of stuff shooting out at you, but is instead used to bring you all the way into the picture and into the film's world. It's used to advance the narrative, making the world of the Na'vi more vibrant, alive and layered than the life that the humans occupy, and it makes the flying scenes that much more thrilling and breathtaking. The technology that is even more important though, is what was used to create CGI performances of the Na'vi. These CGI characters, were so much more expressive, and "realistic" than the CGI performers that came before that it became easier to become invested in the characters emotionally. I "cared" a whole lot more about what was going on on-screen than I otherwise would have with the more "dead-eyed" CGI of the past. This is a movie that changed how filmmaking will be done from now on, it's a movie that captured the world's imagination, and it was the most pure joy I had watching a movie in a long time (plus it made me fall even deeper in love with Zoe Saldana). Avatar is the Best Picture of the year…

G’s Oscar Picks Pt.2- The Actors

More Oscar picking to do, this time focusing on the thesbians…

Best Supporting Actor

Matt Damon- Invictus-Didn't see it…

Woody Harrelson-The Messenger- Didn't see it, but heard he was good…

Christopher Plummer- The Last Station- Didn't see it, never heard of it…

Stanley Tucci- The Lovely Bones- Didn't see it…

Christopher Waltz- Inglorious Basterds- (Predicted Winner + My Choice) More than being the only nominee that I saw, more than the fact that he's won every other supporting actor award known to man for his performance as the elegantly brutal Col. Hans Landa. There's not one but two iconic scenes that Waltz pulls off; the opening 20 minutes where he politely, smoothly, slowly tightens the screws on a French farmer that is harboring a Jewish family. Then there was that "strudel scene." Waltz speaks German, French and English flawlessly (as far as I can tell, which isn't very far), and is delightfully chilling throughout. As much an iconic performance as Heath Ledger's Joker the year before, you don't need to see the competition to know a winner when you see one…

 

Best Actor

Colin Firth-A Single Man- Didn't see it…

Morgan Freeman-Invictus- Didn't see it…Don't know how I missed a Clint Eastwood movie about Nelson Mandela, with Freeman as Mandela, but I did…

George Clooney-Up in the Air- I really liked this movie, and really liked George Clooney in it. Just because he's playing a character that is close to his persona doesn't mean that the man isn't acting. I thought that made some great, subtle choices for a character that isn't going to be very outwardly expressive. The cast is what made this movie so much more than the sum of its parts, and Clooney was the center of this cast. Still, I have to give a little bit more love to…

Jeff Bridges-Crazy Heart- (Predicted winner) I didn't that this movie was particularly great, unique or interesting (and apparently, neither did the Academy, since it couldn't even make the new 10 film Best Picture list) but Jeff Bridges (and to a lesser extent, Maggie Gyllenhaal) were great, unique and interesting. "Bad Blake," as played by Bridges, is that train wreck that you can't help watching, with a little charm sprinkled on top. You cringe as Gyllenhaal's Jean Craddock starts to fall for him, but you also believe that she is falling for him, a credit to both actors involved. He's won every other award you can win, so pencil him in for Oscar (in pen), but he don't win around these parts…

Jeremy Renner-The Hurt Locker- (My Pick) Unlike the rest of this list, Mr. Renner may not come to mind when you think of the great actors in Hollywood today, but if he gives off a couple more performances like this one he will. While I've called the film itself a bit of a "one trick pony," Renner's performance as SSG William James had more layers than an onion. He's the cocky, reckless bomb tech ready to jump into danger, but he still is scared shitless at the most intense moments. His biggest fear however is the normal life that awaits him back home. He's so scared of the adjustment back to a life with the "drug" of war that he doesn't adjust at all, just gets on the first plane smoking back to Iraq and more bombs to disengage. Not one bit of this performance feels fake or unreal, an especially challenging feat to achieve when dealing with unreal scenarios and a character that likes to take them on in over the top ways. Renner gets it done, and gave the best performance (of the ones I saw) last year.

 

Best Supporting Actress

Penelope Cruz- Nine- Didn't see it, don't do musicals. I may make an exception for Penelope via Netflix though…

Vera Farmiga, Anna Kendrick- Up in the Air- Thought they were both great parts of a solid cast overall, but this was Clooney's movie and neither one really stole the show from him. I can't say one outshined the other, so how could either of them have possibly outshined everyone else this year?

Maggie Gyllenhaal (Harvard-Westlake represent!)- Crazy Heart- I talked a little bit about how she and Jeff Bridges rose above the material earlier. Bridges' charm, and the unmistakable, irresistible attraction that Gyllenhaal's character has towards him makes the horrible decision to get involved with this train wreck of a man believable. She makes us able to sympathize with her when trouble comes as a consequence of this decision, and Maggie's so likeable, she's always fun to watch. But the Oscar goes to…

Mo'Nique- Precious (Predicted winner/My choice)- Sometimes it's easy to play a monster, but not when the monster is this horrible, this real, this tortured herself. One of the major criticisms of Precious is that it doesn't delve deep enough into why Monique's character is as horrible as she is. If the movie were "Precious' Crazy Mama and Why She That Way," I'd agree, but since we're not telling her story, but instead, her daughter's story, the motivations for the tormenter aren't as important as the torment that she metes out to our protagonist. Regardless, those criticisms would be even louder without Mo'Nique's performance, because within every vile angry, hateful action towards Precious you can see and feel the pain at the core of this character that is causing it. Mo'nique, the main reason that I was reluctant to see this film (besides the Tyler/Oprah connection) became one of the main reasons to celebrate it. The Oscar will be, and should be Mo'Nique's

 

Best Actress

Helen Mirren- The Last Station- Did I mention that I never heard of this til I looked at the nominees??

Sandra Bullock- The Blind Side- (Predicted winner) Saw the last 10 minutes after watching A Serious Man, and waiting to sneak into An Education. Ummmm, no…. It does feel like her year for some reason though.

Meryl Streep- Julie and Julia- Does Meryl Streep just get an automatic Oscar nomination when she signs on to do a film? Yes, she made Amy Adams' half of the film downright annoying in comparison to her part, and mimicking and iconic figure like Julia Child that we all know already has got to be extremely difficult, but is this even in her top 10 performances? It sure isn't the top one of the year…

This leaves us with the newcomers…

Carey Mulligan- An Education- I have heard the hype about this performance constantly. It really made me want to hate on her as I snuck into the second half of my ghetto double feature to check her out. Bottom line is, I couldn't hate. While the performance may not have been the breathless "revelation" and "second coming of Audrey Hepburn" that some critics have proclaimed, Mulligan was charming and fun to watch, and damn good. To play a 16 year old when you are 10 years past 16 is a challenge, the challenge grows when you are playing a 16 year old that desperately wants to be 25. The plot brings "Jenny," the character Mulligan plays, back to Earth hard and fast, and Mulligan then has to play a 17 year old, accepting the fact that she's still 17, while carrying the experiences that she's had living like she was 25. A confusing, challenging task is placed before Carey Mulligan, and she glides thru it with ease.

Gabourey Sidibe- Precious- I do not know how an inexperienced actress can pull this role off so triumphantly. The movie starts with a bitter, closed destructive and self-destructive girl that hates her color, her size and her life to the point that the only joy that she can find comes from daydreams about living a glamorous life with a "light skinned" boyfriend. Step by step, Precious grows stronger, more confident and more determined, even as the rug keeps getting pulled out from under her, in more and more heartbreaking ways. Precious emerges determined to guide her own destiny, even if most of that destiny has already been cast in stone. The cast, script, and director all help to make this tale come to life, and feel triumphant in the midst of despair. The triumph doesn't come though, without Gabourey's ability to play that despair, and the joy (both the imagined real ones) with equal authenticity. Despite all of the support and love along the way that she receives, Precious is the ultimate heroine of the story by virtue of carrying the burden she's given, and keeping on. Gabourey should be an Oscar winner for showing every ounce of that burden, and the heroine that still carries on with it.

 

 

 

G’s Oscar Picks pt. 1

So I thought I'd take a stab at picking these Oscar winners, and thought I'd start with the category that I actually have a right to discuss, since I saw all of the "Best Director" nominees. This might've been the year that I saw all of the Best Picture nominees too, but the expansion to 10 flicks this year in that category killed that plan. So, Best Director it is…

Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire- (Lee Daniels) This was the most powerful movie in the bunch, and definitely courted the most controversy. The acting was natural and engaging, especially considering the untrained sources that some of the strongest performances came from. The film was unrelenting and dark yet still ended up celebrating the resilience and awakening of a main character that would have simply been doomed in the hands of another storyteller. These reasons make Lee Daniels' nomination for best director well deserved. I can't help feeling that the movie didn't "feel cinematic" enough for Daniels to deserve the Oscar though. It's hard to explain what I mean by that, besides saying that the movie looked like a TV movie and not something that I plop down 12 bucks to see on a 60 ft. screen. That's not because it's a movie without aliens or explosions, it just did not feel like it was shot with the level of technique and skill that makes a movie really "feel" like a movie. An example of a movie that is not an f/x fest but still has that "cinematic" quality would be…

Jason Reitman (Harvard-Westlake represent!)
Up in the Air – This movie was very "Seinfeld"-like, it was really about nothing. We follow characters doing their job, which is firing people, and navigating the twist and turns of life and the changing expectations that we have for it. To make a compelling movie out of "nothing" is a challenge, but it's a challenge that Reitman succeeds in accomplishing. He even uses what we know about George Clooney the person in service of the character that Clooney plays, so that our expectations, based on what we know about Clooney, makes what happens to his character all the more interesting and surprising. But was this the best directing job when you have movies like…

Quentin Tarantino
Inglorious Basterds- My favorite living director at the top of his game. The "strudel scene" alone makes him a deserving nominee. There were so many moving parts, so many dialogue heavy scenes to keep interesting, not to mention so many languages spoken throughout that Tarantino deserves an Oscar just for keeping Inglorious Basterds from becoming an incomprehensible mess. But he ain't gonna win, nor should he, though it's two different movies that makes "ain't" and "shouldn't" true...

Kathryn Bigelow (Columbia represent!)The Hurt Locker- Predicted Winner: I liked this movie a lot, but I sure didn't love it. It had great acting, was shot well, and definitely kept the tension ratcheted up. It felt like a one trick pony though, with the same scenario playing out over and over again. It's an intense scenario, finding and diffusing bombs in the middle of a war zone, but it's still the same one. It didn't help that the "oh shit!" moment of the movie, the six bombs revealing themselves surrounding bomb tech SSG William James (played by the Oscar nominated Jeremy Renner) at once, was plastered all over the ads and posters for the movie before I got into the theatre. I think Bigelow is gonna win though, because it is a good, well directed movie that's gotten a heap of praise, and it happens to have a director that can make history as the first woman to win the Directing Oscar (the reason that James Cameron thinks that her winning is a done deal). Oscar voters love to make history, especially with a winner that you cannot argue is undeserving. I'm also predicting a Bigelow victory because she's already won the Directors Guild Award, and that award has forecast the Directing Oscar winner in 54 out of the 60 years that the DGA has given the award. She's not my winner though because I have to go with…

James Cameron (Avatar)- When you spend $500 Million on a movie your goals would seem to be to get a whole lotta butts in the seats, and wow them enough to keep those butts coming back. Cameron delivered on that. He also made a 3D movie that didn't treat the medium as a gimmick to "shoot things at you" with, but instead as a tool used to really immerse you into another world. He achieved that. He also achieved some surprising things for a movie of this kind. While the script wasn't Shakespeare, Cameron got strong, interesting performances from his cast (see the Star Wars prequels if you think that's easy to achieve with such special effects laden films). The greatest achievement was getting the strong, engaging performances that Cameron got out of the "fake" characters, the Na'vi,. The technological advances that Cameron spearheaded, and Cameron's attention to the most minute details led to "Avatars," or CGI characters, that could show the full breadth of facial expression, and therefore emotion, that made the performances that guided the CGI representations shine thru (and in my opinion should have led to an Oscar nomination for Zoe Saldana). Advancing the art of filmmaking, while telling an interesting, engaging (if not unfamiliar) story? That's Oscar-worthy to me!

 

 

 

Avatar