Tweet
(photo: Dave_B_ )
Last year, I made picks here at The Dissenter. I greatly enjoy cinema and make a list of top films that I post every year. Here are some reflections on the films nominated this year.
*
The front-runners for Best Picture all have facets that lead me to be not particularly excited about the fact that either of them may win, but the nominees for Best Documentary are each incredibly compelling films.
Argo, on the CIA operation to rescue US diplomats from Iran in 1979, is likely to win. However, as much as I enjoyed the film when I viewed it, it is hard in retrospect to overlook the American exceptionalism that appears to have inspired a rewriting of history, which forms the basis of the film. Ken Taylor, ex-Canadian ambassador to Iran, has expressed valid criticism about how the film makes Canada appear like a “meek observer.” On CNN, former President Jimmy Carter said, “90 percent of the contributions to the ideas and the consummation of the plan was Canadian” yet the film “gives almost full credit to the American CIA.”
Though it is the 150-year anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation and it would seem appropriate to revel in the spirit of Lincoln, as someone who subscribes to the principles and values that run throughout Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, it is hard to get past the conviction I have that the acts of African-American abolitionists, which pushed Lincoln to ultimately act, are far too absent in the film. I also was bothered by the opening of the film. Two black soldiers fighting for the Union have a unique opportunity to talk with Lincoln. The scene is convoluted, but it seems typical of liberal filmmaking, as the two “inspire” Lincoln to do what is morally good for the country. (For more, read this critique from Corey Robin: Steven Spielberg’s White Men of Democracy or this interview with Janell Hobson of Albany University professor and expert on race and gender relations.)
Zero Dark Thirty celebrates or, at minimum, excuses the vigilantism of the US government in fighting the so-called War on Terrorism that has become normalized since the September 11th attacks. It exonerates and obscures the inhumane acts of CIA interrogators by placing them into a narrative that appears to contribute to the execution of bin Laden. In service to the national security state, those involved in making the film like screenwriter Mark Boal accepted access to the CIA and other government agencies to develop characters and scenes in the film and they did not honestly reflect on how more than ten years of war and militarism to avenge the deaths of 3,000 Americans on 9/11 has transformed US government. The killing of bin Laden was a natural culmination and possible end of an era yet the military and security-industrial complex is content to press on with permanent war.
Those critiques are why I select Life of Pi for Best Picture. The fantasy and storytelling of that film—in addition to the visual effects and cinematography—were remarkably engrossing (however, I expect Argo to walk away with the Oscar).
Turning to the Best Documentary category, either of the films could win. Peter Knegt of Indiewire points out, “For the first time all Academy members were sent screeners of all the docs and [could] all vote in the category.” In his opinion, that entirely changes voting patterns and gives the category “no precedent.”
Nominated are: 5 Broken Cameras, on the Palestinian struggle to halt construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank; The Gatekeepers, which features former enforcers of Israel’s security service, the Shin Bet, reflecting on the country and what they did; How to Survive a Plague, which presents the fight by activists for access to medicine and treatment for AIDS that was ultimately won; The Invisible War, which is an unnerving presentation of the experiences of women who have been raped and sexually assaulted in the US military and Searching for Sugar Man, which is the story of a search to find out what happened to Rodriguez, a musician who never broke out in the US but became a legendary star in South Africa.
It is my contention that 5 Broken Cameras should win. The film is the first Palestinian documentary ever to be nominated for an Oscar and deserves an award from the Academy. Emad Burnat, who made the film, is a Palestinian farmer and first-time filmmaker. The story is about the life of Burnat as someone bearing witness to fellow Palestinians being brutalized and repressed by Israeli settlers and soldiers. It also is a story of five cameras he has used. A new act in the film begins each time a camera is destroyed or stops working.
Burnat has the courage to train the camera on soldiers as they are firing weapons (sometimes live ammunition) at Palestinians. He himself has been injured and even been detained by Israeli forces for filming.
His commitment to showing the world the reality of Israeli occupation greatly troubles the Israeli government because they know the video he is recording threatens to undermine the perceptions people have in the world. When Burnat tried to travel to the US to present his film at the Traverse City Film Festival (organized by filmmaker Michael Moore), he was stopped from going to the airport in Tel Aviv and made to go to Amman, Jordan, to get to the US. This time, when he came to Los Angeles to attend the Oscars, he was detained at the Los Angeles Airport by US Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE). He is doing what he does at great risk to himself and his family, but, despite that, he has talked about making a Part II.
Yet, it is Searching for Sugar Man that has the momentum going into the awards ceremony. Sugar Man is the weakest of the all the documentary nominees, in my opinion, especially since Rodriguez is alive and well but does not appear until about two-thirds of the way into the movie. There’s much more that could have been explored about his impact in South Africa. The filmmakers could have included more music. The film does not even answer all the questions one would have about him as a musician, including a key question raised in the film: If he is so huge in South Africa, who is making the money off him because he lives a working class life in Detroit? It may be someone in South Africa or a record company, but we never find out.
Both How to Survive a Plague and The Invisible War are profound documentaries. A win for Invisible War would be a nice statement in support of the women in the film and not in the film, who have been victims of the systemic rape culture in the US military. There should be more accountability and justice and supposedly the film was seen by Leon Panetta, members of the Defense Department, lawmakers and others in government and has had an impact. A win for Plague would acknowledge the struggle and sacrifice of gay and lesbian activists, many whom were dying from AIDS, and still put their bodies on the line until the government gave those suffering AIDS access to care and treatment that could stop an epidemic.
In other categories, Jennifer Lawrence should win the Best Actress Oscar. The script for Silver Linings Playbook is so well-written and the honesty Lawrence brings to the character is memorable. The theme for Skyfall by Adele spectacularly carries on a cinematic tradition that goes all the way back to Shirley Bassey with her “Goldfinger” theme in 1964. Django Unchained has become a top contender for Best Original Screenplay. To see that win over Zero Dark Thirty would be satisfying. Life of Pi deserves many of the technical achievement awards, like visual effects and cinematography. Ang Lee winning over Steven Spielberg would be a fine upset, but I think Spielberg will walk away with another Oscar.
Finally, Dan Romer & Beinh Zeitlin were not nominated for their score for Beasts of the Southern Wild. They should have because it gives the film a lot of its spirit. The Academy went with more established composers. Here’s a theme from the film:
*
OSCAR PICKS
Best Supporting Actor:
Will Win: Tommy Lee Jones (Lincoln)
Should Win: Robert De Niro (Silver Linings Playbook)
Best Actress:
Will Win: Jennifer Lawrence (Silver Linings Playbook)
Should Win: Jennifer Lawrence (Silver Linings Playbook)
Best Supporting Actress:
Will Win: Anne Hathaway (Les Miserables)
Should Win: Amy Adams (The Master)
Best Animated Feature:
Will Win: Brave
Should Win: The Pirates! Band of Misfits
Best Art Direction:
Will Win: Anna Karenina
Should Win: Life of Pi
Best Cinematography
Will Win: Life of Pi
Should Win: Life of Pi
Best Costume Design
Will Win: Anna Karenina
Should Win: Anna Karenina
Best Documentary Feature
Will Win: Searching for Sugar Man
Should Win: 5 Broken Cameras
Best Documentary Short
Will Win: Mondays at Racine
Should Win: Open Heart
Best Film Editing
Will Win: Zero Dark Thirty
Should Win: Life of Pi
Best Foreign Language:
Will Win: Amour
Should Win: No
Best Makeup:
Will Win: The Hobbit
Should Win: The Hobbit
Best Original Score:
Will Win: Mychael Danna (Life of Pi)
Should Win: Mychael Danna (Life of Pi)
Best Original Song:
Will Win: “Skyfall” from Skyfall
Should Win: “Skyfall” from Skyfall
Best Animated Short Film:
Will Win: Paperman
Best Live Action Short Film:
Will Win: Curfew
Best Sound Editing
Will Win: Zero Dark Thirty
Should Win: Life of Pi
Best Sound Mixing
Will Win: Les Miserables
Should Win: Skyfall
Best Visual Effects
Will Win: Life of Pi
Should Win: Life of Pi
Best Adapted Screenplay
Will Win: Argo
Should Win: Silver Linings Playbook
Best Original Screenplay
Will Win: Django Unchained
Should Win: Django Unchained
Best Actor
Will Win: Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln)
Should Win: Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln)
Best Director:
Will Win: Steven Spielberg (Lincoln)
Should Win: Ang Lee (Life of Pi)
Best Picture:
Will Win: Argo
Should Win: Life of Pi
17 Comments
Since I have seen none of the movies this year, I reckon I will manage to find something else to pass the time with instead of th Oscars.
If you do get a chance, you should watch one of the documentaries I highlighted.
Book Salon up with Chad Nackers and Alex Blechman’s The President of Vice: The Autobiography of Joe Biden (The Onion) hosted by Watertiger
Heard a short item on presstv about Argo. Can’t find a link. As you might imagine, presstv did not think much of the version presented in Argo.
I haven’t been to the movies this past year. Given a choice, though, I would never look at a movie about anything the U.S. has ever done in Iran. U.S. record is one of moral bankruptcy and incompetence in every way.
Though there are a few (for Hollywood, strikingly) candid acknowledgments of historical fact, Argo obscures far more than which country bears greater acclaim for the successful extraction of the embassy staffers. Yes, it makes a nod to historical fact concerning Mossadegh, and the discerning might wonder exactly what the staffers were so eager to burn/destroy – we can surmise from Wikileaks releases on the Clinton State Department, that at the very least, the documents addressed considerable influene/pressure brought on the Iranian government to accede to international business concerns at the expense of its citizens.
But, it is, interestingly, a movie where Iranians barely exist, until our heroic gang successfully dupes the beauracratic airport security rubes. Otherwise, we are mostly given montages of the direct counterparts of the CIA, who were in all likeliehood, trained by the CIA, or perhaps tortured by SAVAK officers trained by the CIA, in which case even such single minded devotion warrants that explanation. And they are shown as inhuman caricatures, devoid of humor or life as they try to track down the missing staffers. This in direct contrast to the fairly warm view of Bryan Cranston’s character and the assemblage of supporting Langley players.
“Life of Pi” is, at end, an upper class fantasy that whitewashes the West’s interference in the colonies. Go to the wealthy area of your town, throw a rock in any direction and you will inevitably hit a well-off woman who gushes about how good and meaningful it is and all other sorts of pablum. That alone should key you in immediately to the fact that there is something deeply wrong with it.
What are you talking about? Life of Pi was one of the most apolitical movies there was this year. I agree with Kevin. “West’s interference in the colonies”?,it sounds like you have a rather large ax to grind. I saw a movie about family, struggle, and the lengths of rationalization. But that’s just me.
I admit I don’t know how to see story as apolitical or disconnected from the context in which it emerges. What I observe is that while hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers commit suicide, or one might more rightly say are murdered by Monsanto and its GMO cronies (speaking of socializing lobbyist expenses in the form of the State Department), and tens of millions strike against the grinding poverty that is neoliberalism’s aim (the wealthy are rich as a direct consequence of making others poor), the West once again fetishizes the spirituality of its colonies. And, of course, the film quite literally fetishizes the young, handsome and conveniently bare-chested native. It’s nearly as sickening as the hackneyed noble British pensioners retire in the former colonies meme (with full cast of regular British character actors), and it obscures the far darker truth that Orwell, Conrad and Greene so eloquently laid bare.
So that’s what I saw.
What did you think of The Gatekeepers?
I forgot to cite the execrable “Eat, Pray, Love” as example (both book and even worse film – a plea to any god that might have influence: for the good of culture, please take Ryan Murhpy).
A horrifically ironic title, given our abhorrent interference with the Indian people’s ability to simply feed themselves.
I can’t argue with your views, you’re doubtless right about all the colonial injustices. But to me, it’s a little like watching Sherlock Holmes, or even Downton Abbey, and getting stuck on the plight of the poor in old England….sure it’s an issue, but I’m not going to let it ruin the story.
Yeah, “Downtown Abbey” is another lovely exercise in propaganda – it’s been much better critiqued than I can do justice here. But paraphrasing, the idea that the poor will willingly disappear when, and carry the moral responsibility for, the injustices of the elite against them when those injustices become an inconvenience to that same elite seems to be a central preoccupation of the now unsurprisingly knighted Fellowes.
And I agree with you in one respect, far better to be angered by and direct response to the real injustice than the fictional, but that fiction is fairly purposeful propagand a intended to distract. And it’s very successful in that respect so I’ve come to think it’s necessary to unplug from the bullshit stories the elite are selling you – on that, I’d recommend “Century of the Self” to you, or better yet Scott Noble’s “PsyWar” and “The Power Principle” (all of which are available on YouTube or Vimeo). Further to those, of course the real point of Downtown Abbey and at least the latest commercial incarnation of Sherlock Holmes, is to exploit your desires to sell you stuff you don’t need, now made for three cents an hour by children in the former colonies.
Some days I’d rather be ignorant.
As someone who found Silver Linings Playbook to cynically be playing both sides against itself, I have to disagree strongly with most of your choices beyond Lawrence. Deniro, was eh. And the the screen play is the worst offender. Let’s make you uncomfortable by showing how the the cute mentally ill are not that cute, but we’ll have a romance and a happy ending to make people feel good about it. That that ending is as much a fairy tale as Cinderella’s happy ever after – well let’s just pretend none of us know that.
Frankly, listening to so many talk about its truth and bravery, I’ve come to think of it as another symptom of the same delusion that makes people blind to the fact that Obama is to the right of Nixon.
Liking Silver Linings Playbook is like being blind to fact Obama is to right of Nixon? Intriguing.
As usual, someone else is far better and more eloquent on the point than I: http://consortiumnews.com/2013/02/24/waking-up-to-irans-real-history-2/
No, liking it isn’t.
But we as a society, and I’m not excluding myself, seem to have gotten very good at embracing things we like and elevating them to something they are not, even ignoring the obvious to do it. Although I think you have to work hard to miss that most of Barack Obama’s policies are as disgusting and right wing as our previous President’s, a huge portion of our population, including the left, have managed to embrace the pretty speeches and charming family and miss the obvious. But perhaps I should have gone for something of a more trivial nature as an example. So let me make that: Taco Bell, while well loved by many and tasty under the right circumstances, is not great mexican food.
Oh, you already are quite ignorant as to how receptive people are to your insistence that they don their hairshirt every time they watch a movie.
You must be a blast at parties.
Not really sure that I’m insisting on anything, but I have developed a point of view that you’re free to accept or reject. I hope to be persuasive because I tend to think the future of the species is dependent on unplugging, and well, if that makes me too serious, then I’m not sure how to fix that – feels to me like the stakes are too high.
This guy, among others, woke me up: Advertising & the Perfect Storm – Sut Jhally
And, I had said “some days I’d rather be ignorant,” similar to the way that guy in “The Matrix” wants to go back in and have steak taste like steak again. – by the way I quite loved that trilogy, and “V for Vendetta” and “Star Trek.” Anything by George Bernard Shaw. Probably still makes me a stick in the mud, but should it really subject to me a personal attack when I did not make one?