OSCARS 2022: Belfast (2021)

What’s your opinion on Kenneth Branagh? I first became aware of the guy through his supporting roles in big budget movies and his occasional forays into horror and thrillers. Of course, I soon learned that Branagh was much better known for adapting, directing, and starring in movies based on the works of William Shakespeare. Whether you can stomach Branagh always putting himself front and center, much less the pomp and circumstance of the Bard, is strictly a matter of taste. It’s not typically my thing but good for him. In recent years, Branagh has started directing big budget movies too, doing franchise gigs for Marvel, Disney, and whoever owns Jack Ryan. Yet his smaller films have earned him the most praise. This is definitely true of “Belfast,” his most personal work, which now has a good shot of being a Best Picture winner. 

Heavily inspired by Branagh’s own childhood, “Belfast” is the story of Buddy, a nine year old boy growing up in the titular Northern Ireland city in the late sixties. His father works in England, often leaving Buddy alone with his mom, older brother, and grandparents. This mostly idyllic childhood is complicated when the Troubles begins. Buddy’s family are Protestants themselves but do not align with the extremists persecuting Catholics, which make them a target as well. As Buddy attempts to navigate typical childhood challenges — school, crushes, law and order — his parents debate whether they can continue to live in a suddenly dangerous city. 

“Belfast” is a rather uncritically nostalgic motion picture. It’s aloft with the fuzzy feelings of childhood. Buddy is introduced playing with a toy sword and shield, pretending to be a brave knight. He has a crush on a little blonde girl in his class and she seems to reciprocate. His grandparents are sources of infinite wisdom, providing folksy and heavily accented nuggets of knowledge. Though his parents aren’t perfect, ultimately his dad is portrayed as a hero in his son’s eyes. Everybody in Belfast knows each other and the city, at least until the Troubles start, is depicted as quaint and lovable. The film is Branagh’s ode to his childhood home town and he’s not interested in deconstructing those warm memories. 

At times, “Belfast” feels a bit like a “Hope and Glory” style story, of a child’s naïve interpretation of the very serious things happening around him. A fire and brimstone sermon from the local Protestant preacher haunts Buddy, causing him to repeatedly return to the metaphor of a forked road. He overhears his parents argue and is occasionally privy to the family’s financial difficulties. The film is most compelling when Buddy is thrust right into things, when his mother’s morality comes into conflict with the violent state of the city. Yet “Belfast” never gives you any deeper understanding of what Buddy and his parents are feeling, much less a complicated sociopolitical conflict like The Troubles. It’s largely a movie about an adorable kid being adorable while a lot of crazy, bad shit that’s way over his head happens around him. 

So “Belfast” isn’t an especially nuanced or complex movie. Yet it’s not bad either. Branagh successfully transfer the cordial feelings he has towards his childhood and the city he grew up in to the viewer. This is largely thanks to the performances. Directing children can be tricky, so I’ll commend Branagh for getting a fine performance out of Jude Hill as Buddy. The kid has a natural charisma, seeming like a realistic little boy with all the naivety and messiness that implies. Jamie Dornan is charming as his father while Caitriona Balfe, as the mother, does probably the most complex, nuanced acting in the movie. Of course, esteemed actors like Dame Judi Dench and Ciaran Hinds can be relied upon to play their parts with utmost professionalism. The occasional glint of sadness in Dench’s eyes, as the grandmother, and Hinds’ rowdy but affable anecdotes are some of the best things about the movie. It’s not like “perfect grandparents” are the deepest parts to play both these two are good at it. 

And the movie sure looks nice too. After some very digital drone shots of Belfast in the modern day in the first scene, we then transfer to lovely black-and-white scenes set in the past. Harris Zambarloukos’ cinematography provides the depth that is missing in the script, providing monochromatic images of streets and homes. The film has fun playing with its color palette too. Whenever Buddy is present for a performance — be that a movie, a play, or a sermon — what he sees is shown in blazing color. This is a good way to illustrate the impact these images have on the boy. 

In fact, “Belfast” is probably most interesting for the way pop cultures informs the boy’s view of reality. Westerns like “High Noon” and “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance” influence his sense of right and wrong. Fantasies like “Star Trek,” “Chitty Chitty Bang-Bang,” and “One Million Years B.C.” provide escapes. On Christmas, he receives a lot of “Thunderbirds” toys and has a great time playing with them. If this is more-or-less Branagh’s own story, it’s easy to see how his love of cinema was implanted him at an early age. And the director, indeed, nods towards his own career, when he has Buddy read a “Thor” comic. The film could have put a lot more effort into exploring how Buddy uses pop culture to process the difficulties of growing up but “Belfast’s” surface level reading of this idea is all it’s interested in doing.

This approach, a director creating a loving tribute to how great his childhood mostly was, produces a film that is affable but frustratingly shallow. I wish Branagh would’ve acknowledge how nostalgia clouds our memories, creating an idealized version of the past that never existed. (The soundtrack is mostly made up of Van Morrison's biggest hits, furthering this nostalgic mood.) I wish he would’ve explored the story’s ambiguities — the father’s gambling, the troublemaking older girl Buddy befriends — more. You could even argue that setting such a romanticized story against Ireland’s bloodiest, most senseless conflict is irresponsible. Yet taken on its own merits, as a distinguished director looking back on his boyhood days with fondness,  “Belfast” is certainly successful. I guess I’m just too much of a sourpuss to really recommend a movie this totally, functionally fine that also squanders so much potential. [6/10]

OSCARS 2022: The Power of the Dog (2021)

I’m always intrigued by the evolution the western has undergone in the last thirty years. From the early days of cinema, it was the dominant populist genre. In the classic age of Hollywood and television, when there was a lot less content overall than there is now, hundreds of westerns were made. I’m guessing it was this pure saturation that lead to the genre’s slow decline in the seventies. By the time I was a kid, the western had dwindled to a handful of examples a year. And now, the western has migrated from crowd pleasers to the other end of the spectrum: The art house. “The Power of the Dog” is the first film in ten years from Jane Campion, the director of beloved artsy classic “The Piano.” Unsurprisingly, it is a meditative experience and not a white-hat vs. black-hat story. 

In 1920s Montana, brothers Phil and George Burbank run a successful ranch. While the belligerent Phil endeavors to live the life of the rough-riding cowboy forever, inspired by a long-gone mentor named Bronco Henry, George seeks to settle down. Inn owner Rose catches his eye and the two are soon married, much to Phil’s consternation. Phil torments Rose, driving her to alcoholism. When her eccentric son Peter returns from school, Phil starts to bully him too. Yet Phil and Peter soon develop an unusual bond, riding out into the countryside together. The boy and the man uncover each other’s secrets. 

“The Power of the Dog” is a film that interrogates the myth of the American West. Which is also the myth of American masculinity. Phil fancies himself a hardened tough guy but, in actuality, he’s just an asshole. In the very first scene, he calls his brother “fatty.” When frustrated, he abuses his horse. While at the dinner table in Rose’s inn, he insults Peter, who has a lisp and a slightly effeminate manner. His attempts to train the boy in horse riding and roping is merely an excuse to humiliate him. Moreover, Phil delights in bullying Rose. A key scene has him mocking her attempts to learn piano by perfectly mimicking the song she’s playing on the banjo. He is the textbook definition of what we now call toxic masculinity. 

What makes Phil’s sadistic posturing even more obnoxious is that the film reveals it all to be a put-on. We soon learn that Phil went to college, where he studied the classics. For all the talking he does about riding and roping, he’s depicted doing very little ranch work. (The sole exception being a graphic scene where he castrates a bull, a moment full of symbolic implications.) He wasn’t born a cowboy, but merely adopted a persona that exists in the silent movies that are obliquely referenced a few times. And like “Brokeback Mountain” before it, “The Power of the Dog” takes the hyper-macho cowboy lifestyle to its natural conclusion. Phil disdains women. He very awkwardly shares a bed with his brother, something George is clearly uncomfortable with. It eventually becomes clear that his relationship with Bronco Henry was not just a platonic mentor/protégée partnership. 

Yet “The Power of the Dog” doesn’t just seek to reveal the classical idea of the American cowboy as a sexist, toxic, homoerotic fantasy. Despite all his vicious behavior, the film clearly has sympathies for Phil. His invented rancher persona is a shield around his own insecurities, the hinted-at resentments that exist between his brother and parents. As much as he bullies Peter, he also sees himself in the boy. Much like him, Peter is a college-educated intellectual in an inhospitable land. Phil hopes to educate him in the ways of ranching, much the same way Bronco Henry did for him. (Which certainly opens up the possibility of some homosexual longing between the two, something else the film hints at.) Ultimately, Phil’s story is of the biggest prick in the west slowly opening himself up to the possibility of being loved again.

Phil recreates himself in his image of an idealized western tough guy. This is how he deals with his pain. Everybody in the film handles it in their own, frequently unhealthy ways. Rose is reduced to a nervous wreck by her brother-in-law’s constant bullying. She turns to drinking, hiding bottles around the house and constantly being intoxicated to numb the pain of her situation. Peter, meanwhile, carries with him the memory of his father’s suicide, whose body he discovered. He buries himself in his studies, staying up in his rooms and dissecting animals. In one moment, he angrily hula-hoops outside the inn. Which may be the first clue that Peter is an unconventional young man, something the film’s last third runs with in a far darker direction than I anticipated. 

I’m not sure how I feel about that last reveal but “The Power of the Dog” is obviously a beguiling, absorbing film. The cinematography is gorgeous, the camera often luxuriating on the rolling landscapes. (Though not the Montanan ones, as the film was shot in Campion’s native New Zealand.) The soundtrack creates a subtle sense of unease throughout. The performances are all excellent. Benedict Cumberbatch makes Phil an equally intimidating and fragile character, emphasizing the artificiality of his cowboy act by pronouncing words in a ridiculously Texan style. Kristen Dunst is a weeping raw nerve as Rose. Kodi Smit-McPhee makes Peter just inscrutable enough that the viewer is uncertain if the boy is merely a socially awkward outsider or something more sinister. 

I suspect cinephiles will be turning “The Power of the Dog” over in their minds for some time to come. The film also has quite a lot to say about the measures women had to leap through to insure the safety of themselves and their children, feeding into the overall theme of gender roles. Among a number of other topics. It’s a fascinating, well executed motion picture that gives the viewer plenty to think about. [8/10]

OSCARS 2022: Nominations and Predictions

Is it just me or has this year's Oscar season been the most low-key one? The film industry is in such a weird transition period. The reality of life during an ongoing, unending pandemic means that movie theaters still feel like they are operating at half-the-power they once were. The theatrical world is increasingly dominated by blockbuster spectacle and franchise filmmaking. When paired with every corporation in the world having its own streaming platform it's trying to build up, the kind of mid-budget, human interest-driven dramas that used to be The Academy's bread-and-butter are increasingly becoming streaming exclusives. And because the world of streaming is a deluge of constant new content, it's becoming harder for any one movie to really stick out. I'm not sure if this is necessarily worse than the old tradition of sticking Oscar hopefuls in limited runs in L.A. and New York but it certainly makes the annual round-up of nominees feel like less of an event. 

In fact, this year's Oscar season has felt so low key to me that I actually didn't remember the nominations were announced today until last night. For some reason, I thought the nominations were going to be on the 10th! And the list of titles that greeted me this morning was largely made up of things I meant to check out but never had a chance to, streaming exclusives that I vaguely recall hearing some chatter about, and a couple of big releases that managed to break through with the critical hive mind. 

And while I could certainly extrapolate on the (mostly depressing) things all of this means for the cinematic world, I don't have time to. Instead, I now have a long list of nominees to watch and review before the ceremony airs on March 27th. And before I can do that, I have to write up my thoughts and opinions (and doubtlessly inaccurate and woefully misinformed predictions) on 2022's round of nominations. So here we go:

BEST PICTURE:

In the year of our lord 2022, it really seems like "Oscar buzz" means something different now. The most talked about movies of this year's award cycle have not been endlessly discussed because they're great filmmaking. It's been because of stupid debates on Twitter and other places about some tangential topic or another. "Don't Look Up," another hyper-smarmy social satire from Adam McKay, is the most divisive nominee of the year. A lot of people whose opinions I respect seem to regard the shaky climate change parable as utterly insufferable. Twitter has been abuzz with whether the film is good, not-so-good but important, or just straight-up bad. It seems this has made "Don't Look Up" the Villain Movie of the year. That kind of divisiveness rarely leads to Best Picture gold but obviously the Academy likes the movie. So who knows.

Somehow, the other nominee that has driven debate around Film Twitter is "Licorice Pizza." You wouldn't expect a coming-of-age story from beloved auteur Paul Thomas Anderson, drawing from his own adolescence, to be controversial... But a vocal group of people on the internet have objected to the movie being about a romance between a twenty-five year old and a teenager. Mostly, it's been morally uptight young people objecting to this. And it's such a stupid controversy to me because the movie really seems to be about the problems inherent in such an age gap. I've mostly been ignoring this very dumb debate and focusing on the reactions from knowledgeable film writers, who all seem to love the movie. 

Like I said, those are the two most talked-about nominees but neither seem to be actual frontrunners to win. Instead, that seems to come down to two titles. If you had asked me a few months ago what the likely BP winner would be, I'd go with "Belfast." Kenneth Branagh's own nostalgic autobiographical film has swept up plenty of rave reviews and wins in the last few weeks. It's exactly the sort of stately, artistic — if somewhat dull and safe — type of filmmaking that the Academy loves to award. And it still might be the winner.

Yet Jane Campion's "The Power of the Dog" seems to have the slight edge. A western about malignant masculinity, the film is among 2021's best reviewed titles and seems to have the right balance of prestige and topicality to be rewarded with a Best Picture statue. I may be horribly out-of-the-loop here but this really seems like the only movie this year with solid gold buzz behind it.

The remaining six nominees are a round-up of what can typically be called Oscar Bait and a few surprises. "King Richard," a biopic about a difficult father who just happened to raise two star athletes, is the kind of polished studio filmmaking designed to get its lead actor a statue. "West Side Story" and "Nightmare Alley" are high profile remakes, set in beloved if anachronistic genres, from beloved directors. Both earned largely respectful reviews without really breaking through with audiences or blowing critics away. And, once upon a time, a science fiction epic like "Dune" getting a Best Picture nominee might've seem inconceivable. Yet Denis Villeneuve's ambitious adaptation has been poised as the "Lord of the Rings" for the spaceship set from the beginning, so it's less surprising that it managed to scoop up a ton of nods. 

And that leaves us with the surprises. "CODA" is this year's little movie that could, making a big splash at Sundance and being purchased by Apple's streaming service for a ton of money. This seems to stand in contrast to its status as a movie I've heard very few people actually talking about. (Maybe that's because it's on Apple+.) The black horse nominee this year is "Drive My Car," a three hour long Japanese drama that seems to be the fan-favorite among a certain set of in-the-know movie lovers. Some are already wondering if "Drive My Car" would replicate "Parasite's" Best Picture success. Who's to say but I know lots of folks who would be overjoyed by that.

OFFICIAL PREDICTION:

"The Power of the Dog"

BEST ACTOR:

In the last decade, there's been a slow shift of what is considered a slam-dunk Oscar performance. It used to be an actor playing a famous historical figure doing something important — or at least something important to pop culture — seemed like a safe bet for a statue. It still sometimes works and this technique still routinely garners nominations. See nominations this year for Will Smith as "King Richard" or Javier Bardem as Ricky Ricardo in "Being the Ricardos."

Yet this technique is so widely recognized now that a lot of people are skeptical of it. This leaves other types of performances to slip in. Benedict Cumberbatch in "The Power of the Dog" seems to be the one-to-beat this year. It's a respected actor supposedly giving a commanding, compelling performance and everybody loves it. The Academy especially loves it, so Cumberbatch — can I still make fun of his goofy name? — seems to be the favorite.

Though it must be noted that Andrew Garfield in "tick, tick... BOOM!" was called the performance of the year by a lot of people. And you can't underestimate the power of Denzel Washington doing Shakespeare in "The Tragedy of MacBeth." In a year without such a clear favorite, I might have more confidence in giving those two the vote but....

OFFICIAL PREDICTION:

Benedict Cumberbatch in "The Power of the Dog"

BEST ACTRESS:

I'm honestly surprised Kristen Stewart got nominated for "Spencer." That's the kind of smaller movie that is beloved by younger cinephiles but tends to prove more divisive among the older critics. She really seemed like a long shot to me so congrats to the people invested in K-Stew's career. 

And some performers have really established themselves as favorites of the Academy. "The Lost Daughter" is Olivia Colman's second nomination since her surprise win for "The Favourite" and it's clear that the AMPAS really love her. Penelope Cruz is similarly a favorite of the Academy, with her nod for "Parallel Mothers" being her fourth overall nomination in the last fifteen years. Both actresses got nods this year for movies that seem to have medium, at best, buzz.

And then there are the typical Oscar Bait performances. Many seem to agree Nicole Kidman was miscast as Lucille Ball in "Being the Ricardo's" and the movie received mixed notices in general. But the Academy just can't resist an A-list actress playing a Hollywood legend, so she got nominated. The Academy also can't resist a famous beauty "uglying it up" by being covered in make-up to play a notorious person. Even though "The Eyes of Tammy Faye" came and went without much notice, that move was still enough to win Jessica Chastain a nod. 

In this mix, there really isn't a clear favorite. It seems to be coming down to the edgy younger performer — Stewart — and the safe and easy pick — Kidman — and I genuinely don't know which one will get it. 

OFFICIAL PREDICTION:

Leaning towards Kristen Stewart for "Spencer" but I'm probably wrong.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR:

I really can't underplay how much the Academy loved "The Power of the Dog." They loved the film so much that they filled two slots in the Best Supporting Actor category with it. Kodi Smit-McPhee seems to be the front runner in this category, having won at SAG and the BAFTAs, but the AMPAS liked Jesse Plemmons' performance in the same movie enough to pick him a nomination as well.

Plemmons' nomination proves that the Supporting category is really ruled by beloved character actors. J.K. Simmons and Ciaran Hinds both fall into that category. Both scored nominations for their roles in "Belfast" and "Being the Ricardos." Hinds was a real contender earlier in the year and might still sneak in a win too. 

Yet there is always the possibility of an unknown coming out on top. You can debate the ethics of this, if it's tokenism or not, but voting bodies like the Academy love an underdog story. The idea of someone with a disability rising to the highest level of success in his field. Which is the story of Troy Kotsur in "CODA." In addition to this factor, Kotsur's performance seems to be the best thing about the movie. I think this category is a close race between him and McPhee. 

OFFICIAL PREDICTION:

Kodi Smit-McPhee for "The Power of the Dog"

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS:

Jessie Buckley, Aunjanue Ellis, and Ariana DeBose aren't unknowns exactly. But none of them are big stars either. I'll be totally honest: I had never heard of Ellis or DeBose before today. That's because both have risen up to this level of fame through two formats I don't really pay attention to: Stage and television. DeBose, nominated for "West Side Story," is beloved because of her work in "Hamilton." Ellis owes much of her recent recognition to "Lovecraft Country," though she's been in plenty of other things. I only know Buckley — nominates here for "The Lost Daughter"  — from "I'm Thinking of Ending Things," though she's also best known for TV.

This just proves that I'm really not plugged into the cultural zeitgeist. I should know who all three of these people are. (Especially since DeBose seems to be the favorite to win.) I am deeply ashamed and will try to do better in the future.

Anyway, I have heard of the last two nominees. Kristen Dunst's nomination for "The Power of the Dog" seems to be a side effect of that movie being so beloved by the Academy, even if it's clearly a key performance in the film. You could almost say the same thing for Judi Dench in "Belfast," except Judi Dench is Judi Dench. Beloved icon of the stage and screen, I'm not really surprised Dench managed to score a place in this category. She could probably get a Nomination for reading from the phone book.

OFFICIAL PREDICTION:

I have no idea but people who know better than me seem to be betting on Ariana DeBoss in "West Side Story."

BEST DIRECTOR:

When is Paul Thomas Anderson going to win an Oscar? He's one of the most beloved and respected directors of his generation. "There Will Be Blood" is one of the undisputed masterpieces of the 21st century, with "Boogie Nights" and "Magnolia" also being highly regarded. And yet the Academy has repeatedly passed him over. Anderson has been nominated six times across multiple categories. He's nominated for Best Director again this year for "Licorice Pizza" but it seems really unlikely that he's going to win. They're going to continuously snub him and then give him an honorary award when he's close to death, aren't they?

Anderson is nominated alongside Kenneth Branagh, who has also been nominated multiple times without winning. Branagh is not quite the universally beloved figure P.T. is. The last decade spent mostly directing big budget franchise films have definitely taken the sparkle off his Oscar chances some. Yet if "Belfast" ends up being a bigger deal next month than I anticipated, it's totally possible ol' Ken could win. He would, by far, be the safest choice this year.

I mean, he's the safest choice next to Steven Spielberg. Pretty much all of Uncle Steve's "important" movies get Oscar attention and it's not uncommon for him to score a nomination as well. Remaking "West Side Story" was supposedly a dream project for him. Once upon a time, it probably would've been a clear winner too. Yet this year Steve getting nominated at all was a bit of a surprise, so I don't think he'll add to his cache of gold statue in 2022. 

This leaves us with two other choices: The front runner and the dark horse. Jane Campion got a nomination a long time back for "The Piano," a film that has only grown more beloved with time. In fact, Campion's entire career has garnered more esteem in recent years, with even her flops being reevaluated recently. And it seems to me that the Academy has really decided lately to make up for lost time and reward women filmmakers. "The Power of the Dog" is the front runner across multiple categories, so this is clearly Campion's year. The only choice that would be more delightful is Ryûsuke Hamaguchi for “Drive My Car,” if only because nobody really expected him to make it this far.

OFFICIAL PREDICTION:

Jane Campion for “The Power of the Dog”

BEST WRITING:

This is the category, I think, I'm the worst at predicting. Over the years, it's become entirely evident to me that the Academy values totally different things in the screenwriting department than I do. Am I surprised the hyper-verbal, self-aware, self-congratulatory prose of “Don't Look Up” earned an Original Screenplay nomination? Not at all. Do I think more character-driven intimate films like “Licorice Pizza” or “The Worst Person in the World” probably deserve to win more than anything else? Yep. Am I a little confused why films driven by visuals and performances like “Belfast” and “King Richard” managed to score nominations at all? Well, I'm confused by a lot of things. 

Part of why the Screenplay adaptations always throw me is that it seems that Academy members consider writing and storytelling the exact same thing. Because the nominees in these categories are almost always made up of Best Picture nominees, as if people just liked a movie and voted for it across every category. So the Best Adapted category is filled with “The Power of the Dog,” “CODA,” “Dune,” and “Drive My Car,” with “The Lost Daughter” being the sole outlier. Of these, the only one I've seen of this writing is “Dune” and, yeah, okay, I'll admit that film managed to shear Frank Herbert's impenetrable prose down into something cinematic. But it's hard to judge otherwise.

OFFICIAL PREDICTIONS:

Since "The Power of the Dog" and "Belfast" seems to be the frontrunner in most categories, it feels safe to vote for them here. 

BEST MUSIC:

It's been customary for many years for Disney's animated musicals to earn a nomination for one of their songs. Yet due to the convoluted ways the nominees are decided, break-out pop hit “We Don't Talk About Bruno” was passed over in favor of soft guitar-driven ballad “Dos Oruguitas.” “Passed over' isn't even the right phrase for it, as Disney intentionally selected this song as the nominee. And I like this song, don't get me wrong. It's really pretty and nicely sums up the film's themes. But in a movie so full of show-stoppers, it's strange that one of the quieter numbers would be selected. I guess Disney is hoping for a repeat of “Remember Me's” success. 

If “Let It Go” set a precedence for Disney hits to take home Oscar gold, “Skyfall” did the same for Bond themes. These two trends are going head-to-head this year, as Billie Eilish's theme for “No Time to Die” is also nominated. It took me a couple of listens to warm up to this song but now I'm definitely a fan. I like the way it builds, the traditional Bond theme sounds appearing more as it goes on, and Eilish's smoky vocals remain perfect for this particular style. 

Of course, the competing heat of these two songs could cancel each other out. If that's the case, I imagine the Academy would seize on the chance to finally give Beyoncé an Oscar. Now, Beyoncé doesn't really work in my genre so I'm probably not the best judge. But I think “Be Alive” from “King Richard” doesn't represent her best work. Its trudging beat is hard to get into and it sounds like she's really overworking her vocals to invest emotion into some frankly mediocre lyrics. But, I don't know, maybe other people like it.

Meanwhile, over in “Belfast,” rhythmic mumbler/anti-vaxx loon Van Morrison contributes “Down to Joy.” If released back in his “Astral Weeks” heyday, this would surely count among Van's more mediocre efforts. But by the standards of modern day Van Morrison, it's not too bed. It's peppy. I don't think it has a chance in Hell of winning but it's fun to imagine what Van's rambling acceptance speech would be like if it did. 

Which brings us to the required Diane Warren penned nominee. “Somehow You Do,” from some movie I've never heard of called “Four Good Days," is the songwriter's thirteenth nomination. It's pretty much a running joke at this point that Warren gets another nomination for another maudlin ballad, without ever having a chance at actually winning. “Somehow You Do” is this year's edition, with all the over-the-top bombast you've come to expect. I like Reba McEntire's voice as much as anyone else but this is just about the most generic and drippy of inspirational ballads that I've heard recently. 

The scoring side of things is an equally mixed bag. Say what you will — and I'm sure I will — about “Don't Look Up” but it's jazzy score is pretty decent. There's a nice undercurrent of dread to the otherwise upbeat melodies. Germaine Franco's music for “Encanto” also continues the energetic vibe, beautifully mixing traditional South American sounds in with what you expect from an orchestral score. Of the nominated scores, it's the one that probably is most easily listened to outside of the movie. Some of Franco's work here is just really good flamenco influenced dance music. 

Alberto Iglesias' music for “Parallel Mothers" also isn't bad, with enough distortion and sinister undertones beneath the plucking strings, nervous melodies, and piano segments that vary between discordant and tuneful.  Jonny Greenwood's music for “The Power of the Dog” tries something similar, though with more wild west flavor in the form of anxious guitars and fiddles. Which creates more of a mournful feeling from time to time. 

I generally find Hans Zimmer's scores to be pretty boring, so I'm not surprised that I'm underwhelmed by his work on “Dune.” I'll admit, his use of different instruments and styles throughout the soundtrack – from bagpipes to throat singing – is so clever. But a lot of this score is composed of rambling ambiance that doesn't really do it for me. Ya know, the David Lynch version is flawed as fuck but at least he understood that “Dune” really needs a prog rock soundtrack.  

OTHER FILM CATEGORIES:

I'm used to Disney and Pixar dominating the Animated Feature category but the company taking up three of the nominations this year seems to be a bit much. That only left room for one other film from a rival major studio – Sony Animation's “The Mitchells vs the Machines,” which I enjoyed – with the sole indie animation nod going to topical documentary fusion “Flee.” I fully expect widely popular “Encanto” to take it, I'm personally rooting for “Luca,” but “Raya and the Last Dragon” really could've been swiped out with any number of more deserving titles. 

“Flee” continues the trend of a Documentary breaking out into other categories in recent years. It managed to pull of a hat trick of being nominated in Docs, Animated Feature, and International Feature. Documentary seems like the category it is mostly to win in, especially since “Drive My Car” seems to be the favorite to win in International Feature. (Though the critically acclaimed “The Worst Person in the World” may give it some stiff competition.) Though “Summer of Soul” is also a top contender in Documentary, so I guess we'll see. As always, those two categories are filled with films I mostly haven't heard of, so I'm intrigued to get to those.

MISC.:

Ridley Scott's “House of Gucci” was widely presumed to be an Oscar favorite this year, being a flashy biopic from a big director and with a widely lauded A-list cast. Instead, the film managed to score only a single nomination. That would be in the Make-up category, presumably to honor the decision to turn Jared Leto into a sweaty, bald guy instead of just casting an actual sweaty, bald guy. (This is still better than Scott's other movie last year, “The Last Duel,” which I figured would've wormed into Costume Design or something.) The similar physical transformation in “The Eyes of Tammy Faye” also received a nod. The rest of the Make-Up category is as depressing as it always is, with “Dune” being the sole cool genre credit honored and random movies like “Coming 2 America” and “Cruella” filling out the rest of the category. 

Disney's mediocre dog movie also scored a nomination in Costume Design, which seemed like the category it was really gunning for. “Cyrano,” in its sole nomination, is also the sole costume drama in a category usually dominated by such things. Instead, the sci-fi costumes of “Dune” and period clothing of the more recent past in “West Side Story” and “Nightmare Alley” occupy the rest of that category. 

The latter three films also took up slots in Cinematography and Production design. (Of which “The French Dispatch” was totally left out of, one of the few snubs to genuinely annoy me.) I'm really surprised the black-and-white cinematography of “Belfast” didn't earn a nomination, with the Academy instead nodding at another monochromic film with “The Tragedy of MacBeth.” 

Also, I was hoping “Godzilla Vs. Kong” would pull off a Visual Effects nomination, just so we could say that it was an Oscar nominated film. Instead, the Academy deemed “Free Guy – whose achievements include the creation of this monstrosity – worthy of a nomination. 

After several blissful years free of hacky schtick and time-filling bullshit, the Academy is threatening to hire someone to host this year's ceremony. I'm sure that's a result of last year's ceremony being an absolute fucking dumpster fire. While that's true, I don't think the lack of a host was the cause. Regardless of what shape or form it may take, I will be glued to my television on March 27th as things unfold. Until then, I will be trying to cram in reviews of as many of the nominees as I can. This is always a fun journey so let's get to it. 

Director Report Card: Wes Anderson (2021)

10. The French Dispatch

In August of 2018, it was announced that Wes Anderson would be directing a musical, set in post-World War II France. The imagination immediately sparked at what such a project would look like. How a director as precise, as known for his perfectly choreographed imagery, would handle a movie full of singing and dancing. As more information about the film came out, we learned that “The French Dispatch” was not a musical. Instead, the film would tell a collection of stories. Described as “a love letter to journalists” and heavily inspired by Anderson’s love of the New Yorker, the film would wrap filming in 2019. It was yet another one of the high profile projects delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic, not being released until October of last year. By then, it felt a little easy to overlook the newest Wes Anderson film, though it still received considerable critical praise. 

The film is centered around the French Dispatch of the Liberty Kansas Evening Sun, the foreign bureau nestled in the small French town of Ennui-sur-Blasé. After the magazine’s editor dies suddenly, the staff scrambles to assemble the publication’s final issue. Three stories are presented: “The Concrete Masterpiece” concerns Moses Rosenthaler, an artist imprisoned for double homicide. After an art dealer discovers his work, Rosenthaler becomes a reluctant sensation. “Revisions to a Manifesto” follows a student uprising at a local college. Reporter Lucinda Krementz develops a brief romance with Zeffirelli, the self-styled leader of the rebellion. “The Private Dining Room of the Police Commissioner” has Roebuck Wright writing a food review of a meal prepared by the beloved police cook. During the meal, the commissioner’s son is kidnapped and Wright becomes entangled in the investigation. 

With each new Wes Anderson movie, the director’s images grow ever more precise. “The French Dispatch” looks even more like a series of illustrations that has sprung to life than his previous work. The elaborate sets are assembled around the actors, the buildings frequently deconstructing and moving around the cast. More than once, the walls are removed from structures so we can see the interior, like pages of a blueprint. The movement of the cast and the sets feels like an elaborate dance. The cinematography is similarly carefully choreographed, POV shots and whip pans putting exclamation points on multiple moments. Several sequences are paused like photographs, all the action in the frame stopping so the audience can soak up the details. To draw even more attention to the extremely specific visual design, the film often switches between color and black-and-white. The result is a film that is a constant visual spectacle, a complex wind-up machine where every gear and cog slides perfectly into place. 

This technique is certainly on display in the film’s framing device. A lengthy sequence introduces us to the magazine’s home town of Ennui-sur-Blasé. (Literally translated as “Apathy Bordering Dullness.”) Owen Wilson on a bicycle guides us on all the eccentricities and peculiarities of the town. It’s a pairing of information-packed dialogue, each one containing quirky observations, and stylized visuals that is almost overwhelming. The later framing sequences — filled with other Anderson regulars like Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman, Fisher Stevens, and well acquainted newcomers like Elizabeth Moss and Griffin Dunne — are far stiller and reserved seemingly as a deliberate contrast to this breathless introduction.

It’s not just visual complexity that Anderson is increasingly focused on. As in “The Grand Budapest Hotel,” “The French Dispatch” contains multiple narrative layers. This is essentially an anthology film, three stories contained within the larger premise of the magazine. Each one of these episodes contain their own framing devices. “The Concrete Masterpiece” cuts between the story of Rosenthaler in the prison with reporter J.K.L. Berensen telling the story of the artist at a museum exposition, some years later. “Revisions of a Manifesto” shows Krementz living her story and also after-the-fact, the entire history of the characters coming to life. Roebuck’s segment begins with him on a talk show in the seventies, using his photographic memory to read the article exactly as it was written. This multi-nested structure also allows for a number of digressions. Such as when we see that Krementz someday writes a play inspired by these events. Or when the interviewer pauses Roebuck, so that he can discuss another anecdote from his life. “The French Dispatch” is a swirling, fast-paced collection of stories, hidden within each other and built atop one another.

The first proper episode of the film is probably the best. In “The Concrete Masterpiece,” Anderson focuses on the archetype of the self-destructive artist. Moses’ explanation for why he brutally murdered two men is kept vague and impulsive. Inside the prison, his passion to create is fired by a love affair with Simone, the guard watching over him. His impulse to create art is directly tied to his loins, to his fiery affair with the often frustratingly distant Simone. Yet this need to express himself in paint and plaster is paired with a self-destructive streak. He straps himself into an electric chair and threatens suicide at one point. He takes years to finish his masterpiece, greatly angering his art dealer, and still demands more time. The eventual reveal of the masterpiece is shown to be frustratingly immovable. The artist’s (in its own way sexual) need to create is linked totally to a similarly strong need to destroy, whether that be life or his own success. “The Concrete Masterpiece,” in its on particular way, shows the process of the Eros and Thanatos drive inside every creative mind. 

“The Concrete Masterpiece” is also an often hilarious skewing of the art world. Julien Cadazio is in prison for tax evasion when he discovers Moses’ work. He represents all the impertinence of art dealing, praising Moses when buying or selling his work, calling him overrated when he inconveniences him, and screaming at him when he thinks his work can’t be sold. His uncles are also art dealers and often approach Moses’ work with confusion. The woman who ultimately buys his work is a rich old woman from the Midwest, who speaks in a folksy hillbilly accent. It’s clear that those who seek to make commerce out of art have little understanding of the artist’s mind. This is hardly a new observation but Anderson and his team’s particular wit manages to make some fresh, funny observations about this often discussed topic. 

The cast of “The Concrete Masterpiece” sees a good mixture of Anderson regulars and newcomers to the director’s fold. Benicio del Toro is ideally cast in the role of Moses Rosenthaler, a frequently grumbling man who seems foggily stoic until he unleashes an animal-like frenzy. Two modes del Toro excels at. Lea Seydoux, gorgeous, is amusingly curt and implacable as the beguilingly mysterious muse. Adrien Brody gets to indulge in some comedic manicness as the haughty and high-strung Cadazio. It’s a similar role to his part in “The Grand Budapest Hotel” but a good use of Brody’s talents. Tilda Swinton gets some dry laughs in the framing device, when her professionalism slips, and it’s nice to see Bob Balaban and Henry Winkler in small roles.

“Revisions to a Manifesto” is the part of “The French Dispatch” that most reminds me of a prior Anderson movie. Inspired by the May 68 protests, Anderson dismiss any serious political concerns. Instead, the student protests are largely characterized by petty bickering. The students argue endlessly among themselves, about inconsequential topics like pop music or grammar. At one point, they are playing chess with the police over an intercom, suggesting the entire protest is more game than demonstration. Concentrating on the petty posturing of youth recalls “Rushmore” yet “Revisions to a Manifesto” never quite grasps the melancholy or longing of that movie. 

Which isn’t to say I disliked the segment. At its best, the story is an ode to the messiness of youth. The awkward way Zeffirelli stumbles into a relationship with an older woman, clearly having no idea what he’s doing, is endearing. As is the way he disguises his clear attraction to Juliette, his main rival in the protests, via their arguments. In its final moments, Krementz’ perspective emerges as the main point of the segment, looking on at the young man’s adventures with a nostalgic distance that he’s not capable of experiencing. In those final moments, what felt like a trifle becomes more meaningful.

It also helps that “Revisions of a Manifesto” has a very funny cast. Timothee Chalamet seems like such a natural fit for the Anderson style. His ability to deliver precise dialogue is well utilized but so is his comedic timing, especially when it comes to awkward stammering. He has strong chemistry with Frances McDormand, who gives a typically excellent performance as Krementz. She conveys both sadness and joy with a simple smile. I’m not familiar with Alayna Khoudri’s other credits but she gives the breakout performance here, stunning as Juliette. Also, this is the first time I’ve seen Cecile de France — in a small role as Zeffirelli’s mom — in anything in what feels like a very long time.*

The third installment of “The French Dispatch” is probably its most elaborately assembled segment, which is no small feat. The black-and-white photography becomes the most stark and stylized here of the entire film. The interior of the private dining room is very dark, making the brief splashes of light all the more striking. This is also the film’s most action-packed installment, featuring several sequences of gunfire. As technically marvelous as it is to watch Anderson’s tableaus come together, watching one split apart in gunfire is almost as impressive. The segment’s commitment to visual extravagance climaxes with a lengthy animated scene: A car chase through the city, which prominently features a circus strongman clinging to the hood of a moving car, that ends in an explosion. The cartooning recreates the magazine illustrations the entire movie is patterned after in bright colors and speedy motions. 

In fact, the story’s visual trickery is so overwhelming, that the human element sometimes feels a little lost. “The Private Dining Room of the Police Commissioner” has the most complex narrative of the film’s episodes, to the point where I was sometimes a little loss on what a particular character’s importance was to the plot. This is an element the entire film could be criticized for. “The French Dispatch” features so many playful set designs, so much breathlessly delivered information, so much exquisitely designed and displayed images that it sometimes feels more like a technical exercise than an emotional one. Could it be that Wes Anderson has become so hyper-focused on his brilliant images that he is loosing sight of the humor and heart that makes his best work resonate? 

Possibly and this is probably why the most effective scenes in “The French Dispatch” are its most quiet. This is especially clear in “The Private Dining Room of the Police Commissioner.” Two scenes stick out. When Roebuck’s retelling of his article is interrupted so that he can recall how he was recruited to the French Dispatch, is a moment where simple professionalism and human empathy among the characters is hard to distinguish. The emotional climax of the story concerns another soft-spoken man who commitment to his job connects directly with his insecurities as an outsider in society. And there is something to be said for a story that devoted so much time to the way food can connect people from different cultures and countries. 

Narrating the entire story is Jeffrey Wright’s sonorous voice, which has rarely been better used than here. Wright is a sure and steady storytelling who also knows to let just the right degree of vulnerability sneak into his telling. It’s clear that this is the director most capable of utilizing Edward Norton’s certain energy for comedy, as he’s frequently hilarious as the mastermind behind the story’s crime. Anderson is now of such a standing as a director that he can even fill minor roles with well-known actors. Willem DaFoe and Saoirse Ronan really just appear in two scenes, neither doing much besides appearing and saying a few lines. Though I definitely would’ve missed them if they weren’t there. 

Ultimately, “The French Dispatch” does not feel like the next major work from an important filmmaker. That doesn’t mean it isn’t frequently brilliant. It looks utterly fantastic and unwinds with such an incredible sense of charm and skill. The cast are all perfectly utilized. It’s often funny and sad and entertaining in all the right ways. I enjoyed it a lot, even if it also feels like Anderson just kind of playing around, instead of really trying to test his abilities as a filmmaker. And if he spends the rest of his career playing around like this, there’s certainly worst fates a director can suffer. “The French Dispatch” is extraordinarily assembled and executed, even if it ends up feeling curiously hollow at other times. [Grade: B]

Director Report Card: Paul Verhoeven (2021)

17. Benedetta

All throughout his career, Paul Verhoeven has harbored an obsession with Christian iconography. For years, he's kicked around making a film about Christ as a historical figure. He became such an expert on the subject that he was the only non-scholar member invited to a council on the topic. His films, sometimes blatantly and sometimes more subtly, have explore his thoughts and feelings about Christianity as a religion centered around an act of violence. Ultimately, it was only a matter of time before Verhoeven's fascination with religion resulted in a movie directly dealing with the topic. This desire would finally take shape with “Benedetta,” a modern day nunspoloitation film that Verhoeven would fill with the sex and violence devotees of the director have come to expect. 

Our setting is 17th century Italy, at a small abbey in Tuscany. Benedetta Carlini joins the abbey as a young girl. Even at this youthful age, she's already experiencing intense religious hallucinations, which continue into adulthood. This causes her to rise through the ranks of the abbey. By chance, a young woman named Bartolomea comes to live at the convent. The girl stirs new feelings of lust and love in Benedetta, whose visions are soon accompanied by stigmata. Deemed a miracle by church officials, She is given the role of mother superior. This already controversy decision is compacted by the encroaching plague and the discovery that Benedetta and Bartolomea are lesbian lovers. 

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of “Benedetta” is how the title character considers romantic love and religious awe as one and the same. Her visions of Jesus almost always have a romantic, if not sexual, tinge to them. She repeatedly refers to herself as the “bride of Christ.” She takes this very literally, devoted to Christ the way a loving wife would be. At the same time, when she gives into her attraction to Bartolomea, she goes into throes of pleasure that seems identical to the ecclesiastic awe from her visions. Later, when she's put on trial for her sapphic actions, she defends herself by making this exact point: Love is love to her, whether it be love for her God or love for her fellow sister. She expresses the loving message of Christ by loving everyone. The film seems fairly sincere about this, suggesting that religious beliefs are a deeply personal matter.

It's an interesting contrast, which brings with it a certain degree of ambiguity. Does Beneditta actually believe any of her claims? Throughout the film, she has stigmatic episodes. Debate rages over whether these are genuine or if she cuts herself to replicate Christ's wounds. The film eventually provides an answer to that question but still leaves something up to the audience to decide. Is Benedetta another in the long line of Verhoevenian women, whose previous ranks include Katie Tippel, Catherine Tramaine, and Michelle? A women cast in a masculine world who has to be just as ruthless and duplicitous as the men around her to survive? Or is she a true believer, convinced or maybe even unaware of what she does to make her religious visions reality? It's something to chew on, adding a layer of beguiling unclearness to the entire film.

“Benedetta” is not an anti-religion film, which definitely disappointed some viewers. The film seems to agree that the title character should be allowed practice her beliefs however she wants. However, Verhoeven and his team certainly have less ambiguous views on the institution of the church itself. Early on, Benedetta is not admitted to the abbey until her parents promise to contribute a sizable financial donation. Later, Bartolomea is granted entrance when someone agrees to pay for her. The Abbess and the papal ambassador to the abbey spend most of their screen time arguing among themselves and trying to ensure that they maintain their power. It's clear that faith and religious matters is not actually on church officials' minds here. “Benedetta” may portray faith as something deeply personal but it clearly condemns the power structures, hypocrisies, and backstabbing of the church itself. 

It doesn't go unnoticed that the main target of the church's prosecution throughout the film is women. We see multiple examples of women struggling to survive in a world that marginalizes and persecutes them. Bartolomea's past as a victim of sexual abuse is briefly detailed. It's noted that some of the nuns had past lives as prostitutes. And it's certain that the reason the Abbess holds onto the power she has so fiercely is because this one of the few ways a woman, in this time, could have any power at all. The men in the papacy are aghast at the mere idea of lesbianism, some being completely unfamiliar with it. Never mind that the warmth between Benedetta and Bartolomea is preferable to the coldness of the systems, religious and patriarchal, they are both trapped in. Feminist readings of Verhoeven's films are tricky, sometimes, but “Benedetta” is clearly about the constraints put in place long ago to keep women oppressed. 

While Veroheven's modern day work definitely feels classier than his iconic output, “Benedetta” does recall one of his earlier films in a specific way. Much like “Flesh + Blood,” “Benedetta” is set in plague ridden Europe and seems determined to show us how filthy that time was. Within minutes of the movie starting, we see a bird shitting in a man's open eyes. Shortly afterwards, there's a stage show involving a man setting his farts on fire. Later on, a key conversation takes place between Benedetta and Bartolomea while they are using the toilets. It's evident what Verhoeven is doing here. These moments fit right in with the idea that Benedetta's sexual desires and her religious awe are linked. These everyday, lowly acts take place alongside the stately affairs of nuns and elected officials. It's all linked, all part of the same body.

Much like “Flesh + Blood,” “Benedetta” is set in a Europe ravaged by plague. The creeping fear of the infection lurks at the margin of the film's first half. The brief glimpses we get of the city outside the abbey, we see panicked mobs barely clinging to life. Later, the sight of black buboes on people's skin signals that they'll soon become a victim of the plague, spreading it to others. Alongside these grotesque images of disease, Verhoeven throws in some apocalyptic visions of a white comet in a red sky above the abbey. It all adds to capturing a feeling of a world absolutely on the brink of destruction, spinning out of control. This is a mood befitting both 17th century Italy and 2021.

While “Benedetta” may be a seemingly classy costume drama, this is still a Paul Verhoeven movie. The director has never lost his love of sex and violence, of outrageous visuals. This is most obvious during Benedetta's bizarre religious visions. One has Christ, on horse back, swooping in to rescue her by cleaving heads in half, before the figure is revealed as less Christ-like and with more Earthly desires. Later in the film, before deciding to consummate her passions with Bartolomea, she has a vision of Christ on the cross... That concludes with him revealing feminine genitalia. Does this mean Benedetta isn't even aware of the biological differences between men and women? I have no idea but it's nuts. What other director would dare show us forbidden images like these?

Of course, there's the sex scenes too. These are less lurid than the presence of a dildo carved from a statue of Virgin Mary would suggest. Oh, there's plenty of nudity, lots of shots of naked flesh on naked flesh. Yet there's a genuine passion here, a romance around the eroticism of the female form, that separates this from the lurid humping we saw in “Spetters,” “Basic Instinct,” or “Showgirls.” This certainly befits Beneditta's inability to distinguish religious awe from earthly sexual desires. And it must be said, the sex scenes still represent a level of eroticism that has become pretty much totally unseen in mainstream American cinema at this point.

Further supporting the film is a strong cast. Virginie Efira, who previously had a small role as the neighbor's wife in “Elle,” stars as Benedetta. Efira invests Benedetta with the absolute conviction the character needs. While the audience is never certain, even up to the end, if the character has ulterior motives, we never doubt the intensity of her beliefs. Efira can create moments of serenity and religious clarity and also pairs them with fiery outbursts. Daphne Patakia plays Bartolomea as a creature of pure instinct, who does what she feels is right or what feels good. Never has a fart ever been a character establishing moment before. Patakia is very good at summoning up that wild, untamable energy. The two compliment each other nicely. 

The supporting cast is strong too. Charlotte Rampling, whose character is only known as The Abbess, is intimidating. She is steely, hard and unforgiving, in her early scenes. Early on, when haggling about money with Benedetta's parents, it's made apparent that this women is a hard negotiator. Yet, as the film goes on, Rampling is allowed to reveal some humanity under this steely exterior, to confirm that this hardened persona protects a vulnerable person. Lambert Wilson essentially plays the story's villain, the unnamed Nuncio. While it's not the over-the-top performance we've come to expect from Wilson, he still brings a level of venom to the role of a man happy to judge others for his own motivations.

Even at the age of 83 years old, Paul Verhoeven is somehow still pissing the right people off. “Benedetta” would attract small protests from Catholic organizations, who seem to consider the movie blasphemous and an offensive depiction of the Virgin Mary. I guess you can still offend some people in this world. Otherwise, “Benedetta” has been praised by the majority of critics. The film manages to sum up many of the themes and obsessions Verhoeven has carried with him his whole career. It is, simultaneously, more thoughtful and tasteful than you'd expect while never lacking for the outrageous content you would hope for from this director. In other words, Verhoeven and his team hit another one out of the park. “Benedetta” is a fascinating, layered, and hugely entertaining motion picture. [Grade: A]

Film Preview 2022

Things are never getting back to normal. COVID has changed the world forever and it's never going away. In the best version of the future, we'll all get a booster every year and it'll be no more inconvenient than a flu shot. Less optimistic viewpoints show the vocal minority of unvaccinated people allowing new variants to emerge that continue to fuck up our lives and kill more innocent people. 

Depressed now? Of course you are, the world is fucking depressing. But you know what doesn't bum me out? The movies, man. If nothing else, cinema continues to be my companion during these apocalyptic times we are living through. Theaters kind of bounced back from the forced closure of 2020. There's plenty to be grumpy about — it really is starting to feel like blockbuster cinema is pushing smaller films out of theaters and peak streaming is giving us a continuous flood of content that causes everything to be overlooked — but it's the new year. I have to be optimistic about something. 

Because, if nothing else, there's a lot of stuff coming out in the next twelve months that sure looks cool. Putting together these lists of most anticipated films always gets me excited. The day I can't get excited for any movies anymore is the day I pack it in. But I don't foresee that coming anytime soon because 2022 is looking stacked with tantalizing titles. So let's dive right in. This is my...

Top Ten Most Anticipated Films of 2022

1. Crimes of the Future

A few years back, I did a Director Report Card devoted to David Cronenberg. At the end of the review, I postulated that it seemed likely that Cronenberg was retired from movie making. That we'd have to rely on his son, chip off the venereal horror block Brandon, to get our body horror fix again. Well, defying all expectations, David Cronenberg is returning in 2022. And even more exciting, his new film will be returning him to the realm of body modification and weird sci-fi. Not only does the new project take its title from an old student film of Cronenberg, the script was supposedly written twenty years ago. He even got Howard Shore back to do the score! This makes me hopeful that it'll be a return of the Cronenberg we all fell in love with... If not, Brandon has a new, freaky sounding thing coming out this year too.

2. Silent Twins

Agnieszka Smoczyńska's “The Lure,” the New Wave horror/musical about mermaids coming of age, was my favorite film of 2017. Smoczyńska would go on to made a barely released film called “Fugue” and contribute to an anthology. In 2022, she's finally making a more high-profile return to filmmaking. “Silent Twins” is her English language debut. That alone would make the film one of my most anticipated of the year. Yet  Smoczyńska's latest is also adapting the incredibly bizarre true story of June and Jennifer Gibbons. That's a fascinating tale of a pair of twin sisters who communicated only with each other and had a disturbing co-dependent relationship. Imagine a real life version of “Dead Ringers.” All of this has got me so pumped that I can even overlook “Silent Twins' starring anti-vaxx loony Letitia Wright. 

3. Poor Things

It took me a while to figured out if I liked Yorgos Lanthimos. “The Lobster” was the first of his films I ever saw and I didn't love it. However, by the time I caught up with “Killing of a Sacred Deer” and “The Favourite,” I was on Lanthimos' oddball wavelength. For his next weird thing, Lanthimos is returning to macabre subjects again. “Poor Things,” based on a novel by Alasdair Gray, is a “Frankenstein”-inspired story about a mad scientist – played by Willem Dafoe, hell yeah – resurrecting a dead woman – played by Lanthimos' “Favourite” star Emma Stone – by transferring the brain of her unborn child into her own head. I love “Frankenstein” and I'm very intrigued to see Lanthimos put his own spin on this particular story. 

4. Disappointments Blvd.

Ari Aster remains a divisive talent but I found “Hereditary” and “Midsommar” to be highly original, extremely effective horror pictures. Whether Aster can keep it up for a third time in a row remains to be seen but “Disappointments Blvd” sounds like his most ambitious film yet. Aster has described it as a “four-hour long nightmare comedy.” The plot details remain obscure but supposedly it's a story about the rise of an entrepreneur. The cast is the cherry on the existentially terrifying sundae: Joaquin Phoenix, that leading man who specializes in emotionally intense performance, is teaming with the master of hysterical horror. That's enough for me but Nathan Lane, Richard Kind, and Parker Posey – all of whom seem perfect for Aster's style – are all in the movie as well. Meryl Streep is too. Oh yeah, I'm ready for this.

5. Bones and All

Another recent director to get my attention is Luca Guadagnino. “Call Me By Your Name” made me cry and his remake of “Suspiria” was, if nothing else, a fiercely original new take on Argento's original. Guadagnino is returning to horror for his next project. “Bones and All,” also a novel adaptation, is a romance about an underground society of cannibals. Well, shit, right there, I'm intrigued. The stacked cast includes Timothee Chalamet, Mark Rylance, Jessica Harper, and David Gordon Green for some reason. I'm not entirely sure what to expect from all of that and that's exactly why I'm interested. 

6. Asteroid City

Wes Anderson just gifted us with “The French Dispatch” last year but he's already got his follow-up in the can. We don't know much about “Asteroid City” right now. It was filmed in Spain and was, briefly, rumored to have been a western. I'm sure that would've been amazing but it looks to not be the case. What we do know about the film is that it has, as we've come to expect from Anderson, an amazing cast. The stack of A-listers involved include Tom Hanks, Scarlett Johansson, Margot Robie, Bryan Cranston, Matt Dillon, Maya Hawke, and Anderson regulars Bill Murray, Tilda Swinton, Adrien Brody, Jason Schwartzman, and Jeff Goldblum. Nestled among these bigger names is Sophia Lillis, who is probably my favorite actress working right now. Sophia should be a perfect fit for Anderson's style and world, so hopefully she's actually given something to do inside such a jam-packed cast. 

7. Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness

Marvel's post-”Endgame” movies have not been the smoothest ride and I think the common opinion is that the studio is going a little better with its TV series than films. Yet I've got a lot of reasons to be excited for “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” The first “Doctor Strange” has slowly become one of my favorite films in the MCU. This sequel promises to dip its toe into the more horrific side of the “Doctor Strange” comic books. The movie may possibly even feature my favorite Marvel Comics eldritch abomination, Shuma-Gorath. And who is guiding this big budget superhero homage to Lovecraftian madness? None other than Sam Raimi, making his return to directing after a decade away and getting back to the superhero genre he helped defined. Hell yeah, let's do it.

8. You Are Not My Mother

The folk horror revival continues unabated. I'm a fan, for the most part, especially when the films lean more on the mythological side of things. “You Are Not My Mother” is coming from Ireland, a country whose folklore defines folklore. The plot – of a teenage girl's mother being replaced by an otherworldly doppelganger – is obviously inspired by stories of fairies and changelings. That caught my attention but then I read that the entire movie is set in the week leading up to Halloween. The combination of folk horror and Halloween horror is too sweet to resist. This is the debut film of director Kate Dolan, so who knows how it'll turn out, but I'm intrigued enough to roll the dice on this one. Magnet has picked it up for distribution later this year.

9. Three Thousand Years of Longing

Another beloved genre auteur is making his return to cinemas this year as well. George Miller, after crafting a modern masterpiece with “Fury Road,” has been taking his sweet time crafting his follow-up. Now it looks ready to emerge. “Three Thousand Years of Longing” is described as an “epic romance fantasy” discussing life and history with an immortal djinn. Those roles will be played by Tilda Swinton and Idris Elba. Honestly, the thought of those two actors having an esoteric conversation with tinges of elaborate fantasy around them sounds pretty fucking great to me. What form this premise will take is still a bit of a mystery but I'm very excited to see it.

10. Havoc

Gareth Evans' “The Raid” and its sequel remain high-marks for ass-kicking cinema that still hasn't been topped quite a few years later. Especially by Evans himself, whose more recent work has shied away from action. “Havoc,” however, sounds like it might hearken back to “The Raid.” Starring Tom Hardy, who seems like a good match for Evans' style, it concerns a detective fighting his way through a criminal underworld. Hopefully they mean that literally. The only reason I'm not more excited for this is because it's going straight-to-Netflix, which doesn't feel like it's a marker of quality here of late. 

Other Films of Note:

The Batman, The Flash, Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom, and more...

It wouldn’t be a film preview without a run down of the superhero movies coming out this year. DC Comics is actually leading the race this year, with six movies starring their characters hitting the big screens. The most exciting of which, for me, is “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom.” That’s because Aquaman is my favorite DC hero. James Wan struck the perfect balance between high fantasy, campy humor, superhero melodrama, and outrageous action in the first one. Hopefully he keeps it up for the sequel, even if I’m pretty skeptical about that black-and-blue suit.

I’m also mildly interested in the long-in-development “Black Adam,” co-starring the much beloved Justice Society, if only because it’s been too long since Dwayne Johnson play an antihero. (Though his previous film with director Jaume Collet-Serra, "Jungle Cruise," didn't inspire a lot of confidence.) Johnson is also voicing Krypto the Superdog in “DC Legion of Superpets.” That looks rather dire, which is unfortunate as I love the Silver Age silliness of the Superpets concept. 

I’m afraid I can’t muster much enthusiasm for “The Batman.” It looks like another drab, attempt to emulate the Christopher Nolan films. The Riddler being turned into some Anonymous style hacker serial killer holds no interest for me and I’m still not sold on Robert Pattinson as a leading man. I want a Batman movie with color in it again. Seeing Michael Keaton back as Batman in “The Flash” might be fun but I am tiring of multiverse shenanigans in these movies. Especially in a film ostensibly meant to launch a separate series. We might even get a “Batgirl” movie this year too, though I'm kind of expecting that to get pushed back to 2023...

Black Glasses

It's been ten years since Dario Argento unleashed "Dracula 3D," another fiasco that left us wondering if there was any of the old panache left in the once great director. It's a question we'll all have to ask again this year, as he has a new movie coming out. "Black Glasses" has the director returning to the giallo genre he pioneered. Its story concerns a prostitute blinded by a serial killer and adopting a young orphan, which makes it sound like the horror version of "The Life Ahead." You'll have to excuse me if I can't muster more enthusiasm for this one. Dario is also going to be in front of the camera, with a starring role in "Vortex," the latest visual confrontation from Gasper Noe. Maybe he's a better actor than director these days... 

Black Panther: Wakanda Forever, Thor: Love and Thunder, and more...

The second most exciting Marvel movie is "Thor: Love and Thunder." Taika Waititi — whose recently reshot soccer movie might also see the light of day this year — made "Thor: Ragnarok" a delightfully kooky superhero fantasy. Considering the sequel is adding Gorr the God Butcher and Russell Crowe's Zeus to the mixture, another similarly energetic and sarcastic romp is likely forthcoming. 

I'm less certain about "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever," a production that has been fraught with difficulties. It still remains unseen how Disney and director Ryan Coogler will keep this franchise going when there's a huge, Chadwick Boseman shaped hole in the center. And I knew superhero fatigue was real when the visually spectacular trailer for "Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse" left me exhausted, rather than excited. Must that movie be a part one? (Sony is also ready to finally dump "Morbius" this month eventually.)

 

Cocaine Bear

What upcoming release has the best title of the year? Is it "We Have a Ghost," the latest horror/comedy from "Freaky"/"Happy Death Day" director Christopher Landon? Perhaps it's the similarly flippant "Sorry About the Demon," from "Scare Package's" Emily Hagins. What about "Studio 666," a starring vehicle for the Foo Fighters with a fittingly metal title and premise? 

These are all excellent candidates but, for my money, the best title this year is "Cocaine Bear." Those two words together conjure up such powerful images, of a fearsome grizzly driven absolutely out of its gourd by booger sugar. What makes this project even better is that it's based on a true story. Yes, one of our ursine friends really did consume 70 pounds of blow once. There's pretty much no way Elizabeth Banks' film, which is being described as a "character-driven thriller," can live up to that title but I'll definitely be checking it out anyway. 

Dark Harvest

Director David Slade broke out with "Hard Candy," an intense and disturbing thriller that has become one of my all-time favorite movies. I then lost a lot of confidence in him when his next credit was the incredibly mediocre "30 Days of Night." Slade would go to direct a "Twilight" movie but he won back some respect with a run of pretty good television jobs, including the excellent "Metalhead" episode of "Black Mirror." His next project is especially intriguing exactly because it's another horror movie based on my favorite holiday: "Dark Harvest" concerns a small midwestern town who must fight off a pumpkin-headed monster named "October Boy" every fall. Okay, right there, I'm sold. Let's hope Slade brings some of the intimate intensity of "Hard Candy" and not the shaky-cam chaos of "30 Days of Night." 

Dead for a Dollar

Walter Hill will always have the respect of me, and many other film dorks, for the run of hard-boiled crime and action films he directed in the seventies and eighties. Yet it's fair to say, his most recent films, like mediocre Stallone flick "Bullet to the Head" and that movie where Michelle Rodriguez played a trans-woman, do not inspire the most confidence. Nevertheless, his next project sounds pretty fucking cool. "Dead for a Dollar" sees Hill returning to the western genre for the first in decades. It stars Christoph Waltz and Willem DaFoe as a bounty hunter and the gambler/outlaw he has unfinished business with. Sounds bitchin', so let's hope Hill is on the ball for this one. 

Everything, Everywhere All at Once, The Northman, and more...

Six of the movies that were on my 2021 most anticipated list are still awaiting release, presumably because my taste is too hip and cutting edge to handle. Of these, four of which have had trailers or clips released. (We'll have to settle for set photos for Riley Stearns' "Dual" and production artwork for Guillermo del Toro's "Pinocchio.") 

"Everything Everywhere All at Once" has the best of these trailers, looking like a highly imaginative and poignantly funny action/fantasy vehicle for the great Michelle Yeoh. Robert Eggers' Viking epic "The Northman" is shaping up to be another mud splattered, delirious vision from the rising auteur. Nicolas Cage starring meta-comedy "The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent" looks far broader and more flippant than I was hoping for. Netflix has only released a few teasers from the Henry Selick/Key and Peele stop-motion collab "Wendell and Wild" but they look pretty fucking cool. Hopefully all of these will actually be released this year. 

The Expendables 4

I don't really like the term "guilty pleasure" but it's hard for me to justify my enjoyment of the "Expendables" films. They are dumb shoot-'em-ups, full of lame in-jokes that I should hate but... I don't know, I just love old action stars, I guess. After a considerable hiatus, the series is coming back for a fourth entry. As always, my excitement level depends entirely on which washed-up action stars are joining Stallone. (Who also has a superhero deconstruction — but pointedly not "Creed III" — coming this year) Jason Statham, Dolph, and Randy Couture are all back. I guess Arnold was too busy starring in the sequel to an Internet meme... New recruits include Tony Jaa and Iko Uwais — Cool! — and Andy Garcia, 50 Cent(?), and Megan Fox(???). Those three are hardly action hall-of-famers, so my expectations are pretty low for this one. 

Evil Dead Rise, Hellraiser, and Prey

Three beloved eighties horror franchise are getting high-profile straight-to-streaming reboots. HBO Max will receive "Evil Dead Rise," which is moving the series into an urban setting. I was underwhelmed by director Lee Cronin's previous film, "A Hole in the Ground." I also didn't love the remake, so it's hard to get too excited for an "Evil Dead" film without Bruce Campbell or Sam Raimi.

More intriguing is David Bruckner's made-for-Hulu "Hellraiser" reboot. Bruckner has made some movies I liked and seems like a good fit for this much-abused series. We've got a fresh new Pinhead and a promise to dig into the franchise's lore. Whatever the results are, it's almost guaranteed to be better than the last six direct-to-video sequels.

Of the three of these, the one I'm watching the most closely is "Prey," Dan Trachtenberg's "Predator" movie. (Which they originally hoped to market as not a "Predator," which would've been cool, but the internet spoiled that.) The film seeks to depict the first encounter between a human and a Predator, with the story centering on a young Comanche woman in pre-colonial America. That sounds like the fresh approach that, frankly, this franchise needs. This one will always be debuting on Hulu. 

Firestarter and 'Salem's Lot

Studios are still riding the post-"It" wave of Stephen King adaptations. We're getting three more this year. That includes a follow-up to that mediocre "Pet Sematary" remake, as well as new versions of "Firestarter" and "'Salem's Lot." Those two probably could do with remakes, as the previous iterations weren't too hot. Both have up-and-coming directors attached, with "The Vigil's" Keith Thomas handling little Charlie and "Annabelle Comes Home's" Gary Dauberman heading to Jerusalem's Lot. The latter has William Sadler in an unspecified role — might he be Barlow?—  while the former sees Zac Efron stepping into the dad role. Which makes me feel roughly a hundred years old. 

Halloween Ends and Scream

I guess there's just a lot of horror sequels/reboots coming out this year. Long-in-the-tooth slasher franchises are continuing as well. "Halloween Ends," the conclusion to David Gordon Green's trilogy, arrives in October. I was mixed on "Halloween Kills" but its ending left me with no idea where the series might go next. Which is kind of exciting. 

Coming in just a few weeks is the fifth "Scream" film, which is somehow not called "5cream." It looks to be a direct emulation of the Blumhouse "Halloween," with Neve Campbell back as a traumatized Sidney Prescott protecting a new generation of Ghostface victims. The trailer did not impress me at all, looking to barely update this series to the modern day. But maybe the "Ready or Not" guys have some surprises up their sleeves. We'll find out soon enough. (Also, that shitty sounding "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" movie they shot in Bulgaria two years ago is getting dumped on Netflix this year.)

I'll Show You Mine and Year of the Fox

A couple of years back, Megan Griffiths made an intriguing little movie called "Sadie." It didn't get much attention but it's a film that stuck with me more than I realized at the time. Griffiths is back with not one but two new films this year. Both "Year of the Fox" and "I'll Show You Mine" concern the same sort of familial tension and trauma that powered "Sadie." "I'll Show You Mine" has an author interview her own nephew on his history as a model but uncovering buried resentment instead, "Year of the Fox" is a nineties period piece about an adopted teenager navigator her parents' divorce. We'll see how those shaped up when they inevitably surface. 

Jurassic World: Dominion

While Steven Spielberg is threatening to retire with the autobiographical "The Fabelmans," the dinosaur franchise he started looks primed to continue into the future. I know the "Jurassic World" movies are divisive and Colin Trevorrow is widely despised in some circles. But I am a simple man, who loves to watch dinosaurs wreck shit, so I enjoy them immensely. "Jurassic World: Dominion" looks to be finally giving us the movie about dinosaurs on the mainland that "The Lost World" promised all those years ago. The opening five minutes, which Universal posted to YouTube as an early teaser, sure is stunning. 

Lightyear and Turning Red

Pixar may not be the guaranteed hit makers they once were but the studio continues to put out interesting films, at least in my opinion. "Turning Red," Pixar's version of "Teen Wolf," looks to continue the loose, slice-of-life, and slightly chaotic feel of last year's "Luca." It looks adorable and Disney is going to sell so many toys of a big, fluffy red panda. "Lightyear," meanwhile, strikes me as a clever way to continue the "Toy Story" brand without simply making a fifth "Toy Story." If Buzz Lightyear exists as a mega-popular toy within Andy's world, why wouldn't there be a big screen feature adaptation of his adventures eventually? That's the vibe I'm getting anyway. 

Mad God

Legendary Hollywood creature effects artist (and one-time “Starship Troopers” sequel director) Phil Tippett has been working on “Mad God” on and off for thirty years. At one point, he was funding and releasing the film piece-meal fashion as a series of shorts through Kickstarter. Now, Tippett has assembled “Mad God” into a feature length film. And it is, by most estimations, a totally unique and grotesque vision that isn't quite like anything else before it. The only reason this insane looking trip into stop-motion Hell isn't at the top of my list this year is because I have little confidence that a film this off-beat is going to secure wide distribution any time soon.

Marlowe

Probably because I have the soul of a 73 year old man, I'm surprised to see more people aren't getting more excited about this one. Neil Jordan is directing a Philip Marlowe movie, with Liam Neeson playing Raymond Chandler's beloved detective. This isn't a modern update or anything – though it isn't based on Chandler's writing and instead a new Marlowe adventure, which is slightly bullshitty –  just a straight-up new film noir movie being delivered to us in 2022, directed by someone who is quietly an extremely talented filmmaker. Come on, that's cool, guys! Surely I'm not the only person excited by that?

The Munsters 

Rob Zombie is, to say the least, a divisive talent. He has a distinctive style that some love and others find obnoxious or repugnant. That last time he rebooted somebody else's story, the result were the extremely controversial “Halloween” remakes. I'm a fan of some of Zombie's movies, including that first “Halloween” of his. But I'm pretty cautious of his next reboot. Zombie promises that he's a huge fan of “The Munsters” and the man did write “Dragula,” after all. 

Yet my anticipation for his big screen revision of the beloved, Universal Monsters-adjacent sitcom depends entirely on tone. Will Zombie stay faithful to the original show's tone, where the Munsters were largely harmless goofballs in a world that feared them? Or will he “Zombify” these characters into another foul-mouthed brood of depraved lunatics? I don't know if I can handle hearing Herman Munster threaten to skull-fuck somebody. Unsurprisingly, Rob has cast Sheri Moon as Lily and filled most of the rest of the cast with his regulars. (And, supposedly, Cassandra “Elvira” Peterson is in the film as well) I guess we'll find out what approach this “Munsters” will take when the movie premieres either in theaters or, as rumored, exclusively on Peacock. 

Old Man

One of my favorite directors, Lucky McKee, is back at it this year. He has described “Old Man” as a his latest “weird thing.” The vague plot synopsis describes Stephen Lang as an old man, hiding out in the woods, with a terrifying secret. Considering McKee's previous film, the underseen “Kindred Spirits,” was definitely a return-to-form for him, I'm excited to see what will come next. The cast also includes Marc Senter, the star of the McKee-produced “The Lost...” Whose director, Christopher Sivertson, also has a new movie, starring Christina Ricci no less, coming out this year. So 2022 is going to be big for McKee and his collaborators. 

The Toxic Avenger

Since literally the early nineties, Lloyd Kaufman has been trying to get a big budget Hollywood remake of “The Toxic Avenger,” Troma's beloved and depraved superhero horror/comedy franchise, off the ground. At one point New Line was going to make it, as colleterial against the “Ninja Turtles” rights-holders, and at another point it was going to star Arnold Schwarzenegger. I always assumed this was a plot to funnel residuals back into Troma and help fund their weird independent movies. 

Anyway, it's finally actually happening. Peter Dinklage, of all people, is starring as Marvin. Macon Blair, the star of “Blue Ruin” and director of “I Don't Feel At Home in This World Anymore,” is behind the camera. The surprisingly stacked cast also includes Kevin Bacon, Jacob Trembly, and Elijah Wood. It's hard to imagine the excess of the Troma house style surviving a major Hollywood production but Dinklage recently promised the new film will maintain that spirit. I suppose we'll see but this is still shaping up to be one of the stranger superhero movies this year. 

Sick

I've gotten so used to the reality we're now living in that, even when watching modern movies, I'm sometimes thrown off by scenes involving crowds or unmasked people. Horror directors, like all filmmakers, are still struggling how to handle the pandemic. We've had a few attempts to integrate the virus into genre films. John Hyams, the man behind the famed “Universal Soldiers” sequels who successfully moved into thrillers with “Alone,” is the latest director to face this challenge. “Sick” directly address the pandemic, as its plot revolves around a quarantine going horribly wrong. It's also interesting to note that the script was co-written by Kevin Williamson. As in the (in)famous creator of “Scream” and “Dawson's Creek.” Consider my interest piqued!

We're All Going to the World's Fair

The buzziest of the indie projects to emerge out of the festival cycle last year was “We're All Going to the World's Fair.” Everyone I know who has seen this movie has praised it, so I'm pretty eager to catch up with it. It's a horror/thriller set in the world of the internet, concerning a teen girl becoming obsessed with an internet roleplaying game. Considering the internet, much less topics like creepypastas or ARGs, are rarely explored well on-screen, I'm curious to see a better handling of these topics.

The Whale

People have been anticipating a Brendan Fraser Renaissance for a while now and, this year, it looks to be swinging into full effect. Aside from a plum part in the new Martin Scorsese film, Fraser also has the starring role in Darren Aronofsky's new feature. (His first since the also divisive horror allegory “mother!”)  Fraser will be playing a morbidly obese English teacher, attempting to reconnect with his estranged daughter. You can debate the ethics of actors donning extensive prosthetics to play people with disadvantages like that and some have already declare “The Whale” fat-phobic. I have more of a wait-and-see attitude about that kind of stuff. Considering how unpredictable Aronofsky is, I'm very interested to see the form this premise takes.  

Yet More 2022 Films I'm Interested In:

BigBug, Chuck Hank and the San Diego Twins, Consecration, Dawn Breaks Behind the Eyes, Decision to Leave, Hypnotic, I Love My Dad, The Killer, Knives Out 2, The Lair, Men, Nocebo, Nope, On the Count of Three, Rosalind, Shin Ultraman, Showing Up, The Sky is Everywhere, Sonic the Hedgehog 2, Unwelcome, Watcher, When I Consume You, A Wounded Fawn, and X