Worthy

You may have noticed that, barring last week’s excursion in to Netflix’s House of Cards, I had reviewed two of the major contenders for this year’s Best Picture award at the 86^th Academy Awards. This was intentional. I had just watched both films in the cinema so I wanted to review each one anyway but it seemed to perfectly align with the build up to the 2014 Oscars. Before I get into whether either film deserves to actually win, let’s take a look at the other nominations for Best Picture.

• American Hustle
• Captain Phillips
• Dallas Buyers Club
• Gravity
• Her
• Nebraska
• Philomena
• 12 Years a Slave
• The Wolf of Wall Street

It seems fair to rule out Her and Nebraska. That isn’t to say that they aren’t enjoyable films but they either don’t quite fit the genre or lack the impact that the Academy likes. On a similar note, I would probably disqualify American Hustle and Gravity. Both have received a lot of attention but there are just too many top contenders that I can imagine the Academy preferring. Captain Philips, Philomena and Dallas Buyers Club are all worthy dark horses in this competition. The most likely pick would be 12 Years a Slave but given that the Academy usually like to spread the love around the Best Picture award could go another if Steve McQueen picks up Best Director.

Ellen is dancing here but who will be dancing by the end of the night?

That would leave The Wolf of Wall Street then, right? Honestly, my instinct is that The Wolf of Wall Street falls into the American Hustle/Gravity area too much as far as the Academy would be concerned. If 12 Years a Slave does miss out on the award I can imagine it going to Dallas Buyers Club far more easily than The Wolf of Wall Street. It’s not because The Wolf of Wall Street is not a good film or it isn’t well directed or doesn’t have superb acting, because it is. The reason it will miss out here is subject matter, and the controversy, regardless how unfounded, that the film promotes promiscuous sex and recreational drug use won’t have done the film any favours.

My pick for this is 12 Years a Slave, though I would not be surprised if Dallas Buyers Club snuck in a win. Next up, Best Director;

• David O. Russell
• Alfonso Cuarón
• Alexander Payne
• Steve McQueen
• Martin Scorsese

Being up against Martin Scorsese is bound to be quite daunting for many directors. However, he has already won an Academy Award for Best Director, so the academy may prefer to recognise another strong talent. I don’t think Alexander Payne has done enough substantial works in his career to deserve a win in this category. David O. Russell has managed to rack up three consecutive Best Director nominations but I think the opposition is too strong here for him to realistically pull out a win. If Scorsese doesn’t pick up the win here, it’s largely down to Alfonso Cuarón and Steve McQueen.

 

Not to be confused with ‘The King of Cool’ though this McQueen is pretty cool too.

Cuarón is probably best known for Y Tu Mamá También and Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, so there is value to the notion of him winning this award. On the other hand, the Academy has faced criticism in the past for overlooking McQueen’s Shame. This award, in my mind, really relies on who wins Best Picture. If 12 Years a Slave wins, McQueen still stands a good chance (it happened with The Artist in 2012) but they might give it to Scorsese as a kind of ‘we don’t like your movie but we still like you’ consolation prize.

My gut says Steve McQueen though. Onwards to Best Actor;

• Christian Bale as Irving Rosenfeld
• Bruce Dern as Woody Grant
• Leonardo DiCaprio as Jordan Belfort
• Chiwetel Ejiofor as Solomon Northup
• Matthew McConaughey as Ron Woodroof

This is probably Leonardo DiCaprio’s best chance at an Academy Award for Best Actor since Blood Diamond so it is unfortunate that he will have to beat off Chiwetel Ejiofor and Matthew McConaughey for the coveted gold statue. Christian Bale has had a remarkable career but for this year, for the film that he is being awarded for, I just don’t think he deserves it and I don’t know enough about Bruce Dern to possibly comment. Furthermore, I have already picked 12 Years a Slave to lift Best Picture and Best Director and I can’t see them sweeping all of the top awards (although, again, The Artist did it in 2012).

Good news for Leo then, as his main competition is Matthew McConaughey. McConaughey has been really strong lately and has managed to reinvent himself as a serious actor despite a string of terrible romantic comedies. Consistent award winning standard acting has been DiCaprio’s bread and butter for years though and while The Wolf of Wall Street wasn’t his best work, DiCaprio deserves this award more than anyone on that list.

Is this finally DiCaprio’s golden year?

My choice is obviously Leonardo DiCaprio. The final award of the big four is Best Actress;

• Amy Adams as Sydney Prosser
• Cate Blanchett as Jeanette “Jasmine” Francis
• Sandra Bullock as Dr. Ryan Stone
• Judi Dench as Philomena Lee
• Meryl Streep as Violet Weston

There are a lot of big names in this category. Cate Blanchett, Judi Dench and Meryl Streep could all win without too much argument from anyone. However, the main contenders here are probably Amy Adams and Sandra Bullock. Given that Gravity has received at lot acclaim but likely won’t win Best Picture, the academy might give Bullock best actress as a kind of runner up prize. My personal choice would be Amy Adams though because much like DiCaprio she has been consistently acting to a high standard in many of her movies. Just as The Wolf of Wall Street wasn’t his best work, American Hustle isn’t her greatest acting either but I still wouldn’t deny her the prize because of it. A little risky, but I’ll go with Amy Adams.

And that is the big four done and dusted. Jonah Hill probably deserves best supporting actor but I wouldn’t begrudge Michael Fassbender the win. The only worthy best supporting actress winner is Lupita Nyong’o, as I would argue her role in the 12 Years a Slave was tougher than Chiwetel Ejiofor’s and she performed superbly. But these are only my best guesses. For the actual winners, tune into the 86^th Academy Awards on ABC tonight at 7.00pm.

Fallen

On paper, new British drama, The Fall appears to have found a desperately wanting audience. It boasts the best ratings of a BBC Two drama in recent memory, stars award winning actors from around the globe, including Gillian Anderson and manages to be set in Belfast without being ostentatiously about the Troubles. And, in many ways, The Fall does live up to the hype because no one take anything that has just been mentioned away the studio or the programme and they should be very proud of what they have accomplished in their first run. However, in many other ways, the show falls flat.

Gillian Anderson, as good an actress as she might be, is playing an extremely boring character. Her two main characteristics seem to be that she knows how to catch killers and that she’s a strong woman. That strong woman characteristic comes up time and time again, with her staring down superiors, calming out other superiors in the face of violence and having casual sex. The writers seem to enjoy having her character, Detective Superintendent Stella Gibson, rub her promiscuity in the faces of others. Not literally, because that would be weird, but she actually does say to one officer that if she was a man that she would be applauded. It is at that point which the show crosses from strong woman into something more like a feminist tract.

Are they trying too hard to make Stella Gibson a strong female character?

Perhaps the writer or director has personal grievances with this issue, and while it’s true that in the year 2013 not all gender politics are entirely equal, but the existence of feminism in the show doesn’t actually elevate the character or the storyline. The character is in no way stronger for having casual sex and it has little bearing on the main story of catching the killer. In the real police force there are many women in the service, and many that hold high level positions and they are strong women without necessarily being casually active sexually. It is disappointing that they had the opportunity to create a truly strong female character and opted instead to make her a walking feminist protest, shaming any viewer who disagrees. I don’t think this is Gillian Anderson’s fault either. She was certainly better in The X-Files where she was equally as strong without being half as brazen about it. Perhaps it helped for her to have another character like David Duchovny’s Fox Mulder to bounce off of but in this series that might be considered weak.

Rather than invest time in a characteristic that does little to progress the story, more time should have been devoted to her history of catching another killer. So far it seems to have come up twice; once when she is introduced and a second time when she is asked about interviewing the killer, at which point she admits that she didn’t actually sit in on the interviews. Compare Stella Gibson with Ryan Hardy, Kevin Bacon’s character from U.S. crime drama The Following. The Following had its own fair share of flaws but if nothing else it did a superb job of establishing that Hardy knew what he was talking about. He had written a book about the capture, he demanded to be in interviews, he had a drinking and heart problem because of the job and even though he was no longer FBI, he was brought in simply to consult because they needed his expertise. Conversely, Gibson is brought in to review the case file of a victim and the superior officer immediately shoots her down. Uh, what is the point of bringing her in and then not listening to her? That would have been the perfect moment to demonstrate that she is a strong female character and develop her back story by having her persuade him because of something that happened from her last case. Instead, she goes off and has casual sex with another officer.

She isn’t the only character that disappoints though. The lesbian police officer and the pathologist both feel as though they are only there to support Gibson but Jamie Dornan’s Paul Spector fails to be an interesting killer. This is no criticism of Doran, because his performance is sufficiently creepy and intense but rather the story treats him as an elusive killer but shows us evidence to the contrary instead. Aside from being handsome, there doesn’t seem to be anything that makes him different. Gibson gives a generic profile of a killer based off the three current murder cases that somehow manages to be spot on. That scene didn’t help either Gibson or Spector because it seems like she pulled that profile out of her ass and he is made less special by it. Furthermore, his history is barely referred to either. I understand that Gibson shouldn’t know his motivations but part of the reason for showing the killer’s perspective is to allow the viewer to get into his head. It isn’t meant to be a fun way of showing the viewer all the dark and strange things he does. If the killer isn’t going to be developed in some way because of what the audience sees then they may as well not show the killer’s point of view at all.

Sex and violence go hand in hand in this Britsh crime thriller.

Aside from the main plot of the killer, there are a few sub plots, one regarding a drug and prostitution ring and the other concerning the death of the man Gibson slept with. Neither of these two storylines appears to have much relevance beyond padding out episodes and showing that the police do have other things to take care of besides catching serial murderers. Maybe the drug and prostitution gig will have more importance in the second season but neither looks like it will have much influence on the main storyline. Another missed opportunity, as Gibson could have been suspended for her actions, creating more tension for the finale as she hunts the killer without the support of the police force.

Deeply dark and horrifyingly intense at times, The Fall has shaken off all comparisons to Broadchurch and The Killing within the first four episodes. With only one episode left in its current run, The Fall seems satisfied to tell the story that it wants to tell, regardless of entertaining it is or how difficult the viewer finds the subject matter. And yet, while it is good, there is something missing; something which will keep it from being as pervasive as The Killing was. However, with a little poise and control and a tighter script, the second season could be great.