Oscar Predictions and the Best Movies of 2015

It’s that time of year again and I have (mostly) caught up with the major films of 2015, so it’s time to announce my top ten films of 2015 and weigh in on the Oscar race.  First up, my list of the top ten films of 2015.  Of course, I haven’t seen every film of 2015, but I’ve seen a great number of them, some of which I haven’t posted reviews of (yet).  And besides, this is my list, so if you disagree or think I’ve left something out, feel free to leave a respectful comment below.  I won’t go into detail as to why these are my favorite films this year, as most of these will be elaborated upon in the Oscars section, and you can read my original reviews to get my first impressions by clicking the hyperlinked titles below.

1.       Mad Max: Fury Road

2.       Inside Out

3.       The Martian

4.       It Follows

5.       Carol

6.       Room

7.       Creed

8.       Spotlight

9.       Kumiko, the Treasure Hunter

10.   The Big Short

And, without further ado, here are my predictions and thoughts on the 2015 Oscar nominations.  The only film I haven’t seen in the below categories is Boy and the World, and I will not be weighing in on the Best Foreign Language Film and Best Documentary Feature categories, nor any of the short subject categories, as accessibility is a major issue for me as an amateur critic.  I also won’t be weighing in on the Best Original Song category, because I just really don’t care.

The Academy Awards air on February 28, 2016.

Best Picture
Will Win	Spotlight
Should Win	Mad Max: Fury Road
Also Nominated	The Big Short Bridge of Spies Brooklyn The Martian The Revenant Room
Wow. What a category this year. With the notable exception of The Revenant, none of these films is overblown in receiving this nomination, though the exclusion of Carol is definitely heartbreaking.  Realistically, the race comes down to a contest between Spotlight, The Big Short, and The Revenant, and the only way I would be disappointed is if The Revenant walked away with the prize.  The Big Short definitely has gained enough traction to make it a frontrunner, but my money is still on Spotlight, if only because I think it is the slightly better film. The fact that Mad Max has received a Best Picture nod definitely has me happy, though realistically the Academy is extremely unlikely to unite around it.
Best Director
Will Win/Should Win	George Miller – Mad Max: Fury Road
Also Nominated	Lenny Abrahamson – Room Alejandro G. Inarritu – The Revenant Tom McCarthy – Spotlight Adam McKay – The Big Short
This is also a really close race this year, with anyone except for Abrahamson being an entirely viable win.  I think the Academy will likely split the difference between recognizing the indie artistry of Spotlight and the brilliantly technical direction of Mad Max by giving Miller the Best Director award, which he wholly deserves.  But this is still anyone’s race.
Best Lead Actor
Will Win	Leonardo DiCaprio – The Revenant
Should Win	Matt Damon – The Martian
Also Nominated	Bryan Cranston – Trumbo Michael Fassbender – Steve Jobs Eddie Redmayne – The Danish Girl
What a truly disappointing year in the Lead Actor category.  Redmayne is the most overpraised bad actor in the business, and Cranston, while good, still hasn’t quite escaped the shadow of Walter White.  Fassbender is a reasonable choice, but the Academy is definitely going to give DiCaprio the win to prevent his eventual death-by-performance, even though Damon’s Mark Whatney is the most human character of the bunch.
Best Lead Actress
Will Win/Should Win	Brie Larson – Room
Also Nominated	Cate Blanchett – Carol Jennifer Lawrence – Joy Charlotte Rampling – 45 Years Saorise Ronan - Brooklyn
On the other hand, with the exception of Lawrence who is merely being congratulated for existing, the Lead Actress category is amazing this year.  Larson is the frontrunner to be certain, and I had a really hard time deciding whether she, Blanchett, or Ronan is the most deserving.  If there is an upset, though, it’ll be Ronan who takes the prize, as Blanchett has won before and the Academy has a thing for rewarding young female talent.
Best Supporting Actor
Will Win	Tom Hardy – The Revenant
Should Win	Sylvester Stallone – Creed
Also Nominated	Christian Bale – The Big Short Mark Ruffalo – Spotlight Mark Rylance – Bridge of Spies
The Supporting Actor race is just about anyone’s game, and the only one who wouldn’t deserve it is Bale.  I think Rylance is slightly overblown due to his extensive theater career, and though I called Ruffalo’s nomination from the moment I saw Spotlight, the two most deserving are Hardy and Stallone, and if I’m honest, I’m inclined toward Stallone because of the versatility that role allowed him and the fact that it is the only nomination Creed received.
Best Supporting Actress
Will Win	Alicia Vikander – The Danish Girl
Should Win	Rooney Mara - Carol
Also Nominated	Jennifer Jason Leigh – The Hateful Eight Rachel McAdams – Spotlight Kate Winslet – Steve Jobs
I hate to say it, but Vikander will probably win for her part in The Danish Girl; she wasn’t bad in that film, and she’s quite the talented actress, but any recognition that film gains will only serve to justify its transmisogynistic elements.  Leigh is a pretty good candidate as well, though I think Mara is the most deserving, especially because she is just as deserving of a Lead Actress nomination as Blanchett, if not more so.  The Academy clearly doesn’t know how to handle two romantic roles of equal prominence when they are of the same sex, and, to be fair, I’m not sure how you solve that problem.
Best Original Screenplay
Will Win	Tom McCarthy & Josh Singer - Spotlight
Should Win	Pete Docter, Meg LeFauve, & Josh Cooley – Inside Out
Also Nominated	Matt Charman, Ethan Coen, & Joel Coen – Bridge of Spies Alex Garland – Ex Machina Jonathan Herman & Andrea Berloff – Straight Outta Compton
You may have noticed that until now I haven’t thought Spotlight has what it takes to win anything other than Best Picture, and this will probably be the category that the Academy will rally around to justify that win.  Spotlight definitely deserves to be nominated, but Inside Out’s originality and incredibly thoughtful meditation on emotion and growing up made it one of my favorite films this year.  The other three nominations aren’t bad, though I do question whether Straight Outta Compton’s inclusion isn’t more motivated by token Black inclusion rather than recognition of actual achievement.  The African-American film most deserving recognition this year was Creed, not a stock-standard biopic with Black protagonists.
Best Adapted Screenplay
Will Win	Adam McKay & Charles Randolph – The Big Short
Should Win	Emma Donoghue - Room
Also Nominated	Drew Goddard – The Martian Nick Hornby – Brooklyn Phyllis Nagy - Carol
This might be the only category this year where I feel unreservedly positive about every single nomination.  I have a really hard time picking who I think should win between Donoghue, Goddard, and Nagy, but I think Room squeaks ahead just a little based on its unique perspective.  The Big Short is an Academy darling this year, though, so it seems likely that, if nothing else, McKay and Randolph could walk away with this one.  But honestly, this one is anyone’s guess.
Best Animated Feature
Will Win/Should Win	Inside Out
Also Nominated	Anomalisa Boy and the World Shaun the Sheep Movie When Marnie Was There
Realistically this race comes down to Inside Out and Anomalisa, and it would be a huge upset of Anomalisa came from behind, especially considering Inside Out’s screenplay nomination.  And while I did enjoy Anomalisa, I have to back my #2 movie of the year.  It is seriously that good.
Best Cinematography
Will Win	Emanuel Lubezki – The Revenant
Should Win	John Seale – Mad Max: Fury Road
Also Nominated	Roger Deakins - Sicario Ed Lachman – Carol Robert Richardson – The Hateful Eight
Every single one of these cinematographers deserve to be here, but I am firmly against Lubezki winning in this category for the third time in a row.  Though The Revenant was a gorgeous film, the meditation on the gorgeous landscapes ended up detracting from the film’s narrative rather than enhance it.  Mad Max, on the other hand, had cinematography that was great enough to turn the perpetual visual chaos of the chase sequences into some of the most engaging action ever put to film.  Hopefully Seale can pull through with an upset victory.
Best Film Editing
Will Win	The Big Short
Should Win	Mad Max: Fury Road
Also Nominated	Spotlight The Revenant Star Wars: The Force Awakens
One of the reasons that The Big Short is so watchable (as is the case with Spotlight) is because the editing made a film primarily about people talking into a frenetic piece of engaging cinema.  However, I still feel obliged to give greater credit to Mad Max, because without the spot-on editing working in conjunction with the cinematography, the film would have fallen apart under its own insanity, and that is an absolutely monumental task.
Best Production Design
Will Win/Should Win	Mad Max: Fury Road
Also Nominated	Bridge of Spies The Danish Girl The Martian The Revenant
The crazy thing about this year is that it is not entirely dominated by historical films, with two science fiction films making their way into the race.  Though I have great respect for The Martian and The Revenant in terms of their production (and Bridge of Spies is nothing to laugh at either), Mad Max’s incredibly dense world-building was often done wordlessly through the sets and props assembled by the production team.  There is no reality where Mad Max shouldn’t win this award, though The Revenant could potentially sneak up on it.
Best Costume Design
Will Win/Should Win	Jenny Beavan – Mad Max: Fury Road
Also Nominated	Paco Delgado – The Danish Girl Sandy Powell – Carol Sandy Powell – Cinderella Jaqueline West – The Revenant
Sandy Powell is usually a frontrunner in this category, since her costuming is usually elegant and exquisite, and her two nominations are no exception this year.  However, because she is splitting votes against herself, it seems likely that she will lose only because the Academy won’t be able to choose one film over the other.  Mad Max is the next runner up, and I think it is probably most deserving for its incredibly inventive costuming choices, particularly on Furiosa and Immortan Joe.
Best Original Score
Will Win/Should Win	Ennio Morricone – The Hateful Eight
Also Nominated	Carter Burwell – Carol Johan Johanssson – Sicario Thomas Newman – Bridge of Spies John Williams – Star Wars: The Force Awakens
If there was one thing I unironically enjoyed about The Hateful Eight, it was the score, a self-referential set of pieces that jumped from playful to triumphant to tragic in ways specifically designed to manipulate the audience to dance for Tarantino’s pleasure.  The big competition against it is probably John Williams, though I think this is mostly out of nostalgia for his best Star Wars scores, as I didn’t find this one particularly memorable.
Best Visual Effects
Will Win/Should Win	Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Also Nominated	Ex Machina Mad Max: Fury Road The Martian The Revenant
I really wrestled with whether I wanted Mad Max or Star Wars to win more, and I have to give credit to J.J. Abrams’ commitment to practical effects in bringing Star Wars back to its junkyard universe roots.  If Star Wars doesn’t win, the Academy is going to disregard sci-fi entirely and give the prize to The Revenant, and I really don’t want that to happen.
Best Makeup and Hairstyling
Will Win/Should Win	Mad Max: Fury Road
Also Nominated	The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared The Revenant
Is this even a fair contest?  I’m legitimately surprised that Star Wars didn’t make the cut, but against these two films, there’s no chance that Mad Max isn’t walking away with this one.
Best Sound Mixing
Will Win	The Revenant
Should Win	Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Also Nominated	Bridge of Spies Mad Max: Fury Road The Martian
Star Wars has always had some of the best sound design to create the epic feeling of Wookie screams and spaceships hurtling about, yet I get the feeling that The Revenant will snag this for its abstract scenes of empty self-reflection.  On principle, I sincerely hope that doesn’t happen.
Best Sound Editing
Will Win	The Revenant
Should Win	Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Also Nominated	Mad Max: Fury Road The Martian Sicario
My reasons here are pretty similar to those for Sound Mixing, though there is definitely a part of me that would not mind seeing one more win for Mad Max.  However, considering how much Mad Max is likely to dominate other technical categories, I think I feel content to root for Star Wars in the sound department.

And there you have it!  Think my predictions are any good?  Leave your thoughts and counterarguments in the comments below.

"Carol": Finally, A Great Lesbian Romance

Now In Theaters

For whatever reason, the film industry has never done well with lesbian romance.  Whether it is a film built explicitly on an exploitative premise (My Summer of Love) or one made with passion but with a deficiency of talent (Itty Bitty Titty Committee), lesbians just seem underrepresented with quality motion pictures even within the niche area of gay and lesbian targeted romances.  Even films with mainstream notoriety such as Blue Is The Warmest Color turn out remarkably disappointing when actually scrutinized as more than a representation of on-screen diversity.  Fortunately, Carol does not disappoint; it is a great love story that hinges entirely on the nuanced performances of its cast, particularly its two leads.

Therese (Rooney Mara) is working as a toy store clerk in 1952 when from across the store she notices a striking woman whom we will later come to know as Carol (Cate Blanchett).  The two women have obvious chemistry from the start, and minor interactions begin to build toward something more as a friendship and eventual romance blossom.  This results in Therese finding her own assertive voice and finding an undiscovered confidence through her newfound sexuality, yet Carol isn’t simply a catalyst for Therese’s development.  Carol is in the middle of a strained divorce with her husband that threatens to alienate her relationship with her young daughter if her husband can convince the court that, as a sexual deviant, she is unfit to parent.

As far as the romance itself is concerned, the portrayal is spot-on, a slow burn that feels like the natural development of a relationship.  Mara and Blanchett will deservedly be recognized as two of this year’s best actresses, as the body language they exhibit with one another is not only subtle but immediately communicative, as it well should be considering that the time period in which their characters live does not allow for open sexual flirtation with members of the same sex.  Mara in particular does an excellent job of portraying a subtle insecurity befitting of one who is finding new emotions alien to her but is scared to voice those concerns, and Blanchett is equally fascinating as a woman who has to decide between being true to herself and suppressing her identity in order to have a relationship with her child.

The portrayal of men in this film is also astoundingly complex, as Carol’s husband Harge (Kyle Chandler) and Therese’s boyfriend Richard (Jake Lacy) are far from the stock abuse caricatures they could have been in a lesser film.  Richard is the personification of the nice guy trope, the man who thinks that his careful celibate courtship of Therese will one day reward him with marriage and sexual intimacy; he doesn’t have bad intentions, but his view of women as people is certainly skewed so as to perceive them as prizes for kindness.  Similarly, Harge is completely dumbstruck by the possibility that Carol could reject his love for that of, not another man, but women, making him entirely insecure in his ability to control his life and raise his child.  Though the men of this film might be called villains for this instigation of the film’s conflicts, they aren’t one-dimensional and are sympathetic in their lack of education and context in seeing lesbian relationships as legitimate.

Even without all the extravagance of the film’s setting and the commentary on the social perception of lesbian identity, Carol would excel as a beautifully told romance, the kind that could never be emulated by the mindless portrayal of beautiful people kissing in the rain seen in any Nicholas Sparks production.  This is a story of interesting characters navigating treacherous waters together in order to find a way to make love work in a time and place that is openly hostile to them doing so, but without one single villainous entity on which to blame that hostility.  I think I’ve been using the phrase “best of the year” too often as of late (because this is an AMAZING year for movies), but this film is definitely among my favorites this year.  I just have to think long and hard about its competition to tell if it breaks into my top ten.

"The Big Short": Documentary Through Dramatization

Now In Theaters

The Big Short is a pretty bizarre beast of a film, but this is one of those rare instances where immense risk really pays off.  Directed and co-written by Adam McKay, whose previous feature filmography is almost exclusively Will Ferrell collaborations such as Anchorman and Step Brothers, The Big Short is an entirely different sort of comedy, founded on real world events and variations on real people.  Based on a nonfiction book by the same name, McKay focuses his lens on the financial crisis of 2007 and those who had the foresight to predict the collapse of the world economy.  It is with this film that McKay proves himself an incredibly versatile comedy director who can make pointed social commentary as well as screwball popcorn flicks.

The film is shot in pseudo-documentary style, following the experiences of five Wall Street players who, through various means and methods, were able to put together the pieces that foreshadowed the collapse of the housing market and with it the entire American banking industry.  To get into the particulars of the narrative would be an exercise in futility as it would ultimately become a lecture on economic theory and the roles those who manipulated the system played within it.  However, for what is at its core an exceedingly well-produced piece of edutainment, the film is never dull or tedious to sit through.

This is due to excellent comedic direction that is geared toward simultaneously making you laugh and making you angry at the situations being presented.  Complex banking jargon is explained in cutaway sequences of celebrities in innocuous situations explaining the shockingly simple concepts underlying the terminology, which is both silly and necessarily informative.  Meanwhile, the cast of main characters is perpetually shocked by the idiocy of those within the banking sector, whose own greed blinds them to the consequences of their manipulative lending practices.  Intermixed with the handheld, slightly out of focus shots are fourth wall-shattering asides that serve to point out exactly how fucked up a given situation is.

If the film has one major problem, it’s that some of the pieces of the story don’t feel all that interconnected.  Of the film’s four interweaving plotlines, only two ever directly interact, and even then protagonists Steve Carell and Ryan Gosling never actually share a frame together, leading me to speculate that their dialogue was spliced together in post-production.  This fragmentary approach fits decently well with the documentary aesthetic the film has going for it, but it still feels a bit odd considering that some characters never have fully realized arcs or have much of a narrative purpose beyond further demonstrating just how deep the rabbit hole of corruption goes.

But narrative isn’t really the point here.  Adam McKay is a gifted comic director who is obviously outraged at the lack of consequence the banking industry received in the fallout of the economic collapse, so he used those talents to make a film that would reach the greatest number of people: not a documentary, but a comic dramatization of the events that affected the lives and livelihoods of millions of people.  McKay has managed to make a film of people talking about stocks and bonds not only informative, but wickedly funny, and that is no small feat.  I may not count this film as one of the best of 2015, but I would certainly count it as one of the most important.  This is necessary viewing for anyone and everyone.

"The Martian": The Triumphant Return of Ridley Scott

Now In Theaters, Available on DVD and Blu-ray on January 12, 2016

By my estimation, there must be two Ridley Scotts directing in Hollywood today who, for brevity’s sake, we’ll call Alien Scott and Prometheus Scott.  Alien Scott has a deft understanding of film as a visual medium, using it to enhance his story and characters whether or not he has extensive visual effects to back him up (see: Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven).  On the other hand, Prometheus Scott is who we seem to have been stuck with for at least the past five years, using film as an excuse to stage elaborate setpieces at the expense of telling an interesting story or creating compelling characters (see: Exodus: Gods and Kings, Robin Hood).  So I was a bit wary to go see The Martian, as I could very easily see how putting Prometheus Scott anywhere near a science fiction premise could spell recipe for disaster.

Thankfully though, after much goading from my peers and after everyone on planet Earth seemingly having watched this before me, I got to see how Alien Scott proudly suppressed his lesser instincts and asserted control.  I think this is because The Martian, though a piece of science fiction, has an incredibly simple premise: what if one man were stranded alone on Mars?  The comparison has been made that this story is a combination of elements of Cast Away and Apollo 13, as we see the stresses and difficulties of being stranded alone in a hostile environment alongside a scientific exploration of a team looking to problem-solve their way to bringing their lost astronaut home.  And miraculously, that could have been an overly busy film is incredibly watchable and entertaining.

I think a lot of it comes down to excellent casting.  Matt Damon is pretty much perfect for stranded astronaut Mark Whatney, a character who could be a bland cipher if placed in the wrong hands.  Thankfully, Damon is such an effortlessly likeable actor that he brings crude humor and tragic emotion to his part while still remaining charismatically neutral enough to act as an audience surrogate as he spends most of his screentime alone.  You’re right there with Whatney, feeling his triumphs and setbacks just as he does.

The cast back on Earth and in the returning space vessel that mistakenly left Whatney for dead are equally impressive, a collection of characters so vast that it is impossible to list or even remember most of their names.  However, Scott played this smart by giving most key characters a well-recognized actor to play them, including Chiwetel Ejiofor, Jessica Chastain, and Jeff Daniels to name a few.  Their characters are well-developed enough to give them distinct personalities and make them immediately recognizable, but not so well-developed that the audience is given more information than they can handle.  It’s the kind of large cast management that would make Joss Whedon blush, and I think that is the biggest contributing factor to Ridley Scott’s success with The Martian.

There’s obviously a lot more that goes into a film than its characters, but as I’ve said in other reviews, sometimes the seamlessness of direction is precisely what makes a film so great.  The script is rock solid, the story beats land perfectly on the exact emotion the audience needs to feel at a given moment, and the science-positive message of an entire world looking to save one man is simply awe-inspiring.  I know for a fact that Prometheus Scott would not have been able to direct one of the best films of the year.  But Alien Scott, the true Ridley Scott, most assuredly has.

"Creed": Celebrating Its Legacy, But Standing Proud On Its Own

In Theaters on November 25, 2015

Sometimes, not often, a film comes along where everyone just does their god damn job.  The writing is tight, the acting is on point, the score is excellent, the cinematography and editing are engaging without being obtrusive, and the direction of all these elements is executed with a seemingly effortless grace.  This is the heart of effective moviemaking that spawned classics of the 70’s and 80’s that are still remembered and beloved today, and perhaps no film embodies that working spirit more than Sylvester Stallone’s Rocky, a studio gamble on a then-unknown writer/actor/director that paid off in an Academy Award winning hit that spawned one of the most iconic franchises of American cinema.  The franchise has seen its ups and downs, particularly toward the end of its lifespan, but because we live in the age of nostalgia, there is no way this series was going to stay dormant.  And, thankfully, Creed embodies the effort and spirit of the original film, yet still retains an identity and integrity of its own.

Newcomers need not worry about studying up on previous Rocky films, as Creed functions entirely as its own narrative while still winking acknowledgment to longtime fans of the series.  Our protagonist is Adonis Johnson, the extramarital child of legendary boxer Apollo Creed, who died in the ring before Adonis was born.  Adonis bounced around foster care after the death of his mother, but was taken in by Apollo’s widow.  Growing up with an expectation of a calm, corporate career, Adonis finds that he cannot suppress his urge to enter the ring, but wishes to earn a reputation distinct from that of his father.  So he moves to Philadelphia, where he enlists the help of Rocky Balboa to train him into being his successor.  Adonis’s character arc, while entirely functional in its own right, works as a fitting metaphor for the success of the film as a continuation of the Rocky franchise while still acting as a solid story on its own, and the story gains an extra layer of meta-depth because of it.

However, what really sells the film is the combination of those key elements of film-making that I mentioned back in that first paragraph.  The character performances are fantastic, with Michael B. Jordan absolutely killing it as a troubled youth who struggles with issues of identity and an angst that he has never learned to cope with, and Stallone returning as an older, jaded Rocky that seems like a very natural take on the aged character.  The dialogue is alternatingly witty and heart-wrenching, injecting the film with comic relief at key moments while still telling a serious story that tackles difficult emotional issues, both for Adonis and Rocky.  The score is similarly fitting with triumphantly nostalgic swells of the Rocky theme and more somber tones as necessary.  The camerawork is fantastic, particularly in the boxing scenes, one of which is an extended take with hidden cuts that creates the masterful illusion of an uninterrupted match.

I could pick this film apart and tell you exactly why each of its elements work, but that would be a disservice to the efforts of director/co-writer Ryan Coogler to make those elements seem effortless to the casual viewer.  His direction is spot-on, and it’s likely because his efforts that all the right people showed up to work and did their god damn jobs.  This will probably go down as one of the best films of the year, and let me tell you, that was not a sentence I was expecting to write before the lights dimmed in the theater.  This will be the film to go see this Thanksgiving.  Don’t miss it.

"Spotlight": Unsettling Societal Introspection At Its Finest

Now In Theaters

It’s easy to be skeptical of a film like Spotlight.  Often when a film receives such universal acclaim and is also in the wheelhouse of Oscar-baiting tropes, such as adapting a barely decade-old event into a “true story” feature, it is easy to see how eyes can glaze over and awards can be handed out purely out of instinct and habit.  That isn’t to say that a film that fits this mold is usually bad, but its flaws are generally ignored in favor of elevating it above genre flicks that may have been of superior quality.  However, that isn’t what’s happening with Spotlight.  This is an honest-to-goodness amazing piece of filmmaking that will deservedly be recognized as one of the best of the year.

In January 2002, the Boston Globe exposed the Catholic Church’s protection and sheltering of pedophilic priests within its ranks.  Spotlight is the story of the eponymous team that pursued that investigation in the preceding year, tracking down survivors, finding out about more and more priests involved at an exponential rate, and coming to terms with how the Boston community turned a blind eye to these events in favor of preserving the Church’s status quo.

At first, I was a bit off-put by the fact that there were no stand-out performances in this film, no lead to latch on to in order to act as an audience surrogate.  But before long I realized that this wasn’t meant to be a film about a lone hero or even a single antagonist, but a film about people who have to come to terms with what is simultaneously the best and worst kept secret of their community.  No performance stands out because they are all necessarily excellent, from Michael Keaton as the Spotlight team’s increasingly disturbed editor, to Rachel McAdams effortless portrayal of a woman in a male-dominated field, to a slightly neurotic turn by Mark Ruffalo that is deserving of a Best Supporting Actor nomination.  There are numerous others, both in large and small roles, but the entire film pulsates with realistic human emotion and a staggering sense of community between them.

And that sense of community may be the most tragic element to this story, as the film so masterfully portrays.  Instead of veering into cliché and melodrama by making the Catholic Church into a monolithic entity of control and manipulation (though elements of that are definitely present in its portrayal), Spotlight instead opts to focus on how so many key players in Boston institutions had knowledge of the systemic rape of children, and yet nobody opted to do anything about it, or those that did choose to speak up were not acknowledged, even by the news institution that was now putting the pieces together.  Relatedly, there is a fantastic red herring subplot that I will not spoil, but the reveal is so casual that the gut-punch twist is all the more effective because of it.

The film ends on a disquieting note just after the article is published and leaves an unsettling question mark over the future of Boston and its (and the world’s) relationship with the Catholic Church.  This isn’t a film that begs for resolution, but rather asks us to examine ourselves and our communities and whether the perceived benefits of the status quo are worth the secrets we sweep under the rug to preserve it.  This is masterwork filmmaking and I will be most pleased to see this film’s inevitable Oscar nominations.

"Room (2015)": An Impressive Exercise In Perspective

In Select Theaters on October 16, 2015, Wide Release on November 6, 2015

I think Room is going to draw some comparisons to another notable film with a child protagonist, Boyhood.  Both feature really strong naturalistic performances from incredibly young child actors, but Room has a distinct advantage over Boyhood’s overambitious attempt at improvisational storytelling: it has a traditional narrative.  Room is an insightful look into the mind of a child, but is also portrayed in a compelling way that offers a unique insight into the mind of this particular child that is intriguing because of the peculiar circumstances in which he was raised.

The film opens on Room, the only world that five-year-old Jack has ever known.  He has never been outside the interior of the garden shed where his mother’s captor has imprisoned her for seven years, and as far as he is concerned, life is good.  However, his mother Joy conceives a plot to finally get them out of Room and away from her rapist jailer, and after years of isolation the two finally make their way out into the world.  It is in the latter half of the film that Jack must come to terms with a world that he doesn’t understand, a seemingly endless parade of people, places, and experiences far beyond what the small room prepared him for.

Despite the fact that the film dwells for slightly too long on life inside Room, the way the film frames the narrative around Jack’s perspective is incredibly impressive.  Realistic voiceover accompanies Jack’s thoughts as we see how growing up with such a limited conception of reality has informed his perception of a whole new world.  Equally ingenious is how the film chooses to limit the information given to the audience by mostly only showing scenes where Jack is present in order to perceive adult conversations and subplots.  Jack is old enough to understand the words being said by the adults in his life, but his confusion is apparent even if we are able to comprehend the struggles that his mother has in adjusting back to life in the real world.

And that is perhaps also the double-edged sword of the film’s perspective.  By limiting us so drastically in order to give us a better understanding of Jack’s mind, the nearly equally interesting Joy is given the short shrift, as her battles with depression and feelings of parental inadequacy are only seen from the outside perspective of her young son.  This is obviously an intentional stylistic choice, and if one character is going to be the focus of the narrative, it should most definitely be Jack.  However, I can’t help but feel that an opportunity was missed.

Director Lenny Abrahamson blew me away last year with the incredible film Frank, and once again he has used a unique perspective to craft a truly great film.  Despite my inclination to highlight them, my gripes with the film are minor, and were potentially unavoidable in order to tell the story in a necessarily compelling way.  Regardless, Room is one of the best films of the year thus far and one that assuredly deserves your recognition.  Go see it.

"Inside Out": Pixar's Surprisingly Adult Return To Form

Now In Theaters

Pixar is pretty well acknowledged as having a deep understanding of human emotion, with classics such as Toy Story, Wall-E, and Up tugging at our heartstrings while leaving us incredibly satisfied with extremely creative and immensely enjoyable films.  The last few years have either seen Pixar completely absent or blatantly subjecting themselves to the Mouse House’s commercializing demands for more sequels, and things just haven’t quite been the same… Until now.  Inside Out is a fantastic little film that will restore your faith in the beloved animation studio.  Unless you are a child, because this might not be the film for you, paradoxical as that sounds.

Riley is an eleven-year-old girl, born and raised in Minnesota, who moves with her family to San Francisco and must deal with the loss of everything she has ever known and adjust to a new life in a new city.  Coming from Pixar, this could be pretty compelling in and of itself, but this is just as much a story of what’s going on inside Riley’s mind, as we meet the five emotions who drive her: Joy, Sadness, Fear, Disgust, and Anger.  As Riley tries to cope with her move, the emotions vie for control over her mind in the emotional Headquarters.  Things only become worse, though, when an accident leaves Joy and Sadness far outside of Headquarters’ reach, and the two must traverse the recesses of Riley’s mind in order to restore themselves in Riley’s emotional spectrum.

Pixar has been great at providing insight into emotion and humanity in the past, but never before have they taken that task so literally.  And they make it work to great effect.  The parallel narratives of Joy and Sadness learning to understand one another, Fear, Disgust, and Anger struggling to keep Riley emotionally healthy, and Riley herself struggling on a metatextual level are all brilliantly interwoven to create a narrative that might otherwise have been mundane and infuse life into it by literally demonstrating how a world of emotion and cognitive processes function as represented by anthropomorphized abstracts.  We see the depths of the subconscious, the wonders of the imagination, the bureaucracy of memory management, and the curiosity of abstract thought, all realized as a creative world that exists within us all.  Riley’s story is one of emerging adolescence, of losing childhood bit by bit in ways that are scary and imperceptible, and Pixar once again hits the emotional resonance right on the head, finding a way to make us feel for Riley through making her emotions grow in complexity with her.

But isn’t this a kid’s movie?  Isn’t all this philosophizing and cognitive analysis a bit much for the film’s intended audience?  Well, I would argue that, yeah, this is not a great movie for kids.  Sure, there’s some obligatory slapstick and the whole experience is bright and colorful, but I don’t think that pre-adolescent children are going to have the self-awareness nor the emotional intelligence to grasp the complex concepts central to the narrative.  That isn’t to say this diminishes the film’s quality at all, but audiences should expect something targeted at those who can look back on childhood and understand what is happening in Riley’s mind, rather than a piece of diversionary entertainment for their young ones.

That said though, assuming you are an adult and have enjoyed Pixar’s work in the past, Inside Out is a must-see film, especially considering how lackluster the rest of the summer is looking to be.  It is an extremely intelligent piece that has returned Pixar to top form.

Think Pixar can keep this good momentum going with this fall’s The Good Dinosaur?  Leave your thoughts in the comments below.