You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo’ category.

The 84th Academy Awards is almost here! Leading up to the event, we’re going to put all the hours we spent watching these films to good use by giving our thoughts on all the categories, big and small. We may not be experts on everything, but I daresay that’s never stopped anyone from blogging before. On the (very remote chance) you disagree with us or the (much more likely chance) you want to applaud our picks, please chime in below.

Actress in a Leading Role

The nominees are:

  • Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs
  • Viola Davis, The Help
  • Rooney Mara, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
  • Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady
  • Michelle Williams, My Week with Marilyn

JOHN

This is a tough category this year. I think, by a hair, the best performance of the year came from Meryl Streep. Not only did she have to tackle playing a real person but at a variety of ages in different stages of mental decline. This film calls for her to dodder around in her senility and jabber with the ghost of her dead husband but she handles it well. I shudder to think how bad The Iron Lady would have been without such a good central performance.

But if I’m being honest I’m rooting for Viola Davis. She’s always awesome and maybe a win would land her some more sizable, and meatier, roles. Streep already has two Oscars and I don’t think she’d begrudge her pal Viola a win. If I have any complaint about Davis in The Help it’s that she painfully out-acts Emma Stone in too many of their shared scenes!

I didn’t like My Week With Marilyn and I wasn’t looking forward to seeing it, but hell if Michelle Williams isn’t very good in it. She does a good job channeling Marilyn Monroe, including her insecurities and playfulness. I suspect I enjoyed Glenn Close’s performance more than my colleagues. I’m not sure she would have made my list but she really sells the restraint and social ineptitude of her character. And while I’m fine with Rooney Mara, I wonder how much of it is that she gets to sport an accent and wear a bunch of leather. I can’t recall ever being particularly taken by her performance.

And if I had my druthers I’d stick Elizabeth Olsen in.

JARED

Oscar did well here.  It would have been hard for them to do poorly, but they’ve shown a certain capability for that.  I’ve now seen Rooney Mara in four movies (this one, Youth in RevoltThe Social Network, and The Winning Season) and I’m very much impressed with her mutability.  I’d love to see her in an action spy show like Alias, or, at least, what I’m assuming Alias was.  She’s good here, but given what the character did for Noomi Rapace, I wonder if the love here is actually for the role.

Albert Nobbs is a challenging portrayal to reward.  The character has devoted his or her life to staying in the background, inconspicuous.  So Close is all small, controlled mannerisms here.  I think it is a performance that needs to sit a little bit to really appreciate, to get how she played at being a man, not really sure of her place in society when not at work.

I may have Davis third, but she’s absolutely deserving of the statue.  I’m not really one for race debates, especially when it comes to Oscar, because then you end up with Crash.  All I want to say is that should Davis take home the trophy, regardless of what caused people to vote for or against her, she’s a fantastic actress who earned the award on merit.

Not like I have anything new to say about Meryl Streep.  Other than that I hope she’s in the sequel to RED.

It isn’t news that I’m in the tank for Michelle Williams.  I’m assuming something was planted in brain when I saw Dick in theaters, but my love more directly stems from The Station Agent and The Baxter.  Anyway, Michelle’s Marilyn is a heck of a performance.  To take such an iconic figure and breathe such life and nuance into it?  Man.  She did Marilyn when she was on, when she was drugged, when she was nervously trying to act.  She dominates the film and is such a joy to watch.

BRIAN

Rooney Mara

ADAM

Rooney Mara

Advertisements

The 84th Academy Awards is almost here! Leading up to the event, we’re going to put all the hours we spent watching these films to good use by giving our thoughts on all the categories, big and small. We may not be experts on everything, but I daresay that’s never stopped anyone from blogging before. On the (very remote chance) you disagree with us or the (much more likely chance) you want to applaud our picks, please chime in below.

Sound Editing

The nominees are:

  • Drive Lon Bender and Victor Ray Ennis
  • The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Ren Klyce
  • Hugo, Philip Stockton and Eugene Gearty
  • Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Ethan Van der Ryn and Erik Aadahl
  • War Horse, Richard Hymns and Gary Rydstrom

And also:

Sound Mixing

The nominees are:

  • The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, David Parker, Michael Semanick, Ren Klyce and Bo Persson
  • Hugo, Tom Fleischman and John Midgley
  • Moneyball, Deb Adair, Ron Bochar, David Giammarco and Ed Novick
  • Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers, Jeffrey J. Haboush and Peter J. Devlin
  • War Horse, Gary Rydstrom, Andy Nelson, Tom Johnson and Stuart Wilson

JOHN

Sound Editing is basically sound effects and do you know what had great sound effects? Drive. I’ve seen plenty of movie car chases in my day, but the sounds of a car engine have never made an impression on me like they did here. It made me want to go out and drive! I saw Drive about five months ago and I still think of it when I’m driving and the engine revs. But it’s not all mechanical noises here. Another one that made quite an impression on me is the sound of Ryan Gosling’s leather driving gloves and their creaks as he pulls them on or adjusts his hands on the wheel.

Sound Mixing is the mix of all audio elements of a film: dialogue, music, ADR, sound effects. People who have actual knowledge of the subject sayMoneyball has a great mix. But I think I’ll plump for Transformers. It sure has a lot of sound! But I was also struck with how it isn’t overwhelming. The dialogue remains clear even in the busiest action sequences while the music is complementary: notable but not overwhelming. Plus it would be nice to see Greg P Russell finally win an Oscar on his fifteenth try. The film would probably also make a good fit in the Sound Editing category for all those mechanical noises.

Something that crossed my mind during the big Chicago shoot-out at the end of Transformers is what would happen if they went for more realistic sounds as buildings crash and Transformers clang around? We think we know what disasters sound like from seeing so many movies, but think about footage from true disasters like 9/11 or the Japanese tsunami. The sounds are not like the movies and they are horrifying. An action movie should try it some day, unless they are worried about freaking people out for being too real.

The real best sound mixing of the year is Hanna. Truth be told, I’m kind of excited just to have an actual favorite sound mix. Since when does that happen? Anyway, Hanna has a great audio design with, like the rest of the movie, a bit of flair. They really put the thumping Chemical Brothers score to great use.

Hugo, War Horse, and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo all got nominations in both categories. I can see Tattoo for Mixing while war films generally do well in sound categories, but I don’t get Hugo. How about some Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol.

JARED

Sound just isn’t something I notice terribly often.  So if I really had to pull for someone, I’d probably go with what the guilds went for.  The MPSE honored War Horse for Sound Effects and Super 8 for Dialogue and ADR.  I will make the case, though, for Transformers.  That movie is pure eye and ear candy.  The Michael Bay conversation probably isn’t appropriate here, but to me, those movies are all whiz-crack-bang-boom, and that isn’t a bad thing.  Sound plays rather heavily into that sugar symphony, but it never gets distracting, just a natural part of the metallic cacophony.

ADAM

Transformers for both.

The 84th Academy Awards is almost here!  Leading up to the event, we’re going to put all the hours we spent watching these films to good use by giving our thoughts on all the categories, big and small.  We may not be experts on everything, but I daresay that’s never stopped anyone from blogging before.  On the (very remote chance) you disagree with us or the (much more likely chance) you want to applaud our picks, please chime in below.

This time we are going to talk about Cinematography and Film Editing.

Cinematography

The nominees are:

  • The Artist, Guillaume Schiffman
  • The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Jeff Cronenweth
  • Hugo, Robert Richardson
  • The Tree of Life, Emmanuel Lubezki
  • War Horse, Janusz Kaminski

JOHN

When I saw War Horse, I thought it was being projected incorrectly. Particularly in the opening act as our remarkable horse is mucking about in the mud, the lighting is so bizarre that I thought it looked like a sound stage. It turns out they were specifically going for an old-fashioned visual style and lit accordingly. But, well, it’s not for me. I understand that shooting in black and white requires some special considerations from equipment to lighting and The Artist certainly has some visual flair, so I suppose I won’t begrudge its nomination. Dragon Tattoo and Hugo both look great, though the 3D was sort of a miss for me in the latter, but The Tree of Life really takes this in a walk. Even though it drives my colleagues nuts, the bulk of the film is a stream of exquisitely crafted shots. Lightbeams, clouds, reflections. A little meandering, but gorgeous! It’s really just a visual delight. And while I know that’s all part of Malick’s style, DP Emmanuel Lubezki still captured those images and they aren’t the delicate, crisp visuals that they are without him.

ADAM

As much as it pains me to say it, The Tree of Life should win Cinematography (if for no other reason than it shouldn’t even be considered a “movie” without the fantastic camera shots).

JARED

There are differing schools of thought on just how invisible good cinematography should be, but I think everyone can agree that great cinematography shouldn’t be distracting.  Well, everyone save for Janusz Kaminski, apparently.  His shots may be pretty, but they are so repeatedly in your face, demanding you acknowledge their beauty.  If I were to guess, it seems like there were a few specific shots that locked in his nomination here, and I would have edited every single one out for taking away from the film.  The cold, gray feel of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo seems rather appropriate, though I’m not sure anything stands out in particular.  Here’s some thoughts from Robert Richardson, cinematographer for Hugo, on the film.  I’m not sure if it is fair or not, but I’m docking the film some for the 3D here.  If Hugo represents the new frontier of 3D movies, then to me, 3D is dead.  Here’s an interview with Guilluame Schiffman, cinematographer of The Artist.  I was struck by how the film managed to look both old and new.  It is impressive to end up not looking like a replica, or a parody, of old black and white films while still feeling like it was something more than someone just hit the switch for black and white.  Schiffman talks about light in the interview, and I really liked the lighting of the scenes just before the fire.  In the end, though, if John and Adam can agree on something, seems like I’m going to be with them.  Whatever my thoughts on The Tree of Life as a movie, it seems impossible to argue against the cinematography.  The shots were, yes, beautiful and memorable and exquisite.  But they did all that while feeling so essential to the movie as a whole.

BRIAN

I wish I knew more about how the film industry, the production aspect essentially. I don’t wholly understand how to split out film editing from directing from cinematography from each other. Who makes specific decisions on how to film a particular scene or splice a set of scenes together? Who should I really be giving credit to? Hopefully, the Oscar voters themselves know how to divvy up the credit, but I’m probably giving them too much credence. No matter, I’ll use this space to offer the first in a series of why Hugo is my favorite movie of the year.

I have seen two movies that give me hope for the future of 3D technology: Avatar and Hugo. The former bombarded me with visual awe, in part because that’s what James Cameron does and in part to obscure the weaknesses in plot and character development (also what James Cameron does). But Hugo uses the technology to create the atmospherics surrounding Hugo the character. The opening sequence especially threw me into the world of early-20th-century Paris — first the snow that appeared to be falling on my feet and then the journey through the clock gears of the Montparnasse station. The movie itself is a mash note to the early days of film and the imaginative spirit of the industry’s pioneers – and Scorsese and his team created a film that the Georges Melieses of the world would have made had the technology existed. I was enthralled by the film for multiple reasons, but the aesthetics made me yearn to be a part of Hugo’s world.

As for the other nominees, I’d also be pleased to see recognition for The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo and The Artist, as both also built a world in which even if I don’t want to visit it (those Scandanavians are scary!), I feel as though I understand the types of characters who live there.

MoneyballWar HorseThe Descendants and Tree of Life — all of them leave me cold and uninterested.

Film Editing

The nominees are:

  • The Artist, Anne-Sophie Bion and Michel Hazanavicius
  • The Descendants, Kevin Tent
  • The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall
  • Hugo, Thelma Schoonmaker
  • Moneyball, Christopher Tellefson

JOHN

Film Editing is an interesting category, partly because I’m not sure I’d always be able to tell a well edited film! The Artist, Hugo, and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo all had bloat issues. I know that’s not all editing; it’s not the editors’ fault that the script for Dragon Tattoo calls for a story that just refuses to end. On the other hand, I had significant problems with The Descendants and Moneyball but still found them slickly edited. The visual style of Moneyball gives a film about numbers some flash. The segues between scenes are something I definitely noticed on a second viewing. I suppose I pick The Descendants as my winner for its tonal balancing act. The dramatic parts don’t become over the top and the comedic parts are nicely balanced by pathos. Yes, that’s also parts writing, acting, and directing, but hitting the right beats and matching with the right shots are all within the Editing realm.

Snubs: To me, the master Editing work of the year is in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. In such a dense, non-stop story, the editing needs to be precise to keep it all coherent. But this is also a film that keeps its revelations understated, allowing the audience to figure things out for itself. With that in mind, editing is key. A shot lingers just long enough to register who that character is out in the courtyard or to note that there’s something odd with one man’s shoes. It’s always just enough to tease without hammering its points home.

JARED

I feel completely out of my depth when talking about editing, so I’ll keep it brief.  I’ve found the article I’ve read on the discipline fascinating, but it kinda seems that without knowledge of the script and total footage the editor had to work with, bestowing honors is something of a crapshoot.  I’m going with Moneyball.  I had a number of problems with the movie, one of which was some of the weird scenes that felt out of place from the standpoint of the story.  But these stylistic touches, or flashes to statistics from a computer, or video from a baseball all felt like they organically flowed, and I’m going to chalk that up to the editing.

Have you ever seen a movie and thought that the trailer was better than the movie? Not necessarily as a form of criticism of the film or that the trailer simply had all the good jokes or something, but that the trailer was literally a better piece of cinematic art?

I’ve been thinking about this after seeing Like Crazy last week. I think the film’s trailer is a knockout and emotionally evocative in ways the film simply isn’t.

Usually trailers are necessarily thin, reducing a plot to its basics and giving a feel for the tone. (Or they outright lie when a marketing plan calls for it.) But for films that rely on creating atmosphere that task may well be easier in two and a half minutes as a montage backed by an appropriately emotional song and slick editing. The Like Crazy trailer is better than the film because it’s unencumbered by the film’s narrative or characters (bazinga!).

The trailer still gives me chills, though I think part of it is that I see what could have been and it’s a reminder of the missed opportunities of the film.

This happened last year as well with True Grit, which was more of a case of the trailer being great than the film being poor. The first half of the trailer is sweet though fairly standard, but when it launches into the Johnny Cash song it turns totally badass.

And it’s not like great trailers are a curse. The Social Network and The Dark Knight both lived up to kick-ass trailers.

Who knows what next film will be unable to match a great trailer? I’m pretty confident that it will be great, but is it possible The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo won’t equal the intensity of it’s trailer?

September 2017
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930