So with the Oscar just a few hours away it's time to roll out the oscar predictions.

Oscar for Actor in a Leading Role.

Who should win: Daniel Day-Lewis, His acting in Lincoln was phenomenal and from what I here he used some pretty extreme methods in order to get in to character for the movie.

Who will win: Daniel Day-Lewis This is one of the most sure bets of the night.

Oscar for Actress in a Leading Role.

Who should win: Jessica Chastain, she made Zero Dark Thirty her movie and was a big part of what made that movie work.

Who will win: Emmanuelle Riva, I don't think the Academy will pass up a chance to be this pretentious .

Oscar for Actor in a Supporting Role.

Who should win: Christoph Waltz, His biggest competition wasn't even nominated, Waltz was awesome in Django should be an easy win.

Who will win: Christoph Waltz, the Academy loves Waltz and he put on a great performance.

Oscar for Actress in a Supporting Role.

Who should win: Helen Hunt, had a good performance, this category is one of the weaker categories of the year.

Who will win: Anne Hathaway, I'm Against Les Mis getting award recognition, but I wouldn't have any quarrels with Anne Hathaway winning.  For the little amount of time she was on-screen she stole the show, a close second in my book.

Oscar for Best Cinematography.

Who should win: Lincoln, It didn't have any beautiful visuals or amazing landscapes to really on, this movie looked beautiful even though it was a dialogue driven movie.

Who will win: Life of Pi, The Academy won't be able to resist all of the sparkly objects.

Oscar for Costume Design.

Who should win: Anna Karenina, Extravagant costumes that contributed to the great mise en scene in the movie

Who will win: Les Miserables, it's not like it has a ton of competition.  I mean Snow White and the Huntsman got nominated in this category, come on Academy get you shit together, what is this the people's choice awards?

Oscar for Best Directing.

Who should win: Lincoln, Steven Spielberg.  This category had a ridiculous amount of snubs, Spielberg wasn't the best this year, but he's the best of the nominees.

Who will win: Lincoln, Steven Spielberg.  He's got the Oscar pedigree.

Oscar for Film Editing.

Who should win: Zero Dark Thirty, the editing did a great job of adding tension and the progression of the movie was seamless.

Who will win: Argo, Eh whatever.

Best Foreign Language Film.

Who should win: No, Chile.  Honestly the only movie I've seen in this category is Amour and wasn't a fan of it.  I've seen the trailer for NO and I love the movie's premise and I'm fairly certain it's not worse then Amour.

Who will win: Amour, book it.

Oscar for Makeup and Hairstyling.

Who should win: The Hobbit an Unexpected Journey, Make-Up is great.  BUT HOW DID CLOUD ATLAS NOT GET NOMINATED?  We'll save that conversation for another day.

Who will win: Les Miserables, While accepting this award they should have to thank the mud that they made their actors role around, to make them look dirty.

Oscar for Best Original Music Score.

Who should win: John Williams, Lincoln.  You can just feel the vast amount of emotion in this score.

Who will win: Mychael Danna, The Academy will love the "bollywoodish" sounding score.

Oscar for Best Original Song.

Who should win: Skyfall, "Skyfall" by Adele.

Who will win: Skyfall, "Skyfall" by Adele.  It'll win because Adele.

Oscar for Best Production Design.

Who should win: Lincoln, It did a great job of recreating the 19th century and bring it to the screen

Who will win: Les Miserables, some of the Production Design looked a little ridiculous, let's hope it doesn't win.

Oscar Short Film - Animated

Who should win: Head over Heels, Incredibly clever and a sweet short.

Who will win: Paperman, It's incredibly endearing, plus it's disney the kings of Animation.

Oscar Short Film - Live Action

Who should win: Henry, It's a much better and psychological version of Amour.

Who will win: The Buzkashi Boys, All the shorts were really good in my opinion, I don't think I would have a problem with any of the 5 nominees winning it.

Oscar for Sound Editing

Who should win: Django Unchained, I don't think there is anyone in the industry cares and focuses on sound as much a Quentin Tarantino.

Who will win: Django Unchained, just taking a shot in the dark.  It makes sense to me, so why not the Academy too? Right?

Oscar for Sound Mixing.

Who should win: Lincoln, I don't really have a compelling argument......

Who will win: Les Miserables, ugh.

Oscar for Visual Effects.

Who should win: Life of Pi, The effects are beautiful and it would be nice to see a movie win this award without using big explosions

Who will win: Life of Pi, I could tell that the Tiger was CGI, but apparently a lot of other people couldn't....

Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay.

Who should win: Beasts of the Southern Wild, such a great and unique story, which you don't see to often.

Who will win: Argo, Oh boy another movie about how America and the CIA are awesome.

Oscar for Best Original Screenplay

Who should win: Django Unchained, there are some laughs and the dialogue seems genuine to the time period.

Who will win: Amour, there goes the Academy showing off how pretentious they can be again.


Oscar for Best Picture

Who should win: Django Unchained, stylish, witty, and tackles extremely tough subject matter.  Django is everything I want in a movie and more.

Who will win: Argo, It's been surging recently, and Affleck's fellow directors are gonna trying to stick to the academy for not giving him that director nom.  Unfortunately in the midst of all that they forget that they're supposed to pick the best movie.



* categories not mentioned Animated Feature, Documentary Feature and Documentary Short

Supporting Characters

Supporting characters is a movie about two editors and best friends as they work on editing a movie together while also trying to navigate their relationships with each other and their significant others.

The movie is well written with some very interesting scenes, however at times the movie and dialogue can feel a little dry. The story is an original tale and the movie has that charming indie sort of feel to it. After watching the movie I felt as though it was more of a buddy comedy than a romantic comedy.   The movie is a very laid back movie, which is displayed through the color scheme of the movie which was very soft and cool toned with many plain colors.

The acting is neither good or bad, a lot of the character's have an indifferent quality to them.  The biggest problem I had with the movie was at time the background noise or music was to overpowering.  It sometimes made the dialogue difficult to hear and with scenes that had music, it gave the movie a feeling of over dramatization and melo drama that detracted from the experience of the movie.  The movie at times has a very raw feeling to it, however that can be quickly disrupted through the editor's use of overly loud music during the dialogue.

The thing I enjoyed about this movie as a personal pleasure that since it was about film editors, it's a movie that's very relatable for those of us who are or aspire to be a part of the film industry.  You get see problems that a job in a film industry and the unique challenges it presents to a person and their relationships.  The state of how the film production is also a reflection of the state of each characters personal relationships.  The successes of the movie are mirrored by bliss of their personal relationships  when it seems like the movie is falling apart so are their relationships with their significant others.

This is a movie that also provides a view of what it is like work behind the scenes and an examination of the struggle that many filmmakers have of giving up some control of their project even though it may be in the best interest of the film.  The director (the character in the movie not the director of the film) believes that his vision is being tarnished and ruined by the producer an the editors of the film.  This goes to the point in which the director tries to block the film from even being made.  The struggle of the filmmaking process and the clashing of ideas, it very much accurately represents the power struggle behind the making of a film.  The film I think in the end sends an important message to aspiring filmmakers and those in the film industry, that is the idea of working as team and working together creatively.

Overall a relatively good film, that people who make movies will be able to relate to personally. Overdramatized through sound editing but has a very sincere and charming indie feel to it.

My final rating: 71/100

The Carrier a Hometown Review

I thought it might be fitting to do my first film review on the movie The Carrier. The Carrier is a horror comedy movie made back in 1988 that was almost entirely shot in my hometown of Manchester Michigan where I grew up.  Growing up I often heard it referred to as "that horrible horror movie that was made back in the 80's".  Being a film student I knew I had to see this movie, It being the only film history my hometown has really ever had.  After a brief search I was able to track down a VHS copy on eBay.

This movie is about the small town of Sleepy Rock, which has been falling to victim to attacks of a monster that the locals refer to as the "black thing". One night the main character Jake Spear is attacked by the black thing, however he fights it off, kills it and is left with only a scratch.  However Jake later discovers he is now a carrier of a dangerous disease that spreads to every inanimate object he touches. In a frenzy of fear the town of Sleepy Rock goes on a comical witch hunt to find out who among them is the carrier.

The Carrier is an original movie that delivers some great laughs. The movie is incredibly campy which is what makes some parts of this movie so funny.  The ridiculous actions of the of the townspeople is satire gold and reminds me of Monty Python on some level. However where the movie goes wrong is when it strays from the campiness that made it great and tries to be serious, especially in the beginning.  I have trouble telling if the actors are just really bad actors or just masters of satire which made it hard to tell when the comedy ends and when the seriousness begins.  This problem isn't helped much by the fact that the pacing in this movie is all over the place.  

Jake's love interest in this movie is completely unnecessary, has some terrible dialogue, never does anything that makes sense and is probably the worst actor in the movie. This movie had spectacular potential which ended up being somewhat squandered.  Also the outro to this movie is absolutely terrible

The costumes in this movie crack me up, they're just hilarious feats of satire.  However the downfall of this is I can't keep straight who is who and what characters are important.  Besides three of the central characters it's really hard to follow the story of any of the other characters, but then again I don't think you're really supposed to be able too.  The one big plot hole I just couldn't get myself to ignore was the fact that it was the 1980's and people running were around with axes and pitchfork as weapon's.  None of the character's end up breaking out a gun until then end, I was sitting there thinking to myself; well where the fuck was that the entire time?

In early parts of the movie there are some great use of foreshadowing through imagery.  However the director seems to make it his goal to name drop the title of the movie whenever he can.  With Jake at one point even complaining about all the things he's had to "carry" throughout his life.  But the most surprising part of watching this movie to me was the social commentary.  This movie was made in the late 1980's right around the same time people started freaking out about AIDS.  It's very easy to see how the disease of Jake Spear's character was very much a commentary on the fear and frenzy surrounding AIDS during this time in our history. There is also a noticeable commentary on religion in this movie while not as strong as the AIDS commentary it is still ever present.  The second to last scene in this movie in fact without giving to much away about the movie, depicts an upside down cross, a symbol of the anti-christ.  Not only that this movie bits science against religion through the two opposing viewpoints of how to deal with the disease between the preacher and the doctor

So in conclusion this is a campy movie with great entertainment value that has problems when it tries to take itself seriously and the bad acting doesn't do it any favors. However the comedy is done so well at times you almost forgive the plot holes and unnecessary bits of this movie...... almost.

My final rating: 58/100