We are nearing the top of Hollywood’s Mount Kilimanjaro and just have a few…more…steps before reaching the summit.
Movies
323 posts
So, dear friends, we had a grand plan to publish one Oscars story each day this week and then ACCOUNT SUSPENDED happened. That’s okay though because we know it was just Crasstalk winning the Internet. We are all Honey Badger about it.
What that means, though, is that today is all about the Oscars! Missing Peace, Dancing Queen and Ms. Anthropy are on it to bring you a full day of Academy Awards coverage. We’re starting with a fashion pre-cap this morning to get you warmed up for the main event – a liveblog of the show tonight, starting with the red carpet coverage on E! at 6 ET/3 PT and switching to ABC when the ceremony begins at 8 ET/5 PT. Join us – no false eyelashes, boobs, or smiles required!
We are dying to launch right into the fashion review of tonight’s Parade of the Stars but FIRST!, we offer a look into the fashion trends as displayed by the men and women who have strutted, peacock-like, down this season’s red carpets that don’t matter because they are not The Oscars. The pressure of being a stand-out on the Red Mile, watched by millions of people around the world and analyzed by fashion experts (and us), can bring out the best (even if you forget to thank your husband later). It can also bring out the worst. Speaking of the worst, did you know Gwenyth Paltrow is performing a song from Country Strong? We sincerely hope she remembers a bra this year. How many times have you yelled at the television: “FIRE YOUR STYLIST!” or “Baby, you couldn’t look better if you were covered in bacon and chocolate!” Yes, tonight is as much an amateur fashion critic’s dream as it is Joan Rivers’ foreplay to her post-Oscars climax.
Will Nicole Kidman wear a wedding dress for the 67th time? Will Mark Ruffalo comb his hair? Will the first “age appropriate” offender be one of the babies or an old? We’ve got our Tim Gunn bobblehead and black Sharpie at the ready, so let’s go!
Here’s a review of last year’s Oscar red carpet. We are still waiting for the explanation as to why Nicole Richie was invited. As for the ladies, highlights were the pre-breakup, sleek and stunning Sandra Bullock, which is much different than the sheepdog hair she sported at this year’s Golden Globes. We needed her to be more “wash that man right out of her hair” and then style it, rather than just leave it to airdry on the way to the show. Mo’nique, who apparently didn’t spend one moment away from her man long enough to take a solo shot on the red carpet, looked lovely in blue with some hairy-ass legs. You want to know how to stand out on the red carpet? Just study Vera Farmiga.
Disappointments were an unusually bland Penelope Cruz (get a new silhouette), the now infamous “bun boobs” on Charlize Theron, and Tinfoil & Tulle Barbie.
First time nominee last year only to return with a second nomination this year, Jeremy Renner changed it up from the typical penguin suit. Will he go more traditional this year? We’d like to see him “cleaned up” a bit more like this. How you improve on Colin Firth’s perfect perfection (thank you, Tom Ford) is a mystery to us, but it would not be this (come on with the tennies, RDJ – you’re too old for this). Also, Tom Ford should be at every awards show. Honey wears the hell out of a tuxedo.
The 2011 Golden Globes offered us visions of Angelina, Mila, and Ms. Zeta-Jones in multiple textures of emerald green, shimmering neutrals, and whatever it was that the kooky Helena Bonham Carter had on (scraps of leftover fabric from Alice in Wonderland costumes?). We’re not feeling the 80s dresses, complete with shoulder pads and crystals – there isn’t anything new being done with that to make it feel fresh or worth revisiting – let’s hope the ladies got that out of their systems at the lesser awards.
Hopefully, this daisy-sprinkled Mia Farrow-wannabe disaster is a thing of the past – doesn’t she know The Great Gatsby remake has already been cast? Will Johnny Depp’s love affair with the pirate look off-screen continue to merge with his Hollywood Star/French Countryman/Everyman look (otherwise known as the rich hobo)? More men should look like the man on the left, so please make that happen, and that includes you. We’ll wait.
We know how difficult it is to dress when you are expecting but there is no need to look like a box of dollar store Valentine’s day chocolates. Or worse: looking like a lop-sided damaged one even when you are not expecting, for that matter. Also – use a steamer! You’re a celebrity, dammit, demand it!
Our Jakey adheres to the Tom Ford rule. Please note the well-fitting suit, appropriately shiny shoes, and proportional bow tie.
The 2011 BAFTA’s brought out some of the best in this year’s nominees. Her performance may have been so-so but Annette Bening radiated on the carpet and somehow managed not to look like she was wearing a wedding dress. We think this will probably be the only time we can say that SWINTON knocked it out of the park. (Ms. A begs to differ and bows to the Swinton – suck it haters.)
We can’t forget the classics, however. Will we see an updated version of these red carpet figure skating outfits vamping it up tomorrow night? Is Cher coming to the Oscars? She really should, we need the fodder.
Also, will Natalie Portman take a rather obvious cue from the original swan woman? It might make for good maternity wear.
Who are you excited to see? Who will “make it work” and who needed to “edit.” Who will be a hit or a miss (see what we did there)?
Don’t forget to join us later today for a liveblog of Oscar night, starting with the red carpet arrivals on E! (6 ET/3 PT). We will also be doing a champagne-soaked, Spanx-free Oscar re-cap on Monday so be ready to dish!
Well, hello there! It’s Missing Peace, Ms. Anthropy and Dancing Queen here with Day 2 of our guide to the Oscars.
We are handicapping our picks for the winners in the “big” categories: Best Supporting Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Actor, Best Actress and Best Picture. Yesterday, we brought you the Best Actor in a Supporting Role. Today, we get to look at the Supporting Actress race.
Today’s category: Best Actress in a Supporting Role
Last year’s winner was Mo’Nique for Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire. We’re pretty sure that is the shortest name of a winner in combination with the longest movie title, ever! Anyway, she was a force to be reckoned with in a heartbreaking film. While she didn’t need to shave her legs for the part, she probably should have done so for the red carpet. Let’s take a moment to reflect on her odd 2010 Golden Globes red carpet reveal:
But we digress! On to this year’s wide-ranging nominees in a category that engenders a certain scrappiness in its contenders. Female character actresses sometimes suffer from an also-ran mentality: many of them have never been quite right for lead roles in film (read: not conventionally beautiful), but their talents may far outshine those of the Kidmans and Roberts and Bullocks of the world. Relegated to supporting roles, these talented ladies bring years of pent-up angst and desperation for recognition to Oscar night. It is not enough to be nominated in this category. Winning is the only thing that will grant them the blazing spotlight for three glorious minutes. They are the Jan Bradys of the Oscars, poised at the ready to smother Marsha in her sleep and blame it that dolt, Cindy.
Nominee: Amy Adams for The Fighter
Advantage: Boy, is this lady versatile! She easily moves from a singing, dancing fairy tale princess to a gritty, “I ain’t scared of you, mother f*ckers” bad*ss chick! In The Fighter, Adams stands by her man, and perhaps more importantly, stands up against the performance turned in by Melissa Leo. The Academy has had Adams on their radar, even before her stripped-down performance in Doubt erased any doubt that she is nothing more than a modern-day Debbie Reynolds.
Disadvantage: She maybe this generation’s Meryl Streep but the other performances in this category were bone-chillingly good. It’s not her time. The Academy expects to see more great work from Adams and will likely wait until she lands a juicy lead role in a classic Oscar-bait film before granting her the statue.
Nominee: Helena Bonham Carter for The King’s Speech
Advantage: Oh how Hollywood loves a British period piece! The accents! The pretty costumes! Royalty! There is strong momentum behind The King’s Speech but it seems to benefit Colin Firth and the picture itself more than the supporting cast. However, folks seem to love the quirky Ms. Bonham Carter and she is a strong contender. It is nice to see her in something significantly more understated than the maniacally spiteful Bellatrix Lestrange in the Harry Potter series.
Disadvantage: Is she too quirky for the academy? Her delicate beauty and fine acting abilities are often overshadowed by her over-the-top antics. We love her, but are mismatched shoes a dealbreaker? Also, there may be too many opportunities for her to fall up and/or down the stairs while attempting to accept her award. Actually, that may be an advantage. The Academy likes a wild card and unscripted wackiness. Great fodder for the press for weeks after the Awards.
Nominee: Melissa Leo for The Fighter
Advantage: Um, she wins everything. Seriously. She has won the Golden Globe and the Screen Actor’s Guild award for Best Actress for this role. Plus, Hollywood LOVES a physical transformation and she does that here. Besides, even Sissy Spacek and Holly Hunter specifically asked Oprah to tell Leo how much they love her. Yes, they were on Oprah for a pre-Oscar show a few weeks back, and yes, Missing Peace (and Dancing Queen) were watching. We dare anyone to say they could recognize Ms. Leo on the street, dressed in her civvies, based on her performance in The Fighter. However, she took a major risk that can sometimes backfire by taking out “for your consideration” ads herself. Will the voters forgive her for these?
Disadvantage: The cheesy self-promotion campaign may have given the voters another opportunity check the box for HBC. If we were Academy voters (fingers, crossed – someday, we will be!), the poolside fur would have been a deal-breaker. We don’t like gauche self-promotion. Get a blog, Melissa Leo!
Nominee: Hailee Steinfeld for True Grit
Advantage: Hailee Steinfeld is the definition of breakout star in this movie. Young actresses in the Supporting Actress category tend to ruin the party for their, ahem, more seasoned counterparts. See: Patty Duke, Tatum O’Neal, Anna Paquin. Steinfeld held her own among a cast of veteran male actors in a gritty Western; this bodes well for her. In fact, she’s already been cast as the lead in the new adaptation of the novel Forgotten. Steinfeld might benefit from Academy backlash against Leo and a desire to shake things up for ratings.
Disadvantage: Being so fresh and untested can be a huge disadvantage. Many Academy voters may hold off, thinking Steinfeld has a long career ahead of her. She has been nominated for almost every single award possible for this role and hasn’t won yet. The Oscars are not the likely occasion to break this trend, opting for a wait and see attitude on Steinfeld.
Nominee: Jacki Weaver for Animal Kingdom
Advantage: Animal Kingdom centers around the activities of a crime family in Melbourne, Australia, with Ms. Weaver playing the family’s matriarch. The movie made its mark in the US at the Sundance Film Festival in January 2010, but has only earned $1 million at the US box office. The movie cleaned up at the 2010 Australian Film Industry Awards where Weaver earned the award for Best Actress.
Disadvantage: Who? Yeah, that’s what we said. We have to imagine that many Academy voters said the same thing, especially given that Weaver has not been in the US promoting Animal Kingdom during the months leading up to the Oscars. The people need face time and she’s off working in the theatre in Australia. Is there theatre in Australia? Other than that white opera house thing-y? We thought it was all outback and beaches and hot volleyball players. People spend time indoors down there? Acting? Huh.
Our pick for Best Supporting Actress: Melissa Leo. This woman would rip your kid’s gold star off his spelling homework if she knew where you lived. Not that she doesn’t deserve the win – she is a powerhouse performer. But if you are an actress who wants to win an Oscar, you better make darn sure that Melissa Leo didn’t make a movie that year.
Our dark horse contender is Helena Bonham Carter for the upset. Is it wrong that we want to see Melissa Leo’s face when the camera cuts to her tight, fake smile as she watches someone else flounce away with the Oscar and wonders how soon she can break away to call her contractor and cancel the plans for the shrine in the entry hall?
Who do you think will take home the award for her performance in a supporting role? And maybe the better question is who deserves it? Those are two very different questions.
Remember to join us on Sunday, February 27th, for a liveblog of Oscar night, starting with the red carpet arrivals on E! (6 ET/3 PT) and switching over to ABC when the Academy Awards ceremony begins (8 ET/5 PT).
It’s Oscars Week! (Yes, it deserves a week.) It’s Missing Peace, Ms. Anthropy and Dancing Queen here with our amateur’s guide to the Oscars. We’re not film industry insiders – we’re avid movie and fashion fans with opinions. Hey! Just like you! Join us on Sunday, February 27th, for a liveblog of Oscar night, starting with the red carpet arrivals on E! (6 ET/3 PT) and switching over to ABC when the Academy Awards ceremony begins (8 ET/5 PT). We will be talking fashion, surprise wins, loser reactions and speeches that went on too long. E! has nothing on us!
Each day this week, we’ll make our picks for the winners in the “big” categories – the ones that make the careers of relative unknowns and reward those who have patiently waited, year after year, for recognition: Best Supporting Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Actor, Best Actress and Best Picture. To make our picks, we’re taking a realistic approach, considering performances worthy of winning and factors that may help or hurt a nominee.
Also, you may have noticed that we listed only five categories and there are six days between today and the Oscars. That’s because on Saturday, we will be previewing red carpet fashion: the trends, do’s, don’ts and who will be on the receiving end of the coveted Ryan Seacrest “Cop a Feel” Award. Sharpen your claws, kittens!
Today’s category: Best Actor in a Supporting Role
Last year’s winner was Christoph Waltz for his wickedly terrifying and brilliant performance in Inglourious Basterds. Who will take it home this year?
Nominee: Christian Bale for The Fighter
Advantage: Seriously dedicated himself to the role – do you see the weight loss and physical transformation? Although Bale’s currently not working (hence the hot Golden Globes beard and the not so hot Farrah Fawcett do), he has an extremely successful acting career going back to 1987’s Empire of the Sun. He can carry a money-making franchise like Batman but he also translates well in smaller projects. Bale is a compelling on-screen presence with a serious dedication to his craft. Sometimes that dedication results in…
Disadvantage: His Terminator meltdown. Sure, everyone’s heard the tape and most people still think he’s an asshole, but Hollywood is the capital of assholery. It would be a bit hypocritical to hold that against him. It hasn’t stopped Julia Roberts or Russell Crowe or Mel Gibson or…
Nominee: Geoffrey Rush for The King’s Speech
Advantage: Rush won an Oscar for 1997’s Shine, so clearly he has some fans in the Academy. Who doesn’t love a guy who can go from an undead, morally bankrupt pirate to a gentleman spoofing the craft of acting as a royal speech coach? Rush’s crazy-but-lovable uncle thing makes him an endearing favorite.
Disadvantage: Rush is so solid that he is easy to overlook. In some ways, being a consistently great actor can be a disadvantage at the Oscars. The Academy likes to reward “surprisingly strong” performances. Right, Julia Roberts? This year, is Rush too good to win? Will our imaginary uncle be overlooked for a scruffy ruffian? Will the Academy voters be too focused on Colin Firth’s performance to have checked the box for Rush?
Nominee: Mark Ruffalo for The Kids Are All Right
Advantage: Dreamboat Ruffalo is a dreamboat (DQ begs to differ but that’s a different story for another day). Also, he comes from a film that was in limited release, which the Academy loves, and has a working actor’s humility and grace.
Disadvantage: To this day, we see Mark Ruffalo as the love interest in 13 Going on 30. And if we see it that way, everyone does, right? Ruffalo’s biggest disadvantage is that The Kids Are All Right is just all right: it isn’t a particularly important film and his performance as a sperm donor with a (misguided) heart doesn’t show the emotional depth worthy of an Oscar.
Nominee: Jeremy Renner for The Town
Advantage: Renner was a front-runner last year for his performance in 2010’s Best Picture winner The Hurt Locker, but lost to Hollywood favorite Jeff Bridges for his amazing performance in Crazy Heart. In a mere eight years, Renner has ascended quickly, from playing Jeffrey Dahmer to being a two-time Oscar nominee. The Academy likes to reward young talent in the Supporting Actor category, so Renner may be due for a reach-around after last year’s snub.
Disadvantage: AnotherBostonStreetTough. This character is quickly becoming the new ManicPixieDreamGirl and is equally as tiresome. Renner’s performance in The Hurt Locker was far superior to this turn in Ben Affleck’s second homecoming vanity project.
Nominee: John Hawkes for Winter’s Bone
Advantage: Hawkes plays an incredibly convincing scary dude here, with a buzz-worthy performance. The Academy loves drug addicts and dirt bags: Hawkes covers both. Winter’s Bone may be the best least-seen movie of the year. And Hawkes is a natural character actor who blends so seamlessly into roles that he can get LOST in them.
Disadvantage: Winter’s Bone made $6.4 million at the box office and, compared to Black Swan, with a box office draw of over $101 million, it’s pretty small potatoes. Have enough hoity-toity Academy members gotten around to seeing this movie yet?
Our pick for Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale. Talented assholes finish first. Plus, he sure is pretty. Bale’s strongest competition is Geoffrey Rush – the two have been neck-and-neck through this awards season, making Oscar night a nail-biter in this category.
Your turn. Who’s your pick for Best Actor in a Supporting Role?
As a youth, one of the best things about lazy Sundays was sitting at home and watching old movies and television shows. There was something soothing about Dagwood and Blondie, Laurel and Hardy, or Abbott and Costello. Sure the antics were silly and a bit far-fetched, but it was always good-natured fun. Whether they were hunting monsters, wandering through Toyland, or tripping out the door or over a dozen dogs, this was the comfort of Sunday viewing.
It was such a cool routine and now that I reflect back on it, an integral part of family time. Some say that music is the soundtrack of your life, and I truly believe that it is, but I think your life also has its own movie reel.
You can often pinpoint certain things in your life based upon a movie or a visual experience. You remember the first movie you ever saw with your best friend, when you were finally able to see “R” rated films, when you got your first giddy kiss in a movie theater, when you finally discovered that as a viewer you knew when something sucked sooo bad, but you didn’t care because it was still fun, and you remember what movies your parents loved, and loved to discuss.
It’s a tradition as old as the moving picture…the youth and movies. It didn’t start with my generation watching John Cusack holding a stereo over his head for the love of a girl. No, my parents remember getting excited to go out to see West Side Story, and the anticipation of that event. It was a big deal. It was infectious and gorgeous, and everyone was caught up in the swell of that cinematic masterpiece. My dad also remembers sitting in the theater watching Elvis double features (Twice!) because not only was Elvis the man, but the theater held all the girls who watched and listened to the crooner do his thing and shake his hips. I have the oddest feeling that my father left the theater and attempted to sing some of the Elvis tunes in the lobby just to put an extra feather in his cap after the show and woo the girls who lingered there. I think if asked he’d say, “no comment“.
My mom, no doubt one of those girls my father would have popped his collar to impress back in those days, was sitting right there in the crowd a whole state away, probably on some of those very days watching Elvis shimmy and “get the girl, kiss the girl.” Because that’s what they were, right? That entire genre of film was about the swoon. Wow, some things just don’t change. It’s almost scary that Justin Bieber now understands exactly what that’s about.
When I saw my parents this weekend, I asked what they loved to watch back in their swoon era, and boy they talked about it with such zeal. They said, “Oh, definitely Elvis, Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis, Annette Funicello and Frankie Avalon Beach Party movies.” Mom added, “Gidget” And I said “with Sally Field?” and she said, “Oh, no, she came later…with Sandra Dee, the original Gidget…yes, Gidget and Moon Doggie.” And she smiled fondly. Dad added, “And of course James Bond movies.” He had to specify, “with the real James Bond…Sean Connery.” I wasn’t going to argue, because I knew that was a losing argument. The way I feel about Christopher Reeve being the one and true Superman is how my father feels about Sean Connery as James Bond. Mention Roger Moore and you get an icy stare. I find this hysterical. Not sure what would happen if I said something like, “Pierce Brosnan. ”
It was fun and cool discussing this movie-related history, and finding out that a double feature, two movies on one ticket, cost $1.50! And that kids would just spend an entire Sunday in the movie theater watching those two movies over and over again. And they would go back the next week to see the same movies and sit in the dark and repeat the same lines right along with the coolest guy in the world. I am so beyond shocked at how cool my parents thought Elvis was, this from two people who never listened to his music or discussed him much in my recollection. But from what they say, Elvis just was. There was none of this “new movie opening every week” thing. Once something came out in the theater you were married to it, there was no, “I’ll pass and wait for it to come out on DVD.” No, you watched it all, the good, the bad, and the Jerry Lewis.
Jerry Lewis is indeed another matter. I know, I know, people just hate Jerry Lewis movies! But this is a spot of mutual affection my father and I share. We adore Jerry Lewis. We can watch the Nutty Professor and Cinderfella with no shame. We find him to be a comedic genius despite what the rest of the world says, and I’ll defend it with honor….MISS LADY!
Of course my movie reel doesn’t stop at these old classics, but this is definitely where they start, and I count my folks as the “cool people” in their own right who started my love of movies.
We’ll talk again about our collective lifelong movie reel, after all we’ve not even touched the John Hughes era.
You already know how this will end. And begin. And arc. What is surprising about this “romantic” “comedy” is the number of talented actors who agreed to appear as supporting players in this drivel: Kevin Kline, Lake Bell, Mindy Kaling, a bearded Cary Elwes, Greta Gerwig. If Kutcher’s only task was to look appealing, since acting is clearly out, this movie came about ten years too late in his “career.” Portman infuses a clunky script with some verve, but not enough to overcome a storyline in which making a period mix for an adult woman is considered charming. PMS is more fun.
Some of you might remember PoBoyNation mentioning the film The Whole Gritty City back at the other place. The independent filmmakers are trying to finish their documentary on the experiences of three New Orleans marching bands and the kids band leaders are trying to keep off the streets in the wake of Katrina, but have run short of funds. Watch the trailer and donate here to help them out if you are as moved as I was.
Have you noticed lately that your Netflix (or Redbox, Blockbuster, etc.) movies aren’t as feature packed as they used to be? The movie studio overlords had a problem, the rental houses only have to buy a disc once and then they can send it to hundreds or thousands of people. The studio oligarchy would much rather that individuals pay $30 each for individual copies of those movies. A new plan was needed.
Enter the “movie only” copies of DVDs and Blu-ray discs. Let us take the money making machine that is Twilight Eclipse as an example.
Your kids already forced you to take them to see it in the theater for $12 a pop plus snacks. Now the whole point of getting the DVD or Blu-ray is to watch the special features, so they put it on their Christmas wish list. Grandma goes to Best Buy and gets them the only copy they have left, the single disc DVD. The back of the box doesn’t list any features, but granny doesn’t know anything about the schemes of movie studios.
Your kid and her friends just want to watch the commentary where the pale face Brit tells what it was like to make out with Miss Dead Eyes. But it’s not there. So, you march down to return the stupid thing (open box returns are fun) and you are presented with a well stocked after holiday shelf where you find the following:
1. The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (Two-Disc Special Edition) DVD
2. The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (Single-Disc Edition) DVD
3. The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (Single-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo) Special Edition DVD and Blu-ray on a flip disc
4. The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (Single-Disc Edition) Blu-ray
Can you guess which one has special features, or which features each one has? If you said number 1 and 3 you’re win a prize (that being the ability to hear Miss Dead Eyes attempt to emote). Further, can you guess which are the only ones the studios will sell to the rental companies?
This leaves only one question. What took them so long?
Everyone knows that Roger Ebert has gone soft in his old age and ill health. How else do you explain THREE STARS for Gulliver’s Travels and only a mere half star more for True Grit? Facing the end of your life will do that to a sensitive soul and I love him, so I chalk it up to serious meds. Anyway, Ebert thinks this film of the holiday blizzard deserves an Oscar nod in the short film category. This is lovely, but all it really makes me think is “please spay and neuter your pets” (cut to 2:40 mark for my The Price Is Right reference).