It’s Oscar season, the time of year when “serious” films starting flooding the marketplace and bloggers go out on a limb with early predictions.
It’s probably more helpful to ask a few pointed questions before the big Oscar favorites reach the public. After all, crystal ball gazing is an inexact science, but being curious never goes out of style:
- Can “Sherlock Holmes” actually be good? While the Holmes brand is the main reason for yet another take on the super sleuth, it’s hard to envision a quality product coming from director Guy Ritchie. The all style, no substance auteur is leaving behind his preferred genre, the British thuggery, to handle a sophisticated crime fighter with a legendary rep. Can he build genuine characters and take full advantage of an actor as skilled as Robert Downey, Jr.? Fingers crossed, but I’m skeptical.
- Will a mainstream blockbuster crash the Best Picture party? The field is now open for 10 pictures, up from the traditional five, meaning Oscar voters might deem one populist film worthy. I just can’t imagine which one it’ll be. Some predict “Star Trek” will make the cut, but will stuffy Oscar voters deem a space opera worthy?
- Is “Avatar” as disappointing as its special effects? Computer generated characters have come a long way in recent years, but the trailers for “Avatar” show a big step backward. The blue beasties look … silly, and that’s hardly what we can expect from director James Cameron. The man literally pulled the special effect film into the 21st century with features like “The Abyss” and “Terminator 2: Judgment Day.”
- Can Peter Jackson thrive without trolls, gnomes or might apes at his disposal? The Oscar-winning director branded himself as the go-to guy for escapist fare with his “Rings” trilogy and “King Kong” remake. His latest, “The Lovely Bones,” can’t fall back on any FX wizardry.
- Is is Jason Reitman’s world … and we just live in it? The director of “Thank You For Smoking” and “Juno” returns with “Up in the Air,” the only film rivaling “Precious” for better pre-Oscar buzz. Will audiences want to watch a man (George Clooney) jetting across the country to fire people? If anyone can sell it, Reitman can.
My .02 cents – no, no, yes, yes, yes.
(Photo: “The Lovely Bones,” directed by Peter Jackson, casts Oscar nominee Saoirse Ronan as a girl who watches down on events here on Earth after being brutally murdered/DreamWorks Entertainment)
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Since you asked the questions, here are my humble opinions:
1. I think Sherlock Holmes will be a well-made film, a fun guilty pleasure, and great counter-programming for the depressing and pretentious Oscar season films. It will do well and be well-liked, but nothing more.
2. Mainstream films this year have been good, but not great. And compared to last year’s excellent crop (The Dark Knight, Gran Torino), they’ve been downright disappointing. I don’t see any of them crashing the Oscar party, no matter how many Best Picture slots there are. Inglorious Basterds might have an outside shot, but that’s about it.
3. Avatar will be this year’s Phantom Menace; it’ll make decent money but will be a huge disappointment. All the hype in the world doesn’t change the fact that the special effects look lame and that the plot looks even lamer (one blogger described it as “Captain Planet with cats”).
4. I have high hopes for The Lovely Bones. Peter Jackson showed with Heavenly Creatures that he can make a good film without trolls or apes, but he’s never been a gentle or subtle filmmaker, and that could be what’s missing from this film. Only time will tell, though.
5. Jason Reitman is a fantastic director, but Up In the Air looks incredibly dull, and Clooney still can’t open a movie on his own. With it’s standard anti-corporate message and its smug leading man, the film will probably get some Oscar nominations just for existing, but I doubt it will get much love outside of NY or LA.
1. I’m looking forward to Sherlock Holmes. I don’t expect it to be great, just a lot of silly fun. Since Guy Ritchie makes some of my guiltiest pleasures…win win!
2. As a Trekker, the thought of Star Trek (2009) getting a best picture nomination makes me throw up in my mouth a little. And I agree with Jimmy C, last year’s crop was so much better than this year is sort of embarassing.
3. I think South Park described Avatar best in their episode, “Dances With Smurfs.”
And as for 4 and 5, meh. I still need to see Heavenly Creatures or anything directed by Reitman. I am waaay behind the curve.
Heavenly Creatures – one of the most underrated drug movies of all time. Monica Lynskey should have been a star.
Meant Melanie Lynskey. Hope that was mere grammatical slippage not Freudian.
I. Ritchie may surprise with “Holmes,” as historically, directors with personal life upheavals often focus their best effort consequently in their projects. Plus, Downey, Jr., plays well with Brits, and much of the supporting cast is from the UK, so Ritchie is not really outside of his sandbox. Finally, the Academy long has been overly-fond of Downey, so there may be a “Chocolat”-like nod for the film.
II. Abrams’ Yeoman’s work on “Star Trek,” much like Nolan’s similar genre-revitalizing work on “Batman Begins,” has been rewarded by b.o. , critical accolades, and franchise promise. The Academy Awards long have been uneven and questionable in their apprisals, especially with regard to the lesser categories, but even I would be disappointed to see “Star Trek” among the ten nominees. The story was entertaining but NOT Oscar quality.
III. I also fear “Phantom Menace”-ing from “Avatar,” particularly in light of the low ROI that was the fourth “Indiana Jones” film, despite the collaboration of two of Cameron’s peers. However, despite the 12-year absence, I am willing to give Cameron a mulligan, as he has been one of the very few directors making films MEANT for the big screen – for that reason alone, I will screen “Avatar.”
IV. Jackson admittedly now is known for F/X but as JFWayne noted, “Heavenly Creatures” was a well-done character piece. Whether the years-long absence from directing such work has diminished him remains to be seen, but it may be overlooked that his masterpiece “Lord of the Rings” was an adaptation as well. I do not expect Oscar-worthiness, but I do expect a well-crafted, thoughtful, grown-up film.
V. Clooney, like Downey, Jr., currently is beloved by the Academy, so there will be no small effort to acknowledge his work this year. The long-form preview I screened of “Up in the Air” suggested a more legitimate Oscar buzz for Farmiga, who seems to be garnering a second-life career as a good actress in grown-up, non-television fare.
I rather enjoyed “Smoking” and “Juno,” so I expect the Reitman-esque sharpness to be on display; Clooney’s experience with the Coens has taught him how to navigate such an enviroment. As the film technically is a comedy, however, I do not expect it to achieve a Top 10 nod on its merit alone.