We Have Some Planes.

Like the Rwandan genocide, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States is another event that for the first time made me really aware of plane hijackings, major terrorism and the true extent of and willpower behind suicide bombings. In the days before the Afghanistan and new Iraq wars, this was before car bombs and religious extremism was a nightly news story. So unbelievable was it that when my mother woke me up to tell me it had happened I rolled over and told her to go away, thinking it was some sort of practical joke. But getting myself up and watching the replays of the twin towers of the World Trade Centre collapsing has left one of the most enduring images in my mind, one that can never fail to bring about shock and horror in me whenever I see them referenced. Even watching Man On Wire brought some of that back, with its repeated images of those buildings still standing so shortly after construction.

United 93 was a bold undertaking, coming as it did five years after the events of that day. Like movies dealing with current wars, this was always going to be a hard sell, a film about the one hijacked plane that did not make its target, instead crash landing in a field before reaching Washington, D.C. Delayed out of Newark by earlier inclement weather, the flight was probably lucky to get in the air. The terrorists on board are jumpy and edgy, biding their time waiting for the right moment to launch their attack on the cockpit, not knowing whether or not their co-conspirators in other planes had managed to achieve their goals until they are inside the cockpit.


On the ground, air traffic control are having a hard time believing what is going on. Two planes have crashed into the World Trade Centre in clear weather, but without any real broadcasts from the planes to arouse that much suspicion. They have no reason to believe immediately that these were acts of hostility, instead initially fearing they were tragic accidents involving smaller planes. A naive thought in retrospect, but no one really wanted to jump to the worst possible conclusion. Then another jet hits the Pentagon - it's on. The military gets involved as the traffic controllers jump around, suspecting any plane that does something unusual or doesn't immediately respond is a part of this operation. The military can't get fighter jets scrambled, there just aren't enough of them, and for some reason they're taking off and heading in the wrong direction. The President can't be reached to authorise engagement with civilian aircraft, meaning it's pointless having them out there anyway, since they can't do anything. Besides, the first fighters they can get up there are unarmed.


On the last hijacked plane, people are calling their loved ones and relatives, and they have chance to find out that this isn't a hostage taking exercise. With their families telling them that these three planes have hit such high profile targets, the passengers are no longer wondering how long they will be on the plane, but what their target is. What landmark they will be crashing into as they die. With a pilot of sorts on board, they decide the only way to deal with the situation is to rise up against their aggressors. If they're certainly going to die standing around doing nothing, they may as well give a shot at reclaiming control of the aircraft and hopefully being able to get it safely to ground. Of course, as we know, their bold attempt doesn't end in victory for them, though it might well have saved the lives of countless others on the ground.


Paul Greengrass wrote and directed this incredible hand-held retelling (built, one must assume, to no small extent on speculation of what actually went on onbaord United flight 93) that is one of the most consistently tense films from the get-go that I have seen in a long time - despite the fact that we all know how the film is going to end. As much as there might be a part of your mind wishing and cheering for the success of the passengers, you know your dreams will not be realised. They are going to perish. Barry Ackroyd captures it all with his stunning cinematography, redolent of his later work on The Hurt Locker.


The amazing thing about United 93 is the different representations of fear through the actions of people in very different situations both in the air and in the ground. The hijackers are not villainised any more than what has already been shown in media over the last eight years, and they are also terrified. They just channel their fear into determination. Which is exactly what the passengers of United 93 do - they take their fear and turn it into a resolve to overthrow. On the ground, confusion and fear reign the day, as no one knows what is going on or has the opportunity to formulate any real action plan. And with so many planes in the air, and every one of them a possible weapon, there is a hell of a lot to fear and not enough people to fear them all. Looking back one could easily say action should have been taken earlier, but in reality there just wasn't any information, communication, or precedent for this kind of occurrence. They were, pardon the pun, flying blind, and making it up as you go along will always leave room for improvement.


A truly incredible movie, touching and powerful and affecting, examining one of the most poignant moments in recent western history whilst still managing to craft an exceptionally taught motion picture. 5 stars.

My Favourite Colour Is Fluorescent Beige.

Truly, everyone has heard so much about Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire that there doesn't really feel much more to say. Yes, it was the first film ever to take out the Audience Award at the two most influential North American film festivals last year (Sundance and Toronto - taking out the Grand Jury Prize at the former to boot. Plus it nabbed the audience awards at San Sebastian, Hawaii and Chicago.) Yes, it peaked hella way too early, somewhere around September everyone was saying that it would take something mammoth to beat it to the Best Picture Oscar this year. As we now know, it's not getting anywhere near that trophy - Avatar blitzed, The Hurt Locker came from behind, and Up In The Air safely flew through the middle. No one is even mentioning Precious in the same sentence as Best Picture unless they're mentioning that it received a nomination. It's definitely not going to win.

This is a textbook example of buzz creating backlash creating lasting damage for a film that otherwise should have been able to pose more of a threat. Probably released a little too early to be able to carry the high hopes through to Oscar, it nevertheless did the best thing for its box office (and that's the most important thing - let's be honest, Oscar is all glory and no moolah these days.) I do find it a bit upsetting, however, that it is being so comprehensively ignored these days. Apart from the gimme that is Mo'Nique's Supporting Actress Oscar, the only real surprise seems to be the Editing nomination for Joe Klotz and, to a lesser extent, that Lee Daniels arrogance and the Academy love for Clint Eastwood didn't shaft him from the Best Director race.


On to the film. Clareece Precious Jones (Gabourey Sidibe) is sixteen, horrendously overweight, failing junior high school and pregnant with her second child. And her father is the father. She is kicked out of her current school, and is pressured to go on welfare by her mother, Mary (Mo'Nique), who is also on welfare and seems to do nothing but sit in her apartment, abuse Precious and smoke, occasionally trying to tidy up when a social worker comes to visit and she reclaims Precious' first daughter from Precious' grandmother - the child has Down's Syndrome, and Mary doesn't want it in the house, but she does want the welfare cheque that looking after a baby brings with it.


Precious enrols in a new school, an alternative school, where her teacher, Ms Rain (Paula Patton) proves an inspiration, very much in the vein of Michelle Pfeiffer's character in Dangerous Minds. She motivates her students to write, to learn to read, to explore what it is they really want to do with themselves. And she cares for them all from the beginning. Precious is also talking to Mrs Weiss (Mariah Carey) at the welfare office, who has taken an interest in the fact that Precious has been raped and impregnated not once, but twice by her own father, under the watchful gaze of her own mother.

I guess this is the majority of the storyline. I'm not going to go into the character arc of Precious, because, when broken down, it's actually quite basic, almost exactly what you'd expect. It does hold on to a few surprises, so that just when you're feeling better about it all it kicks you back down into the depths of despair without so much as an 'excuse me.' The film does manage to leave off on a hopeful note, contrary to all of the reports of how bleak and terrifying the film is. It is bleak and terrifying, but it is also profound and moving, funny in moments, and warming at the end.


The film basically takes any previous concept of female performance and shits all over it. Seriously. I don't aim to be crass, but that's really what I saw. Sidibe, a total newcomer, was astonishing, mumbling her way through trauma and tears, wrenching your heart, but constantly shining a light through the middle of her distress. Patton (her characters is a lesbian! For no reason! It means nothing to the story, is only really mentioned once! Is this the breakthrough we've been waiting for???) is perfect as the inspirational leader, pretty, confident, successful, with just enough superiority to keep the kids in line without once seeming to patronise them. Carey... dare I say it, but I think if Mo'Nique's character hadn't been in the film (because I think it is such a strong character that a lot of people would have been able to turn in award-worthy performances, though maybe not as stunning as Mo'Nique pulled off) there would be serious talk about her being a proper contender for Best Supporting Actress. She's only in a couple of scenes, but the last one especially is so tremendously crafted. As a social worker she's trying to keep her personal feelings and emotions out of it, but failing dismally, and you can see that struggle through her questioning of Mary. A definite match for the Oscar nominated turns by Mo'Nique and Sidibe.

Which brings me to Mo'Nique. Hot. Damn. Seriously. Monstrous. Switching between connivingly nice and outrageously awful in a heartbeat, she turns it all up to eleven, and then manages to push it closer to a hundred. Magnetic at the same time as she is hideous, she never makes Mary so detestable as to stop you from pitying her at least just a bit for whatever has caused her to be such a fearsome and loathsome character. You don't pity her for her desire and need for love, no sir, not when the most obvious candidate for love has been beaten and bullied so badly by both her and those around her, but you do feel sorry for the fact that she so needs to trample her child in order to feel worthy. She pushes so far into the realm of hatred that you come full circle and almost want to help her. Almost being the operative word. At the end of the day, I'd still be quite happy watching her fall under a bus. And all of this doesn't come close to describing the true gravity of her achievement here. Let it be said that if, somehow, she doesn't walk home with an Oscar next month, you can quite rightly expect riots in the streets. I'll be leading them.


All that having been said, it is far from a perfect movie. Some of the directorial choices seemed a little random, and I must say I didn't really enjoy the fantasy cutaways of Precious. I appreciate the idea, but they didn't work for me. They could have, maybe if they were a little more lo-fi, but as they were it felt manipulative. And little things, like pulling away from Mo'Nique's face to her hands in the middle of her final scene's explosive and powerful monologue. WTF? Stick with her face! It's redefining performance! This is what it's all been leading up to! WHY AM I LOOKING AT HER HANDS??? TAKE ME BACK!!! WAAAAH!!! (I really did feel that strongly about it in the movie as well. I think I actually muttered various curse words in surprise in the theatre. Truly.)


Overall, though, the story and the performance did incredible things, enough to help me get past all else. 4.5 stars, but with a note that Precious should still be very, very high on your list of things to see as a masterclass of an entire ensemble doing absolutely everything right every step of the way. Not a foot wrong, even from the lesser supports.

It Seems Diplomacy Has Failed.

What else is there to say about the behemoth that is Avatar? It has recently become the fastest film to ever pass US$550mil at the US box office, is only the fifth film to ever take more than US$1bil at the global box office, and as of today (presumably, though definitely by tomorrow) it will have overtaken James Cameron's previous directorial feature film Titanic to become the highest grossing film of all time on the world stage. (Let's not start talking about adjusted grosses or inflated ticket prices for the 3D presentation, because that's all academic, and nor shall we bring in the fact that major markets such as China have greatly opened up since the time of Titanic. Just let the glory ride. After all, it was only a couple of years ago I remember reading an article stating that the honour of box office champion would remain with Titanic for many years to come due to the changing nature of film performance and blockbuster patterns, something that Avatar has just shot down.) It's also the first film to stay at number one of the US box office for more than five weeks since The Sixth Sense did it back in 1999. It's one of the most expensive films ever made (though the actual cost of it is impossible to find out.) And this is all purely fiscal. The film is also extraordinarily groundbreaking for its visuals - each frame of the CGI world took an average of somewhere between forty and fifty man hours to render. Each. Frame.

This film has been the subject of so much publicity for so many years that I'm not going to go into plot, I'm not going to touch on the politics, if you don't know it by now, you're obviously living under a rock. In fact, if you haven't seen it by now you must be living under a rock. And I'd strongly advise you to get out from under that rock and go and see it immediately in a large cinema with those 3D glasses on. It will take your breath away.


Cameron has acquitted himself quite nicely. This film could have gone either way. If the technology hadn't been up to it, the film would have been a disaster. There's no way one could get so involved with a world and a people unless they looked as good as they did. The landscape created for Pandora is phenomenally realistic, awe-inspiring. I want to all of the visual team Oscars, and then knight them all, and then marry them all. Weta and ILM were both responsible (the larger part, I believe, came from Weta) and no superlative does justice to the splendour witnessed on screen. And the film itself, reasonably basic and run of the mill as it is, managed to live up to years of hype and a month of incredible performance on everybody's lips quite nicely - I had such sky-high expectations that were not only met, but exceeded. Those scenes in the Hallelujah Mountains - breathtaking. It did, I think, owe some debts to the world created by George Lucas (without the CGI power of today) in the original Star Wars films. There were many moments I watched and had flashbacks to the many times I saw those films as children. But that was actually kind of touching - an homage to another blockbuster groundbreaker.

This totally doesn't do it justice. Imagine this image, but about a million times better. Or a billion!

Sigourney Weaver as the scientist in charge of the Avatar operation is fabulous, as always. I've long been a fan of hers, and lately she has been doing amazing things for me. How Snow Cake got ignored a few years back is beyond me. Giovanni Ribisi as the head of the company mounting the mining operation creating the conflict in the film is fantastic. I think he is a terrific supporting actor, though I've never seen him carry a film as a lead. Keep him in supporting and I'll keep turning out to see him. Stephen Lang pulls of the role as the head of the US Marine unit on Pandora with amazing style. It's a role that quite easily could have been overplayed and hammed up, but he kept it to the minimum amount of hamming he could get away with and leant his character an air of arrogance and determination the fits perfectly with the setting and story. Zoe Saldana as Neytiri, the prominent Na'vi character, does incredible work considering her character is all motion-captured. (And that motion capture! It's really them on screen! Really! You can see it in their faces! Their expressions! Holy shit!) Sam Worthington has never been my favourite actor, though I'll commend his efforts in Somersault, but he pulls off the role of Jake Sully fine, probably because he doesn't really need to do much. He plays a marine well, though he couldn't quite nail the accent. And maybe I've seen him in too many Aussie movies, because I kept expecting him to pull out that hysterical line in his broad accent from his role as Macbeth, 'Is that a dagger I see before me?' (you have to see the film to understand that hysteria, but I wouldn't recommend it as I just don't think it's any good.)


James Horner's score is a James Horner Score For A Major Motion Picture, which means it's sweeping and majestic and doesn't really try anything new. It suits the film, but I'm not about to go out and buy it. And besides, it's all about those visuals. Not to say the rest of the film doesn't matter (if the visuals had been that stunning but it was let down in story and performance, it would be a shit film), but it is definitely the major element. And I'm going to give James Cameron full credit and a hats off for managing to not only conceptualise it, but then to impart that concept to his team, reign in all the things that could go wrong and make it work, and then inject the humanity of the story and the truth of the performance.


Seriously, go and see it. I'm sure it's going to win a bunch of Oscars (though my pick for Best Picture and Best Director is still probably The Hurt Locker and Kathryn Bigelow, which is actually looking more and more likely as the days go on), and deservedly so. It's a mammoth blockbuster making packets of money that I'm not going to object to. It deserves its acclaim. Bring it.


5 stars.

War Is A Drug.

Glad I got Borat out of the way, now I can move onto something I really liked.



I'd heard nothing, absolutely nothing about The Hurt Locker on its initial theatrical release. Not a word. Then it started popping up at In Contention as an awards contender. Then the US critics awards started coming through, and it was every.where. Literally. LA, NYC, NBR, dozens of other wins and nominations. Everywhere. Three Golden Globe nods. Truly. If critics awards meant anything to Oscar (which they don't - re: The Dark Knight) then The Hurt Locker would be the one to beat. It's definitely a lock in the 10 film Best Picture category (and would also be in the old five film system) but I think Avatar is looking to be the whirlwind at the moment. Precious is gone.

Anyway, this isn't an Oscar entry. This is all about The Hurt Locker.

Kathryn Bigelow is an interesting director, in that she is a female director making, for all intents and purposes, male films. War movies. Action pictures. Surfing films. I can't think of another woman like her. But, what I love about women directors, and what comes through in The Hurt Locker, is that she isn't a man. She doesn't follow that testosterone-only format. Within the brutality and staunch masculinity of war (and remember, this is her portrayal here. Yes, a man wrote the film, but she is showing an army of men - it may not be 100% accurate to reality, there are females on the frontline, but that's what is on our screens) there is a gentleness and masculinity that most male directors don't care to explore. The guys are out there on their own day after day shooting at people and witnessing death and destruction - they're going to get fucked up by it somehow. If they don't, well, they were fucked up to begin with. Male directors have a tendency to clog it up with emotion during limited episodes within the broader film (Saving Private Ryan) or just put in bigger and better explosions to mask emotion or provide for an outlet for revenge (I don't have to feel bad anymore because look at how big that explosion is! We got them good!) What Bigelow does is much more subtle. Without once ever compromising the military masculinity of her characters, she allows them their moments of weakness. Without needing them to burst into tears and cry for their mothers, she lets us look inside and see that, beneath the bravado, they are afraid. And this is what makes this film so damn powerful.

Staff Sergeant William James (Jeremy Renner) is a bomb technician, sent into Irag to join a division who have recently lost their leader (played briefly but brilliant by Guy Pearce). James is all gung-ho and live for the moment, outwardly afraid of nothing, seemingly invincible - or incredibly lucky. Coming across a huge bomb in the back of a car, he takes off his protective suit (which has been shown to do nothing at much further distances anyway), saying if he's going to die, he's going to be comfortable. At the beginning, this doesn't sit well with Sergeant JT Sanborn (Anthony Mackie), who is below him in the unit. Sanborn wants to get out alive, and he wants everyone he is with to get out alive, and James' reckless behaviour from the moment he joins the unit imperils that. Sanborn is counting down the days until he gets to go home - James is counting up the bombs he has disposed of.

Their relationship (which is the core of the film) changes, however, and quickly, as the film goes on. Sanborn discovers a box under James' bed, filled with bits and pieces of bomb equipment - this is the 'hurt locker' of the title. James is collecting bits and pieces of bombs. The locker is full of things that could have killed him. And then, when the unit stumbles across an undercover unit in the desert (lead by Ralph Fiennes) they are forced to fight for their lives under a hot sun, exposed, wounded and scared. James proves himself a damn good leader, a compassionate soldier, extremely good under the pressure dealt to them. The delicacy of collecting bomb parts and the simplicity of passing juice boxes under the hot desert sun combine with so many other nods and nuances to create this extremely well rounded character, played to absolute perfection by the hitherto little-known Renner.

Supports are excellent, primarily from Mackie, his second in the last three films I have watched (with Half Nelson the other day.) It's never made as simple as Sanborn hating James - Sanborn has to follow James as his superior, and respects James for his obvious talents and bravery. And Mackie has to deliver these conflicting emotions under the cover of respect for command, not stepping out of line, and not going too far when hair is allowed to be let down. It is, again, the little flashes, the moments, that are pitch-perfect and, in a split second, tell you so much. Here's hoping people start to sit up and realise that he holds his own against the formidable lead performance.

As for the rest of it, it's all pretty much perfect. I can't think of a thing to fault. The cinematography by Barry Ackroyd (who's responsible for a hell of a lot of Ken Loach work) is sublime. It's not showy, it doesn't do anything it doesn't need to do, but when it does show you something it shows you everything you need to now. Like the performances, it is subtle, but the flashes are instants of immediate clarity. And the script, well, after all else that has been said if you need me to praise the script you need your head read. Mark Boal has done extraordinary things here to create a tight script without any real sense of artifice or superfluity. Score? Check. Editing? Double-check. Design? Check check check. All of it terrific.

Really, why don't films like this come along more often? And when they do come along, why don't they create more of a wave? It's the second film relating to war (though this one is directly about war, rather than the impacts at home) after Stop-Loss that I have liked and has been directed by a woman. Maybe this is what is missing here. More women talking about war.

5 stars. Excellent. Very highly recommended. The more I think about it, the more I'm liking it.

Let's cut to the chase, shall we? Yes. Let's.

This may end up being a little long, but we're all grown-ups.

It's the beginning of November. In the States this signifies the beginning of the Oscar season, in real and expensive terms. I thought I might just run my mouth off a little about what I think sits where in terms of this particular awards ceremony, in order that those participating in workplace sweeps and the like can start their planning. I'm only going to go over some of the major categories right now, because... that's what I'm going to do. It's worth bearing in mind that, due to my lack of media pass and living on the other side of the Atlantic, I haven't actually seen many of these movies yet. This is all based on what is being said in various forms from around the world. And I'm going to link to a trailer wherever I can. Because trailers are pretty.

First up, let's kick off with some supporting players, shall we?

Best Supporting Actress

The only name that really rings in this category right now is Mo'Nique for the cumbersomely titled Precious: Based on the novel 'Push' by Sapphire. She's been hot favourite for this category literally all year, since she snaffled a Special Jury Prize for her performance at Sundance. From what I've been hearing, every single notice for this film is ranting and raving to the high heavens about her performance. There has been talk lately of the fact that she's not doing any promotion for the film, which traditionally has hurt people in a campaigning sense, and there have been whispers of diva-style antics. But fuck it. If the performance is even half as good as what I'm expecting, she'll be a shoe-in. I think this film is actually going to be hard to kill in a backlash, and she along with it, but we'll get to that. At the moment, I'm putting her as the actress to beat. And that's probably going to be an impossible feat.

Also-rans would include Julianne Moore for her role in Tom Ford's debut A Single Man; any one of all the girls in Rob Marshall's Nine, though my personal hopeful is Judi Dench because she is actually my god; and Maggie Gyllenhaal (be still my beating heart) for Crazy Heart now that it is getting a release. Some people are bigging up Anna Kendrick for Up In The Air, but I'll get to that film later.

Best Supporting Actor

I'm throwing Christoph Waltz for Inglourious Basterds and Matt Damon for the unseen (by anyone) Invictus at the top of my list. Waltz for obvious reasons. Everyone's talking about this performance, and have been for months. He's not as strong a lock as Mo'Nique in her respective category, but he's still probably the one to beat. Damon... look, I've never been a major Matt Damon fan. But there's something about him this year, the props he's getting for this (where I think, if the film turns out all right, should at least net him a nom) and that he received for The Informant!, which actually bombed a little at the box office and will probably not pan out to a second lead actor nod (after that which he received for Good Will Hunting back in the day.) This is a film by Clint Eastwood, about a major recent historical figure, with allegorical ties to the current American administration (both black, both reconciling a country, both trying to make up for past wrongs etc) with Morgan Freeman in the lead - I think it will be a formidable contender, and the trailer looks fantastic.

Also-rans: Christopher Plummer for The Last Station (why can't I find a trailer! Waaah!), which I'm not really feeling, especially since it feels a little like category fraud, though that didn't stop the Winslet win last year. Not that I'm complaining about Kate Winslet winning - I think she's incredible. But still. Where were we? Oh yes. Anthony Mackie for The Hurt Locker because I don't think anything can kill that film and he'll pull through with ground support.

Best Actress

This category is a little all over the place. Gabourey Sidibe is hot right now for Precious, but I think she will have to content herself with a nomination. Come on - she's a non-actor who, granted, may be pulling off a stunning turn, but until people actually know that she can indeed act in anything else, they're not going to give her a naked gold man to play with. Carey Mulligan is running hot for An Education, but she's very young... Helen Mirren is getting attention for the aforementioned The Last Station, but she just won one and this isn't The Queen. People are talking Meryl (of course) for It's Complicated or Julie & Julia, htough probably the former. There is also still lingering sentiment for Abbie Cornish for Bright Star. None of these, however, are slam dunks. I think Mulligan and Sidibe can count themselves in for a nod, but that's about it. I'm not willing to speculate any further until I've seen some more.

Best Actor

It kind of looks same-old, same-old in here, a kind of Best Of of the last forty years. With Crazy Heart being pushed into this season, Jeff Bridges seems to have overnight solidified himself as the front runner, almost four decades after his first nomination. He's never won the man, so I'll pay it. Plus, his performance is meant to be extraordinary, meaning he can get this deservedly and not be forever talked about like Michael Caine - a career-achievement award wearing the plaque of a Best Performance award. He looks set to beat Colin Firth for A Single Man, for which he won the Volpi Cup in Venice and has been receiving a lot of notice for. George Clooney is looking like a nominee again for Up In The Air - who would have thought he'd be such an Oscar darling when we were drooling over him on E.R.? I think Daniel Day Lewis may make a showing with Nine, Morgan Freeman may turn up with Invictus, Damon may turn up with The Informant!, I think Jeremy Renner will turn up with The Hurt Locker. This is a mighty strong category this year, with a lot of product still to come. I think it's Bridges' trophy to lose at the moment, however.

Best Director

This year has been touted as the year of the woman in film. Kathryn Bigelow is hot here for The Hurt Locker. Jane Campion has cooled somewhat but is still a possibility for Bright Star, though not a strong one. Lone Scherfig is looking likely for An Education. So that's three, which is a fair number. Lee Daniels has to be thought of for Precious, but it actually wouldn't surprise me if he didn't get it. There's a bit of a backlash against him personally for kind of taking the credit for the direction of Monster's Ball (which he produced) and for just generally appearing to think that he is god. So he might drop out of the race, probably controversially. I don't think you can count James Cameron out for Avatar. If the film is actually any good, I think it will redefine a number of these categories. And obviously Clint Eastwood for Invictus. If Eastwood is working, he'll get nominated these days. There are a number of other strong contenders, but I think it will look like being amongst these people at the moment, with one or two being replaced by any number of others. So let's leave it at this until it clears up, shall we? Yes. Lets.

Best Picture

This is the biggie, and now the hardest to make any sort of call in, as they have widened it to ten nominees. I'm just going to run through a few that I think will be in, and maybe a couple of others.

Precious is a gimme. Seriously. If this film doesn't end up in contention I'll buy a hat, and then eat it. (Please note that I reserve the right to not actually buy a hat, or eat it. But I don't think it will come to that.) It's the only film to ever win the Audience Award at Sundance and Toronto. It's an Important Film. It's a black film. It's backed by Oprah. It is receiving kudos from around the world. And it opened over the weekend to an estimated USD$100,000 per screen on 18 screens, the highest screen average for any film playing on over 6 screens, ever. This film is going to be big. While most people whose opinions I've heard say that it's a hard slog of a film, and that going into second viewings they have trepidation, winning those two big audience awards says that, difficult though it may be, it is pushing buttons with viewers.

The Hurt Locker is more than likely going to hit home here. Most critics are calling it the film of the year. It is at a disadvantage because it was an early release, though it is not unprecedented for a film to hit cinemas in the States early and go on to major glory - just look at The Silence of the Lambs. I don't think it will manage to trump any major awards, really, but I think it will heavily feature.

Up In The Air will probably feature. I don't know what I'm thinking about this film. I think the widening of the field to ten nominees will pretty much assure it a place, but there's something about the trailer... it all looks to easy. People are loving it from festival appearances, and Clooney is on the campaign trail and well liked so that won't hurt its chances, but for me, he kind of looks like George Clooney in it. There must be something bubbling under the surface, but it's just not ringing with me. I liked Jason Reitman's Thank You For Smoking as a debut, I really liked Juno as an entertaining piece of cinema, and this is meant to be much bigger, better, deeper, metaphorical, all that stuff without doing away with the entertainment aspect. People have been comparing Reitman prematurely to someone like Billy Wilder. The must be something to this film, but I'm just not gagging for it like so many others seem to be. It looks like the kind of film I'll go and see, really enjoy, and then forget about when it comes to crafting a best of 2009 list. This is totally judging a book by its cover, but there you go. That's my feeling. If there is going to be one major upset this year, it wouldn't surprise me if this is it. I don't think it will be, however. I think it's a nominee lock in this category. But don't expect it to be lifting the trophy.

Invictus. It's Clint Eastwood. It's Morgan Freeman. It's political. It's everything they want it to be. Unless the film is a pile of crap, expect it to show up here. If it's good, I'd even be calling it a shot at a Precious upset. There's really not much more to say about this one.

Up is going to be the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture. Deal with it. It won't win, but there you go.

Avatar - it's too early to call for sure. But, like I said earlier, you can't count Cameron out of the race. Remember Titanic? The movie we all love to slag off? It's still one of the highest grossing films of all time when adjusted for inflation, it's still one of only three films to win 11 Oscars. He's a powerhouse of blockbusters, and the Academy will want to show that they appreciated diversity, even if it means saying hello to a major CGI film from the director of Terminator. This is groundbreaking stuff. If the film works thematically, expect it to be here.

Nine? Maybe. It'll depend on how it plays. A Serious Man? I'm not an enormous fan of the Coen Brothers, but a lot of people are. It could show up here. It's not going to pull a No Country For Old Men, however. The Lovely Bones? Again, don't count Peter Jackson out, but it is WAY too early to tell. Anticipation runs from white hot to totally cold. An Education will probably pull through because of the bigger list. But really, I think the major contenders here are Precious, The Hurt Locker, probably Up In The Air, probably Invictus, and that's about it.

I know I haven't seen it yet, and I am totally aware of the lukewarm critical and commercial receipt it is getting, but I really want to call Where The Wild Things Are a contender. It's easily my most anticipated film of the year. And if that isn't just one of the best trailers ever... But I don't think it will be. I'm DYING to see it, and I can't believe I have to wait another MONTH to see it when it has been out for WEEKS in the States and it is a HIGHLY ANTICIPATED MOVIE that they really should be releasing DAY AND DATE across the globe. But there you go.

So they're my major thoughts right now. It will of course change over time, and I'll probably update bit by bit as I get around to seeing the films mentioned. But it's a bit of an overview of what you should be watching out for should you be interested in all this jazz.