The Demis: Wayyyy Better Than the Oscars

[Avaitor]

One thing I've always wanted to do for a series of writing is make my own attempt at a Best Picture ballot from over the years. I'd pick 5 films from each specific year, not in any order, write about their merits, and choose a winner.

Why? Well, I thought about doing either this or doing write-ups of each Best Picture winner, but looking over and familiarizing myself with each of them does show something off- the Academy has a major bias against genre or foreign films, at least for the major categories. Only the most successful of either cases tend to get a nomination for BP, and a few British films and The Artist aside, few non-American films have taken the big prize home. The Last Emperor is the closest thing to a non-English speaking film to win, and that still has English in it! This is a travesty, since so many good films get shut out because they aren't traditional dramas, sweeping epics, or sharp comedies.

These nominations will allow for any creed of film to make it into the ballot, as long as they're good. If they actually were nominated or even won Best Picture, they still have a chance to be nominated and even win, and in a bunch of cases, you will see such films. And I'm working a schedule out so I can actually update these and still work on my other writings.

And why do I call them the Demis? What could be a better award?

First up: 0 B.R. Guess the abbreviation there.

[Spark Of Spirit]

They're also not big on adventure flicks. Raiders and Fellowship were more than worthy winners for best picture. Being that adventure is my favorite genre, I rarely agree with their choices.

I'm also not a fan of musicals and comedies being the same category. One does not infer the other.

[Avaitor]

I'm also not a fan of musicals and comedies being the same category. One does not infer the other.

Well that's a Golden Globe problem, and lbr, the Globes don't matter at all.

[Avaitor]

I was going to write about where the world was at during this year, but do you really care? Let's get to my nominations and my choice.

The nominees for Best Film are:

Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
Release May 21st
Directed by Irvin Kershner



If you ask many fans of George Lucas's massive Star Wars franchise which of the six films currently out is among their favorites, a strong majority of which would vote for The Empire Strikes Back, the first sequel to the original Star Wars, and the fifth chronological chapter in the saga. And while it is totally credible for those awed by the impact of the original to side with it, there is plenty of reason to side with Empire, and even more to list it as among the year?s best and most memorable.

For one thing, Empire takes many of the revelations from the original Star Wars- the serialized pacing, wide influences of storytelling, layered mythology, memorable characterization, zeitgeist-sprinkled dialogue, and those glorious actions scenes, and multiples them all to higher fashion, with almost nothing but one classic scene after the other.

You've got the classic battle at Hoth, a video game designer?s wet dream and one of the most exciting aerial sequences put on film this side of Wings. There's Luke's training in Dagobah with Yoda, introducing one of the most iconic characters in the franchise, and arguably Frank Oz's best pupeteering performance. And the dual between Luke and Vader is still being referenced and ripped off to this very day. These are only three such examples of classic scenes of high caliber and strong memorability that the film is responsible for.

But what elevates Empire is that beyond just the classic sequences and characters (besides Yoda, we're introduced to the suave, ever likable, if shady Lando Calrissian), is the film's attempt at not just humanizing, but deconstructing the mythos introduced in the first. Luke Skywalker?s spirit is challenged, and eventually broken over the course of the film, with the classic plot twist a major reason for this. This isn't the whiny little kid we were introduced to before. Even his complaining with Yoda showed some growth for young Skywalker. More importantly, while Luke continued his destiny, the rest of the gang has their own story to tell, and they don't get a happy ending either. True, it all works out in Return of the Jedi, but Empire Strikes Back had a bittersweet ending at the time, one that made perfect sense.

The Empire Strikes Back ranks among the best sequels ever made, not just of blockbusters or sci-fi films, but in general. It takes virtually everything that made the original so great, rarely recycled key events, and took the characters and world into a wholly engaging and essential movie, one deserving of high praise.

The Shining-
Released May 23rd
Directed by Stanley Kubrick



Stephen King hates this interpretation of his novel. Well, rats to him, I have to say.

Kubrick's take may change radically from King?s story (Stephen King's greatest argument is that the novel ended with fire, while the film ended with ice. As I'm trying to not spoil these films for you, if you haven't read or seen either, take this as you will), it's an incredibly effective take on its own right, based more on atmosphere over anything.

The film's basis takes place in the hotel, in an attempt to give husband and father Jack Torrance a chance to write his novel while looking over the place, while his wife and son attempt to make the best of their arrangement. It starts off slow and quiet, and stays that way for a while. This is what builds up the atmosphere though, as when the initial silence breaks, Jack's increasing mental breakdown and withdrawals become more apparent.

His breakdown makes for one of the most iconic performances of all of film, horror or otherwise, as it shows better than arguably any other performance just how far Jack Nicholson's range can go. He's able to act sweet early in the movie, keep plenty of his wit throughout, and shows off Nicholson?s psychotic potential by the end, and makes for an all-time frightening performance. Kubrick even went out of his way to make sure that his scares were genuine. Look at Shelley Duvall's face during the film. This is true horror, and doesn't hold any punches.

In the world of horror and the supernatural, few films have made more of an impact than The Shining. While Kubrick never touched upon this range of film before or ever again, his name will always come up in discussions of the finest, due to this one classic act.

The Blues Brothers-
Released June 20th
Directed by John Landis



"What kind of music do you usually have here?"
"Oh, we got both kinds. We got country AND western!"

Is that not a good idea of just how sharp this film is? The amazing thing is, even though The Blues Brothers has a lot of good lines, it doesn't rely on just snappy dialogue to gain a laugh, nor great comedic stunts or out-of-this-world situtations for that matter, although it has plenty of both in spades.

What makes the movie work so well is in big part to the performances, most notably the team of John Belushi and Dan Aykroyd. The duo had perfected the characters of Jake and Elwood Blues on Saturday Night Live over their four classic years on the show, and released this spin-off film as their big post-SNL debut. By now, Belushi and Aykroyd had perfected the characters, keeping a straight face no matter what the circumstances and selling every line they get with no remorse. They can even sing and dance, as evident by the many great performances.

But of course, Belushi and Aykroyd weren?t the only ones who got to sing and dance in the film. Some of the all-time greats in the world of R&B and jazz had memorable appearances in the movie, including James Brown, Aretha Franklin, Ray Charles, and most notably Cab Calloway. They all get to supply their own laughs and belt out classic tunes of their own, helping to add to a great soundtrack and serve as a tribute to a timeless form of music.

Even those who didn't get to sing had some great bits. Carrie Fisher dropped the Princess Leia buns and made her mark as a vengeful mystery woman who finds her way throughout the film. Kathleen Freeman is hilarious as the Penguin, and makes Jake and Elwood pay for their sins. Henry Gibson gets to briefly steal the scene as the leader of a neo-nazi party who follows the brothers. Even director John Landis has some fun as a state trooper who follows the bros after they perform for all the right reasons.

Speaking of Landis, his excellence as a director shines as he makes a lot of establishment shots that actually help to sell an atmosphere for the humor, a rare trick in comedy that works. As a result the film runs a little longer than it probably should, but Landis times it so well that you'll forget that it?s over 2 hours long when its done.

But you won't forget the movie. Even if you aren't familiar with the original cast of Saturday Night Live (and if you aren't, shame on you), it's a comedy that works well in pretty much every regard, and easily one of the funniest and most memorable of the year.

Ordinary People-
Released September 19th
Directed by Robert Redford



This one is so good that it actually did win the Oscar. But hey, doesn't mean I can't write about it as well.

I actually have only seen Ordinary People recently, but it stands out to me very well in that I can relate to a lot of it. More than I should. Conrad is a relatively normal teenager, one that just wants some kind of relief after losing his brother, and it seems as if whenever he gets a chance to obtain that, his mother pulls him back. Even his father acknowledges this, which is where a big part of the conflict comes from.

The film's relevance in 1980 was quite strong, as while psychiatry was very much prominent during this period, it was still a bit of a dirty word among the ignorant. To some, it still might be, but it is increasingly becoming a more acceptable field today. Another important aspect to realize about the movie is that it doesn't even make a specific statement for or against psychiatry. Conrad's time with Dr. Berger seems to help him, but as we see, some damage is and will always be irreversible, and even the doctor isn't able to help him at the end. Conrad's dad attempts to understand the need for his son's visits, but his feelings of ambiguity towards the idea is what we?re supposed to relate to the movie.

I think another reason the film was so critically important at the time was the necessary change of pace it had for two of its key proponents, primarily Mary Tyler Moore and director Robert Redford.

Redford was still a hot actor in his day, both physically and statically, and his first venture into filmmaking wasn't necessarily a risky one in terms of content, but it was very surprising to see how he didn?t even attempt to star in the film. It's a shame, since Redford is a very fine actor, and could have easily taken on the role of Dr. Berger, since he may have been a little too young to be the father figure. As a director though, this is where the film starts to falter a little, since Redford's inexperience does become apparent. It's the last Best Picture winner to not share a nomination for Best Editing for a reason. He became more comfortable in the director's chair over the years, but at least the story turned out quite well here.

As for Miss Moore, this was a major change of pace from the loving roles she had on television over the years as Laura Petrie and Mary Richards. Her Beth Jarett was cold, neurotic, and overly unlikable, a major contrast to these characters. It?s a necessary step she needed though, and does prove her chops as an actress outside of comedy, which tends to be forgotten even today. She's easily the highlight of the performances, even over Timothy Hutton's Conrad, who is fine until he needs to go into deeper territory, which is where he faltered. I'm not so sure if he truly deserved the Oscar or not.

Overall, Ordinary People is far from perfect, but does have a lot going for it. It's a captivating drama, contains a mostly solid cast and had some interesting points to share for its time, some of which even do hold up today. Definitely a winner.

Raging Bull-
Released December 19th
Directed by Martin Scorsese



There are so many performances in the world of film that are worth of praise, ones that can take impossible characters and not only make them seem plausible, but even admittedly likable. Then there are performances that focus on possible, but rather unlikable characteristics, and make them still detestable, but too engaging to look away from on the screen. This is what Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro accomplished with De Niro's take on Jake LaMotta in the biopic Raging Bull, and as result, they crafted one of the greatest monsters in film, a bully of a boy of a man.

The movie was shot in black and white, but looks absolutely gorgeous in its palette, and makes full use of it. You can feel the ties to the earlier parts of the century, from La Motta's first fight in the 40's to the end of his prime in the 60's, reflecting on some of his worst moments, and of course, you get most everything in between as well.

The use of black and white is especially delicious during the boxing scenes. Every punch is beautifully shot and displayed, especially the hits La Motta takes, which by his point, ends up being lauded among the viewers, as we see just how awful the man is.

Jake La Motta is a horrid husband, a shit brother, a difficult subject for his manager, and anything else in between. Scorsese makes no point in hiding that or attempts to make us root for him. Instead, when La Motta beats up his brother Joey in front of his wife and children, it's obvious who we're supposed to root for here.

De Niro makes no attempt at hiding it either, and sells him as the brute that he truly is. There's little in the needs of reasoning for why someone can be such a menace, but just pure action of a person doing such things. De Niro sells La Motta straight throughout, never even letting up the fact that this is only a movie.

This lack of pretension is what makes the performance so riveting, and the film so strong. It?s based off of one idea, and sells it with no remorse. It's rare for a movie to succeed in doing such, but Raging Bull stands out among Marty's filmography by pulling off one concept- the worst of the worst of human nature- with nary a hitch.

And the Demi goes to:

Raging Bull

And here's it's award.



Thoughts?

[Dr. Insomniac]

Redrum

[Daikun]

Here's the thing about the Oscars...

Doing a sci-fi movie? You'd better pray you get nominated for Best Special Effects; you're not getting any higher than that.

Doing a fantasy? You're stuck with Best Makeup.

Doing an animated feature? Have fun being excluded from everyone else in your own category instead of being taken as seriously as live-action.

Doing a comedy? You may as well kiss that award goodbye. The Academy used to be nicer to that genre in previous decades; now they don't care anymore.

Doing a horror film? Meh, you probably aren't even worth Hollywood's time, anyway.

Doing action or adventure? You'll be critically acclaimed, but sadly not considered award material, no matter how popular or well-made it is.

Doing a pretentious drama? Congrats! You're the only real contenders for Best Picture.

This is why the Oscars suck.

[Dr. Insomniac]

If you're about the Holocaust or reference mental illness in a manner that seems deep but is actually poorly researched, then you're gonna reap nominations.

[Avaitor]

Doing an animated feature? Have fun being excluded from everyone else in your own category instead of being taken as seriously as live-action.

Well, a lot of Pixar movies have been nominated for screenplay awards even before the Academy brought it back to 10 nominees, and it's also worth noting that they banned musicals from being nominated for Best Score after the Renaissance films kept on winning the award.

But yeah, anything else is a no-go for animation, especially if you're not Pixar.

Doing a comedy? You may as well kiss that award goodbye. The Academy used to be nicer to that genre in previous decades; now they don't care anymore.

I dunno, The Artist was pretty much a comedy, and Oscar was kind to it this year. Otherwise, yeah, they usually relegate comedies to screenplay and acting awards.

There used to be a little more variety to the winners, but over the years, that's just no longer true. The Artist was a fluke, a  fun, unstuffy romp. And it only one due to novelty.

[Spark Of Spirit]

The English Patient.

Why?

[Avaitor]

I actually did like it, but I just have to share this.

[Lord Dalek]

I dunno, The Artist was pretty much a comedy, and Oscar was kind to it this year.

Artist ain't that funny. Hell it isn't even a good movie.

[Spark Of Spirit]

I dunno, The Artist was pretty much a comedy, and Oscar was kind to it this year.

Artist ain't that funny. Hell it isn't even a good movie.

Oh yeah? I haven't heard much about it, is it poorly executed or just plain bad?

[Lord Dalek]

I dunno, The Artist was pretty much a comedy, and Oscar was kind to it this year.

Artist ain't that funny. Hell it isn't even a good movie.

Oh yeah? I haven't heard much about it, is it poorly executed or just plain bad?

Its just a thinly veiled remake of Singin' in the Rain trumped up by its main gimmick (SILENT MOVIE! WHICH IT DOESN'T DO AS WELL AS ANY GUY MADDIN MOVIE EITHER!). Hugo should have won.

[Avaitor]

Well I dug it, even though it is kinda derivative of Singin' in the Rain and A Star is Born. It's just a fun flick, although I do prefer Hugo myself.

[Nel_Annette]

And why do I call them the Demis? What could be a better award?

The Titties! 

I'm sorry.