Glitz and Glamourless

So the Golden Globes have come and gone; the best in acting, writing & directing for 2007 have all been revealed, and now people look forward to the 80th annual Academy Awards on February 24.

Only thing is: will we see it?

The Golden Globes "ceremony" was nothing more than a press conference that lasted less than 45 minutes, as the winners were revealed one after the other. This is because of the WGA writer's strike that has now been going on for over two months, and now people are left to wonder if the general public will even be able to see the undisputed King of All Award Shows, the Oscars. Right now, the plan is for it to air Sunday, February 24 on ABC, but if some sort of agreement isn't reached between the major studios and the WGA, it may just be another press conference instead of the excitement of wondering if your favorite actor/actress/writer/director/film won. I myself am a huge fan of the Oscars and have had a habit of making my picks on a score sheet for the last five years.

I guess you really have to be a huge fan of film and filmmaking to appreciate the yearly ceremony. Some people like sports, I like movies. I treat the Oscars like the Grey Cup, smiling and shouting when something good happens, like when Martin Scorsese finally got his first (!) statue for Best Director last year, and groaning when something I hate happens, like when "Chicago" when Best Picture in 2003. The movie wasn't even released until December 27, 2002, and that was only in select cities. It didn't get a wide release until mid-January, so in my mind, it does NOT count as a 2002 film! (Plus I thought it was incredibly overrated and boring...)

Though I am strongly in favor and on the side of the writers, my hope is that some sort of deal can be made so that the TV-watching public can be able to enjoy the show. Its one thing to water down the Golden Globes, but the "main event" should not be altered or tinkered with in any way, shape or form.

So just what are some of my own Oscar picks, you ask? Well, I haven't had that much time to think about it, but I will share my own views on a few of the categories. I don't think I'll be able to conjure up a solid four for each of them, just the select few that really caught my attention in 2007.

Best Director
This is a tough one for me because as many movies as I've seen this year, many of them were sheer 'popcorn' entertainment that didn't exactly require someone with the experience and finesse of a Scorsese or Coppola. As well, there are directors being named Oscar-worthy whose films I haven't had a chance to see yet. Tim Burton's "Sweeney Todd" and the Coen Bros.' "No Country For Old Men" come to mind. But here are a select few who really impressed me in directing an emotional, gripping picture worthy of that elusive golden statue.

a) James Mangold, "3:10 To Yuma" - The western genre had really grown stagnant and absent as far as feature-length films go, continuing a life on TV mini-series' and direct-to-DVD movies. But Mangold took Elmore Leonard's source material, a story about a poor cattle rancher volunteering to escort a criminal to catch a train to prison (the 3:10 to Yuma, to be exact) and shot it full of life. Those who said Mangold's directing peak had hit with "Walk The Line" are sorrily mistaken. He creates characters faced with numerous conflicts, seaping through them like so many pieces of paper, and finding the courage to do what is right.

b) David Cronenberg, "Eastern Promises" - Canadian director Cronenberg made this film in England, marking the first time he's ever made a film entirely outside Canada. In this, we're immersed in the culture and dealings of the Russian Mafia, all taking place in London. Cronenberg gives us characters that we care for, but its almost as if we don't want to because "they're mobbed up and bad". He almost takes an approach to it like The Sopranos, showing you the inner workings of a Mafia family and giving you that sneak peak before the door closes in your face. Cronenberg is also a master of cranking up the tension, as shown in a violent brawl that takes place inside a bathhouse.

c) Ridley Scott, "American Gangster" - Scott is no stranger to the Oscars, as in 2001 Russell Crowe took the Best Actor statue for "Gladiator" and that film also won Best Picture. With "American Gangster", Scott uses a rotting New York backdrop and the unlimited acting talents of Crowe and Denzel Washington to tell us the story of Frank Lucas, a man who rose to the top of the drug trafficking game in the 1970's by offering a better product at a lower price. Scott gives us the ins and outs of each character. How Crowe's character is going through a messy divorce and is looked down upon by his fellow, crooked police officers. How Washington's character goes from a simple driver to a millionaire drug mogul in almost no time. Scott shows us two leading men with different complexities, yet doesn't confuse us with them.

d) Paul Greengrass, "The Bourne Ultimatum" - The third installment in the complex "Bourne" franchise was marketed last summer as an intense, smart action movie that delivers awesome special FX and great action sequences. That, I'm not arguing. But "Ultimatum" was more than just a $100-million summer action flick. Unlike most summer blockbusters, where everything seems to just happen for no reason, there's true motive and a deep story involved with this film that you really need to pay attention to. Paul Greengrass, who also directed the first sequel, "The Bourne Supremacy", returns to helm the third film, in which Jason Bourne is still searching for his true identity and running from the authorities in several countries. Greengrass differs from other blockbuster makers like Michael Bay by not having the film be one continuous explosion after another. You find yourself immersed in the story and the fancy FX take a back seat to character exploration.

Best Picture

Once again, there are several being talked about that I haven't been able to see yet. "No Country For Old Men", "There Will Be Blood", "Sweeney Todd", these are just a few examples. But again, I'll give you a few which I felt were very impressive and worthy of 'the nod'.

a) "3:10 To Yuma" - This is most definitely on my top five favorite films of 2007, if not my #1. It didn't break any box office records and it wasn't a $150-million FX-infused movie about pirates or robotic vehicles. "3:10 To Yuma" is an incredible piece of filmmaking that I believe was underrated when it was released in theaters last fall, opening to about $14 million on its way to a little over $50 million. But that doesn't matter, because what director James Mangold has created here is a film that reinvigorates the western genre and asks the viewer what their definition of courage is. Christian Bale shows just why he's one of the best actors of this generation as Dan Evans, a lowly cattle rancher who agrees to escort wanted criminal Ben Wade to catch a train to prison. Russell Crowe plays Wade with an alarming calmness that can turn to swift anger at the drop of a hat. Crowe and Bale complement each other well and thankfully share most of the screen together throughout the film. Its climax is emotional, intense, and even tear-producing. Nothing in your world will matter in this film's last 3-4 minutes and you won't be able to look away. "3:10 To Yuma" stays with you long after you've left the theater or turned off your DVD player.

b) "300" - To the normal moviegoer's eye, this violent, barbaric bloodbath about group of 300 Spartan warriors fighting the entire Persian army is just that: ruthless on-screen violence. And to a point, it is. There are severed heads, buckets of blood spilled, and plenty of sword-on-skin action. But I always thought it was more than that. Its a story of one man's fight for his people, defending their way of life and protecting whats their's from overlording emperors and snobbish royalty. King Leonidas, played by Gerard Butler, may be stubborn, but his way of thinking is that if the ship's going down, he's gonna stay on it with his men. In his mind, Spartans never back down and will always refuse to conform to any other King. Leonidas' fate may be sealed in the end, but that doesn't stop "300" from being one of the best films of 2007.

With that, I think I'm gonna stop with all this Oscar talk. I think we may as well halt that in case the entire show gets scrapped in the first place. As well, I still need to see a few of the potential contenders, which I hope to do in the next few weeks.

Keep 'em laughin',
Derek