I haven’t seen all of the nominated films–there are too many (ten) nominated films this year anyway. But I can talk about what I have seen.

The Holdovers

This one could also have been titled “The Throwback” in the sense that it’s an old-fashioned dramatic film: no CGI, no crazy special effects, no aliens, ghosts, monsters or supernatural beings, etc. It’s simply about a handful of people who encounter one another more acutely because they’re tossed together almost randomly like “leftovers “ that result in a surprisingly good goulash.  Like most good films, it’s unpredictable but credible. As a teacher, I was a little more engaged, perhaps, because the setting is the holiday break at a New England boarding school where the main character (Paul Giamatti) is an aging bachelor instructor  who himself had attended the school. I was also, as a teenager in the 1970s when the story unfolds, near in age to the students involved in the tale.

A lot of the latest buzz and earlier awards say that the Oscar will go to a supporting actress in this film, Da’vine Joy Randolph, who plays the cafeteria manager. Giamatti is more of a longshot’ for best actor.

Killers of the Flower Moon

One movie that has been nominated for (and won) many awards is one  I can’t necessarily recommend—having watched. I refer to Scorsese’s film. 

There are different kinds of violence; I’m watching Masters of the Air about bombing raids from England during World War II. Serious violence, also. Yes. 

And somehow the violence of Scorsese’s earlier films that covered the mafia families and their ruthless  killings demonstrated another kind of violence when it remained largely between (or within) families. 

But the story of extreme violence in this film (along with that of other films about brutal racial murder), while historically important to tell, is hard to watch.  The genocide is so premeditated and systematic that it reveals a brand of evil that has no conscience and knows no remorse. And while that evil has countless examples in human history, the motivation might for those have been power, religion (same thing), ideology, or conquest, In this case, it was just as heinous, yet the motivation was different: it was about money.

I love being taken into the past through film, but this one was too grueling as an experience. I’ve enjoyed films with Robert De Niro and Leonardo DiCaprio in the past, of course— even violent films. 

Despite a well-made film with a worthy Oscar nominations for best actress (and a very possible win) for Lily Gladstone, I would not sit through it again, and would not wish the experience on another person who might share my sensitivities. One of the best films that Scorsese ever made was Hugo. I think it’s one of the top five movies of all time. I’ll use this space to recommend it again because I reviewed it a number of years ago. But as far as KOTFM is concerned, I would pick something else to watch. 

Poor Things

I rented this film and watched it on the small screen. I can certainly appreciate the art film aspects of it because it was distinctly creative and imaginative. I’m not sure Emma Stone gets best actress for this; she did, however, have to adapt as her character “grew up.” I couldn’t believe that Mark Ruffalo was nominated for best supporting actor. I thought he was awful, regularly allowing his Victorian accent to lapse  into his mousy American one.

It was a unique and ambitious concept, well made and shot with a strong cast (e.g. Villem Dafoe). It worked on a number of levels. Is it best picture stuff? – probably not, but still worth the watch.

One annoying element is that  the dialogue occasionally seems too contemporary for the time in question–in this case, Victorian England. I’ve noticed this in a few films, and wonder if it’s a convention to avoid the turn off that can come with the overly formal and elevated speech of that era. Pet peeve.

Oppenheimer

It may be the lack of serious competition (again, I have not seen several of the nominated films), but I was not overly impressed with this as a film. The history lesson and the reality check about “the bomb’ were worthwhile in themselves. The quality of the production was impeccable, yet the deep dive into the “fallout” that occurred after the debut of the bomb got a little tiresome. Not surprisingly, the same thing (per Greek mythology) happened to Prometheus after he stole fire and brought it to humans: he was chained to a rock and fated to have a large eagle devour his innards–every day, over and over. I am not sure Robert Downey, Jr. should be the best supporting actor, but the rising tide of a film’s success lifts all boats. The chances of the best actor award not going to Cillian Murphy are very low. You can actually bet on the Oscars now (in some states) if you want a chance to make 10 or 20 times your money and pick someone else.

Not having seen Maestro, American Fiction, Anatomy of a Fall, Barbie and a couple others, it’s hard to predict award winners. There are themes every year–or so it seems. Biopics are still very fertile ground for Oscar statuettes to grow in. Quiz Question: Is Barbie a biopic? –Talk amongst yourselves…

WRH