30 Day Film Challenge – Day 30 – Your Favorite Film This Time Last Year

THE KING’S SPEECH

I assume this prompt means what my favorite movie in general was a year ago.  The only problem is that my favorite movie a year ago was the same as it is now.  So I changed the prompt a little bit, and I’m choosing my favorite film of the previous year, to avoid repeating films.

I’m choosing The King’s Speech for a number of reasons.  First of all, it was a great film that I thoroughly enjoyed.  Also, it was a movie that I was kind of invested in outside of the theater.  The rating controversy related to the film affected me, and I posted multiple opinions on the matter.  The fact that the R-rated version of the film won Best Picture at the Oscars meant a lot to me.

Well, I finished the challenge.  It was an interesting assignment.

Really, MPAA? Leave The King’s Speech Alone.

It’s been reported that the Classification and Ratings Administration, run by the MPAA and NATO, has given the Weistein Company permission to edit The King’s Speech down to a PG-13 rating by removing the repeated use of the F-word.  The company plans to rerelease the film to appeal to families.

As I’ve touched on in a previous post,  the F-word is used in this film in a necessary context.  It is crucial for character and story development and provides comic relief.  It’s certainly not a situation in which curse words are thrown around for no reason whatsoever.

To add insult to injury, wanna know how Weinstein is dealing with director Tom Hooper’s insistance that no frame of the film be changed?  The F-words will be muted while we see Colin Firth’s lips move.  Wow, that’s great cinema for you, isn’t it?  To essentially “bleep” curse words in a potential multiple Oscar winner.  And talk about a slap in the face for Hooper.   Technically, they obeyed his requests, but really they disregarded his decisions as a director in order to make more money.

I believe the ratings system is flawed to begin with, but this is just shameful.  This situation might be enough for me to start rooting for The King’s Speech for Best Picture on Oscar night, if only to show that the R-rated version is what garnered the win.

I can only hope that the DVD release will feature the original R-rated version of the film, although that’s not looking too likely.

Obligatory MPAA Post

I feel it’s necessary for me to weigh in on the controversy recently surrounding the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America).  I just read a convincing argument from Scott Weinberg at Cinematical concerning the new film The Roommate and its PG-13 rating.   Read Weinberg’s post for a full explanation of this issue (warning that the post contains a detailed description of a violent scene in the film), but I’ll give you the jist.  Basically, The Roommate‘s rating is based on “violence and menace, sexual content, some language, and teenage partying.”  However, the film features a scene of harsh animal cruelty.  Weinberg mentions that the film’s two main influences, Fatal Attraction and Single White Female, feature similar scenes and received R ratings.  The question is whether animal cruelty should be taken into consideration and noted when rating a fim, and whether this type of content should garner an R rating.  If you ask me, no child should witness the murder of an innocent animal.  If violent, cruel human murders (including against children) are considered reason for an R rating, certainly the murder of an animal should.  Similarly, I’ve always had a problem with the fact that the MPAA is so concerned with content such as harsh language that a film will receive an R rating for repeated use of the F word, yet intense violence and cruelty often only receive a PG-13.

This brings me to the next controversy surrounding the ratings system.  Recently it was announced that Harvey Weinstein was considering re-editing The King’s Speech to bring its rating down from an R to appeal to a wider audience.  Thankfully, the director, Tom Hooper, is against the idea.  I believe it’s completely ridiculous to re-edit the film to fit the MPAA’s standards.  In case you haven’t seen the film, the R rating is due to the brief use of harsh language.  However, these are not gratuitous F-bombs.  The use of this language is a crucial part of the story and character development, and it also provides light comic relief.  While I believe it’s ridiculous that the film is rated R, since it would easily be a PG without the language, I also wholeheartedly believe that the language should be kept in the film.  Let’s be honest.  How many people would decide to take their children to see the film if it were rated PG rather than R?  Honestly, the film is already aimed toward adult viewers, and certainly any responsible parents who would take their children to the film would research the content and make an informed decision.  I believe the ratings system is flawed and inconsistent.  I mean, can you believe The King’s Speech has a harsher rating than The Roommate?

This post obviously wouldn’t be complete without mentioning the Blue Valentine controversy.  In case you’re not aware, the film initially received an NC-17 rating because of sexual content, and one scene in particular.  The producers complained, refusing to re-edit the film.  Ryan Gosling accused the MPAA  of sexism.  The rating was finally reversed and the film now has an R rating.  The problem with an NC-17 rating is that it attaches a stigma to the film, so fewer people are likely to see it.  Additionally, NC-17 films are not shown in certain theaters, which would limit the film’s already small independent release.  If you ask me, I think it’s really ridiculous that films depicting intimate relations between a married couple should receive a harsher rating than a slasher film in which people are tortured and raped and murdered.  Granted, I understand that sexual content should lead to harsher ratings, but the ratings system needs to be more consistent and crack down more on violent content rather than worrying about an F-bomb or a shot of a rear end.  I haven’t seen the film, so I can’t comment specifically on that particular scene, but I am confident that this issue is representative of a larger problem.

That’s my MPAA post.  I think the ratings system and the controversies surrounding it form an important topic of discussion and debate, and it’s important for moviegoers to be informed about the films they see and the organization who gives those films ratings.  Parents should research the films’ content before taking their children to see them and make a responsible decision concerning its appropriateness.  Okay, I’ll stop before I get too preachy.

The King’s Speech vs. The Social Network: A Generational Battle?

I’ll admit that until just a few days ago I was absolutely positive that nothing could beat the juggernaut that is David Fincher’s The Social Network on Oscar night.  Well, now everything’s a little less definite.  Tom Hooper’s win for The King’s Speech at the Director’s Guild Awards and the cast’s win at the Screen Actors Guild Awards (remarkable for such a relatively small group of actors) is causing everyone to rethink who the front runner for Best Picture is.   Cinematical spells it out better than I can.

So who will win?  It’s funny, because I always find it difficult to pick who I think should win in any category.  I spend so much time wondering who will win that I rarely consider who I think should win.  That’s partly because I unfortunately have rarely seen all the nominees, so I feel bad choosing any one nominee when I haven’t witnessed them all.  It’s also partly because the choices are often so different, especially in the Best Picture category, that it is difficult to decide which is “better.”  I know that’s what the Oscars are all about, but I think that it is often a very subjective decision.  I often have favorites going into it, films which strongly affected me or which I immediately decided I would watch many more times.  The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King was the first of these for me.  I was obsessed with the trilogy, and the film’s clean sweep at the Oscars had me on the edge of my seat and screaming at the television.  Slumdog Millionaire was another instance of a film I was really rooting for.  I wish I had one of those movies this year.  The reason I don’t have one isn’t that there weren’t any worthy films.  It’s because there were so many films which I believe are equally deserving and appeal to me in very different ways. 

The Social Network and The King’s Speech, for example, were both great films, if you ask me, but they were also very different, so it’s difficult to pin down which was better.  The Social Network is very American, very contemporary, very hip, very young.  The King’s Speech is very British, very much a period piece, innovative but with a classic story, and about older characters.  It’s really hard for me to choose which one is more deserving.  I honestly cannot decide.

As far as which film the Oscars will choose, I can only base my choice on recent Oscar trends.  The awards seem to recently be geared toward more hip, unorthodox films, as opposed to the period pieces and “serious” dramas which reigned in the early to mid nineties (Dances with Wolves, Schindler’s List, The English Patient, Titanic, Shakespeare in Love).  For instance, a Coen brothers film (No Country for Old Men) won Best Picture.  I wasn’t a big fan (I just didn’t get it), but that’s definitely a hipper choice than, say, Atonement, its competiton.  Slumdog Millionaire (Hooray!) beat more conventional Oscar bait Benjamin Button (a David Fincher film, ironically) Frost/Nixon, and The Reader.  And gritty, female-directed, intimate military drama The Hurt Locker beat out Avatar, which was probably considered the front runner for a while.  Now, if Inglourious Basterds had won, the world might have been taken over by Tarantino-obsessed  film hipsters, and the Oscars would never be the same.  But you can still see that the Oscars are no longer this seemingly stuffy, pretentious awards show that only honors serious movies about older people decades ago.  Hell, the show’s being hosted by James Franco and Anne Hathaway (the youngest host ever), for Christ’s sake!  What I’m saying, in case you haven’t figured it out, is that I’m still pretty sure The Social Network will take home the gold, although I’m not as certain as I was a few weeks ago.  We shall see.

This also brings up an interesting question concerning the Oscars, and film in general, and a generational gap.  Is this battle for Best Picture a generational battle?  A fight over the future of film?  A struggle between the old and the new, the old-fashioned and the hip?  Ah, I’m being too dramatic.  Right?

Just an aside: I was directed to this amusing site the other day.  It’s called the Film School Thesis Statement Generator.  You’re supposed to type in a film and it will give you an appropriate thesis around which to write a paper.  Of course, these are randomly generated statements, but it’s funny how many films of I typed in resulted in sort-of-convincing thesis statements (“Through the use of implied depth-of-field, Jaws reminds the spectator of the post-war crisis of masculinity.”  Hmm, that’s kind of spot-on.)  As a Film Studies student, I’m familiar with these kinds of thesis statements, whether as a result of reading academic articles by intellectuals or struggling to form my own arguments for papers.  Maybe it won’t be as funny to those who aren’t familiar with concepts like the male gaze or mise-en-scene, but I thought I’d share it.  Maybe that should have been included in my previous film nerd post.  Aw, who am I kidding, all my posts are nerdy.

83rd Academy Award Predictions: Part 2

Here we are again.  Time to examine a few more categories for this year’s Academy Awards.

The supporting categories are really hard to pin down this year.  For some reason I find myself having trouble picking five appropriate actors for each category.  But here’s my best attempt.

 

Best Supporting Actor:

1. Christian Bale, The Fighter
2. Geoffrey Rush, The King’s Speech
3. Jeremy Renner, The Town
4. Andrew Garfield, The Social Network
5. Michael Douglas, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps

[This is a tough category, because the first four are pretty much definites, but the last nomination is up for grabs.  I looked at the nominations for the Critics Choice Movie Awards, the Golden Globes, and the Screen Actors Guild Awards, all of which include the first four actors on my list.  The fifth choice varies, however.  The Golden Globes chose Michael Douglas, the Critics Choice Awards chose Mark Ruffalo (The Kids Are All Right), and the SAG Awards chose John Hawkes (Winter’s Bone).  I’m going with Michael Douglas for a few reasons.  First, the Golden Globes are usually very similar to the Oscars, with the occasional exception.  Second, the Academy almost always gives away one or two unexpected nominations from more mainstream films.  Wall Street hasn’t gotten a lot of Oscar buzz, but Douglas’s role might be this year’s unexpected nominee.  While Mark Ruffalo is always great, I didn’t feel personally that it was a particularly Oscar-worthy performance, and I don’t think there’s been enough buzz surrounding John Hawkes to garner a nod.  But who knows.  Maybe I’ll be wrong.  I probably will.  The first four names, however, are pretty much set in stone.  Who’ll win?  I predict Christian Bale to take home the top prize.  I mean, how many times does this guy have to drastically alter his physique before the Academy rewards him for it?  Personally, though, I thought Geoffrey Rush was delightful and pitch-perfect in The King’s Speech, so I’d like to see him walk away with a win.]

Best Supporting Actress:

1. Melissa Leo, The Fighter
2. Helena Bonham Carter, The King’s Speech
3. Amy Adams, The Fighter
4. Mila Kunis, Black Swan
5. Hailee Steinfeld, True Grit

[This is another instance in which the first four nominees are pretty much set in stone, but the fifth is kind of up for grabs.  I can definitely see the Academy going with breakout star Hailee Steinfeld.  The Oscars love to recognize young, fresh talent (Abigail Breslin, Gabourey Sidibe), so I think she has a really good chance.  Who’ll win?  I think Melissa Leo is the front runner, but I personally loved Helena Bonham Carter in The King’s Speech.]

Best Adapted Screenplay:

1. Aaron Sorkin, The Social Network
2. Simon Beaufoy and Danny Boyle, 127 Hours
3. Joel and Ethan Coen, True Grit
4. Michael Arndt, Toy Story 3
5. Debra Granik, and Anne Rosellini, Winter’s Bone

[Let’s face it.  Aaron Sorkin is going to win this one.  His witty, fast-paced, hip screenplay for The Social Network was one of the most important factors in making that film so great, so he has to take home the award.  Beaufoy and Doyle have street cred because of Slumdog Millionaire, so they’re likely to get a nod, and the Coen brothers are continuously beloved by the academy for their dark scripts.  Toy Story 3 was just brilliant storytelling, so that’s likely to get a nod, and I chose Winter’s Bone as the final nominee mostly as wishful thinking, because I always want to see more female writers on the list.]

Best Original Screenplay:

1. Christopher Nolan, Inception
2. David Seidler, The King’s Speech
3. Lisa Cholodenko and Stuart Blumberg, The Kids Are All Right
4. Mark Heyman, Andres Heinz and John McLaughlin, Black Swan
5. Mike Leigh, Another Year

[I love this category.  For starters, I always appreciate an original idea.  So many films now are either remakes, adaptations, or sequels.  We really need more original scripts.  Plus, my favorite screenplays have won this category (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Juno).  The ultimate original idea this year, Inception, should definitely earn a nod, as will popular films Black Swan and The King’s Speech.  And as always, there’ll be a couple of quirky, character-driven scripts thrown in.  This year, I predict those will be The Kids Are All Right and Another Year.  As far as the winner goes, it’ll probably go to the juggernaut Inception, but The Kids Are All Right could sneak up and win as the year’s indie darling.]

Best Animated Feature:

1. Toy Story 3
2. The Illusionist
3. How to Train Your Dragon

[This year the animated category will only feature three nominations, because the number of available nominees fell just short of the amount needed for a five-nominee ballot.  How to Train Your  Dragon was a favorite of both critics and moviegoers, so it’ll be recognized, and The Illusionist is the foreign favorite that often gets nominated.  But let’s face it.  Nobody’s beating the brilliant Toy Story 3.]

Check back soon for my predictions for the technical awards.