With all the movie sites out there doing Live-Blogs of the 2012 Oscars, why join ours? For one, because you’ll get to voice your opinion. For two, our team’s opinions combined with yours are far more important than the opinions of other movie websites. It’s science.

Plus, you’re already here. We’re not saying you’re lazy, but, come on. The window to follow and participate in our 2012 Oscar Live-Blog is inches of screen away.

Double plus, we’ll be doing trivia, poll questions, and Neil will be drunkenly judging red carpet walkers based on clothing styles. He’s chic that way. It all starts at 7pm EST/4pm PST/1am German Time, so join us! By looking below this!

The Best Picture Academy Award is really what explains film as a collaborative effort. The Best Picture is what the Academy has found to be the best combination of every aspect that film has, whether thematically or structurally. The producers of the winner take home the Oscar, because, well, they footed the bill. They were also the decision-makers. We know its more of a gray area than that, but the classic Academy likes to think like classic movie-making. It doesn’t stop the Best Picture winners from being some of the greatest pieces of work in the artform.

One film this Sunday will be written in along with films like It Happened One Night, On The Waterfront, The Godfather parts 1 & 2, and No Country For Old Men. That’s a list of 83 movies that will be or already are considered essentials when it comes to film history. We don’t look down on the nominees who didn’t win. What are they called? Oh, yeah. Losers. But, seriously, they are all films of value in some form or another, films that were still able to make their mark on some part of this history.

But it’s that big boy. That one who gets its name yelled out at the end of the night, who hears the orchestra play their music for the climax of the show, that’s the one that’ll make headlines come Monday morning. Which one is it gonna be? The odds seem better for some, but here’s the breakdown on all nine Best Picture nominees, and my predicted winner in red…

The Artist

Why It Was Nominated:

Forget why was it nominated. Why was this even made? A black and white, silent film in 2011? That’s crazy. But, you know what, Michel Hazanavicius had a dream, and he got his film made. The Weinstein Company saw a hit at Cannes, and they picked it up for US release. That was a series of risky moves all the way, and they all paid off tremendously. That kind of risk-taking should be rewarded.

Why It Might Win:

But that isn’t stopping The Artist from being a moving story that reflects the very nature in which it is presented. Jean Dujardin’s performance is one for the ages. And it’s got a cute dog? Who doesn’t love a cute dog? Financial success, critical lauding, audience approval. All the result of one man’s dream to realize a love letter he had for the art form. That spoke to the movie-watching world. That spoke to the Academy.

Why It Might Not Win:

It might not win because of that other little love letter to cinema that came out last year. There’s a great story with The Artist, but Hazanavicius is a newbie, and that other film has Scorsese. That’s a monster of a deciding factor if ever there was one. The Artist could very well walk home with the gold Sunday night. It’s the more pleasant of the two films, the one more likely to be applauded with the more casual movie-goer. But…Scorsese. That’s a tough one.

The Descendants

Why It Was Nominated:

Alexander Payne is no stranger to the Academy, and vice versa. After winning for screenwriting with 2004′s Sideways – Payne was nominated for directing – the Academy was very interested in what he had up next. The Descendants is that next film. It tells a moving story and Payne adds to the emotion with his direction. Throw George Clooney into the mix, and you’ve got a nice pot of “I’m gonna win a bunch of Oscars” stew. The Academy bit.

Why It Might Win:

Payne might be owed in the eyes of some voters. Sideways was considered by more than a few to be a superior film to 2004′s Million Dollar Baby. But politics aside, The Descendants shows Payne as a matured storyteller. He’s becoming one of the greats, and 2012 could be his year to be welcomed into the fold.

Why It Might Not Win:

But then again. The Descendants had a lot of steam until it became evident who the real front-runners are. That’s when things started to slow on the Alexander Payne/Oscar winner talk. Human drama might not be in this year, and Alexander Payne’s time might have to come at a later date. Sorry, George.

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close

Why It Was Nominated:

11 years after Billy Elliott, director Stephen Daldry returns to the Oscars with a film about another lost boy. Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close didn’t exactly touch the right chords with critics, but something resonated with the Academy. Its mostly made up of people carrying SAG cards, and the power of having Tom Hanks, Sandra Bullock, Max Von Sydow, and the impressive newcomer Thomas Horn couldn’t be denied.

Why It Might Win: 

The power of that cast would really have had to hit the Academy. Hard. Many were surprised to even see Extremely Loud get a nomination. The Academy could all be playing a hoax on us and give the award to it just to see the reaction. That would take a lot of planning, though, so…

Why It Might Not Win:

There isn’t anything about Extremely Loud that makes one think it will be one of the all-time classics 50 years from now. Not even the mark in time of 9/11 will make it a film people will remember. Some found Thomas Horn impressive. Others found him obnoxious. Most found him obnoxious.

The Help

Why It Was Nominated:

The Help is the one surprise success story everyone loves to hear. The great, female cast mixed with an unforgettable story proved fit for audiences. The Help ended up with over $200 million worldwide, the largest gross for any of the nominees. Critics largely approved, as well. Surprise success stories need a happy ending. What better place for that than the Oscars?

Why It Might Win:

It might be a night for Hollywood endings, and giving The Help the Best Picture award would certainly be a fine end to the story. It’s a film that found its fan-base quickly, and it’s sure to live on for years to come. Having a couple of important statues won’t look so bad around it, either.

Why It Might Not Win: 

The Academy doesn’t generally award those surprise hits. The Junos and Preciouses of the Best Picture field have generally been thankful to be nominated and gone home happy. Empty handed but happy. 2012 won’t be the year they change their minds.

Hugo

Why It Was Nominated:

Because Scorsese told it to be nominated. Seriously, though, this isn’t the Scorsese we know. This isn’t the guy who likes to kill Joe Pesci in his films. This isn’t the guy who locked Leonardo DiCaprio in a mental institution. But, it is. Like his gangster films, like his throwback to old, sanitarium, horror movies, Hugo is a love letter to those who inspired the film maker. It’s a film that goes back to the days when the art and its magic couldn’t be done at a computer. It’s one of the modern masters of today’s film world giving us his most personal film yet. There was no way it wasn’t getting nominated.

Why It Might Win:

Lucky for Hugo‘s chances of winning Best Picture, Scorsese’s passion was film itself. 2011 was a year Hollywood admired itself. More so than usual. The admiration for the art-form has made Scorsese’s film and The Artist the two front-runners and for good reason. Both are passionate films about the very thing Oscar night is celebrating. Scorsese and everything he represents is a big factor.

Why It Might Not Win:

He did get his “honorary” award already, though. The Departed could have been the beginning of Scorsese’s run for Oscar gold. It could also have been a gentle pat on the back. The Artist seems the more generally beloved of the two, and who does the Academy serve if not the public? Sarcasm aside, it looks more glamorous for Best Picture to go to the artful drama and not the goofy kid’s movie.

Midnight In Paris

Why It Was Nominated:

Woody Allen is an up-and-down director for critics and audiences. Midnight in Paris was a big up. Critics found the film to be Allen’s funniest in years, a return to his early career. The Academy has always admired Allen. They just wait for him to give them a reason to nominate him. Midnight in Paris was a very good reason.

Why It Might Win:

The stamps Allen puts on the film industry, particularly the Academy Awards, is not finished. Allen’s films have been taking home gold for 34 years. As prolific as he is, his legacy is anything but finished. Midnight in Paris taking home Best Picture would be remarkable moment for it.

Why It Might Not Win:

Those 34 years have given a lot to Allen. Midnight in Paris is a film deserving of praise. Whether it’s deserving of being called the best of the year is another matter entirely. It’s that film that always goes on people’s “best of” lists but never hits #1. There just isn’t enough there to warrant the highest honor.

Moneyball

Why It Was Nominated:

The story told in getting Moneyball made is almost as interesting as the story Moneyball tells. Bennett Miller, previously nominated for directing Capote, took the reigns from Steven Soderbergh and made a dynamic but witty film about the inner workings of Major League Baseball. Having a screenplay by Aaron Sorkin doesn’t hurt matters one bit. So many aspects about Moneyball work so well the Academy couldn’t deny a Best Picture nod.

Why It Might Win:

Brad Pitt is another factor hard at work for Moneyball. Pitt served as one of the producers on the film. Moneyball could do for him what Michael Clayton did for Clooney. Michael Clayton didn’t win Best Picture, but Moneyball‘s strength begins with its incredible screenplay. If Sorkin and Steven Zaillian win an Oscar, we might see Moneyball shock the world. If Pitt’s name gets called up for Best Lead Performance, it’s a sure thing.

Why It Might Not Win:

It’s about baseball. No movie about baseball, no matter how good it is, ever wins Best Picture. The Academy hates sports.

The Tree Of Life

Why It Was Nominated:

When Terence Malick makes a movie, he does it because he has something to say. When he makes a movie, he makes sure it’s precisely how he wants it. The power of this personal story combined with the exquisite detail put into the direction made it one of the most beloved films of 2011. It was #1 on many critics’ “best of” lists for a very good reason. Some considered it a religious experience. Some of those people are on the Academy.

Why It Might Win:

It depends on how many people The Tree of Life spoke to. It’s a film that tells a message. Not many hear that message, but those who do are moved by its power. It’s all about sheer numbers at that point. The Tree of Life is a title that would sit comfortably among the past Best Picture winners. If Malick is ever going to walk home with a winner, it’s here. That could give some Academy members the reasoning to vote for it.

Why It Might Not Win:

The Tree of Life was a very divisive movie, though. It appears on “worst of” lists. Not as many as “best of”, but it happened. The Tree of Life was the earliest of the nominees to get the Oscar buzz about it. That didn’t do the film any favors, and the steam let out long ago. It was probably around the time the dinosaur showed up. A last minute resurgence isn’t going to happen.

War Horse

Why It Was Nominated:

Did somebody say Spielberg? Did somebody say war? And there’s a talking animal? Hell, yeah, it’ll get nominated for Best Picture. Oh, the horse doesn’t talk? Eh, they already had Babe, anyway. Spielberg. War. Give it a nod.

Why It Might Win:

Sentimentality is what gets the Academy really going. They might not have noticed how thick it was being laid on with War Horse. Maybe they did notice and just didn’t care. Spielberg didn’t direct Saving Private Ryan to a Best Picture Oscar, and the outcry that next day could be heard around the world. War Horse winning is merely a factor of politics. Does Spielberg deserve a return Oscar after losing 13 years ago?

Why It Might Not Win:

No. No, he doesn’t. Not with War Horse he doesn’t. We’ll see about Lincoln.

—

What Will Win: The Artist and Hugo are the serious front-runners in this race, and it all boils down to how is Hollywood going to reward Hollywood for loving Hollywood? War Horse, The Tree of Life, and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close are all too divisive to take home the gold. Hugo could be just divisive enough to sway votes to the newcomer, Hazanavicius. Most of the choices this year have been safe. Even decisions on the Academy Awards’ production have felt safe, like their collective minds are back in 1999. That was the year Harvey Weinstein took home the gold for Shakespeare in Love. There’s no reason they should switch things up at the last minute by getting risky with their Best Picture statue. The Artist is the safe choice, and it’ll be the film that makes headlines Monday morning. Congratulations, Harvey. Make sure your tux looks nice.

What Should Win: Well, Drive should win, but that’s another argument for another article. Out of these nine films, the best of them, the one that will be looked at and studied for years to come is Hugo. It’s Martin Scorsese’s gift to the artists who made him what he is today, the best film maker of the modern era. Passionate love letters can easily turn into ambitious failure, but Scorsese’s craft holds true with this film. For nearly 70 years, he’s been learning the craft. For more than 50 years, he’s been honing his craft. He’s a master who diligently studied the masters before him, and he keeps surprising us to this day with his 27th feature film. That’s the greatest magic trick yet.

Complete Academy Awards Coverage

In a couple of hours, we’ll start live-blogging our little hearts out as Neil pretends to know what “chiffon” is, and after the red carpet, we’ll sink into that fifth drink while reveling in the sheer majesty of the 2012 Academy Awards. Stifling cynicism can take a taxi outta town for a while, because no matter what, if you want to see it, there’s still something magical about this night.

Part of that magic is being completely wrong. We’re confident now, but when the winners are announced, there’s always the tiny possibility of a big surprise. So who did you put down in your office pool to take home gold tonight? Our team spent all week tossing out their best analyses, and it all comes down to this.

Here’s who we picked. Would you take us up on these bets?

BEST PICTURE

War Horse

The Artist - “Jean Dujardin’s performance is one for the ages. And it’s got a cute dog? Who doesn’t love a cute dog? Financial success, critical lauding, audience approval. All the result of one man’s dream to realize a love letter he had for the art form. That spoke to the movie-watching world. That spoke to the Academy.” – Jeremy Kirk

Moneyball

The Descendants

The Tree of Life

Midnight in Paris

The Help

Hugo

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

BEST ACTOR

Demian Bichir – A Better Life

George Clooney – The Descendants “Here’s where the popularity contest really comes into play. The media loves Clooney. The ladies love Clooney. The Academy loves Clooney. Starring in an acclaimed film helps him out a lot, but even more so, his competition isn’t as fierce as it has been the last times he’s been up for the Best Actor award. Two years ago, his performance in Up in the Air was eclipsed by Jeff Bridges’ sure-bet performance in Crazy Heart. Similarly, four years ago, his turn in Michael Clayton couldn’t beat out Daniel Day-Lewis in There Will Be Blood. While the Best Actor field is still strong this year, Clooney is the clear front-runner partially for his performance but also because of how much the industry loves this guy.” – Kevin Carr

Jean Dujardin – The Artist

Gary Oldman – Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

Brad Pitt – Moneyball

BEST ACTRESS

Glenn Close – Albert Nobbs

Viola Davis – The Help

Rooney Mara – The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

Meryl Streep – The Iron Lady “The bottom line is that many voters believe that Meryl Streep deserves another Oscar, especially considering her last Oscar win was for Sophie’s Choice thirty years ago. I recently had a conversation with another film critic, and he said, “Oh, they just want to give Meryl that Oscar.” He’s totally right. And with such a spotlight role like this one, it’s the safe bet.” – Kevin Carr

Michelle Williams – My Week With Marilyn

BEST ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE

Kenneth Brannagh – My Week With Marilyn

Jonah Hill – Moneyball

Nick Nolte – Warrior

Christopher Plummer – Beginners “There is no “might” or “maybe” when it comes to Plummer, he’s going to win. There’s no doubt about it. He’s been cleaning house at every other awards show to date, and with charm , style, and class. When Plummer gets up to that podium, everyone is prepared for a slice of witty and heartfelt remarks. Who wouldn’t want to see him do that while wielding an oscar in hand?” – Jack Giroux

Max Von Sydow – Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

BEST ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE

Berenice Bejo – The Artist

Jessica Chastain – The Help

Melissa McCarthy – Bridesmaids

Janet McTeer – Albert Nobbs

Octavia Spencer – The Help “This shouldn’t be why she “might” win, but why she will win. Minnie was a hard-to-understand gruff character in the book and she needed someone to not only become her but believe in her. There  is no doubt that Spencer understood Minnie and wanted to bring a vulnerability to her that any other actress might not have been able to achieve.” – Gwen Reyes

BEST ANIMATED PICTURE

 A Cat in Paris

Chico and Rita

Kung Fu Panda 2

Puss in Boots

Rango “Not only is Rango the year’s best animated film, but it’s also one of the best movies of 2011 period. The animation is absolutely stunning, and the film’s design allows for the occasional seamless integration into live footage that works beautifully. Gore Verbinski‘s direction and John Logan‘s script keep things engaging, exciting and smart as it tells a fun story filled with homages to pop culture icons as diverse as The Man With No Name and Hunter S. Thompson. Johnny Depp‘s excessive quirk has grown tiresome in live action, but he finds a perfectly suited home for it here.” – Rob Hunter

BEST DIRECTOR

Michel Hazanavicius – The Artist “The Artist has dominated award ceremonies leading up to the Oscars, and Hazanavicius has already picked up seven awards as Best Director including the one from the Director’s Guild of America. That’s fairly telling, though far from definitive, and the momentum seems to be pointing in a repeat here.” – Rob Hunter

Alexander Payne – The Descendants

Terrance Malick – The Tree of Life

Martin Scorsese – Hugo

Woody Allen – Midnight in Paris

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon, Jim Rash – The Descendants “Payne, Faxon, and Rash crafted some of the finest characters of the year – Clooney’s Matt King, Shailene Woodley’s Alex King, Judy Greer’s Julie Speer. Hell, they even made a woman in a coma feel like her own character.” – Kate Erbland

John Logan – Hugo

George Clooney, Grant Heslov, Beau Willimon – Ides of March

Steve Zaillian, Aaron Sorkin, Stan Chervin – Moneyball

Bridget O’Connor, Peter Straughan -  Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Michel Hazanavicius – The Artist

Kristen Wiig, Annie Mumolo – Bridesmaids

J.C. Chandor – Margin Call

Woody Allen – Midnight in Paris “Allen’s film was the delight of the year, a moneymaker and crowd-pleaser, but one that also comes with a script that has the most pay-off for book nerds, art fans, and history wonks. It’s Academy bait, but the rare kind that everyone can enjoy. Also, Academy members probably watched this with their grandkids. ” – Kate Erbland

Asghar Farhadi – A Separation

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM

Bullhead (Belgium)

Footnote (Israel)

In Darkness (Poland)

Monsieur Lazhar (Canada)

A Separation (Iran) “Writer/director Asghar Farhadi’s excellent relationship drama has received the highest number of accolades of any of the nominees, but more importantly it deserves all of the praise and the eventual win. Beyond simply being a smart, beautifully acted ‘he said/she said’ drama this movie offers an eye-opening look into a world most people simply don’t know about. Our idea of Iran is shaped by the nightly news, but Farhadi’s movie shows us the real people who populate the country and may surprise some with the revelation that they’re actually pretty damn similar to the rest of us.” – Rob Hunter

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE

John Williams – The Adventures of Tintin

Ludovic Bource – The Artist “With a Golden Globe for Best Original Score already under his belt, Bource seems poised as the one to beat come Oscar night. Unlike his fellow nominees, Bource’s score did not just play under scenes and highlight climatic moments, it provided all the sound in The Artist (no small feat.) Taking us back to a time in film when instruments had to convey the myriad of emotions we can now rely on words for, Bource’s score truly sounded like it was taken from the 1920s and gave The Artist real weight making this return to the early days of filmmaking both exciting and entertaining.” – Allison Loring

Howard Shore – Hugo

Alberto Iglesias – Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

John Williams – War Horse

BEST ORIGINAL SONG

“Man or Muppet,” by Bret McKenzie – The Muppets “The song has the epic grander that fit the climactic scene it was featured in and had audiences singing (and questioning) whether they were a man or a muppet as they left the theater. If you were to ask people to name one of the songs that stood out to them from the films released last year, “Man or Muppet” would probably top many people’s lists and if the Academy is looking to reflect film in 2011, they would be remiss to vote over this choice.” – Allison Loring

“Real in Rio,” by Sergio Mendes, Carlinhos Brown, Siedah Garrett – Rio

COMPLETE PREDICTIONS

Check out the latest edition of Reject Radio for Cole’s complete, 24-category Oscar predictions and make your own for a chance to win some sort of fabulous prize.

Complete Academy Award Coverage

Editor’s Note: This article will be updated in real time as the winners come in during the Academy Awards broadcast. Please join us for our Live-Blog tonight (because we ask nicely), and while you wait for the winners, check out our Oscar Week Series, where you will find breakdowns and predictions for all of the major categories.

It’s finally here! The time of year where I can write a paragraph that no one will read because they’ve already scrolled down to see who’s won. But even though this won’t be seen by humans, here’s a personal reminder that this night may be about politics and back-slapping, but it’s also about the splendor of cinema. It’s about the magic of movies. The genius of thousands of images all strung together with blood, sweat and tears to create characters and a journey through the heart of a story.

There are some great stories on display tonight. That’s what matters second most. What matters most, of course, is crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you and hearing the lamentation of their women.

Let’s get to the winning, right?

And the Oscar goes to…

BEST PICTURE

War Horse

The Artist

Moneyball

The Descendants

The Tree of Life

Midnight in Paris

The Help

Hugo

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

BEST ACTOR

Demian Bichir – A Better Life

George Clooney – The Descendants

Jean Dujardin – The Artist

Gary Oldman – Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

Brad Pitt – Moneyball

BEST ACTRESS

Glenn Close – Albert Nobbs

Viola Davis – The Help

Rooney Mara – The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

Meryl Streep – The Iron Lady

Michelle Williams – My Week With Marilyn

BEST ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE

Kenneth Brannagh – My Week With Marilyn

Jonah Hill – Moneyball

Nick Nolte – Warrior

Christopher Plummer – Beginners

Max Von Sydow – Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

BEST ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE

Berenice Bejo – The Artist

Jessica Chastain – The Help

Melissa McCarthy – Bridesmaids

Janet McTeer – Albert Nobbs

Octavia Spencer – The Help

BEST ANIMATED PICTURE

 A Cat in Paris

Chico and Rita

Kung Fu Panda 2

Puss in Boots

Rango

BEST DIRECTOR

Michel Hazanavicius – The Artist

Alexander Payne – The Descendants

Terrance Malick – The Tree of Life

Martin Scorsese – Hugo

Woody Allen – Midnight in Paris

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon, Jim Rash – The Descendants

John Logan – Hugo

George Clooney, Grant Heslov, Beau Willimon – Ides of March

Steve Zaillian, Aaron Sorkin, Stan Chervin – Moneyball

Bridget O’Connor, Peter Straughan -  Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Michel Hazanavicius – The Artist

Kristen Wiig, Annie Mumolo – Bridesmaids

J.C. Chandor – Margin Call

Woody Allen – Midnight in Paris

Asghar Farhadi – A Separation

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM

Bullhead (Belgium)

Footnote (Israel)

In Darkness (Poland)

Monsieur Lazhar (Canada)

A Separation (Iran)

The Independent Spirit Awards and the Oscars never agree. Well, almost never. In 28 years of co-existing, the two organizations have only agreed once before – on Oliver Stone’s Platoon back in 1986. It’s not surprising since the Spirit Awards focus on celebrating a particular method of filmmaking that is often overlooked by the red-carpet-ready Academy Awards, but if both honor prestige movies, it seems at least likely they’d agree from time to time, right?

They didn’t until last night. The more-than-two-decades-long drought was finally broken when The Artist took home Best Picture less than a week after bringing home the top Spirit prize. It became the first movie since 1986 to win both the Oscar and the Indie Spirit Award. One was in an ornate theater, the other was in a tent on the beach, but the implication is clear: independent movies are breaking more and more into the mainstream.

It’s not wholly unexpected. The politicking from Team Weinstein is a factor, of course, but the trend was building this way on a bigger scale regardless of how many hands were shaken by one giant producer. In fact, the Spirts and the Oscars have had more chances to agree in the past few years than ever before.

• After Platoon in 1986, The Indie Spirits and Oscars didn’t even agree on a single nominee until 1994′s Pulp Fiction (which won the Indie)
• They also agreed on nominating Fargo in 1996 (which won the Indie), the only other film of the 90s to match up
• From 2000-2012, they’ve agreed on a whopping 15 nominees
• Whenever there’s an overlap in nominees, the Indies always pick one of the overlapping films as a winner

From 1 in the 80s, to 2 in the 90s, to 15 in the last decade and change. It’s an explosion of agreement from two disparate organizations with two different goals. With opportunities for Brokeback Mountain, Little Miss Sunshine, and Precious, it was just a matter of time before they’d celebrate the same Best Picture.

It could have been last year. In 2010, both awards had Black Swan, The Kids Are All Right, 127 Hours, and Winter’s Bone on the ballot. Even so, it was the year the Oscars lauded twice the amount of Best Picture nominees, and the move was seen broadly as an attempt to pay lip service to overlooked movies. The Artist obliterates that argument. Sure, it was a movie with buzz for months, but it’s also a 1) foreign 2) silent film from 3) an arguably unknown director produced 4) far outside of the studio system. Even without all those qualifiers, the bloated nominee list can’t be a hollow pat on the back, because they handed out gold. They made good. The movie praised by Film Independent was raised up on the shoulders of the Academy.

If it weren’t an isolated incident, it could be dismissed as a delightful diversion from the usual, but it comes at the end of a large wave of independent films crashing the mainstream of the Academy. It’s the culmination of a trend, not the outlier it might appear to be. Independent movies increased their presence on Oscar nomination lists, and the result was bound to be an overlapping winner sooner or later.

Will it mean more silent films get made? Probably not. Will it mean any huge tectonic shift in the way movies are made or distributed? Not a chance. This is a slow-burn revolution where the prize isn’t dominance, but a fairer share of the viewing space. Independent movies are taking over to fill a void (similar to the early 1990s when Pulp Fiction‘s nominations were watershed moments), and it’s just an issue of momentum and time. The Artist isn’t the cause; it’s the effect.

With options from Fox, Warners, DreamWorks, Paramount, and Sony, the stuffy old Caucasians of AMPAS chose an outsider without Hollywood headliners. Chalk it cynically up to the Weinstein touch, dismiss it because of its appeal to classics, but no matter the caveats, two organizations that haven’t agreed in over 25 years, just did.

There’s a solid chance that you haven’t heard of most of these movies. Yet they exist – out there somewhere as a thorn in the side of movie fans trying to see as much as possible. Nuggets of potential waiting to be picked up from the movie orphanage by a distributor and given a warm home with cup holders in every seat.

The European Film Market is fascinating for that reason and for the way people attend it. Tickets this year were around $600, but that’s a reasonable price for companies sending representatives trying to find the next moneymaker for their company or the hot movie to bring to their festival. That means screenings come complete with people on cell phones and unimpressed buyers walking out after ten minutes to hustle next door to see if the other movie playing has any promise to it. It’s a bizarre way to watch movies, but it makes a kind of sense given the massive size of the movie list compared to the tiny amount of time to see everything.

There were upwards of 675 movies in the EFM this year, all of them with their own selling points. Here are the 87 most interesting-sounding with descriptions found in the official catalog. For the most part, I haven’t seen these movies (and didn’t even know about many of them until the Berlin Film Festival), but they all have something going for them that should earn them a spot on your radar.

4:44 The Last Day on Earth

The Pitch: “A loving couple lives in a beautiful apartment. It’s just a normal afternoon – except that tomorrow, at 4:44, the world will come to an end.”

The Point: Director Abel Ferrara and star Willem Dafoe, with an intriguing (if not Von Trier-ian) concept.

5 Broken Cameras

The Pitch: “5 Broken Cameras looks at Palestinian farmer Emad Burnat, who has been documenting his village’s resistance to advancing Israeli settlements since 2005, using the 5 cameras of the title. Each camera tells a part of the story.”

The Point: A doc with an interesting angle, timely subject matter, and a reluctant storyteller who ends up getting a new camera every time one is broken in the conflict.

The 25th Reich

The Pitch: “Five American GIs stationed in Australia in 1943 get caught in a secret OSS time-travel mission gone awry. Sent 50,000 years back in time, they must retrieve an alien spaceship that may help to win the war against Hitler.”

The Point: Did you just read the pitch? Awesome.

1911

The Pitch: “Based on the Chinese Revolution, 1911 follows Huang Xin (Jackie Chan) & Sun Yat Sun (Winston Chao) fight for a better life for the people of China and lead the revolt against the deteriorated Qing Dynasty.”

The Point: Already out on DVD with a Hunter seal of approval, they’re most likely looking for distribution in other markets, or perhaps a theatrical here in the States.

Ace Attorney

The Pitch: “In 20XX, to prevent the rise of vicious crimes, the government introduces a new justice system where the defense and prosecutor go head-to-head in open court. Within just three days, a guilty or not guilty verdict is decided…”

The Point: Directed by Takashi Miike…

The Adopted

The Pitch: “Melanie Laurent teams up with her Inglorious Basterds co-star Denis Menochet in her directorial debut. A heartfelt, hopeful and bittersweet take on love and rebirth.”

The Point: The premise is generic-sounding, but Laurent is an impressive actress who deserves some attention for being on both sides of the camera now.

Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry

The Pitch: Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry is the inside story of a dissident for the digital age who inspires global audiences and blurs the boundaries of art and politics.”

The Point: A firebrand, bizarre activist with a mind for design and sculpture, Sundance Selects has recently picked it up to show in theaters near us.

Alois Nebel

The Pitch: “Love, trains, insanity and history all descend upon a railway dispatcher deep in the heart of Central Europe…”

The Point: This is the rotoscope animation project that had a trailer last year. I have it on good authority that it’s a slow-burning revenge thriller with an engaging visual style.

Arbitrage

The Pitch: “Hedge-fund magnate Robert Miller is desperately trying to complete the sale of his trading empire before the depths of his fraud are revealed. An unexpected bloody error forces him to turn to the most unlikely corner for help.”

The Point: Richard Gere stars with Susan Sarandon and Tim Roth. Plus, it’s the first feature narrative from Nicholas Jarecki – the guy who wrote, and was then kicked off of, The Informers.

As Luck Would Have It

The Pitch: “An unemployed advertising executive decides to take advantage of an accident he has, after yet another humiliating work interview.”

The Point: New Alex De La Iglesia? Yes, please.

Battle of Warsaw 1920

The Pitch: “From Oscar-nominated director, Jerzy Hoffman, and Oscar-nominated cinematographer, Slawomir Idziak, comes an epic tale of bravery and love that depicts the Polish battle for independence against the Bolsheviks after World War I.”

The Point: Hoffman was nominated for Best Foreign Film back in 1974 for The Deluge – another historical drama. Here, he’s teaming with Idziak, who’s nomination was for shooting Black Hawk Down. That’s one hell of a partnership, especially if the veteran still has some skill left in him.

Below Zero

The Pitch: “A writer locks himself in a meat cooler, determined to finish his screenplay. As the temperature drops, the lines between fiction and reality blur and Jack’s script comes dangerously to life.”

The Point: Edward Furlong stars, but it’s really Michael Berryman‘s grisly, Hills Have Eyes-face that gets the blood boiling, even if the premise is just ridiculous enough to be (sorry) cool.

The 84th Academy Awards have come and gone: let the bitching begin! As someone who is more of a genre fan than anything, I’ve never really cared too much about the Oscars, but that sure as hell doesn’t prevent me from complaining about them. Granted, over the years, some great films have won. I’m a big fan of Unforgiven and I dug Shakespeare In Love. I just think far too many good films are ignored in favor of “Oscar movies.”

I can’t say that I was particularly impressed with any of the films nominated this year, but there were a few categories were I feel like the little golden man statue when to the wrong film. Luckily, the internet exists and I can complain about it!

First off, if I don’t bring it up below, it either means I agree or I don’t care.

Best Picture

While I’m not a fan of any of these movies for Best Picture, I’d give it to The Descendants over The Artist, but don’t feel too strongly.

Best Actor

A cute film with a neat premise doesn’t have much to do with acting. Here, Gary Oldman should have won for Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy or, if not him, then Demian Bichir – A Better Life.

Best Original Screenplay

Anything other than Midnight in Paris. I can’t believe this wins. This was a weakly-written film that was far too on the nose. There is nothing clever here, other than the idea, which I felt wasn’t even executed well. Accessible and average, across the board. Throw it to Margin Call.

Best Achievement in Cinematography

This is actually a tough one and I thought it was a good three way race between Hugo (which won), War Horse, and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Personally I was leaning towards War Horse, but I just wanted you guys to think about how pretty these films were to look at.

Best Achievement in Costume Design

Really? The Artist was one of the weaker ones here. Costume Design almost always goes to old period films, which I think is unfair to modern films, but this one should have gone to Anonymous as the obvious choice or to Jayne Eyre which I think were spot on in terms of color and tone regarding realism, which meant they weren’t showy and thus maybe that was held against them.

Best Achievement in Make-Up + This is What’s Wrong With the Oscars Part 1

The make-up in Iron Lady was great, it was realistic, bravo. But really, so what? Aging Meryl Streep under 20 years isn’t that impressive. I’d rather see Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 get the nod here because not only is there a TON of make-up work going on, it’s not just age make-up.

Now, age make-up is notoriously difficult, but the Potter film deals with that to some extent. But beyond that, what you have to realize this is the Best Achievement in make-up and I think creating two dozen little goblin folk and a whole bunch of nasty looking people, all of whom are in layers of make-up, is a great achievement then doing a pretty realistic job on one person.

This is what’s wrong with the Oscars – they are hesitant to reward commercial films. They are hesitant to reward films outside of the dramatic arena. Why aren’t more horror and science fiction movies included in Make-Up? Anything applied to an actor is basically considered make-up. Plenty of actresses get fake noses or other prosthetics, so really what is the difference between a nose and a werewolf face?

Achievement in Sound Editing

Hugo wins here, which is stupid. Drive was nominated because it was loud and realistic, but I don’t think that overcomes Transformers: Dark of the Moon, which created an amazing and realistic immersive experience that was well thought out. Say what you will about the movie or Bay, but the film is cutting edge and sounded amazing.

Achievement in Sound Mixing

Again, Hugo doesn’t hold a candle to Transformers. The action film is ignored because it’s perceived as being big, loud, and stupid, when it is actually big, loud, and technically crafted amazingly in several departments. Hate the film, you can’t ignore the layers of sound work here.

Achievement in Visual Effects + This is What’s Wrong with the Oscars Part 2

The childish Hugo again wins, inexplicably. I don’t think Deathly Hallows had the consistency in its effects work to win here. Many were cheering Rise of the Planet of the Apes, but I don’t think that wins here either – what was the achievement? More facial mocap? Big whoop. The technology being utilized here is Lord of the Rings stuff plus the hair texturing of King Kong. It’s not groundbreaking. I liked Real Steel, which had some pretty great effects, but the king of the pile here is Transformers: Dark of the Moon.

This is again what’s wrong with the Oscar’s. They don’t want to give Transformers an Academy Award, despite the fact that it is utterly amazing visually. Michael Bay has a bad reputation in some professional circles and a lot of people consider him to be a bad director – so what? This isn’t about good people and this category actually isn’t about “good” movies. Transformers is at least competent in every department, but when it comes to visual effects, this film is retardedly amazing. The robots move more realistically than the apes in Rise, and they seamlessly interact with the physical environment. The effects are blended perfectly.

Further, the film breaks ground in processing power and what’s possible on the screen. Each of the Transformers is made up of hundreds, if not tens of thousands, of pieces that are animated. There was a time when just putting one of those guys on screen was impossible, yet now a battle can rage with dozens of Transformers fighting dozens of flying vehicles while buildings collapse in the background. This just isn’t about the robots, it’s about the entire digital landscape collapsing around them. Dark of the Moon was fucking robbed.

What’s Wrong With the Oscars Part 3

Ho ho ho, man, this is already too long to delve into what’s really wrong with the Academy Awards; we’ll save that for next year, but I do want to throw out a few thoughts.

Filmmaking has changed a lot throughout the years. We can tell stories today that were never possible before though the evolving technology. Scripts, directors, and actors will always be important and the prime movers of films, but the world around them, the tools available to them, have become such a huge part of the movies that we must recognize them and the stories they create.

This means the Academy must recognize films outside of the typical dramatic films they currently reward. Movies like Alien, and The Thing should be recognized as best pictures, not just for effects or the occasional technical award. Monsters should be welcomed and celebrated. Alien should have been a Best Picture nominee, not just best effects (which it rightly won). I would love to live in a world where a film like Halloween or The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly are films that have a shot at best picture. Nothing about being entertaining, or scary, or exploitative to some degree says that a movie can’t be fantastic and deserving of praise.

Films like Transformers shouldn’t be shunned even if they do target the lowest common denominator. Great films are great films. Great effects are great effects. Realize what the award is truly for and give it out accordingly.

Create new award categories too! Make-Up can be for realistic human make-up and you can create a Fantasy Vision award or something. So many films these days have out-of-this world elements that should be rewarded. In this day and age, the game of stunts has gone from daring men doing dangerous things to an elaborate technical achievement (that still features daring men doing dangerous things).

If you want to spice up the Academy Awards, break the image of it being just about dramatic films. Throw in some places for a monster movie to take home an award. Nominate a scary ass picture for something. Bring in more science fiction. Add a stunt team category. The Academy Awards should be about celebrating everything in movies, not just one facet of the film world that is rapidly shrinking.

From wrong winners to ignored films and missing categories, I can’t remember a year the Academy Awards didn’t send me past my boiling point.

And the Award for Best Film School Rejects Column Goes To….

Why Watch? Good old Chris Gore posted this micro-short up on twitter a while back, and it hit home (probably because of an unexplained fear of public restrooms). In it, a young pair of schoolgirl legs is attacked viciously by a monster who’s called Inky for a reason.

It’s little more than a showcase of an interesting practical effect, but it works in a twisted way, and it’s absurdly hilarious for a split second. Or maybe that’s just the fear talking again. It’s outrageous and over-the-top without really showing a single thing. Since it’s this short, it only gets to throw one punch, but it throws it hard.

What will it cost? Only 1 minute.

Skip Work. You’ve Got Time For More Short Films.

Let’s be honest here, the first time we all heard about Adam Sandler’s cross-dressing comedy, Jack & Jill, it was already clear that it was going to be an epically awful abomination that would inevitably get the attention of the yearly awards for worst in film, the Razzies. And get their attention it did. Upon today’s announcement of the nominees for the 32nd Annual Razzie Awards, Adam Sandler has earned the distinction of being the most nominated performer of all time, receiving 11 nominations for his work in not only Jack & Jill, but also Just Go With It and Bucky Larson. Also, as a whole, Sandler’s Happy Madison Productions has scored a whopping 19 nominations overall for the three aforementioned films.

While these numbers are staggering, especially since The Razzies only give out ten awards every year, they should probably come as no surprise. It’s hard to understate just how bad all of the work that Sandler has done this year is, how lazy and pandering every film that has his name on it ends up coming off, and how shamelessly self-aware Sandler seems to be about the awful choices he makes, all while gleefully counting his stacks of money. Some may say that it’s going too far to nominate the man both in the Worst Actor and Worst Actress category for Jack & Jill, seeing as he’s not really an actress, but not me. I say he deserves it. His ridiculous portrayal of a woman was just that bad.

Other big losers of the night include New Year’s Eve, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, and Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part I, all of which garnered Worst Picture nods as well as myriad nominations in other categories. Though Sandler is clearly the darling of the day, special recognition should be given to these films all, as they were truly, truly painful film-going experiences that probably took weeks off of my life. A full list of all the nominees can, of course, be seen on the official Razzies site.

Fresh off their night of acting nominations for Moneyball, Jonah Hill and Brad Pitt are already planning on working together on another project. Not so much as co-stars though, this time around, Pitt will just be producing while Hill sidles up next to James Franco for the on-camera work. The project, which will be directed by Rupert Goold, is an adaptation of New York Times reporter Michael Finkel’s memoir “True Story.”

Finkel’s story is a true life tale almost too strange to believe. It starts in 2002, when a man named Christian Longo, who was on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted list for the murders of his entire family, was captured in Mexico. What does this have to do with Michael Finkel, you ask? Well, it turns out that the entire time Longo was on the run, he was posing as Michael Finkel of the New York Times. And, to make matters more complicated, after his capture the only journalist he was willing to talk to about his arrest was…the real Michael Finkel from the New York Times.

That’s not it as far as complications in this story go either. It turns out the Times couldn’t just send Finkel out for an interview, because before this whole crazy tale got started they had just fired the writer for falsifying parts of an investigative article. Regardless, the two liars ended up getting together for a bunch of phone calls, letter writings, and jailhouse visits, and eventually it all snowballed into a crusade by Longo to prove his innocence. Whether or not that happens would be telling too much, but True Story promises that, by its end, it will reveal all of the details about what really happened to Longo’s family.

Hill will be playing the reporter, Finkel, and Franco the accused murder, Longo, which sounds more heavy to me than I would imagine a collaboration between these two guys should. I don’t know why that is, though, because they’ve done plenty of dramatic material on their own, so it shouldn’t be weird that they would work on serious stuff together. Hopefully they knock this one out of the park and shatter all of the preconceived notions I have about them. Or, if not, we should all make sure to shame them back to playing stupid stoners. [Deadline Sunnyvale]

Ever since French actress Lea Seydoux dropped my jaw playing back-to-back roles in Midnight in Paris and Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, I’ve vowed to follow her career very closely. You see, it’s not stalking, because I write about movie news. The first news about Seydoux’s career that perked up my ears was word that she was going to be starring in a new telling of the Beauty and the Beast story opposite acting powerhouse Vincent Cassel which, to that point, I thought was about the best news ever. But now there’s a new development in the lovely young lady’s career that just might rival it.

According to Variety, Seydoux is set to star in a film called Blue Is a Hot Color, from Tunisian director Abdellatif Kechiche. It’s set to be a relatively low budget adaptation of a graphic novel by Julie Maroh that tells the story of a girl who, quite unexpectedly, falls in love with another woman and then has to face the judgment of her friends and loved ones. This not only sounds like a story that’s ripe with both dramatic and comedic potential, but it also sounds like a movie that will be full of moments that I’ll have no problem shamelessly ogling. If any of my other favorite, young, French actresses get cast as the love interest, then I just might keel over from excitement.

Will this be a movie that those of us in the U.S. will be able to see though? I have high hopes. Kechiche is a director whose past works, including films like Black Venus and The Secret of the Grain, have been tearing up Venice and winning all sort of Caesars, so adding his rising star overseas and Seydoux’s now-blossoming career in the States could lead to some sort of distribution deal. A company called Wild Bunch will be handling the French distribution and selling of overseas rights, so consider this my plea for the powers that be in Hollywood to get these guys on the horn right away. Come on fellas, I need this! 

Act of Valor didn’t prove star power is everything when it comes to box office weekends – a good gimmick and some snazzy marketing will do the trick every time. Its $24.4m was slightly above our own prediction last week, and, as expected, the film debuted in the #1 spot ahead of three, opening contenders. Of those, Tyler Perry’s latest was the only film to come within $10m of Act of Valor‘s numbers. The other two hardly even registered.

But the film of the hour is one about Navy SEALs portrayed by actual Navy SEALs. Audiences were led to believe the action in Act of Valor would be more lifelike, more thrilling, if the people firing the machine guns and swimming around submarines actually did that day-to-day. Whether that’s true is moot. The commercials sold that very prospect and, this weekend, moviegoers ate it up without seasoning.

Act of Valor‘s opening is the second biggest for Relativity. Their Greek fantasy epic Immortals hold onto the biggest debut for the new studio with $32.2m. That film ended its run with $83.5m domestic, another $134.1m in foreign markets. Act of Valor won’t have the longevity to crack either of those numbers. It’ll be lucky to match those of Relativity’s second highest earner, Limitless, which brought in $79.2m domestic and $82.6m foreign. Films about modern, American warfare aren’t the biggest blockbusters when it comes to foreign ticket sales. Without that star power we’ve talked about, Act of Valor has nothing in its favor to help boost its second and third weekend takes or even secure a large turnout in markets outside the US.

Good Deeds, Tyler Perry’s latest, isn’t the lowest debut the director has had. 2007′s Daddy’s Little Girls and its $11.2m opening weekend keeps hold of that title. But the numbers of Good Deeds aren’t up to snuff for Perry, who has more $20+m opening weekend films than not. Still, Perry isn’t a director who makes $100m blockbusters. Even if it doesn’t match up to his other films, Good Deeds is sure to find itself in the black sooner rather than later. You can rest assured Perry’s days of making movies are long from over. You can rest even more assured knowing plans to bring Madea back to the screen have been considered.

Wanderlust and Gone were the poor souls who barely even made the needle move this weekend. Wanderlust is the bigger surprise of the two with Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston seeing their lowest debuts to date. It didn’t help matters that Universal only put them up on 2000 screens. The studio’s Safe House continues to bring in a steady stream of cash, though, so that may have been the wiser of the two options.

Summit has nary an excuse for Gone, a film that seems to have served no one this weekend. It’s getting some of the worst reviews of the year so far – One For the Money remains at 2% over at Rotten Tomatoes, while Gone is boasting a 12% fresh rating – and now it’s not even proving itself as a good investment. Those 2186 screens Gone opened in will be open for whoever wants to step into them this coming weekend. The studio now turns to The Cold Light of Day to bring them out of the slump tankers like Man on the Ledge and Gone put them in.

Some Oscar contenders saw their box office increase this Academy Award weekend. The Artist, A Separation, My Week With Marilyn, Midnight in Paris, In Darkness, Bullhead, Chico & Rita, and The Help are all Oscar nominated films that saw an increase in both theater counts and weekend box office take. It’s telling that The Descendants, a front-runner for Best Picture and Best Actor, dropped out of 354 theaters and had its box office drop 27.3%. Fox Searchlight may have gotten early word on Sunday night’s winners.

Here’s how the weekend broke down:

1. Act of Valor – $24.4m NEW
2. Tyler Perry’s Good Deeds – $15.5m NEW
3. Journey 2: The Mysterious Island – $13.3m (-32.5%) $76.6 total
4. Safe House – $10.9m (-53.8%) $98.6m total
5. The Vow – $9.9m (-57%) $102.9m total
6. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance – $9m (-59.3%) $38m total
7. This Means War – $8.4m (-51.6%) $33.4m total
8. Wanderlust – $6.5m NEW
9. Gone – $4.7m NEW
10. The Secret World of Arrietty – $4.3m (-32.5%) $14.5m total

$106.9m is actually a good number for this time of year. You have to go back to 2004 to find a time where the last weekend in February grossed higher. At that time, The Passion of the Christ had just unleashed itself on the world with $83.8m, so it was an anomalous weekend that year, anyway. Even with Tyler Perry’s ostensible steam loss and Wanderlust and Gone offering nothing, the films this weekend did a commendable job keeping the overall box office well above water. Much of that is thanks to films like Journey 2, Safe House, and The Vow continuing to pull decent numbers here in their third weekend out together.

Those three might have to hold on strong for another weekend coming up. The Lorax and Project X are the only big opening on Friday. While The Lorax could pull some big, animated feature numbers, it won’t be a record-breaker. Project X, on the other hand, is a wild card. It could drop in big, or it could tank hard.

We’ll be back later in the week to see how the weekend is shaping up.

What is Movie News After Dark? It’s a nightly movie news column that’s coming off of a really great weekend. Live-blogging the Oscars with no pants on is the best decision it has made in a long time. Well, since last February, at the very least.

Because last week was such a serious week — what with the Oscars and all — we begin this week with abject silliness and two gritty dudes Baking Bread. This would make an excellent spin-off of Breaking Bad, but only if the bread was baked with some sort of intoxicant that allowed Jesse and Walter to dive deep into the dangerous world of narcotic baked goods. Quick, someone fuel up the RV and the Easy Bake Oven!

Speaking of serious Oscar shit, Mashable runs down 14 memes and gifs from Oscar night 2012, including Robert Downey Jr. doing what can only be described as Tebowing (this is a football thing, for our less-inclined readers) before taking the stage. Also, everything Melissa McCarthy is funny.

Peter over at /Film made a great catch on the recently leaked set photos from Star Trek 2. There’s not only a shot in which Zach Quinto’s Spock pinches the neck of Benedict Cumberbatch, it will also be shot in IMAX. How much of Star Trek 2 will be shot in IMAX is yet to be said, but that’s cool, either way.

Hero Complex has a preview of Marvel’s John Carter comic book for your inspection. If it’s anything like the movie version of John Carter, it will be “Full of Action.” At least that’s what the commercial during last night’s Oscar broadcast told me. The quote came from one of the must trusted names in the industry, so it has to be true.

Fans of Waiting to Exhale are about to be devastated. It is one of almost 1,000 movies that will disappear from Netflix now that Starz is leaving the service. Which begs the question: if you’re such a big fan of Waiting to Exhale, why don’t you own it on DVD?

“Truthfully, none of us, the guys at SPC included, wanted to change the title from the original. But once we knew we were going to expand the film into a sequel – possibly a trilogy it opened our eyes up to maybe the need for an all encompassing title that could work for all three films.” That’s The Raid director Gareth Evans talking about the title change on his movie, which will now be known as The Raid: Redemption. There was also some legal issues, as he explains in his recent blog post. In related news, here’s a beautiful poster for The Raid: Who Cares What It’s Called It’s Going to Be Awesome!

/Film has a fun gallery of rejected Star Wars merchandising ideas.

Garth Franklin at Dark Horizons, a veteran film blogger, gentleman and scholar, is a little late to the party with his Best Films of 2011 list, but he beat the Oscars by a few hours. And as long as you beat The Academy to the punch and you include Drive on your list, you’re good in my book.

According to showrunner Kurt Sutter’s Twitter feed, a Sons of Anarchy video game may be in the works. Oh how I long to bring my less than notable gaming skills to the streets of Charming. First thing I’d do: smash Clay’s stupid face in.

Pajiba has a list of the 10 lowest grossing Best Picture winners of all-time, with results adjusted for inflation. Their findings show that yes, The Hurt Locker is still the low man on the list, with The Artist coming in a close second. The Hurt Locker‘s take is the only one that makes me sad, however.

In honor of the upcoming documentary Corman’s World and pretty much everything he’s done to date, Cracked has a profile on Roger Corman called 6 Ways the Creator of Sharktopus Invented Modern Cinema. I did not realize that Martin Scorsese was once Corman’s editor. Nice.

A new poster for the upcoming fourth season of Mad Men has been revealed. As The AV Club points out, it’s time to begin overanalyzing Mad Men‘s marketing materials. Because that’s what the internet does best. That and cat videos.

Speaking of amazing TV shows, here’s the season two trailer for Game of Thrones. It’s potentially spoilery for those who have not yet seen season one all the way through, so consider yourself warned. For everyone else, it may cause joyous spasms. You’ve also been warned.

We close tonight with a trailer for every Academy Award winning movie ever.

Continue Reading Movie News After Dark…

According to Variety, the John Francis Daley and Jonathan M. Goldstein writing team whose been crafting the words behind a remake of National Lampoon’s Vacation are now in talks to direct the film. It would be the first feature directing job for both, even though no amount of movies can make Daley not the guy from Freak and Geeks.

It’s being produced by David Dobkin over at New Line, and at the very least involves the high concept of good old Rusty Griswold takes his loving family out on the road. Who knows what adventures they’ll get into from there.

So why pick two newcomers to the directing game? Because they have a strong short film resume. Their latest is Audio Tour which features Will Forte as a man who leaves a museum with his tour guiding headphones still on and learns way too much about the world around him. Check it out for yourself:

Despite heavy popular and critical love toward The Blind Side, director John Lee Hancock has been cautious to start a new project. He’s signed on for several, including a Denzel Washington-starring uplift-fest called American Can, but he’s been too busy sharing his insights and tips on the festival circuit to get behind the camera. He also typically takes a few years between projects, so it isn’t surprising.

However, it’ll be a surprise to see which of his potential films ends up becoming more than kinetic energy, especially now that he’s added another. Deadline Debenhams is reporting that the American popular auteur is close to signing on for Saving Mr. Banks, the script from Kelly Marcel which chronicles Walt Disney’s fruitful attempt to secure the rights for the P.L. Travers book that went on to become Mary Poppins.

Yes, Disney is going to make a movie about Disney. Hancock is a great choice here, especially with as saccharine as something like this could be. He’ll no doubt lend is unique ability to shovel down sweetness without causing diabetes if he gets the gig.

It’s been almost a decade since the first Johnny English movie tore up the box office internationally and fizzled on American soil. But with that international success, it was inevitable there would be a sequel. Though, the spy film genre has changed with the Bourne films and James Bond reboot redefining its style, as well as the spy spoof movies (including the first Johnny English and the entire Austin Powers franchise) a thing of the past.

That didn’t stop Rowan Atkinson from reprising his role as bumbling MI-7 agent Johnny English in the sequel Johnny English Reborn, which had similar success overseas and similar failure here in the U.S. Still, fans of Atkinson’s comedy should enjoy this new installment in the series. And for those who aren’t sure if they’ll enjoy it, try watching it with a martini, shaken, not stirred.

And now, to cover our butts… This game is only for people over the age of 21. Please drink responsibly, and never underestimate a bumbling spy.

TAKE A DRINK WHEN…

• Someone is killed
• There’s a flashback
• Someone gets hit in the balls
• Johnny English makes a major blunder

TAKE A DRINK WHEN YOU SEE…

• A Vortex key
• A location title
• A new spy gadget
• The Toshiba logo or type treatment

TAKE A DRINK WHEN SOMEONE SAYS…

• “Vortex”
• “English”
• “Pegasus”
• “Mozambique”

CHUG YOUR DRINK WHEN…

• Johnny English discovers the mole in Toshiba British Intelligence

Click here for more Drinking Games

Movie studios have been using testimonials to market their films for years. Most frequently, they rely on professional film critics to supply pull quotes for use in advertising. While some of these quotes are genuine, some are simply generated on demand by media hounds who just want to see his or her name on a movie poster or in a TV spot. In the industry, we disrespectfully refer to these folks as “quote whores.”

Quote whoring is big business to some, giving them attention from the studios with perks and junkets. Being in the inner circle of quote whores is kind of like being in the Hollywood Foreign Press Association. There’s lots of benefits and little responsibility.

However, there’s a disturbing recent trend in Hollywood that jeopardizes the institutionalized quote whore’s well being, and it comes in the form of social media.

When a glowing review of a film by Pete Hammond or Joe Nobody on a local NBC affiliate isn’t enough to convince the younger generation to flock to a movie, the studios are seeking their whores online.

The latest example of this is the slate of TV advertisements for the upcoming party film Project X, which is loaded with dozens of tweet excerpts from real Twitter uses. To be fair, these aren’t exactly the deepest thoughts about the movie: “OMG,” “LMAO,” “DOPE,” “WHOA,” “HUGE,” “SICK” and “EPIC.” But then again, Pete Hammond didn’t offer any more depth when he declared Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides the “perfect summer movie” only a few weeks before declaring Larry Crowne the “perfect summer comedy.”

Check out the Project X TV spot for yourself below. More examples are available on the Warner Bros. YouTube Channel.

Studios going directly to the audience for validation for their films is nothing new. We’ve seen tweets show up before in advertising, and back in 2008 before the Twitter explosion, online advertising for the film Never Back Down included pull quotes from users on the IMDb message boards.

Long before Twitter was even conceptualized, Hollywood was famous for interviewing theatergoers as they left movies to get the “man on the street” angle. In some ways, this type of direct-from-consumer opinion can be more valid than your notorious quote whore (which is why the quote whores’ names are always smaller than the quotes they give).

Accessing a Twitter following is actually a shrewd play by Warner Bros. to market Project X. After all, their own @ProjectX Twitter account has less than 1500 followers (which is about a third of what @JLosNipple currently has), while the combined followers for the users quoted in the above TV spot numbers about 10,000. And if you look at their Twitter accounts, these users are pimping out the ads like crazy.

So what might appear to be a desperate grab at attention from the young and tech savvy youth who still have no idea who Paul McCartney is, might just be the best marketing effort in recent years. I guess we’ll see if it worked when the box office numbers come in this weekend.

What do you think? A desperate grab or a brilliant marketing ploy?

When Austin’s very own homegrown distributor Drafthouse Films signed on to distribute the 30th anniversary re-release of Comin’ At Ya! in the United States, I really wasn’t sure what to think. I had heard that the screenings at Fantastic Fest 2011 went over like wildfire, but I suspected that those screenings were essentially just preaching to the choir. What would other audiences think?

Then I watched the fully restored Comin’ At Ya! and realized exactly what is so damn special about this film. Sure, Comin’ at Ya! is ridiculously gimmicky but that’s exactly what makes it so much fun. The first-ever 3D spaghetti-western, Comin’ at Ya! does precisely what the title promises. Rather than using 3D technology to add greater depth to the scenes — like most of the namby pamby 3D films released today — Comin’ at Ya! breaks out from the confines of the silver screen and attacks the audience with a relentless barrage of… well… everything but the kitchen sink. From the brilliantly conceived opening title sequence, it seems like there is always something jumping off of the screen and into your face. Watching Comin’ at Ya! is more like strolling around inside a wacky fun house (or a haunted house) than a traditional cinematic experience. It will rarely scare or thrill you (though the flaming arrows are pretty effective), but it never fails to conjure up laughs and cheers from the audience.

Upon its initial release in 1981, Comin’ At Ya! single-handedly ignited the resurgence of studio-produced 3D films. Thirty years later, Comin’ At Ya! is back again as the first fully restored classic 3D film utilizing state-of-the-art RealD 3D® technology. We chatted with actor-producer Tony Anthony on the eve of Drafthouse Films’ tactical Texas-wide release of Comin’ At Ya!.

What prompted you to restore and re-release Comin’ At Ya! now?

Comin’ At Ya! had the reputation of having the most natural and organic special effects of any 3D film ever made. It was about four years ago when my partner Tom Stern kept on me about doing this because Avatar was coming out and the whole world was talking about 3D again. I started getting calls from distributors and people kept asking me if Comin’ At Ya! could be restored using modern 3D technology, because they thought if we could do that the film would have a whole new life. So we went on this very long journey — it took us four years, if you could believe that?

It seems like it would be a long, tedious and labor intensive process.

Yeah, we re-edited, re-did all of the sound, scanned and animated all of the 3D effects, put it in Dolby 5.1, we did all kinds of things to bring it up to date. And I know one thing, Drafthouse Films — especially Tim League — will get the people to the theaters. Once the people get in there they are going to have a good time.

Speaking of good times… From what I have heard, the screenings of Comin’ At Ya! at Fantastic Fest 2011 were a blast.

It was a mad house with a big cocktail party going on outside. They turned away so many people that we added another screening. It was unbelievable, the reaction. Within a minute of the film starting people were clapping and carrying on like they were at a live rock concert. We had that exact same reaction at the Berlin Film Festival (2011). We had a full house. The audience was just carrying on and having a good time — and that’s the real point of this film. No pretension, you know?

I’m curious about how the deal for Drafthouse Films to distribute Comin’ At Ya! came to fruition?

Our foreign sales people were the first to talk to Tim [League] about Comin’ At Ya!. Then, after doing research on the Alamo Drafthouse, Drafthouse Films and Tim League, I knew that this was the right place for Comin’ At Ya!. You don’t open this film in thousands of theaters and spend $20 million on marketing and distribution. Comin’ At Ya! requires a new model, specifically for 3D distribution.

Tim and I had never met in person, but we developed a really good professional relationship on the phone. I was talking with a couple major studios at the time, but I had a feeling that with what Tim has done with his business, Drafthouse Films would be the perfect fit for us. And what Tim has done with Fantastic Fest — he is making a fantastic contribution to the world of cinema. Then, we got into negotiating and I have got to tell you — this guy, you have the next big thing that is going to happen in Hollywood with Tim. He is tremendous and his whole staff — I love them all. They have a terrific, tight group of young people who really have their thumb on what the market is doing and I am thrilled.

We are releasing Comin’ At Ya! the right way. When Tim and I talked, I said “Tim, this picture should stay in Texas and saturate Texas. My god, you have over 25 million people there and some of the biggest distributors.” Sure enough, as soon as they started booking the film, we broke into the Rave Cinemas and they are the sixth largest exhibitor in the United States. I don’t know if anyone has ever done anything like this before, but we are sure going to try!

I am very curious to hear your thoughts on the current explosion of 3D films — specifically on their approach to the 3D medium.

Here is the problem. They are very conscious about depth of field, and with the equipment you have today, you can have perfection with that. But that kind of 3D doesn’t deliver like Comin’ At Ya!, and we did that on purpose. Our approach was: If we are going to put the audience through this, let’s bring it home, let’s let them have a good time! Before Comin’ At Ya!, all of the 3D films only actually had a few 3D effects. We went against that. We wanted to give the audience a ride. Comin’ At Ya! — great title, huh?

Cinematic Things To Do in Austin This Week:

2/27 – Alamo South Lamar – Gearing up for the 12th annual Texas Film Hall of Fame Awards show on March 8 at ACL Live at The Moody Theater, Austin Film Society is screening films by this year’s honorees. This week is No Country For Old Men featuring Texas Film Hall of Fame Honoree Barry Corbin. (More info)

2/27 – Alamo Ritz – Everything Is Terrible! presents Doggiewoggiez! Poochiewoochiez!, which purports to be a remake of Alejandro Jodorowsky’s The Holy Mountain (1973) composed entirely out of dog-related found footage. Umm… I’m going to have to see this before I’ll actually believe it exists. (More Info)

2/29 – Alamo Village – Austin Film Society hosts a Best of the Fests screening of Better This World with the film’s two primary subjects — David McKay and Bradley Crowder — in attendance. (More info)

2/29 – Regal Metropolitan – Cine Las Americas hosts a sneak preview of 2012 Oscar nominee for Best Animated Feature Film, Chico & Rita. (More info)

3/3 - Veloway - Rolling Roadshow is screening Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure at the Veloway! To attend this screening, meet at the Alamo Slaughter Lane parking lot at 6pm. Tim League will lead the bike posse to the Veloway. (Note: No foot traffic is permitted to enter the Veloway, so you must be on wheels.) (More info)

Click here for more Austin Cinematic Limits

John Huston’s 1941 detective tale The Maltese Falcon gets credit for a lot of things. Not the least of which is the launching of both Huston’s career and the career of its star, Humphrey Bogart. It also gets credit for beginning the longstanding and successful onscreen pairing of Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet, and heck, more often than not it’s pointed to as the beginning of the entire film noir movement of the 40s. That’s a lot of acclaim for a pretty simple mystery story about a salty detective named Sam Spade trying to find the whereabouts of a statue shaped like a bird.

The late 70s and early 80s were a time when genre films were king. Not only were the titans of the industry, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, tearing up the box office with huge event franchises like Star Wars and Indiana Jones, but lots of other directors were getting in on the act as well. Joe Dante hit it big with horror/comedy Gremlins, Robert Zemeckis struck gold with sci-fi/comedy Back to the Future, and even directors like Walter Hill made their names doing exploitation stuff like The Warriors. But, despite having the schlocky grit of something like The Warriors and the goofy humor of something like Gremlins, Alex Cox’s 1984 film Repo Man remains a movie remembered only by those plugged into the pulse of cult film. It’s a trivia question, an obscure pick, and not a cherished childhood memory like all the others.

What do they have in common?

The Maltese Falcon and Repo Man are both films set in the underbelly of society. They’re not about the average Joe, they’re about the weird worlds of private eyes and repo men. Or, as Emilio Estevez’s character Otto puts it in Repo Man, “You never told me it was gonna be like this, man! Cops and robbers! Real live car chases!” They’re both films that are full of crime, double crosses, and greed. These are worlds where you’re always looking over your shoulder, always trying to protect what you have from getting taken away by someone else.

And they’re both films that concern themselves primarily with the possession of objects that take on almost mythic statuses. In The Maltese Falcon Sam Spade and the other characters are looking for the obscenely expensive statue that the film’s title is derived from, and in Repo Man Otto and his fellow scavengers are hunting down a ’64 Chevy Malibu that will supposedly fetch the guy who gets his hands on it $20,000. With big payoffs like these out there, it’s imperative that you keep your friends close, and your—no, scratch that—you have no friends.

Why is The Maltese Falcon overrated?

A lot of people love The Maltese Falcon because, when you break it down, it’s really just a movie about people talking about things that never really happen, yet it still entertains. I don’t get that. I don’t need to break it down to get to that conclusion, to me it’s very obvious, and consequently huge portions of this movie drag. There’s some good acting, particularly from Bogart and Lorre, and there are some good speeches, particularly when Spade is dealing with Mary Astor’s character toward the end, but the majority of this movie is just expository jibber jabber that Bogart, Lorre, and occasionally Greenstreet try to lift up with their Herculean strength.

I could take a lot of talking if the characters were complicated and they developed over the course of the film, but we don’t get any of that either. Spade is introduced to us as hard boiled and stubborn, and he stays that way to the bitter end. We don’t trust Astor’s character when we first meet her, and by the end of the movie… we really don’t trust her. There aren’t any revelations in this one, just a couple memorable lines and some decent acting.

Really, it seems to me that this movie is so well thought of more for what came after it than what it has to offer itself. This is one of the first films that introduced us to a callous protagonist, but there were better ones that came after. This is the movie that began Bogart’s run as a huge actor, but all of his best work came after (both of these points can be proven just by comparing his work as Sam Spade here to his work as Philip Marlowe later). And, over time, Bogart became a name synonymous with his pairings with leading ladies. You’ve got Bogart and Bacall, Bogart and both Hepburns; all great pairings, and they completely overshadow his work with Astor here. This may be the worst femme fatale Bogie ever worked with. He chews Astor up and spits her out in every scene, the big kiss they share is limp and comes after the trading of some really generic barbs. The Maltese Falcon may have been a launching pad for a whole host of great things, but when viewed on its own it’s kind of just a hokey, dated film where Bogart girl slaps people and karate chops guns out of their hands.

Why is Repo Man underpraised?

If you want to look at this one in relationship to The Maltese Falcon, instead of being a movie with a bit of good dialogue where nothing much happens, this is a movie with a bunch of good dialogue where all sorts of stuff happens. No, there isn’t anything in here on par with Bogart and Lorre chewing scenery, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t packed full of fun (and Harry Dean Stanton). This movie has gang fights, chases, radioactive cars, flying saucer time machines, and a smart-mouthed, earring wearing, spiky-haired Emilio Estevez as its protagonist. It’s got some great action scenes with explosive gunshot wounds that rival anything in any of the other squib-filled 80s greats. It’s got immortal lines like, “Ordinary fucking people,” as well as flirtatious exchanges that rival Han and Leia dialogue like,

“What about our relationship?”

“What?”

“Our relationship.”

“Fuck that.”

Repo Man has more to offer than just mouthy characters and action-packed exploitation though. There’s some insightful commentary on the human condition going on here too. Once the promise of the $20,000 starts revealing everyone’s true natures, all of the relationships get deepened. Characters who have relationships with Otto that you might have thought were important are revealed as being false, and others as flawed but real. And aside from being a look into how people respond to the corrupting influence of greed, this one also works as an insightful look into the frustrations of being young and confused. Otto is having a lot of trouble finding his place in the world. His girlfriend is a slut, he can’t find a job that allows him to be treated like a human as well as an employee, and his parents, the people who are supposed to be his guiding influence, are too zoned out in front of the TV to pay any attention to what’s happening to their son. Predictably, he turns to violence. Repo Man tackles the ennui and aggression of youth just as effectively as any straight street crime drama I’ve ever seen.

The crafting here is nothing to be sneezed at either. The mystery of what’s in the trunk of the Chevy Malibu, what makes it so valuable and why it’s so dangerous, is built really well throughout. The pacing never drags, the tension around the acquisition of the car keeps building, and by the time the fate of the car is eventually revealed, what happens probably should be a big disappointment, but it actually delivers. This one’s got a bunch of tense moments that rival many horror films as well. I especially liked a scene where Otto tries to repossess a little old lady’s car by having tea with her, when suddenly her very large, very masculine family shows up. Cox leaves Estevez sitting there, surrounded, for a few beats longer than I would imagine most other filmmakers would, and it really amps up the awkwardness and tension of the situation. It’s a shame Cox never made any more movies.

Oh wait, he did? Oh.

Evening the odds.

If you need a short, concise exercise to let you know why I think The Maltese Falcon gets overrated and Repo Man gets underpraised, just listen to their soundtracks. It wouldn’t surprise me if some of the goofy incidental music in The Maltese Falcon’s score got recycled decades later as random walking around music in episodes of The Beverly Hillbillies. Meanwhile, Repo Man has an insanely good punk soundtrack with tracks from people like Iggy Pop, Black Flag, Circle Jerks, and Suicidal Tendencies. This isn’t even my kind of music and I’ve been listening to it nonstop over the last two days. It’s got to be considered one of the greats of its decade.

Continue the debate with more Over/Under

Editor’s Note: With Landon still celebrating Marcel Pagnol’s birthday, Cole was left to write this week’s entry. Please don’t riot.

Every so often, The History Channel will play The Planet of the Apes, and it freaks me out. In recent years, the station has lost the meaning of its name completely, but a few years ago, I genuinely worried that someone would stumble upon the movie in progress, see the logo at the bottom, and be convinced that there was a time in Earth’s history that we were ruled by simians. There’s no proof, but considering that people have tried to rob banks with permanent marker all over their faces as a “disguise,” it seems possible that at least one person would be confused by a non-fiction station about our past playing a fictional movie where Moses pounded his fist into the sand in horror.

Maybe there’s no real danger of that, but it still displays a certain power that movies have. They, like all stories, are how we share with each other. From person to person, from culture to culture, movies provide a certain shared sentience. A great story, told well, can transport and give insight into What It’s Like, especially in a world where photography and audio recording are relatively new technologies. The hitch is that there are still limitations to the art. The camera always lies, so even as we grasp toward understanding, it’s easy to be misled when it comes to experiences we have no personal knowledge of.

For millions, war falls under that category, and it’s a massively popular focus of film. So, even with as dauntingly large a topic as this, why not explore the battles of the past, the present, and a legitimate war of the future through a camera lens?

The Past or What’s so Civil About War Anyway?

Yesterday, the world lost a hell of a historian and teacher. C.W. Webb was a human library of Civil War knowledge. He was also my grandfather. Every Christmas, he and my grandmother (who we called “Ne” because I couldn’t say “Granny” as a small child) would visit our home in South Texas – a time which consisted mostly of him sitting and explaining the origins of a Union uniform button. Here’s the thing: the guy could make buttons riveting. He was an ace storyteller that filled your mind with a battleground hallowed by the men, now dead, who struggled there. With the antique farming tools hung dangerously on the living room walls and a grandfather who stopped by yearly to expound on the War Between the States, I lived as much in 1862 as a kid in 1990 should.

Last night, my wife and I watched The General in his honor. Now, Buster Keaton‘s masterpiece of physical comedy is not at all meant to be a war film, but it deals directly with a real event that took place – The Great Locomotive Chase – and focuses on the idea of being a soldier. Keaton’s character, Johnny Gray, is rejected from the Southern Army and told by his one true love that he shouldn’t talk to her until he’s in uniform because without it, he’s not a brave enough man for her. A year later, when his train is stolen with her on it, he chases it into enemy territory in search of a Hollywood ending.

It’s a great example of a movie that takes its idea, location, costuming and plot from a real war event but is completely divorced from the reality of the conflict. Perhaps that’s one reason that it successfully makes a Confederate the undisputed hero of the whole affair (it’s still slightly jarring to see Johnny Gray boldly raise the Confederate Battle Flag in triumph even as it’s used for a sight gag). Of course, it’s important to remember that the movie hit theaters 62 years after The Civil War and The Great Locomotive Chase actually happened, meaning that many of the people who saw it had fathers that had fought in the war. That makes it the comedy equivalent of World War II movies that hit in the late 90s. There’s a connection there, but it’s at least one degree removed, and that’s a huge cognitive distance. Today, we’re at least two more degrees removed and knowing What It Was Like to Fight in the Civil War is still as impossible to know as What It’s Like To Be A Bat.

The effect is a temporal game of Telephone where authenticity might be possible, but it’s impossible to confirm. While Ken Burns can use history to create feeling in his documentary The Civil War, other filmmakers like those behind Glory use feeling to create a history. Even a great filmmaker who utilizes eye witness accounts and journal entries from the time to craft something new is still an interpreter telling his or her own story with someone else’s parchment. Unlike cultural or foreign films, there are no representatives from the past to nod their heads and proclaim that a film accurately reflects their experiences, so the game of Telephone leaves us romanticized and still grasping forever for truth (even as Keaton lunges for another piece of firewood to power his engine).

The Present or You’ll Know When You’re In It

In 2008, a Pew Research Poll found that awareness of Iraq fatalities had dropped from 54% to 28% in 6 months. It’s sort of shocking that it was in the mid-50s to begin with, as we’re living disconnected from the wars (now war) in which we’re currently engaged. This is not new or surprising information, but it’s sort of fascinating to think about it in the context of:

• A movie featuring real Navy SEALs winning the box office this weekend (echoing the popularity of the Navy SEALs following the real-world killing of Osama Bin Laden)
• A war movie from 2008 winning 6 Oscars (despite being the lowest grossing Best Picture winner of all time)

Speaking of the latter, The Hurt Locker‘s advertising even played off of its experiential quality (even if the movie itself was fast and loose with reality). “You’ll know when you’re in it,” was plastered all over posters and television commercials, but that doesn’t mean the film did anything to let audiences know what it’s like to be in a war. If there’s one thing I’ve learned from being married to someone in the military, it’s that I still know exactly the same amount about what it’s like to be in the military. Watching the movie wasn’t enlightening either. And how could it be? It strives to create an environment of war with shots from the Hummer and a genuine skill at making the camera the fourth man in the unit, but it’s still a story about the Iraq War made by people who don’t know what it’s like to fight the Iraq War.

Which brings up the difficult question: can a filmmaker accurately display war fictionally? The simple answer is probably, “No,” but the complex answer might be, “No, but it does the best job possible displaying war in the way most people can handle seeing it.”

This was the lesson of the Berlin Film Festival where I saw Korean WWII epic Mai-wei and Yemen revolution documentary The Reluctant Revolutionary on the same day. It was striking that the war movie used Saving Private Ryan-style bombast to display gorgeous and impacting battle scenes that felt weighty in a percussive way, while the movie that technically wasn’t about war felt far more carnal and violent. An artist’s rendering of a man being run over by a tank just can’t compete with video of a real 10-year-old boy with real blood flowing too freely from where the real bullet ripped through his neck.

Perhaps that’s why it’s important to watch those kinds of documentaries, for the media to persist in sharing the story of the war, and why it’s also important for fictional movies to continue the romanticism that we can process without going insane.

The Future or The Things That Separate Us

As fun as it would be to dissect the brilliance of a future war movie like Starship Troopers, it’s more intriguing to consider a movie that sits at the center of a possible future war. A Separation, the first Iranian film to win a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar, is celebrating this week with national pride and increased audience numbers as people around the world (including especially Israel) head to see it.

In his acceptance speech, writer/director Asghar Farhadi made a plea for a broader view of Iran:

“At this time, many Iranians all over the world are watching us, and I imagine them to be very happy. At the time when talk of war, intimidation and aggression is exchanged between politicians, the name of their country, Iran, is spoken here through her glorious culture, a rich and ancient culture that has been hidden under the heavy dust of politics. . . I proudly offer this award to the people of my country, the people who respect all cultures and civilizations and despise hostility and resentment.”

Completely missing the point (or chafed that Farhadi dared to wear a decadent, Western-style tie on international television), the Iranian Film Czar, Javad Shamghdari, considered the win a triumph over Zionism (since the film was up against the Israeli film Footnote) and said, “American judgment bowed for Iranian culture.”

This is a movie from a country that current American Presidential contenders are suggesting we bomb. Or suggesting we help Israel to bomb. Right now our President is wrestling with the specter of both intervention in Syria and with an Iranian bomb which is seen as abjectly unacceptable by an ally in the region. There is, at the very least, a possibility that our country will be drawn into more military action in the Middle East.

Yet even while they’ve jailed their most prominent filmmaker, Iran has a movie representative using his well-earned time on the international stage to point out that the Iran that we know, is not the Iran that he knows. That the regime is not the people. That the stories we’ve been told that shape our perception are incomplete.

The Lying Camera

Michael Haneke was right. Film is 24 lies per second at the service of truth, or at the service of the attempt to find the truth. What he doesn’t mention is whether the camera is successful at finding that truth or not, and when it comes to war – or other experiences that are alien to the average person – it’s difficult to determine where or how that truth can be found.

It’s difficult for the medium to handle. For example, The General‘s look was actually inspired by the raw war photography of Matthew Brady – a movie modeled after photography which represented in print what actually happened. Not exactly a copy of a copy, but far from the real thing living and breathing through the screen. This is the inherent flaw in filmmaking, as noble as its intentions may be.

Still, it’s comforting to see that members of Iranians middle class are praising A Separation specifically for how accurately it depicts their lives. After years of playing stereotypes or nausea-inducing jingoistic elements heralded by their state media, it must be refreshing.

Can that accuracy be applied to war? Maybe there’s hope. Now the next question is: should it?

Hopefully our future ape overlords can answer that. After all, history repeats itself.

More Culture Warrior at 24 frames per second