As he does yearly, my movie-maven nephew Steven, with his usual hubris, has nominated last year’s movies for what he humbly calls the “Golden Steve” awards. As he says on his website “Truth at 24“:
Far and away the most coveted of motion picture accolades, Golden Steves are frequently described as the Oscars without the politics. Impervious to bribery, immune to ballyhoo, unswayed by sentiment and riddled with integrity, this committee of one might legitimately be termed “fair-mindedness incarnate.” Over 160 of the year’s most acclaimed features were screened prior to the compilation of this ballot. Check back tomorrow night for the winners. First, some caveats:
1) Owing to a lifelong suspicion of prime numbers, each category is comprised of six nominees, not five.
2) A film can be nominated in only one of the following categories: Best Animated Feature, Best Non-Fiction Film, Best Foreign Language Film. Placement is determined by the Board of Governors. Said film remains eligible in all other fields.
3) This list is in no way connected with the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences—a fact that should be apparent from its acumen. Please look elsewhere for Oscar analysis.
I’ll give just his “Best Picture” nominees; you can see the rest on his site. There are 12 categories, and the winner in each (chosen by the lad himself, of course) will be announced on the site tomorrow night.
Best Picture
Boyhood
The Dance of Reality
Goodbye to Language
Ida
Mr. Turner
Under the Skin
Steven has also announced his selection for the winners of the regular Oscars (to be announced Feb. 22), which I put in an earlier post. He has a superb track record of picking the winners, so we’ll check back in ten days to find out out how he did.
I think Steve got a little cute by splitting the actresses from Ida into the lead and supporting role – Agata Trzebuchowska and Agata Kulesza. It is a great film and both performances were outstanding. I guess Steve did not want to pick one over the other. I will. Agate Kulesza as the aunt (Wanda) had the more interesting and profound role.
The Los Angeles Film Critics Association named Kulesza best supporting actress, and many other critical bodies (Chicago, London, San Francisco) nominated her as such. I consider Wanda’s arc accessory to Ida’s, though in no way less compelling.
I should have prefaced my remarks with the fact that I speak Polish and have a good grasp of Polish history. The result is that I may have a different view of the movie than most viewers. SPOILER ALERT! I do not think that Ida’s parents and brother were killed ecause of anti-semitism. I think the most likely cause was fear (and cowardice). Helping Jews in Nazi-occupied Poland was a capital offense. The father had been protecting Ida’s family. The son panicked, killed them and hid the bodies. If they had been discovered, the Germans would have also have killed the Skiba family for harboring them. And turning Ida’s family over to the Germans would have had the same result. So he killed them and hid the bodies. Except Ida who could pass as gentile – but not her brother who was circumcised and had dark features.
Pawlikowski does not say when during the war they were killed. If it was before the Russians were nearing, then I think the reason I gave is right. If the Russians were approaching, then it might have been because he wanted their property.
The character played by Kulesza, Wanda Gruz, is based on a real person whom Pawlikowski actually met – Helena Wolinska-Brus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helena_Woli%C5%84ska-Brus
Wolinska-Brus prosecuted members of the Polish Resistance (Armia Krajowa) which was loyal to the London government-in-exile. Among them was Wladyslaw Bartoszewski – one of the founders of Zegota (the Council for Aid to Jews) – and one of the greatest human beings ever.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C5%82adys%C5%82aw_Bartoszewski
The move is set around 1960-62. De-Stalinization began in Poland in 1956 but the country was basically decrepit. You can get a good insight into the events of that era in Teresa Toranska’s “Them.”
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/26/books/books-of-the-times-719387.html
From my perspective, there is a lot more going on in this movie which I have barely touched on. More than the central story of Ida.
Makes me want to see it again.
I guess I should begin with Get off my lawn…
Saw Under the Skin at the Toronto International Film Festival in Sept 2013 and thought it was one of the worst movies I’d ever seen. We kept wanting to leave, but figured it must get better. Not… My bf agreed, despite the nude scenes with Scarlett Johanssen. Also thought that Ida was waaaaay over-rated. Nicely filmed, but not a whole lot to it. I thought that Boyhood was very good, especially Patricia Arquette’s acting, but maybe not as great as all the fuss. HowEVER, Mr. Turner is a fantastic piece of work. I like/love most of Mike Leigh’s films, but this was truly outstanding. It’s worth seeing in the cinema for the big screen beauty, but you might want to re-see it (as we plan to do) on DVD with subtitles because Turner’s grunting way of talking is not easy to grog.
That wasn’t a grunting way of talking. Most of the time he was just grunting. Marvellously expresive grunts, I thought.
When he actually used words, I found him easy enough to understand.
I also saw Under the Skin, and quite agree with you. Even after reading the wiki synopsis of the film, it still doesn’t make any sense to me. The only thing I could think of is that Scarlett lost a bet, with the wager being that she had to do a nude scene in her next movie, so she picked the one with the most confusing and ridiculous plot so that very few people would actually go see it. The movie just left question after unanswered question like: Who was the guy on the motorcycle? What is his connection?
I don’t “get” the adulation for Boyhood. I’m probably in a worldwide category of 3 people, but while I think the idea was an interesting one, I completely fail to appreciate the result.
Perhaps I should add a “get off my lawn” for good measure. 🙂
I am another of those 3. I don’t consider it a bad film, it just isn’t my cup of tea and there wasn’t anything special enough about it to overcome that.
What I mean is, some films are of a category that I generally don’t like or am indifferent to, but there is something stand out about them that causes me to like the film anyway. For example, comedy is a hard sell with me. I don’t usually bother watching new comedy films after years of being bored silly with most of the Adam Sandler, Ben Stiller and Will Ferrell type comedies, but I ended up seeing The Heat last year and I laughed my ass off. Melissa McCarthy just really hit my funnybone for some reason.
I have to agree. I never watch comedy because I just don’t find them funny. Ever. (But perhaps I’ll take a look at “The Heat”). The only comedy worth watching is the subtle comedy that sneaks into non-comedic films. “Fight Club” for instance.
I thought Boyhood was indeed the finest film released anywhere in 2014 (out of the 134 I’ve seen). I’m not sure what category you could be placing it in – it struck me as a unique film, and the unusual way of making it made it rewarding in strange ways I couldn’t have predicted. I felt I was actually living the previous twelve years, at high speed… or perhaps it was like watching a period film where they actually travelled back in time to get the period right.
But The Heat! You and I will never see eye to eye – I don’t watch one film in a hundred that’s that dreadful. Not only unfunny but one of those movies so painfully obnoxious it makes me never want to watch another American comedy so long as I live.
You have certainly seen more films than I! I think Boyhood was a fine film. But it isn’t on my top ten of 2014 list. The Imitation Game is perhaps my favorite of the year. Though I admit to being biased towards the story and the acting of Benedict Cumberbatch.
I feel no urge to criticize you for not liking, or try to change your mind about, The Heat. I am perfectly comfortable with my sense of humor.
I thought Boyhood was fascinating and very interesting. Mut not a great movie going experience.
Mut=But
Mut – that would be a film about d*gs!
Not seen it but it surely deserves a prize for persistence & for the idea…?
Having a bunch of kids in a short period of time has put us way behind on our movie watching. The most recent film I have seen on DVD is The Best Exotic Mariglod Hotel. The last movie I saw in a theater was disney’s Frozen – twice! The last grownup movie I saw in a theater was The Big Year, the only film I know devoted to competitive bird watching, which the Google tells me was over three years ago.
Still, I have a pretty successful method for picking to whom the Oscar® goes (don’t call it “winning”!): whoever buys the most square inches of ad space in Variety during screening season. Congratulations, American Sniper!
Frozen??? Let it go…
True enough…kids put boundary conditions on everything…especially movies. It sometimes feels like living in jello. Although Frozen was pretty good. And I look forward to the second installment of Best Exotic Marigold Hotel.
I agree. The boundaries are matter of priorities, though: we do manage to see six or eight concerts per year, I go to a few conferences and wifey will have one or two getaways with her mom or girlfriends – it’s a fraction of the R&R we got pre-offspring, but more than many of my peers get and when you add those up we’re pushing $500 in babysitter hours per year alone. A movie night can cost well over $100 all. Plus, the energy it takes to plan and then stay awake during the film (which mostly me + darkened room = zzzzzzzzz pretty much).
And since Time is the thing Out Of which I am a Man, it had better be one f**king great movie is the thing!
As a filmmaker friend is wont to exclaim: “Be bold!“
In my view, any list that neglects to include Birdman is immediately rendered suspect.
I have only seen two of the Best Picture nominees – Boyhood and Ida. I now have four movies to add to my list of films to see. Leviathan (from Best Foreign Films) was already on my list – but I will be adding some films from Steve’s other categories as well.
In any year, there are only 20-25 mainstream Hollywood movies I want to see. I need to find 30 more. I am looking forward to two documentaries – Red Army and Life Itself.
“In any year, there are only 20-25 mainstream Hollywood movies I want to see.”
Even fewer for me.
I am obviously on the ball – only heard of the first of those!