Reckless Review: LOW AND CLEAR (2012)

Early in the 2012 documentary Low and Clear, one of the two main characters, J.T. Van Zandt, remarks, “the biggest mistake about fishing is that it’s about catching fish.” It would have been easy for the filmmakers to make this mistake themselves…fortunately they do not. Though it’s ostensibly about a fly fishing trip taken by J.T. and his friend Alex “Xenie” Hall, Low and Clear doesn’t really have much to do with fly fishing. Its stunning visuals pull you into a quiet, leisurely-paced meditation on the nature of friendship…how do people become friends, can they stay friends as their lives change, and if so, how?

LOW & CLEAR Official Trailer from Finback Films on Vimeo.

J.T. and Xenie are almost completely different in personality and lifestyle. Fly fishing and love and respect for nature are the things they have in common, and they even differ in their approaches to that. Short-tempered Xenie lives to fish and arranges his life around it, while mellow J.T. has a more balanced life, with a fiancée, a job and a house. They met when J.T. was working in a fly fishing store and Xenie was the local legend. Their relationship has developed from teacher-student to one of mutual respect and fierce competition. They both at times interpret the other’s choices as a judgement on their own, and though they are important influences on each other, J.T. describes their relationship now as “combative.”

This dynamic comes to the fore on their trip. As J.T. also stated early on, when people are fishing, “personalities come out and you can’t hide it.” Xenie sticks to his tried-and-true methods and routine, obsessively photographing every fish he catches, while J.T. has decided to use the time to learn some new techniques and isn’t getting even a nibble. Xenie gloats and tries to give advice as J.T. becomes more and more frustrated yet refuses to budge. It’s clear that, like any other friends who’ve drifted apart, they’ve become separated in a million different little ways.

There’s no fighting, gunplay, special effects, or explosions. No one gets marooned in the Canadian wilderness. It’s just two guys talking about themselves and each other, and gorgeous photography by the directors Kahlil Hudson and Tyler Hughen. The Gulf Coast of Texas (J.T.’s home), Colorado (Xenie’s territory), and British Columbia (where they take their trip) never looked better. The film’s pace is slower than audiences are used to, but if you’re patient, you’ll get some food for thought on friendship and the meaning of life, and a reminder of the breathtaking beauty of the natural world.

Low and Clear is playing in the metro Detroit area on Tuesday, July 30 as part of Gathr’s preview series at the Maple Theater. You can win free series tickets by emailing promotions@gathr.us with your name and subject line “CMB.” Good luck!

After the series, the films will be available for Gathr’s Theatrical-On-Demand service, which allows moviegoers to request screenings of indie films at their local theater. For more information, visit the Gathr site.

What is ‘Side by Side’ All About?

St Clair Cinema Club is showing Side by Side (2012) tomorrow night (Saturday, June 22). It’s a great look at the huge change happening in the movie industry right now, so if you like movies at all, and you’re in the Detroit area, we hope you’ll stop by Jam Handy (2900 East Grand Blvd.)

Cinema Detroit

In this short video, producer Keanu Reeves explains what the documentary SIDE BY SIDE is about. We’ll let Reeves do the talking, but the most important thing is that it’s for anyone who likes movies. SIDE BY SIDE has something for the casual moviegoer who’s curious about how movies – both film and digital – are made. And for the serious film geek, many of the best directors working today express their views on the change from film to digital – which is probably the biggest technical change in movie making since the change from silent movies to talkies.

So, come on out to JAM HANDY this Saturday at 8p.m. to see SIDE BY SIDE. We’ll have popcorn and beverages. See you then!

View original post

Reckless Review: MAN OF STEEL (2013)

This review contains spoilers. Just about every sentence is a spoiler!

I have to admit my expectations for Man of Steel were pretty high. And it did get pretty close. If I was giving out grades, it would get a B, maybe even a B+. But an over-reliance on explosions and effects for the IMAX/3D crowd unfortunately dilute the impact of an otherwise excellent movie.

The good:

Henry Cavill as Superman and Amy Adams as Lois Lane. As I expected, Cavill expertly conveys the humility, goodness, and dry wit that work for this character. His American accent is perfect (and pretty neutral for Kansas…but this guy has worked all over the continent apparently). Let’s face it, it doesn’t hurt that he’s as handsome and almost incredibly fit as a Superman should be. Adams is convincing as a determined reporter who just can’t leave well enough alone. She isn’t sassy, just strong-willed. I liked that the character didn’t immediately go to pieces at her first sight of Superman…that’s not right for a hardboiled reporter, which is what Lois should be. These two have an easy chemistry that I’d like to have seen more of (more on that later).

In addition, I’m glad the writers found a rather clever way out of the conceit of Lois not knowing who Superman is, one that both strengthens the Lois character and furthers the plot. The idea that Superman’s identity is a secret to Lois was never believable to me — she’s a brilliant reporter and she can’t figure it out right away? Plus it’s always annoyed me that she didn’t recognize him supposedly because of his glasses, probably because I wear glasses myself. I think I basically look the same with or without them!

The casting. I think it’s excellent, from Russell Crowe and Ayelet Zurer as Clark’s birth parents, to Diane Lane and Kevin Costner as his adoptive ones, from Richard Schiff as the requisite scientist, to Christopher Meloni and the ever-reliable Harry Lennix as a military colonel and general respectively, it just works. Michael Shannon is an appropriately detestable Zod and parallel to Kal-El/Clark. And why didn’t it occur to anyone to cast Laurence Fishburne as a cranky newspaper editor before this? I really liked his take on Perry White. In addition, care was taken with the younger versions of Clark so that the actors playing the character at different ages actually look plausibly alike.

The structure of Superman’s back story. While the circumstances surrounding his birth kick the film off, much of Clark’s childhood is recounted in a series of flashbacks, which are triggered by seemingly ordinary occurrences in his life. While a couple of the people I saw this with were annoyed by it, I found it to be naturalistic and quite easy to follow.

Spot-on depiction of the severe ADD resulting from Superman’s powers. Sitting in a classroom at school, young Clark is bombarded with hundreds of stimuli, well-represented on film. Although I don’t have it nearly as bad, if you’ve ever wondered, that’s basically what it’s like.

The religious references. Superman is like Moses — a foundling, outcast from “normal” society — and he’s also like Jesus — Kal-El/Clark Kent was uniquely conceived, he is 33, he excels at turning the other cheek, and he sacrifices himself to save humanity. Also Jor-El (Crowe) becomes a computer-driven “ghost,” who believes Clark will be received as “a god.” All of this taps into elementary archetypes and helps to overcome the fact that we don’t really see enough motivation for Superman to save the people of Earth. Other than his parents, the only person who treats Clark with any shred of decency is a kid whose life he saves. So why should he bother? That’s why.

The not so good:

This is a CANDID, people. How do you mess this up?

Cavill’s hair. I thought it was impossible to botch perfection but somehow they managed to goof up Henry’s look, at least part of the time. His hair style and color change from scene to scene and it became a distraction. This is very minor compared to…

Not enough interaction between the characters, and too much big multi-stage battle between Zod and Superman. The mass destruction of Metropolis goes on way too long, becoming tedious. This film has a handle on epic, particularly the flying scenes and big beautiful images, courtesy of director Zack Snyder and DP Amir Mokri. What interaction there is, worked well; I just wanted more of it. I wish there was a way to magically re-distribute some of the time spent on dismantling skyscrapers and put it into the characters’ relationships. It’s this unbalance that tips Man of Steel from excellent to pretty good.

P.S.

Ruth from Flix Chatter predicted correctly long ago that Henry Cavill would play Superman, but here’s 13 other clues…in a gallery no less 😉

Plus Henry Cavill’s career in pictures

31 Days of Oscar – 2013 Predictions and Musings

I am the first to admit that I have been too busy to actually see a good many of the 2013 nominees, but I still like predicting who will win and lamenting who should win but probably won’t. I haven’t read anyone else’s predictions but I do rely heavily on tweet buzz. I estimate a whopping .5% of the Academy are on Twitter, so we’ll see how that goes.

Best Picture — While I’ve seen less than half the nominees in this category, and I suspect that Moonrise Kingdom belongs in it, I’m really happy to see movies from so many different genres get the nod. We’ve got a detective story, a Western, a couple of fantasies, historical drama, a musical, and even a rom-com that shows that two dysfunctional people can have a functional relationship. Not that Silver Linings Playbook is going to win…it looks like that distinction will go to Argo, with which I’m completely happy.

The detective story? Zero Dark Thirty. That’s how I think of it, but sometimes I wonder if I saw the same movie as everyone else. So I’ve really stopped reading anything about it. Yes, it shows torture and that really is bad f*cking news…but it also shows that, whether despite the torture or because of it, terrorist attacks continued. [[Possible spoiler —> Lead agent Maya (Jessica Chastain) gets her initial lead by tricking a suspect. Maya’s boss’s boss George (Mark Strong) sure does get ticked that his team isn’t making more progress. He advocates for more torture and more violence, to no avail. In the end, what does work (in the film anyway) was a methodology worthy of an old episode of Columbo or Agatha Christie’s Miss Marple…cross-checking rediscovered records from Moroccan intelligence. That’s right…bin Laden was found as a result of detective work.]] If this film glorifies torture, then Trainspotting and Requiem for a Dream glorify drugs.

Maybe the reason ZDT is so controversial is because a woman is the lynchpin of the ultimately successful “greatest manhunt in history.” Maybe it’s because Jason Clarke makes Dan, Maya’s colleague who does a lot of torturing, funny and likable, and that makes people uncomfortable (could just be me). Whatever the reason, the controversy surrounding this film has overshadowed its actual merit. There seems to be more outcry against a fictional piece of entertainment than there was against a real-life U.S. policy. Which is sad because it takes a ton of talent to retell a now-familiar story that is more static than dynamic in such an absorbing and visually stunning way. Yet this didn’t even get a nomination for Cinematography.

Actor — Daniel Day Lewis.

Actress — This is between Jessica Chastain and Jennifer Lawrence, with Lawrence winning it. I guess there’s a small chance they’ll cancel each other out and someone else will take home the statuette, but I doubt it. This is Chastain’s second Oscar nomination and sometimes I wonder if she’ll ever win, because her acting seems so effortless and her looks are so timeless. Hopefully those two attributes provide her with a long career.

Supporting Actor — I’d like Christoph Waltz to win but I’m thinking it’s going to be Tommy Lee Jones.

Supporting Actress — Anne Hathaway. I don’t get why there’s so much negativity about her.

Director — Even though I’d rather talk about who isn’t in this category, I have the feeling this is a really close race. Or maybe it works the other way around…the race was so close that not all the worthy could be nominated. At any rate, I predict Steven Spielberg.

Foreign Language Film — I don’t really think there’s any doute about this one...Amour.

Animated Feature — Frankenweenie or Brave. Probably Brave.

Cinematography — I’d like Django Unchained or Skyfall (Bond DP Roger Deakins is a perennial nominee who has never won), but I think Life of Pi.

Costume Design — Les Misérables or Anna Karenina. I find this category fascinating, you might want to check out The Hollywood Reporter’s Costume Designers’ Roundtable if you haven’t already.

Original Screenplay — Probably not Zero Dark Thirty or Moonrise Kingdom. I’m thinking Django Unchained.

Adapted Screenplay — I’d like Argo, but I get the feeling it’ll be Lincoln.

Screenplay update: Guess what…both Zero Dark Thirty and Argo won Writers Guild of America awards last night (Feb. 17).

Original Song — “Skyfall” had better win.

Presenting Week 3 of the 31 Days of Oscar Blogathon

The winners, the losers, the snubs, the backstories, the gossip, the players and the games… it’s all about Oscar!

The 31 Days of Oscar blogathon, hosted by myself, Aurora of Once Upon A Screen, and Kellee of Outspoken and Freckled, continues. We’ve had two great weeks of submissions covering a wide variety of films from the silent era to this year’s nominees. So if you need more Oscar, you can also check out Week 1 and Week 2.

And now…these are the brilliant Week 3 posts, listed with Twitter handles (where available) so we can all find each other and converse.

Check out my completely random, probably totally wrong 2013 Oscar predictions, including a mini-review of Zero Dark Thirty.

“Glorious to look at, enchanting to listen to – a romance to remember…” My co-host Aurora (@CitizenScreen) reviews Midnight in Paris at Citizen Screenings.

Michael (@le0pard13) from It Rains… You Get Wet was a projectionist for a while, which I think eminently qualifies him to revise Oscar snubs from the 1970s and then make 1980s Oscar wrongs right as well.

Rich (@ratzo318) of Wide Screen World loves a good song and dance…for instance, octuple Oscar winner Cabaret.

The Nitrate Diva (@NitrateDiva) explores the connections between “spiritual sisters” and Oscar cinematography winners Black Narcissus and Apocalypse Now.

The Focused Filmographer (T, aka @FilmsWith_T) spotlights two criminally overlooked Oscar-worthy performances from 2012, one in The Perks of Being a Wallflower, the other in Les Misérables.

Paul (@LassoTheMovies) from Lasso The Movies discusses the similarities between 1940’s and 2012’s Oscar nominees, particularly the diversity of genres.

Pete (@FuriousCinema) from Furious Cinema reviews The Master, “another masterwork from visionary filmmaker Paul Thomas Anderson.”

The Gal Herself discusses “the first time Mr. Lincoln was in the house,” 1940 Best Actor race at One Gal’s Musings.

Angela (@MaterialGirl850) of The Hollywood Revue analyzes and assesses “Oscar’s Most Awkward Year,” 1928-1929.

Murtaza (@apotofvestiges) reviews The Master, “a multifaceted work of cinema that can be enjoyed at so many levels,” at A Potpourri of Vestiges.

Dawn at Noir and Chick Flicks explores why Blood and Sand (1941) won Best Cinematography.

Dan (@PGCooper) from PG Cooper’s Movie Reviews takes a look at 12 classic films that, despite being worthy of Best Picture and Best Director nods, received none at all.

Lê (@startspreading) at Crítica Retrô gives her take on Oscar and the surprising 1950s.

Joel (@joelrwilliams1) of Joel’s Classic Film Passion appraises three Oscar-winning or -nominated foreign films from the 1980s.

R.A. (@925screenings) at Silver Screenings briefs us on why Miriam Hopkins was perfect for the role of Becky Sharp.

Karen (@TheDarkPages) highlights 10 Oscar-Less Dames Their Oscar-Worthy Roles at Shadows and Satin.

Kimberly (@glamamor) at GlamAmor surveys Audrey Hepburn’s amazing, and non-nominated, wardrobe in Two for the Road.

Marlee (@MarleeWalters) of Spoilers bestows the First Annual Muse Awards to Ida Lupino, Gene Tierney, and Gloria Grahame.

reblog: The beauty of MELANCHOLIA

This weekend we’re showing MELANCHOLIA, a very strange and very beautiful film…if you’re in Detroit, you might want to check it out Sunday (2/17) at 3 p.m. at Ponyride, 1401 Vermont in Corktown 🙂

Cinema Detroit

We won’t lie, we’d never seen Lars von Trier’s Melancholia on a big screen before. While the director is understandably controversial, there’s no disputing that he made a beautiful film. We really want more people to see this movie, hopefully the screen caps below will help convince you to stop by Ponyride tomorrow (Sunday, February 16)) at 3 p.m.

Like Peter Greenaway with The Draughtsman’s Contract and Lech Majewski with The Mill and The Cross, among others, von Trier draws from painting for Melancholia‘s lighting and compositions. Just one example is John Everett Millais’ Ophelia,

For more on the look of Melancholia, check out this fascinating clip from the filmmakers, including cinematographer Manuel Alberto Claro:

View original post

31 Days of Oscar: Jack Black in BERNIE

Oscar snubs are pretty much a given. When the Academy made the number of Best Picture nominees variable, it virtually guaranteed them in the Best Director category, and it’s no secret that I think both Ben Affleck and Kathryn Bigelow deserved nods this year. Still, If you haven’t seen Richard Linklater’s Bernie, you probably had to read the title of this post a couple times. But yes, I do believe Jack Black deserved a Best Actor nomination for his performance in the title role.

The film is a genre-defying mix of reality and fiction based on the true story of Bernie Tiede. It blends documentary style interviews, scenes with only actors, and scenes where actors play off real townsfolk playing themselves. Tiede befriended and eventually murdered an elderly woman, Marjorie Nugent (Shirley MacLaine), in Carthage, Texas in the mid-1990s. The character Bernie is unlike any other I’ve seen Black play. To be fair, I’d only seen him in The Holiday, Be Kind Rewind and Year One, in which his characters were all sort of similar, funny, a bit wild, sometimes manic, and seemingly based on himself.

Bernie Tiede is a complete departure. He’s a popular small-town funeral director who favors gospel music, community theater, and the company of women 20 years older than himself. Black becomes Bernie, but his performance isn’t just an imitation of mannerisms and speech. The actor invests the character with enough heart so that, murderer or not, he’s likable. We can relate to Bernie and his apparently innocent desire to help improve the lives of the town’s residents.

First this clip, Black as Bernie:

And an interview with the real Bernie

So why wasn’t Black nominated for an Oscar, despite receiving Golden Globe and Independent Spirit nominations? Part of it is that the Golden Globes have separate comedy/musical categories for Best Picture, Actor and Actress, while comedies are notoriously unpopular with Academy voters. And, because the film didn’t receive a wide release, I think it’s a safe assumption that many Academy members, like many of the moviegoing public, completely missed it. Also, the story unfolds on such a small canvas that it reminded me of Jane Austen’s work, and her description of it as “the little bit (two inches wide) of ivory on which I work with so fine a brush.” Yet, also like Austen’s work, it manages to comment on class conflict, justice, and human nature. How easy for a film like this to get lost in the shuffle of special effects showcases and global-history dramas. Which is really a shame.

When I say playing Bernie Tiede is a departure for Jack Black, I really mean it.

PS: I’ve said before, Bernie is a character study, and boy oh boy, is it ever full of characters. Make sure you watch the credits to see who is acting and who are actual members of the town. I’ve included some clips below in the hope that they’ll convince you to give the film a try:

Matthew McConaughey as Danny Buck Davidson, district attorney in Carthage:

A Carthage resident’s guide to Texas:

Plus, sing along with Bernie on “Love Lifted Me” — this scene is our first sight of Black in the film:

This post is part of the 31 Days of Oscar blogathon.

Reckless Review: BERNIE

Recently tagged “most underappreciated film of 2012” by the Los Angeles Times, Bernie (2012) is based on the true story of Bernie Tiede (Jack Black), who befriended and eventually murdered an elderly woman, Marjorie Nugent (Shirley MacLaine), in Carthage, Texas.

In real life, Tiede befriended Nugent in 1990, shot her in 1996, was convicted in 1998, and is serving a life sentence. The case deeply divided the townspeople of Carthage. Danny Buck Davidson, the district attorney played by Matthew McConaughey in the film, told a local paper in 1998, “This town is split up.” Nugent’s son, Dr. Ron Nugent, maintains that Tiede drove her family away and that her side of the story has never been told. On the other hand, there is a blog, Free Bernie Tiede, which allows Bernie to communicate with his supporters, and in August 2012, the Dallas Morning News reported that, after seeing the film, an Austin attorney has taken an interest in Tiede’s case.

But Bernie isn’t really about all that. It’s actually a character study, the kind Hollywood doesn’t really produce all that much any more, and, in this world of big-budget special effects showcases, something as narrow in scope and as perfectly executed as Bernie is a welcome refreshment.

bernie_marjorie-lowres — Marjorie Nugent (Shirley MacLaine) and Bernie Tiede (Jack Black) in happier times

In the film, Bernie is much beloved by all of Carthage for his affable personality and tireless involvement in many civic and church activities. A mortician by trade, it is his habit to check up on the town’s widows, and someone as unpleasant as Mrs. Nugent, recently bereaved, needs a friend. The two soon become inseparable, but Mrs. Nugent is also more and more possessive of and verbally abusive toward Bernie, who can’t deal with any kind of negativity or drama. One night he snaps and shoots her. He then hides her body and continues as if she’s still alive…just very very sick. Having been given power of attorney, Bernie also spends her money, but only to help other people.

When Marjorie’s body is found, the music on the movie’s soundtrack is the only real indication of sadness. Nobody, including her family, really missed her spiteful ways, only her money. No one in town can quite believe Bernie capable of murder, anyway; a few even hassle the district attorney to “leave poor Bernie alone.”

Reality and fiction meld in this genre-defying film. Bernie is a seamless mix of documentary-style interviews with actual Carthage townsfolk interspersed with re-enactments and scenes from Bernie’s point of view, which use actors. It’s pretty clear whose side director Richard Linklater is on, but the story and its implications are only part of this film’s pull. The casting is perfect. Black excels as Bernie, making the character relatable and the oddity of the plot believable. MacLaine makes the most of her smaller role, displaying a steely-eyed malice and hinting at the grief behind the jealousy. However, the citizens of Carthage steal the show — they are a charming, funny bunch whose loyalty to Bernie is as endearing as it is stubborn.

All about “stingers”

“Stingers,” aka “post-credit scenes,” are those awesome little clips that reward the patience of that intrepid moviegoer who, resisting his or her comrades’ rush to the parking lot or the restroom, remains seated for the entire credits of a motion picture. Just when this film fan thinks it’s all over…a little gem of a scene pops up, giving much satisfaction and perhaps a slight feeling of superiority.

The term “stinger” is also applied to extra scenes or bloopers shown during the credits, which are also a ton of unexpected fun, but to me, they’re not as gratifying as true post-credit scenes.

A stinger is the sign of filmmakers who really love movies. I can picture these people wanting to share that feeling of not wanting to leave the cinema. The stinger becomes an in-joke between the makers of a film and its fans, and may also complete the story or hint at further developments taking place after the time included in the movie.

Text advertising the next installment of a movie series (“James Bond will return in…”) had been around since From Russia With Love (1963), but according to Wikipedia, “[o]ne of the earliest appearances of a true stinger” was in The Muppet Movie (1979). The earliest movie stinger I can remember is Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, in which the main character, having demolished the fourth wall throughout the film, appears and says to the audience, “It’s over. Go home!”

Comedy and action-adventure seem to provide the majority of post-credit scenes, although some horror films have them. The Avengers cycle has delivered a few of my favorites.

The Avengers (2012) actually had two stingers, one involving The Other and Thanos, and this one:

Recently I ran across MediaStinger, a site which exhaustively catalogs scenes that run during and after the credits in movies and video games. Consult this site before going to the theatre and you’ll never miss another stinger. Details and spoilers are thoughtfully hidden behind a link. Comments are not hidden though, so don’t scroll down too far if you want to preserve the surprise.

The most recent post-credit scene I’ve seen (I don’t think this is a spoiler anymore) is the very fleeting one in Django Unchained. What is the first stinger you remember seeing, and what are some of your favorites?

31 Days of Oscar update

Time for an update on the 31 Days of Oscar blogathon (full rundown at the original post). We’re a little more than a couple of weeks out from the first deadline. Publish your post and email me the link by any one of the following dates: January 31, February 7, February 14, February 21 and February 28.

The nominations were announced on Jan. 10, providing as much fodder for blog posts as any other’s, maybe more. Right away, I was aware of what I consider to be one major snub: Ben Affleck for Argo, and now that I’ve seen Zero Dark Thirty, I think Kathryn Bigelow was snubbed as well. Of course, the format of the Best Picture nominations, where 5-10 movies are tapped, virtually guarantees that there will be snubs. Is the Academy crazy, or crazy like a fox? Sounds like an idea for a blog post, speaking of which here’s some topic prompts (new ones at the end of the list):

Is there a film, performance or art or technical work the non-nomination of which you feel is a crime? Tell us about it.
Sometimes the Oscar seems to hinder, not help, someone’s career, including but not limited to the “Best Supporting Actress Curse.” Discuss.
Special Achievement Awards and Board of Governors’ Honorary Oscars…do you dare go there? Who should have gotten a competitive Oscar, and/or who might win an honorary Oscar the future?
Spotlight on sound editing and sound mixing, or any other unfairly neglected award.
Your favorite/the most influential Best Costume winners/nominees/should-have-beens through the years, or just focus on one.
Short films are often given short shrift…throw some love on your favorite.
Cinematography and editing vs.directing…the auteur theory, etc. Discuss, using Oscar-winning examples.
The Oscars still create the most hoopla, but should we be paying more attention to other awards, such as the Golden Globes or (fill in the blank)?

NEW:

The Academy’s rules for selection of the Best Picture dictate that any film receiving 5 percent or more of first place votes is nominated, so that a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 10 are in the running each year. This year there are 9 nominees, but there are still only 5 Best Director nods. Discuss the implications and ramifications of this set-up.
Judi Dench famously won a Oscar for her 6 flawless minutes in Shakespeare in Love. If there was an Oscar for cameos, who would be nominated, and who would win?
It’s generally accepted that actors and directors, and possibly other filmmakers, may receive an Oscar for a previous year’s, or an entire career’s, work, sometimes referred to as a “cumulative Oscar.” Do you think this is legit or totally unfair? Discuss.
Academy…why so serious? Certain genres are overlooked every year, generally speaking comedy, adventure, and science fiction are rarely given nods. Is this due to the overall age of the Academy, or other factor(s)?
Final Oscar ballots aren’t due until the Tuesday before Oscar Sunday; this year that is Feb. 19. Any answer to this question is likely to be pure speculation but: Do the other awards influence voting?
As reported last year, the Academy is overwhelmingly white, male and over the age of 60. Only 2% of the Academy is under the age of 40. Discuss.

If you’d like to participate, leave me a comment or email me at paula.guthat[at]gmail.com. So far our Oscar bloggers, in addition to myself, Kellee at Outspoken & Freckled, and Aurora of Once Upon A Screen are…

Fernando – Committed to Celluloid
R. A. Kerr – Silver Screenings
Ruth – Flix Chatter
Lê – Critica Retro
Kevin aka “Jack Deth”
Paddy – Caftan Woman
Vanessa – Black & White All Over
Iba – I luv cinema
Le0pard13 – It Rains, You Get Wet
Joel – Joel’s Classic Film Passion
Lindsey – The Motion Pictures
The Gal herself – One Gals’ Musings
Paul – Lasso The Movies
Ivan – Thrilling Days of Yesteryear
Jessica – Comet Over Hollywood
Kay – Movie Star Makeover
The Lady Eve – The Lady Eve’s Reel Life
Kimberly – GlamAmor