Gone Girl Movie Review

Gone Girl Movie Review

by Brian Wezowicz

I'm going to keep this review short because it's been about two months since I've seen this movie and I don't even think it's in the theaters anymore.

I'm a huge fan of professional wrestling.  I've been hooked since I was in the third grade.  I mention this because I think there should be a championship belt for movie directors.  Yes, I'm aware that the Oscars happen every year, but the championship belt would be for a body of work, not just a single film.

I'm a huge fan of David Fincher.  I think The Social Network may be the best film of the 2000's, and I'm still bitter that we haven't seen a sequel to his brilliant adaptation of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.  I salivate at the mere mention of a future Fincher project.  So it was with great excitement that I went to see Gone Girl, Fincher's adaptation of the popular novel by Gillian Flynn.

It's the story of the search for the missing wife of Ben Affleck's character, who may or may not be sketchier than he seems.  He soon comes under the media microscope, because his story isn't completely believable.  Affleck is so believable in this role because he knows a thing or two about being under the media microscope from his time in the Bennifer days.  This was a great casting choice.  I can't go too deeply into the plot, because there is a pretty major reveal about halfway through the film, but if you've read the book, you know what that reveal is.  If not, definitely check this one out.

This film flows like clockwork.  Fincher has a real talent for delivering a top-notch thriller.  As the layers peel back, and the story goes deeper, we are delivered a thoroughly entertaining film.  It is edited perfectly, the score (again by frequent Fincher collaborator Trent Reznor) is eerie as hell, the directing is top notch, and all the perfomances are great.  However, I left the theater wanting a little more.  I knew I had just seen a great movie, but there was a sinking feeling in my stomach that I couldn't quite get over.  At first, I couldn't quite put my finger on the problem, but after having time to ponder, I have realized what is wrong with this movie: Everyone in this film is an asshole.  There isn't a single likable character in the entire film, and I think that it slightly takes away from the film.

I'm giving this movie 3 out of 4 stars.  I'm docking it one star for the asshole factor.  It's a good, but not great David Fincher movie.  It's not as strong as his last few outings, but you'll probably enjoy it.  

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1 Movie Review

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1 Movie Review

by Brian Wezowicz

There's a great scene in Mel Brooks' classic, Spaceballs, where Lonestar meets Yogurt.  After a brief introduction, Yogurt introduces Lonestar to the gift shop, where they've managed to put the movie on everything (Spaceballs: The Flamethrower!).  The scene served as both a satire on the commercialization of films and served as an eerily truthful prediction of things to come.

This is how I imagine the conversation between studio execs went the first time they mentioned splitting the final book in a popular series into two films.

Studio exec 1:  You know what would be better than one movie?

Studio exec 2:  No, what?

Studio exec 1:  TWO movies!

Studio exec 2:  OMG!  Let's do it for every movie series from here to eternity!!!

Then the two execs did a jumping high five.

What started as a great idea (Harry Potter, which fully deserved the dual movie treatment) has quickly blossomed to a shameless money grab.  From Twilight to The Avengers, every "final" movie is getting split in two.

Knowing that the story wouldn't end in this "final" chapter, I was still excited at the thought of going back to the rich world of Panem.  When we last left our heroine, Katniss Everdeen, she was being rescued from her second go-around in the Hunger Games by the leaders of the rebellion.  The twelve districts of Panem are in full scale mutiny against the capital, and Katniss is their symbol of freedom.  However, she does not accept her role in this rebellion.  She is reluctant to say the least.  It's not until she sees her destroyed home district (and the pile of bodies left by the Capital) that she agrees to become the Mockingjay, the one symbol that every district can rally to.

The Capital has their own symbol.  They have kidnapped Peeta, Katniss' love interest, and have forced him to film pro-Capital propaganda pieces.  There is a war coming, and the Capital is pulling out all the stops to stop it.  Katniss is heart broken at the sight of Peeta, and you can really feel her pain.  She believes that she is at fault for his distress, which only adds to her stress of being the Mockingjay.  All the acting in this film is top-notch.  Jennifer Lawrence keeps her hot streak going with her performance as Katniss.  Like the Harry Potter kids, I can't imagine anyone else playing this role.  The rest of the actors in this cast completely own their roles.  I should say something about the giant elephant in the room.  These Hunger Games movies are the great Philip Seymour Hoffman's last roles, and it's hard not to notice the pain he was feeling in his personal life seep into the role of Plutarch Heavensbee.  He looks tired and detached.  Maybe that's what he was going for in the performance, but it's not hard to notice art imitating life.

The problem I have with this film is that all of his could have and should have been covered in about an hour of film time.  Instead, the movie lasts over two hours and we don't really have any other scenes besides Katniss filming propaganda films aimed at stirring rebellion.  We never get the payoff.  I'm not completely against splitting a final story into two movies.  I just want there to be enough in the source material to merit this decision.  I just don't feel like there's enough here to do it.  The movie cuts to the credits as soon as the film picks up steam.  It does set up what is sure to be a balls to the wall part 2, that I'm already looking forward to.  I just wish that I didn't have to wait a year to see it.

I'm giving this movie 2.5 out of 4 stars.  It's a good movie, but it's incomplete and feels a little empty.  See it if you're a die-hard Hunger Games fan.

Guardians Of The Galaxy - After 10 movies, the Marvel Cinematic Universe feels fresh again.

Guardians Of The Galaxy - Movie Review

by Brian Wezowicz

A space pirate, blue rage monster, green alien warrior princess, talking tree, and a wiseass raccoon walk into a bar...  It's a joke that's as old as time... What's that?  You've never heard that one?  If you're like most people, you are agreeing with that last question.  Guardians Of The Galaxy is the story of one of Marvel's most "out there" superhero teams.  It's also a testament to the power that Marvel has in Hollywood right now.  These guys could get a story about a scientist that gets shrunk down to the size of an ant and has the strength of one too.  What's that?  There's a movie called Ant-Man coming out soon?  Man, oh man... these guys can do anything.  Anyway, back to Guardians.  I was a little skeptical when this movie was first announced.  My skepticism was lessened with the first trailer for this film.  And my skepticism was totally blown away by the quality of this highly original, totally self-aware, and wholly refreshing tale of the biggest band of misfits in the universe; the aforementioned Guardians Of The Galaxy.

I won't bore you with the minutiae of the film.  Only a true comic book nerd could recite the intricate details of Infinity Stones, Thanos, Yondus, and the far out world of Knowhere.  Basically, the Guardians have to band together (as dysfunctional as they are) to save the world from an evil overlord, Roman The Conquerer (Played devilishly by Pushing Daisies' Lee Pace), from destroying the universe.  They are the Bad News Bears of the galaxy, and it's a delight to watch them come together and form a bond through their dysfunction.  This movie is exciting in every way, and as far as superhero movies go, I haven't had this much fun in a long time.  Here are a few reasons why:

Chris Pratt - As Peter Quill (or Star Lord as he would have you call him), Pratt totally owns this role.  He's shined in other film and television roles (most notably, as the lovable goofball, Andy, on NBC's Parks and Recreation), but this film is his true breakout role.  He brings a perfect blend of Han Solo cockiness and  spot-on comedic timing to the role.  Quill was abducted from earth in 1988, so his references are left to that era, and they are uproariously funny.  His choice of music (on cassette tape!) is equally endearing.  He seems like someone you would love to grab a beer with, while being enough of a badass that you wouldn't want to mess with him.

Rocket Raccoon - Bradley Cooper voices this eternally wise-cracking, gun toting, butt kicking raccoon.  On paper, this character doesn't make any sense.  However, in the world of Guardians Of The Galaxy, he TOTALLY works.  Rocket ends up being the brains of the operation, and his transformation from "chip on my shoulder" a-hole to lovable teammate with a heart of gold is one of the better character arcs in recent Marvel movies.  If I could liken it to anything, it would be how the Grinch found his heart in the classic Dr. Seuss tale.

The special effects are amazing! - I have to stop for a minute to say that we're lucky to be alive during this period of computer generated effects.  I know we always complain that there's too heavy a reliance on computers, but when done right, the effects are mind blowing.  I saw this movie on IMAX 3D and it was worth every added penny (special thanks to my sister for paying for this movie!).  The 3D wasn't just some cheap attempt at making more money.  There was depth to every scene.  The CG characters weren't distracting.  Every frame of this movie looked gorgeous.  I felt like I was on set with these characters.

Three words:  I. Am. Groot. - Never before have three words gotten so much life out of them.  As Groot, the walking talking tree, Vin Diesel (thumbing his nose at all his detractors who claim his acting is "wooden) gives this character an incredible amount of life using only those three words.  Pay attention to the "conversations" between Groot and Rocket where every one of Groot's responses is, you guessed it, "I am Groot."

Marvel allowed the director to make his own movie - I think that James Gunn got to make the movie he wanted without a ton of studio suggestions and notes.  I don't know how else to explain it, but this movie just felt like the sole vision of a director who knew exactly what he wanted to make.  It doesn't feel like a movie where every line was test screened a million times.  Sometimes it's best to step back and let the directors direct.

Dave Bautista can act (who knew?) - The track record for professional wrestlers turned actors isn't the best.  It's basically Duane "The Rock" Johnson and everyone else.  Bautista (or Batista as he's known in WWE circles) gives a surprisingly strong performance as Drax, a tattooed alien hell bent on avenging his family.  His character is very literal, which provides a ton of comedic relief.  But he's more than just muscle and laughs.  You get a sense that there's a genuine rage underneath his think layer of skin.  His first big breakout role couldn't have been any better.  Big things are in store for him.

These are just a few of the reasons why I loved this movie.  I really can't wait to see it again and again.  It had a huge opening weekend ($94 million+ domestically), and a sequel has already been announced.  Will the Guardians have a role in next summer's Avengers: Age Of Ultron?  I sure hope so!

I am giving this movie 3.5 stars out of 4.  It's the best blockbuster of the summer and will certainly be on my 2014 top ten list.  You don't have to have seen the other Marvel movies to enjoy this one.  It stands on its own.  See if on IMAX if you can, and be sure to stay through the end of the credits for the best 80s reference in the movie!

Bonus Round:  Here's my list of my favorite marvel movies in order from least to most.  * I like all the Marvel films, so the lower films are just some that I like LESS than the others.

10) Iron Man 2 - A total let down after one of the greatest superhero movies of all time.
9) The Incredible Hulk - With the recasting of Bruce Banner, this movie doesn't feel like it belongs in the Marvel Cinematic Universe anymore.  On its own, it's still a very entertaining movie.
8) Iron Man 3 - Not a bad movie, but I had a little Tony Stark Fatigue after this one.
7) Thor: The Dark World - A solid sequel.
6)  Thor -  Kenneth Brannagh brings some of his Shakespeare skills to Marvel's Norse God.
5) Captain America: The First Avenger -  An entertaining origin story Marvel's WWII hero.
4) Captain America: The Winter Soldier - A tense, fast paced political thriller.
3) Guardians Of The Galaxy - It's good to see a fresh take on the superhero genre.
2) The Avengers - The ultimate superhero team takes on the delightful Loki to save the world.
1) Iron Man - The one that started it all.  There would be no top 10 list if it weren't for this gem.

Escape From New York - A Stone Cold Classic!

Escape From New York

Why you need to watch this movie tonight!

I recently re-watched John Carpenter's classic, Escape From New York, and I have to say that the movie has aged incredibly well, and still kicks major ass.  This movie is set in the year 1997, where crime has risen 400%.  The island of Manhattan has been transformed into a maximum security prison compound, where there are no guards, and inmates run the asylum.  We come into the action seeing that Air Force One has been hijacked by a group of terrorists (the 9/11 foreshadowing is strikingly eerie) on the way to a freedom summit in Hartford, Connecticut (Hartford???  The insurance capital of the world?  That Hartford??Yup, that Hartford).  Before they can crash the plane, the president (portrayed by Donald Pleasence) escapes in an escape pod.  His safety is in peril as he is stranded on the prison island of Manhattan and captured by the criminals.  With the fate of the world hanging in a delicate balance (The president was supposed to deliver a speech at the peace summit that would effectively end World War III), the warden hatches a plan to rescue the president in time for the peace summit to take place.  You see, as luck would have it, a prisoner had fallen into the warden's lap.  A prisoner that could go in and save the president and... wait for it... Escape from New York.  That prisoner is none other than Snake Plisskin.

Here's a few reasons why you should skip the big budget dreck (with the exception of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - go see it!) that is currently in theaters and rent this 80s masterpiece.

1) Kurt F'n Russell  

Russell's portrayal of the former Special Forces soldier gone bad, Snake Plisskin, is a PhD dissertation on badassery.  He just oozes confidence throughout the film.  He doesn't play it too over the top, which I like because when he does explode it has more gusto behind it.  It's my second favorite Kurt Russell role (the first being the immortal Jack Burton from one of my all-time favorite movies, Big Trouble In Little China).  He is calm, cool, and collected.  He never seems over his head, no matter the amount of peril he seems to be in.  Much like a real snake, Plisskin strikes with speed and certitude.

I like his character because Kurt Russell, the action hero, is the antithesis of the steroidal meat puppets that would soon come to dominate the 1980s action scene.  He was strong, both mentally and physically, yet he didn't look like a Mr. Universe contestant.  He had to rely on his brains and cunning to get through his impossible mission.  Don't get me wrong, I love me some Schwarzenegger/Stallone action as much as the next guy!  It's just refreshing to see a different, less chemically enhanced, actor playing the lead role in an action movie in the 80s.


2) The rest of the cast is amazing!

This movie works so well because the supporting cast is so strong.  Carpenter could have surrounded Russell's character with a bunch of no names in crazy costumes to save some money, but the movie would not have worked as well.  Just take a look at the supporting cast and you'll see why this movie is so amazing.

- Lee Van Cleef (whom most of you will remember as "The Bad" in Sergio Leone's epic conclusion to the "Man with no name" trilogy, The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly):  Van Cleef's prison warden/New York police chief character is the perfect blend of good and bad.  He toes the asshole line perfectly, to the point where you don't know what his motives are.  He promises Snake Plisskin immunity if he can successfully rescue the President, while at the same time implanting a timed explosive inside Plisskin in case he decides not to complete his task.  This move also gives the movie a perfect sense of pacing, as Plisskin is forced (quite literally) to race against the clock.  You get a sense that there's history between the warden and Plisskin, and that something has gone wrong between the two.

- Ernest Borgnine:  Borgnine's "Cabby" character provides the otherwise grim film an sense of comedic relief.  You get a feeling that he's not quite playing with a full deck, mentally, but it's not done in a demeaning way. It's almost as if his character may have been driving a cab at the time when the prison island was put in place and just happened to stay there.  He also very well could have been very dangerous in a previous life... we never find this out. You don't really get his back story, which leaves it open to interpretation.  He is, perhaps, one of the only "good" people in this movie.

- Isaac Hayes:  Hayes' Duke character is the leader of "Crazies," the group that runs the show on this prison island.  I always love these kind of characters, and Hayes is the perfect choice to play the Duke of Manhattan.  He plays him as cool as the other side of the pillow.  He runs the island with an iron fist, and yet you can't help but root for him because of his natural charisma.  The fight at the end of the movie between the Duke and Plisskin is feels meaningful because both actors do enough to develop the sense of animosity between the two.

These are just a few of my favorites in a stellar supporting cast.  My only knock on this film is that there isn't a great female presence to balance out the testosterone.

3) The score.

The first thing you notice in a John Carpenter movie is the music.  From Halloween (a Mt. Rushmore theme song), to Escape, to Big Trouble In Little China, Carpenter's scores (which he composes himself) are incredible.  Each theme song is almost another character in the movie.  The music in this film adds depth and a sense of foreboding to each scene.  The score was a key element in making this such an effective action movie.

4)  The film is still very much relevant.

John Carpenter wrote this movie in response to the Watergate scandal (and the resulting distrust of the government) of the 1970s.  You can see it permeating throughout this film.  Donald Pleasence's president is a wholy unlikeable character, whose indifference to the death of "lesser" citizens is made evident as the film closes.  The police force surrounding the island is unrelenting in their use of power and force.  Snake Plisskin is a direct embodiment of the lack of care given to returning Vietnam veterans (and, for that matter, American soldiers ever since).  We call them heroes, but turn our back on them when they need us the most.  Although this movie is set in the "future" of 1997, the themes of distrust and the loss of innocence are still very much present in today's culture.  Look at the level of skepticism people have in our Federal government (whether that skepticism is warranted or not is another matter for another blog).  Look at the recent VA scandal as proof of how we are failing our returning soldiers and veterans.  Look at the level at which we incarcerate our citizens as proof that this movie was on to something in 1981.  These are just a few of the themes that make this a movie worth exploring.

5)  Parts of this movie are slightly dated, which only adds to the fun.

I'll just say this briefly.  The president holds the key to world peace, and that key is... a cassette tape recording!!!  I guess CDs were too difficult to predict back in 1981.

I highly recommend this film to anyone looking for a good rental.

Easter 2014... Yes, I'm extremely behind on my videos/blog posts!

Here's a little video of Axel meeting the Easter Bunny for the first time.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier Movie Review

Captain America: The Winter Soldier - Movie Review
by Brian Wezowicz

I have to admit that I have been excited for this movie since before the first Captain America film came out.  I am a big fan of Ed Brubaker's run of Captain America comics, which included a subplot involving the Winter Soldier... a nefarious Soviet super soldier with ties to Steve Rogers (Cap's real name).  Brubaker brought a sense of grit and realism to Marvel's most vanilla superhero. So you can imagine the nerdgasm I had when the title to the sequel to the unexpectedly satisfying first entry in the Steve Rodgers saga included "The Winter Soldier."

This movie did not fail to meet my already heightened expectations.  It is perhaps the most original, most unique chapter in Phase 2 (Post-Avengers) of Marvel's cinematic universe.  Admittedly, Captain America is a tough sell (they had to add The First Avenger in order to distribute the first film internationally).  How do you create a film that, on the surface, is so uber-patriotic in a world where the USA doesn't have many fans?  I thought the first film excelled because it took us back to a simpler time.  A time where everything was seemingly black and white, and we knew our enemies.  Post World War II, there was a clear sense of good and evil with each corner of the globe fitting neatly into this dichotomy.  This film, which like Iron Man 3 and Thor: The Dark World, picks up after the events of The Avengers.  Captain America has gone back to work for S.H.I.E.L.D., and we meet him as he's getting ready to embark on yet another tedious rescue mission in a series of endless rescue missions.  You can see doubt start to creep into his mind.  He doesn't just blindly follow orders.  But this film differs from the first in that the line between good and evil has blurred in the 70+ years since Cap was frozen in ice, and you can see that represented in Cap's actions.

One of the major questions of this movie (and with the Captain America character overall) is how can a pure soul with unscrupulous morals exist in modern society with all of its flaws and corruption?  Well, he struggles to say the least.  He doesn't have any friends (he jokes that all the members of his barbershop quartet are dead), and he doesn't really know what to do with himself outside of his hero duties.  Black Widow (played by Scarlet Johansen, reprising her role) tries to get him to go out on dates when she's not helping him kick serious ass.  Cap keeps a list of all the things he's missed in the last 7+ decades (Star Wars, Steve Jobs, etc.) and hopes to get to if he ever has any free time.  You get the sense that he is married to his job, because that's the only thing that seems normal to him.

S.H.I.E.L.D. has changed since the events in The Avengers.  Nick Fury (played by Samuel L. Jackson, with his most screen time to date... which is a great thing) has to deal with a new power structure.  He must report to the Secretary in charge of S.H.I.E.L.D., Alexander Pierce (played by Robert Redford, in a rare blockbuster appearance).  Fury senses that the agency has been compromised.  Before you you know it, he's attacked by the villainous Winter Soldier (in a thrilling car chase scene)... a foreign trained super assassin.  Fury narrowly escapes and confides his beliefs in the only man he can trust, Captain America.  Shortly after this, Cap is on the run and viewed as a traitor.  He must piece all of the clues together to get to the bottom of this before it's too late.  You see, S.H.I.E.L.D. has now become the largest weapons manufacturer in the world.  They are creating weapons that will strike the enemy before the enemy can strike first.  There are a lot of parallels to today's world and America's role as the world's police force.  Captain America, along with his cohorts The Black Widow and The Falcon (played with charm by Anothony Mackey) is in a race against time before these weapons can be deployed in a preemptive strike.

What follows is a tense, fast paced political action thriller that kept me on the edge of my seat.  Yeah, it stretched in parts, and the handheld camera work was a little too frenetic, but for my money this was a top notch thriller.  It gives the original Iron Man movie a run for its money as the best in the Marvel cinematic universe.

I am giving this movie three and a half out of four stars.  I had to dock it for its overuse of handheld cameras and for a few other minor infractions (like, why doesn't he have The Avengers on speed dial?  I know it's a solo movie, but seems like a glaring fault of all these solo movies).   My complaints are really minimal.  I really enjoy how it contributes to the Marvel universe while also standing as its own film.  Chris Evans gives the right amount of humor and confidence needed to play a modern Captain America.  He's really grown on me.  I groaned when he first was cast as Captain America, but he really embodies the fish out of water nature of the character without making him too cheesy.

Stay through the credits for two extra scenes.  I won't spoil it, but they help set up next summer's superhero spectacular, The Avengers: Age of Ultron.

Divergent Movie Review

Divergent - Movie Review

by Brian Wezowicz

Before I get into my review, I have a confession to make.  I'm a closeted Young Adult (or YA as the cool kids say) fan.  I've read the Hunger Games, and Twilight series (although I'm not as proud to admit that one), and I've seen the movies.  They are fun because they don't require too much concentration, which is a key feature when having a six-month old child.  That being said, I always walk away from these stories thinking, "Hey, I could totally write one of these."  They all seem to follow a simple formula:  1) Strong (but not too strong when you really think about it) female lead.  2)  Future dystopian society  and/or 3) Supernatural features.  4)  Brooding, socially awkward male love interest (or two!  Love triangle alert!) with whom you can't quite figure out why the main heroine falls in love with.  5)  Brooding.  LOTS of brooding. Divergent, based on the worldwide bestseller, is no different.

The world of Divergent is set in the not too distant future.  The remains of society are stowed away in a post-apocalyptic city of Chicago.  The surviving humans are divided into five factions based on their personalities.  Abnegation, Amity, Candor, Dauntless (The cool kids), and Erudite.  By adhering to the principles of their faction, in theory, society thrives and the violence that nearly wiped out the human race is vanquished.  There's just one catch (isn't there always a catch?).  A small group of society doesn't fit into a single mold.  They're called Divergent (Hey, that's the name of the movie!).  They are viewed as a threat the the very foundation that holds society together.  They are to be rooted out and destroyed, or so says our main villain (played wickedly by a slumming it in YA fodder Kate Winslet).

Back to the story of the factions.  On your sixteenth birthday, you take an aptitude test that determines which faction you should belong to.  There's an elaborate choosing ceremony (blatantly ripping off the sorting ceremony in Harry Potter, but whatever... young love and brooding!).  Our heroine, Beatrice Prior (played by Shailene Woodley) is part of the boring, government running, totally selfless Abnegation class (or was it one of the other factions?  I have trouble remembering).  She has bigger dreams that don't quite fit one faction.  She finds out during her aptitude test that she's Divergent.  She has to lie about this and choose a faction on her own.  At the sorting hat, er, I mean choosing ceremony, she enlists in the fearless Dauntless faction to the great disappointment of her square parents (Ashley Judd alert!).  The Dauntless don't abide by the normal rules of society. They're the thrill seekers, who jump on and off of moving trains, and climb really tall buildings, and get tattoos.  It's shortly after arriving at the Dauntless compound that Beatrice (now going by the MUCH cooler name of Tris) meets Four (not to be confused with Six from the famed 90's sitcom, Blossom), her distant but irresistible instructor.

This is where the movie takes a sharp left turn from interesting into boring town.  We're 20-25 minutes into the movie when this happens and for the next 3.5 (estimated) hours, we see the Dauntless train... and then brood... train... and then brood.  Sure, there's some interesting war games-style simulations, but this whole chapter of the movie could have been shortened with some cool training montages.  Instead, the director stays a little too accurately to the source material.  Do we really need every single training session?  I get it, Dauntless take risks.  By the end of the training/brooding section of the movie, Tris has transformed from skinny nobody into a skinny somebody.

Another issue I have with this movie is that there is an internal conflict building within the factions... only it's not fully developed enough.  Basically, the smarty pants faction feels that the selfless faction isn't fit for leadership and they develop a serum to turn the Dauntless into mindless soldiers to take over.  There's some whispering about the reasons for doing this, but they seem to take a back seat to the other more YA-ish parts of the film.  This is also where we learn the other aspect of being Divergent that makes them feared.  They are immune to mind control.  Anyway, long story short, there's some interesting action sequences at the end, where good must find a way to triumph over evil.  But, in my opinion, it takes too long to get there.  They focus too much on the training/brooding/star-crossed lovers section of the movie, so that when they get to the good stuff, I was slightly checked out of the movie.

That's not to say that this was a terrible movie.  It just felt like an overextended first act in a much larger story.  Divergent will get compared to the other, better YA trilogy (quadrilogy if you're being picky), The Hunger Games, because of the similarities in structure.  I just think that this series feels like a cheaper knockoff... A Challenge Of The GoBots to the Tranformers if you like.

I am giving this movie two out of four stars.  If you've read the books, you'll probably want to see it.  If you haven't read them, then you should just go rent a copy of the two Hunger Games movies.  It has some good parts to it, and it seems to be building to something bigger, it just takes forever to get going.

Accepting suggestions?

Today was my first day as a proud JCC member, which also means it was my first time at a real gym in over a year (home workouts not included).  I. am. out. of. shape.

That's to be expected after such a long layoff.  I'm here today soliciting suggestions for a weight lifting regiment.  I should mention that this is the JCC and not a crossfit compound.  There are none of the following:

1)  Kettlebells
2)  Giant tires to throw around.
3)  Tractor trailers to pull with my teeth.

There are a fine variety of free weights and nautilus machines, however.

So how about it?  Any suggestions?  Feel free to post away here on the blog or on my Facebook page.  The goal is to fit into some skinny jeans... not to make the cover of Muscle & Fitness.

Back at it!

Hello world,

Sorry that I have been MIA for the past few months.  I haven't been able to post anything since before The Oscars, but I'm back and I promise to do this more regularly.  A big reason for the absence from the blog has been the start of my new job.  I started at Studio 11 Pittsburgh as an Editor/Producer about three months ago.  I am having the time of my life with this job.  It's really rewarding to have a job after such a long time off.  The job, along with my rapidly growing (and adorable!) son, has left me with no time to blog about my journey to fit into a pair of skinny jeans.  It also has left me with virtually no time to work out.

So now that I'm back, how is that goal coming along?  Unfortunately, not very well.  I have fallen back into my old (bad) eating habits.  I ate anything and everything that came across my plate.  And, unfortunately, that plate was not loaded with fruits and veggies.  Add that to my lack of workout time, and you have a stalled effort.  I am happy to report that I have, basically, maintained my fatness instead of balooning into even fatter territory.  It's not like I haven't been trying my darndest to make a permanent living in Huskytown.  I'd hate to see what I would have to eat to get up to 300 pounds.  I have I have hovered for the past three months around the 250 pound mark, which was where I started.

So here I am... back at the starting line.  Ready to take the challenge again.  Those skinny jeans are out there, laughing at me while also wearing a Kangol hat and an Ed Hardy t-shirt.  I can hear them taunting me that I will never join their ridiculous, douchbag flavored party.  Damn it!  I know I can do this.  I have lost weight in the past.  How, you ask?  Nutrisystem!

I am here today to tell you that I am back on the System (it's what we in the weight loss game call Nutrisystem.... kidding!  I just made that up).  I have been on it for about three weeks and I have lost about 8 pounds so far.  I like it because I need to be on a system (a Nutri-system... Thank  you, I'll be here all night.  Try the veal).  I have realized that I can't do the Paleo diet or others like it.  I lack the will power.  I need someone to tell me, "here's what you will eat today and here's when you will eat it."  The last time I was on it, I lost 30+ pounds for my wedding, and it took me about a year to lose all of the weight.  It will probably take me that amount of time and then some since I have a limited time to workout.  Hopefully when spring (finally) arrives, I will have the opportunity to get out and go for runs and hikes with my family.  Pittsburgh is loaded with hills and trails to explore.  To get the workout ball rolling, I signed up for another 5k in about a month (You can read about it and sign up here), and I hope to have another video for the blog from that.

The biggest challenge I will have will be how do I ever go off this program without ballooning up to my current weight?  I'll have to cross that path when I get to it.  In the meantime, I'm back with a vengeance.

Wish me luck!

Oscar Picks with special guest Adam Howard

BW:

It's officially Oscar season (or the movie nerd Super Bowl as my friend calls the show), and I would like to welcome Adam Howard from The Grio (thegrio.com).  You can also follow him on Twitter (@at_howard) and catch him around the NYC area performing.  He and I share a common love of cinema and I highly respect his opinion on all things Hollywood.  He's also someone I wish I had the opportunity to hang out with more before I left NYC.

Hello Adam!  I'm really excited that you have agreed to do this with me.  The first time I met you, you and your girlfriend, Liz, were in the middle of a Highlander marathon.  From that moment, I knew you were a special person.

I think we can both agree that 2013 was an exceptional year for film, and I'm very excited for this year's Oscars telecast.  I think it's a closer race than in years' past, and a lot of these categories could go any way.  However, I'm not too excited for Ellen as a host.  I think they went the safe route after last year's rather risque choice of Seth MacFarlane.  I think she'll do just fine as host, but it won't be anything spectacular.  The Academy seems to dip its toes into the "fun host" pool every couple years only to go running and screaming back into the safety zone.  What are your thoughts?

As I mentioned in a previous exchange, I would like to go start pick your brain category by category.  The format will be as followed:  I will start with the first category (The order we will tackle these will be posted below), give my picks, then you can follow up with yours and lead off the next category.  I would like your opinion on these three things:  1)  Who WILL win.  2) Who SHOULD win (they can be the same if you feel that way).  3) Potential dark horse.  Without further adieu, let's get this started.

We will be handing out our Too Fat Oscars similar to how they are presented in the main show.  I've lumped similar categories together to save a little time.  The order will be as followed.

1) Best Supporting Actor

2) Best Supporting Actress

3) Best Animated Feature

4) Sound Editing/Sound Mixing

5) Best Short Film Live & Animated

6) Make Up & Costume Design

7) Documentary Short & Long

8) Production Design & Cinematography

9) Foreign Language Film

10) Music Score & Song

11) Film Editing & Visual Effects

12) Screenplay - Original & Adapted

13) Best Actress

14) Best Actor

15) Best Director

16) Best Motion Picture

If I left off any from this list, we can add them in somewhere in the middle.

Ok, our first category up is Best Actor in a Supporting Role.  This is a particularly strong category that features many great performances.  We've got some returning nominees, some first time nominees, and in the case of Barkhad Abdi, a first time acting nominee.  They all gave amazing performances, but I think it's really a one horse race.  So here are the nominees followed by my predictions.

• Barkhad Abdi - Captain Phillips
• Bradley Cooper - American Hustle
• Michael Fassbender - 12 Years a Slave
• Jonah Hill - The Wolf of Wall Street
• Jared Leto - Dallas Buyers Club

Who Will Win: Jared Leto - He's been cleaning up in the pre-Oscars awards circuit.  He gave a performance that the Academy loves (He lost weight, changed his appearance, etc.), and ultimately I think he comes away with it.

Who Should Win: Jared Leto or Michael Fassbender.  Both were amazing performance and I won't be upset if either of these guys come away with the statue.  The only thing Fassbender has going against him is that the Academy tends to shy away from villains.  And what a villain he was!  His performance left me emotionally drained.  On the other hand, Leto has been winning a bunch of awards and he should win this one as well.

Dark Horse:  Jonah Hill.  The Wolf of Wall Street was my #3 film of the year and he had a large part to do with it.  He created such an incredible douchebagginess that my jaw literally dropped a few times during the movie.  This is his second nomination after Money Ball and I think he's really nailing it out of the park with his dramatic roles.  His "dick in hand, high on quaaludes and Steve Madden shoes" scene deserves it's own separate nomination.  Had he only been in the movie for those 5 minutes, I STILL would have nominated him.

There you have it.  I think Jared Leto will walk away with the award.  This was a great collection of performances, and I didn't even mention how amazing Barkhad "I'm the captain now" Abdi was in Captain Phillips.  Who gets the win on your ballot?  Then you can lead off the next round with your pick for Best Actress in a Supporting Role.

AH:

Who Will Win: Jared Leto. I wasn't quite as enamored with this performance as Hollywood and all the precursor award givers appear to be. But I am also willing to admit that my opinion may be largely colored by the fact that I am not the biggest fan of Leto's off-screen persona and I have grown somewhat cynical of physical transformation performances. That said, he gave a very good performance and while I think all the nominees in this category are worthy of winning he seems like one of the most inevitable of the night.

Who Should Win: Jonah Hill. I was torn between Hill and Fassbender on this one but I wanted to force myself to make an unequivocal choice. I suppose the Hill performance is fresher in my mind but Fassbender deserved props for bring so much depth and nuance to what could have just been a horrific, almost cartoonish villain. Still, Hill for me was a revelation. Even more than in 'Moneyball' he disappeared into this role and gave a ferocious, funny and at times, even scary performance. For me his monologue about why he married his cousin should be the Oscar clip and enough to win the award. He won't get it this time but I have a feeling if he keeps making smart choices he eventually will.

Dark Horse: Bradley Cooper. I wasn't sold on the movie 'Silver Linings Playbook' or Cooper's performance in it. However, in 'American Hustle', I found myself saying -- for the first time -- ok, this guy can really act. In fact, he surprised me the most of that whole cast. I think he's on his way to becoming a major actor. He's definitely one of the new 'It' crowd in Hollywood (which includes Jennifer Lawrence and Amy Adams too). I think if anyone upsets Leto it could be him because the Academy clearly loves the movie and he's kind of the cool new heir apparent to the Clooneys and the Pitts.

So in conclusion this appears to be Leto's to lose at this point. I'd actually prefer to see any of the others win (I too, thought Barkhad Abdi was terrific in 'Captain Phillips'). Leto to me gave a very conventionally good performance that has been the benefit of hype surrounding the so-called 'risk' of him playing a man who dressed in drag and the weight he lost to play he part. But if your criteria for best supporting actor is they sort of brought the best out in the lead I think he certainly deserves it -- his byplay with McConaughey was very deftly handled, although I would argue Hill performed that function with even greater aplomb in 'Wolf of Wall Street', still, Leto is going to win and I will have to accept it.

Oh and re: the Ellen hosting thing. I think she is a very likable, inoffensive choice. I feel like she will give a very Billy Crystal-esque performance minus the dated Borscht-Belt gags and humor. I've come to realize that the audience at the Oscars is very stuffy, they don't like hosts who REALLY make fun of them or the industry, hence the mediocre reviews received by Jon Stewart, Chris Rock and Seth MacFarlane. I think even Tina Fey and Amy Poehler would have a hard time working that room.

The atmosphere is very "reverential" and not particularly conducive to laughter. I also find that the role of host has become so thankless and diminished that it's not really a gig any comedian should want. They basically get to do their shtick in the beginning and by the time the evening is over you half forget who's hosting. I remember thinking that Hugh Jackman really brought it the year he hosted, but who ever remembers how he did now? The problem for me is there is no consistency in style or tone and everyone just gets compared unfavorably to Billy Crystal anyway (and he was never THAT good).

It's almost like playing Bond after Connery, until they really reinvent the role of host (like they did with the role of Bond with Daniel Craig), they're all being sort of set up to fail or at least be compared unfavorably to what came before. 

BW:

I hear you about Bradley Cooper.  To me, he's been playing the same asshole since Wedding Crashers.  I was a little higher on his performance in Silver Linings Playbook than you were, but it was refreshing to see him follow up that performance with another excellent one in American Hustle.  The big question on him is will he be able to deliver that caliber a performance outside of a David O. Russell film?  Time will tell on that one.

So far, we are one-for-one in agreement with our picks.  Next up, is Best Actress in a Supporting Role.  I don't know if this is as strong a list as the supporting actor group, but we have some really strong performances.  I think this is a two person race between 12 Years A Slave's Lupita Nyong'o and last year's best actress, Jennifer Lawrence.  Nyong'o has been the front runner thanks to her recent string of wins, but America loves them some J-Law.  I wouldn't be surprised if it went to either actress.  I feel like the other three names are there because they have to have 5 nominees.

Here are the nominees for Best Actress in a Supporting Role:

Sally Hawkins, "Blue Jasmine"

Jennifer Lawrence, "American Hustle"

Lupita Nyong'o, "12 Years a Slave"

Julia Roberts, "August: Osage County"

June Squibb, "Nebraska"

Who Will Win:  Lupita Nyong'o - 12 Years A Slave was my top movie of 2013 and Nyong'o had a large part to do with it.  Her performance as Patsey, the favored slave on the plantation run by the devious Michael Fassbender was mesmerizing.  She handled the role like someone who has been acting for decades, and not someone making her film debut.  Can we agree that this was an especially incredible year for first time film actors?

Who Should Win:  Lupita Nyong'o - Her performance was perhaps the best one in a movie of incredible performances.  She deserves to hear her name called when the envelope is opened.

Dark Horse:  Jennifer Lawrence - Like I said before, this is a two person race.  And I don't really think she's a dark horse in the truest sense of the phrase, but she is the only one that can unseat Lupita Nyongo's coronation.  Would the Academy reward Lawrence two years in a row?  Maybe.  They usually aren't too keen on that, but if anyone can pull it off, she can.  I didn't love the story of American Hustle.  To me, there was something lacking that left me wanting more.  It was Scorcese-light, and I didn't care about their little caper enough to place it higher on my top 10 list.  A friend of mine described it as Ocean's Eleven... a really entertaining movie that had great acting in it, but was probably a tad overrated. That isn't to say that I didn't really like film (I did), but to me, it was the performances that carried Hustle.  Jennifer Lawrence may have been a little too young for her character, but after about 10 minutes it didn't matter.  Her charisma is second to none and it jumped off the screen every minute she appeared in the film.

How about you?

AH:

I would have liked to see Octavia Spencer in the mix for 'Fruitvale Station' and like you, by and large I don't think is quite a strong a group as the best supporting actors. I should preface my picks by admitting I did not see 'August: Osage County' (it looked like a 'wait for Netflix' movie for me from the moment I saw the trailer) so I can't really judge Julia Roberts' performance but I feel like she is the biggest longshot in this category.

Who will win: Lupita Nyong'o. This is one of the closet races of the night and I keep flipping between Lupita and Jennifer Lawrence. I thought Sally Hawkins was terrific in 'Blue Jasmine' and June Squibb was hilarious in 'Nebraska', but barring a really shocking upset the race is clearly between these two. I am leaning Lupita only because Oscar has a history rewarding the 'new girl' with this award and because her recent SAG and Critic's Choice wins seem to have shifted momentum in her favor.

Who should win: Lupita Nyong'o. It's incredible that '12 Years a Slave' is her first film cause she gives such a profound, assured performance. It's Chiwetel's movie, but she is its heart and its her character that sticks with you long after the credits roll. She literally just breaks your heart and puts the plight of women during slavery front and center. There won't be a dry eye in the house after her acceptance speech.

Dark Horse: Jennifer Lawrence. I really loved 'American Hustle' and I try to avoid the substance vs. entertainment arguments because it's really hard to compare movies like '12 Year a Slave' to anything else because their intentions and goals are so different. For instance, I am an unabashed fan of the 'Ocean's' movies and for me they deliver on what they're supposed to be -- entertainment for entertainment's sake -- but I don't think I can compare that to a heavy drama. But I'm rambling. 

I actually think Lawrence was totally miscast (who would believe any man would ditch HER at home), and I wanted to not to like her in this movie but damn it she delivered. She was funny and unpredictable and gave one of those show stopping performances that had a lot of clip-ready moments. If she hadn't already won she's probably be a shoo-in and she is so the toast of town right now she may just be anyway.


BW:

Excellent picks.  I, too, would have loved to see Octavia Spencer (or anyone from that brilliant but overlooked movie) to be nominated.  The guilt her character felt for suggesting her son take the train was so raw and emotional.  It's truly a shame that she was left out of the mix.  I wish more people paid attention to Fruitvale Station.  Perhaps it suffered from being released too early in the year and voters simply forgot about it.

August: Osage county may be a good film, but the title sounds like a bad Lifetime movie.  I may not even see it when it comes out on DVD.

Ok, on to the next category: Best Animated Feature.  Let's try to bang these next few categories out.  I can admit to not seeing any of these films except for Despicable Me 2.  I'm an animation fan, but it's a little creepy for a 34 year old man to go by himself to the theater to watch these.  I'm a bit surprised that Monsters University & Pixar (usually a lock for this category) was passed over.

Here are the nominees:

"The Croods"

"Despicable Me 2"

"Ernest & Celestine"

"Frozen"

"The Wind Rises"

Will Win:  Frozen - Disney (parent company of Pixar) keeps the Oscar in house this year with the #1 animated movie of the year.

Should Win:  Frozen - Box Office Success = Oscar this year.

Dark Horse: Despicable Me 2 - People love them some Gru and those Minions.  I liked this film, but didn't love it.  I wasn't clamoring for a sequel to the surprise hit.  I can take about 5 minutes of Minion screen time before I lose my mind.  I really wanted to see The Croods, but never got a chance.

AH:

I love animation but with the exception of the first 'Despicable Me', which I loved, I've mostly been a Pixar guy and for me even they've fallen off since 'Toy Story 3'. I must admit I haven't seen any of these.

But for pretty much the exact same reasons you listed I would say:

Will Win: Frozen, for some reason (maybe it's awesome) this movie is a legit phenomenon and seems to be THE animated movie of the moment

Should Win: I can't really say, but again Frozen seems to have struck a chord with its intended audience.

Dark Horse: The Wind Rises. I've only seen the trailer but it's made my the "classy" animators who made other acclaimed animated films very people saw like 'Spirited Away' and I could see the Academy rewarding a more artistic enterprise than such a nakedly commercial one.

BW:

Next up, we have sound editing/mixing.  I am going out on a rather safe limb and will say that Gravity will sweep all the technical awards and may even be in play for some if not all of the top awards.  It was a technical masterpiece, and a movie that totally blew me away.  I think the last time I experienced this level of awe with a film was when I saw Jurassic Park for the first time.  It was a rare movie that was a "must-see" in 3D.  It was my #2 movie of the year.  I wanted to watch it again immediately after seeing it.

Here are the nominees:

Sound editing

“All Is Lost,” Steve Boeddeker and Richard Hymns

“Captain Phillips,” Oliver Tarney

“Gravity,” Glenn Freemantle

“The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug,” Brent Burge

“Lone Survivor,” Wylie Stateman

Who will win:  Gravity - It was technically perfect and it will run away with this award.

Who should win: Gravity - See above.

Dark Horse: All Is Lost - The movie featured very little dialogue, so sound design was a very important element in telling that story.

Sound mixing

“Captain Phillips,” Chris Burdon, Mark Taylor, Mike Prestwood Smith and Chris Munro

“Gravity,” Skip Lievsay, Niv Adiri, Christopher Benstead and Chris Munro

“The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug,” Christopher Boyes, Michael Hedges, Michael Semanick and Tony Johnson

“Inside Llewyn Davis,” Skip Lievsay, Greg Orloff and Peter F. Kurland

“Lone Survivor,” Andy Koyama, Beau Borders and David Brownlow

Who will win: Gravity - These categories usually go hand in hand.  I don't see this year being any different.

Who should win: Gravity - I think that this movie wasn't all just about the camera work and 3D.  The way they used sound to effect the audience's emotion was just as important as the visuals.

Dark Horse: Captain Phillips - I'm picking this one because I have to make a choice.  I don't think there will be any upsets in this category.

AH:

I am in total agreement with you. Every year there seems to be one film that is clearly the premiere technical achievement of the year and for me it's a no brainer.

Sound Editing

Who will win: Gravity, second only to its visuals, the sound was a huge part of that film's visceral power and impact.

Who should win: Gravity, it was simply the best looking and sounding movie of the year (although 12 Years a Slave gives it a run for its money in terms of looks)

Dark Horse: All Is Lost. The sound was vital to create the atmosphere of this sadly mostly overlooked film,

Sound Mixing

Who will win: Gravity, these awards usually go hand in hand

Who should win: Gravity, even if you have quibbles with the movie (which I don't) it was technically flawless

Dark Horse: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, I could see this winning just because the Oscars are weird sometimes.

BW:

Here is are the categories that I have absolutely no clue about... the short films.  I am going to keep this section short because my picks will 100% be a guess.  I wish these films were more widely available.

Best Live Action Short Film  “Aquel no era yo” from Spain, “Avant que de tout perdre” from France, “Helium,” “Pitaako mun kaikki hoitaa?” from Finland, “The Voorman Problem.”

Who Will Win:  Avant que de tout perdre (Just before losing everything).  I read an article on these films and this was the one clear gem in the group.  I wish I was able to see these films, but alas, I will just have to guess.

Who Should Win:  See above.  

Dark Horse:  I'll go with The Voorman Problem because having a Voorman problem sounds like something I don't want to have.  And it has Martin "Bilbo" Freeman in it, so that's a plus.  We all love Mr. Freeman.

Best Animated Short Film:  “Feral,” “Get a Horse!,” “Mr. Hublot,” “Possessions,” “Room on the Broom.”

Who Will Win:  Feral.  I saw the trailer for this (can shorts have trailers?) and it looks pretty cool.  

Who Should Win:  Mr. Hublot.  This one has an even better trailer.  It should in.

Dark Horse:  Possessions - Crazy Japanimation in this one.  I never quite understood the obsession with Japanimation, but Ghost in the Shell was always one of my favorites.

Tough category to call.  Where do you stand?

AH:

I haven't seen any of these and worse, I haven't done any research on them. So I am thinking I will abstain from these ones or if that's not acceptable, I'll just pick the same ones as you.

BW:

Skipping a category is totally fine with me.  Let's move on to the next two categories:  Make-up and costume design.  First up, I will tackle make-up.  How funny would it be to see Johnny Knoxville accept an Oscar?  Looking at the nominees, it seems he has a legitimate chance.  Here we go:

Best Makeup and Hairstyling:

"Dallas Buyers Club"

"Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa"

"The Lone Ranger"

Who Will Win:  Dallas Buyers Club - I just don't see the Academy rewarding either or the two Razzie (although I actually kind of liked The Long Ranger.  I would love to have a "defending bad movies" conversation about this one with you) caliber movies, so I'm going to go with Dallas Buyers Club.  I think Jared Leto and Matthew McConaughey's potential wins in their respective categories have a lot to do with their physical transformations.  I think this movie wins.

Who Should Win: Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa - I just want to see the Academy pull the stick out its' ass once and give it to a surprise.

Dark Horse:  The Long Ranger - Johnny Depp's Tonto character was 99% make-up and 1% weird.  I liked this movie way more than a lot of other people.  Maybe its because I rented it on Netflix and lowered my expectations to the lowest they could possibly go.

Costume design is always the "let's give it to the English period piece movie" category.

Best Costume Design:

"American Hustle"

"The Grandmaster"

"The Great Gatsby"

"The Invisible Woman"

"12 Years a Slave"

Who Will Win:  American Hustle - I'm a bit surprised this wasn't nominated in make-up and hair styling since the hair in this movie was AMAZING.  I will give the costume award to it.

Who Should Win: 12 Years A Slave - Another movie that perfectly captured the attire of that era.  And it was a far superior film, so I believe it should win.

Dark Horse: The Invisible Woman - You can't fight the power of the British period piece film.

AH:

Best Make-up

Will Win: Dallas Buyers Club, because it's the one 'respectable' movie in the group

Should Win: Jackass: Bad Grandpa, I didn't see it -- in fact I must admit I've never watched a second of Jackass, not out of some snobby disposition -- I've just never checked it out. That said, i was genuinely impressed by how well they disguised Johnny Knoxville, who is a pretty recognizable guy.

Dark Horse: Jackass: Bad Grandpa. I never saw The Lone Ranger but I think it was such an expensive bomb that Hollywood would not want to reward it, let alone remind themselves of it. Jackass would be the more fun and for the academy 'out of the box' choice.

Costume Design

Will Win: American Hustle, this is a tougher one than you'd think but I think with 10 nominations, American Hustle is clearly beloved by the academy and its know for it hair and costumes almost as much as its actual content.

Should Win: The Great Gatsby. It's one of my all-time favorite books -- the movie was just ok for me (although I thought DiCaprio was fantastic) -- but they did nail the costumes and the look of that era, at least for me.

Dark Horse: 12 Years a Slave. If the movie has a big night this could be one of the awards it picks up. I just feel like they tend to go for flash here over authenticity, so although the slave-era garb was accurate it's not as lavish as the charms of Gatsby and Hustle.

BW:

ext up are the documentaries, both long and short.  I don't really have anything to add to this category, unfortunately.  The one documentary that I did see (Blackfish... Amazing movie!  In my top 10 for the year) didn't even get nominated.  I'm going to take a pass on this one.  How about you?

AH:

What are the nominees again?

BW:

Best Documentary Feature:

"The Act of Killing"

"Cutie and the Boxer"

"Dirty Wars"

"The Square"

"20 Feet from Stardom"

Best Documentary Short:

"CaveDigger"

"Facing Fear"

"Karama Has No Walls"

"The Lady in Number 6: Music Saved My Life"

"Prisoner Terminal: The Last Days of Private Jack Hall"

AH:

Again I am sad to say I've seen known of these. That said, I've heard great things about '20 Feet from Stardom' and I've heard buzz, but little detail about 'Cutie and the Boxer.'

Will win: 20 Feet From Stardom. I think it was successful by documentary standards and it's a Hollywood story in a sense

Should win: N/A

Dark Horse: Cutie and the Boxer. I've heard it's good but I know nothing about it

I will abstain from Documentary Short since I haven't seen any of them and sadly know nothing about them.

BW:

Ok, back to some categories that we will both be able to contribute to:  Production Design & Cinematography.  I think that there is a clear front-runner for both of these categories, but there are some really interesting potential dark horses.  

First up is production design, which I always looked at as being how well the script is carried about on the screen.  A good design can make a bad movie (see: Wonderland, Alice in) and make it into an Oscar winner.  In this category, I think that Gravity is the clear front-runner.  This movie pushed the limits on creativity and visuals in a way that has never been seen on screen.  So here are my predictions for this category.

Best Production Design:

"American Hustle"

"Gravity"

"The Great Gatsby"

"Her"

"12 Years A Slave"

Who Will Win:  Gravity - I just feel like this movie is a lock to clean up on these technical awards.  It looked amazing and the time and effort it took to bring this story to the screen was incredible.

Who Should Win: Gravity - I was just in awe of every aspect of this film.

Dark Horse: The Great Gatsby - It's a film that I haven't seen yet (it's coming in the mail on Netflix as I write this), but Baz Luhrman knows how to make a movie look great.  His movies look like a rainbow throws up on screen, but in a very elegant way.  An American classic gets Luhrman'd and the end result was a very satisfying visual film.

Our second category this go-around is for cinematography.  Again, I feel that Gravity is the front-runner, but as I think about it, should it be?  Yes, they did invent cameras specifically to film this movie, but the majority of this film was aided with computer graphics. Te other films in this category represent the more traditional meaning of cinematography.  They all captured their stories without being heavily enhanced by computer graphics.  It's a bit of a surprise to see that 12 Years A Slave wasn't nominated.  The scenery of that movie looked absolutely beautiful.  Will the Academy reward a movie that uses a heavy amount of CG, or will it go in the direction of the more traditional meaning of cinematography?  Here are my predictions:

Best Cinematography:

"The Grandmaster"

"Gravity"

"Inside Llewyn Davis"

"Nebraska"

"Prisoners"

Who Will Win:  Gravity - I just think the momentum is too strongly in the favor of this film.  I don't see it going any other way.

Who Should Win:  Gravity - I can't say enough about this film, and with no 12 Years A Slave (Again, I'm totally shocked it wasn't nominated) in this category to unseat it, I think there's nothing stopping it.

Dark Horse: Nebraska - Could a black and white film sneak in and unseat a juggernaut?  Probably not, but it's a long shot.

Where do you stand on these two categories?

AH:

Production Design

Who will win: Gravity. I actually think there are some other strong contenders here. Her did an awesome job of presenting a plausible offbeat future and 12 Years a Slave was a very believable period film, but Gravity literally made you feel like you were in space for 90 minutes.

Who should win: Gravity. I think all of these movies have a case to make but this is the film with the most acclaim and academy support.

Dark Horse: The Great Gatsby. Some could/should argue that this movie was overproduced, but the money and effort were up there on the screen in a big way. This will probably have a shot at this if not the costumes.

Cinematography

Will win: Gravity. Another tough category but it's hard to see this movie coming up short in any of the technical categories.

Who should win: Gravity. I wish 12 Years a Slave was in the mix because it was a beautifully shot movie. Without that film included it seems like this is going to be Gravity all the way.

Dark Horse: Prisoners. This movie looked great. Grim and moody just how I like it. I expect Gravity to win but if this one took it I would be sad at all.

BW:

If it's ok with you, I'm going to skip the foreign films and head straight to the next category.  The music.  First on the list is Best Musical Score.  It seems like there hasn't been a completely memorable score in recent years, and that the films have veered toward a minimalistic approach.  Trent Reznor won an Oscar for his score of The Social Network (one of my all-time favorite movies), which was essentially the same tones and drones that were lampooned in Forgetting Sarah Marshall (another recent fave of mine).  Will The Academy reward Arcade Fire for their score of Her, or will Gravity take this category as well.

Best Music (Original Score):

"The Book Thief"

"Gravity"

"Her"

"Philomena"

"Saving Mr. Banks"

Who Will Win: Gravity - The score was just as important as the effects in creating the (outer space) world of this film.  I think it walks away with this one as well.

Who Should Win: Gravity - It wasn't a memorable score like Star Wars or 2001: A Space Odyssey, but I think the Oscar returns to the world of Sci-Fi this year.

Dark Horse: Her - It has the star power of Arcade Fire, and as we saw with Trent Reznor, even the stodgy Academy loves a big name.

Best Music (Original Song):

"The Moon Song" from "Her"

"Happy" from "Despicable Me"

"Let It Go" from "Frozen"

"Ordinary Love" from "Mandela: A Long Walk To Freedom"

Who Will Win: Ordinary Love - U2 walks away with their first Oscar.

Who Should Win: Ordinary Love - Like Bruce Springsteen with Streets Of Philadelphia, U2 wins to give them an Academy Award to add to their impressive list of trophies.

Dark Horse: Let It Go:  Never count out a Disney film.  

This category only has one truly memorable song and I think U2 wins in a landslide.  It did, however, produce a bit of controversy when a song was disqualified after it was nominated.  The original song has been in steady decline for years now.  It's good to see a big name act back in the ring and not just 5 different songs by Randy Newman (although I love me some Randy Newman).

AH:

I feel like there have been stronger years for scores. I remember liking the music in Prisoners but again it was overlooked (like it was all year). I think there are a lot of people doing interesting stuff -- for instance I love Hans Zimmer's bombastic work on Christopher Nolan movies. As for this group:

Who will win: Gravity. This score stuck just the right majestic and at times scary tone of the film and it's arguably the most memorable of the lot

Should win: Gravity. Like the sound and look of the movie, the music was vital to this movie's power. I still goosebumps when I think of that intense note after opening titles which set up the film.   

Dark Horse: Her. It was subtle and elegant just like the film itself, they might want to honor it somewhere but I expect it to be for screenplay.

BW

Let's bang out these next two categories :  Film editing and Visual Effects.  A truly good editor will never get noticed.  You won't notice the cuts, or any continuity errors that may occur.  The highest compliment that you can tell an editor is basically nothing.  If they have no complaints about the pacing of the movie or the shot selection then you've done your job.

Here are the nominees:

Best Film Editing:

"American Hustle"

"Captain Phillips"

"Dallas Buyers Club"

"Gravity"

"12 Years a Slave"

Who Will Win: American Hustle - The movie had a ton of nominees and this is a story that is all about the editing.  One of my favorite things about American Hustle was the pacing.  They seamlessly weave through all the major characters' story arcs.  I think they did a great job of building up the the crescendo and then ended the film in a good way.  I think this is the first of the technical awards to swing in American Hustle's direction.

Who Should Win: Captain Phillips - I said when I reviewed this film that it takes a lot of talent to make a movie interesting when you already know the ending.  I was at the edge of my seat the entire time.

Dark Horse: 12 Years A Slave - This was another perfectly edited movie.  The shot selection and editing made this movie come together in a very satisfying way.

And now we move on to Visual Effects.  I think this is Gravity's award hands down.  Any time you can create a new technology, the Academy will reward  you with a statue.  Here are the nominees:

Best Visual Effects:

"Gravity"

"The Hobbit: The Desolation"

"Iron Man 3"

"The Lone Ranger"

"Star Trek Into Darkness"

Who Will Win: Gravity - The visual effects were just as big a part of this film as the acting and directing.  You really felt like you were in outer space with Sandra and George.  The best visual effects I've seen in a long time.

Who Should Win: Gravity - Any other movie is a MAJOR upset.

Dark Horse: I want to say no one.  That's how much of a lock Gravity is in this category, but I will go with The Hobbit - I love the world that Peter Jackson created, and his use of 3D really adds depth and clarity to Middle Earth.

Where do you stand on Editing and Visual Effects?  We are in the home stretch of this email exchange.  After this, we are on to the big 4 (Actor, Actress, Director, and Picture).

AH:

Editing

This is such a hard category for me, I loved four of these films and really liked the fifth (Dallas Buyers Club). In the past they used to say whatever film won editing would likely win best picture but that hasn't always been true, especially as of late -- which makes it even harder for me to pick.

What Will Win: I feel like this is going to be very close between Gravity and American Hustle. It's such a toss up for me. American Hustle juggles several different plotlines and characters skillfully while Gravity is economical and tight. I am thinking it will go to American Hustle because its editing was a little flashier.

What Should Win: Based on the logic that editing makes the best picture, I think I would go with 12 Years a Slave here, but all these films were incredibly well edited.

Dark Horse: Captain Phillips, this movie didn't get all the credit it deserved, the Tom Hanks snub really bothers me, perhaps others feel the same and they'll reward it here.

Special effects

What will win: Don't really think there is a contest here. Gravity wins again.

What should win: Gravity, whether you liked the movie or not, everyone agrees it was THE state of the art movie of the year and what an unforgettable visual masterpiece.

Dark Horse: The academy loves them some Peter Jackson and all three of his Lord of the Rings pictures won this award before so I supposed if any movie could upset Gravity it's The Hobbit, but it ain't gonna happen.

BW:

Ok, now we are on to the final 4.  First up, we have Best Actress.  This was a particularly strong year for women's roles, and the best actress category reflects that.  Plus, Meryl Streep is nominated because The Academy is contractually obligated to nominate her for every role she's in.  I think this is Cate Blanchett's award to lose, but there are some strong alternatives.  I, for one, liked her performance more than the movie itself.  I didn't feel like there was enough of a conclusion to the film, but enjoyed it because the performances (Dice Clay can act?  Who knew) were so strong.  Here are the nominees:

Best Actress:

Amy Adams, "American Hustle"

Cate Blanchett, "Blue Jasmine"

Sandra Bullock, "Gravity"

Judi Dench, "Philomena"

Meryl Streep, "August: Osage County"

Who Will Win:  Cate Blanchett - She gives a brilliant performance as a "Mrs. Bernie Madoff" who is in the middle of a breakdown (both financially and mentally) after her husband is arrested.  I especially enjoyed how, even after losing everything, she was blind to the lives of the ordinary people around her.  Her bloodshot eyes deserved a Best Supporting Actress nomination.

Who Should Win:  Sandra Bullock - Simply put, without Bullock there is no movie.  You feel her panic.  You gasp for breath with her.  And, ultimately, you yearn for her to make it to the abandoned station to try to find a way home.  She won an Oscar for The Blind Side, and this performance is light years (get it... outer space?  Thank you, I'll be here all week!  Try the veal) beyond that.

Dark Horse: Amy Adams - Will the Academy finally reward her after multiple nominations?  David O. Russell gets the best performance from all his actors and American Hustle was no difference.  The way she seamlessly transitions from British to American accents to the point of making the audience forget what nationality she actually is was genius.  I feel like this is the one actor from that movie that could walk away with the statue.

How about you?

AH:

Best Actress

Who will win: Cate Blanchett. Every year I feel like there is a performance that I feel like I just KNOW I won't see a better one (in that category) all year. I'm thinking Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds or Javier Bardem in No Country for Old Men. For me, when the credits rolled on Blue Jasmine, it was a no brainer -- this woman gave one of the most fully-rounded, entertaining performances of the year -- the best female lead in a Woody Allen film since Diane Keaton in Annie Hall.

Who should win: Not the strongest category this year. Cate Blanchett, deservedly, has won ever precursor award. I loved Amy Adams in 'American Hustle' and I wouldn't be sad if she won but I don't see her rising about her competition. If Sandra Bullock hadn't already won for The Blind Side I think she'd have a great shot but the idea of her being a 2-time Academy Award winner in such a short window of time seems impossible to me.

Dark Horse: Amy Adams. Five nominations, no wins. Everybody likes her (or they should) and American Hustle is very popular with the Academy. Also, the recent flurry of anti-Woody Allen sentiment (as misguided as I personally think it is) may hurt Blanchett -- who until now has been a lock -- I could see Adams pulling off a shocking win.

BW:

Next up we have Best Actor.  I think that this is a really strong group of performances and that it's McConaughey's to lose.  I do think that it may not be as big a lock as people think it will be.  Remember when Mickey Rourke was cleaning up on the award circuit for The Wrestler, only to lose to Sean Penn?  I think the Academy has a sense of superiority to it that could make it hard for him to win.  That being said, I still think it's his (and I'm looking forward to his Wooderson-esque acceptance speech).

Here are the nominees:

Best Actor:

Christian Bale, "American Hustle"

Bruce Dern, "Nebraska"

Leonardo DiCaprio, "The Wolf of Wall Street"

Chiwetel Ejiofor, "12 Years a Slave"

Matthew McConaughey, "Dallas Buyer's Club"

Who will win:  He's been cleaning up and looks like the front runner.  He also altered his appearance (which The Academy loves).  This is the culmination of his return from romantic comedy hell to full-on leading man.  Amazing year for The McConaughey.

Who Should Win: Leonardo DiCaprio - He's been nominated numerous times before and I think that his portrayal of Wall Street uber-douche, Jordan Belfort, was his best performance to date (and the best he and Scorcese have been together).  He's paid his dues, and I think it should go to him this year.  I'm conflicted because I think Chiwetel Ejiofor was equally as brilliant for his portrayal of captured slave Solomon Northup.  He gave perhaps the most honest and raw performance out of anyone this year.  If they could share the award that would be ideal.

Dark Horse: Bruce Dern - He's been a great supporting actor in television and film for years (I loved him in HBO's Big Love).  It would be a great upset if he pulled it off.

Where do you stand?

AH:

Yeah 2008 was a tough year. I was rooting for Rourke but the Penn performance was genius too. Wish they could have tied like that one weird year where Streisand and Katherine Hepburn took home the Oscar. This IS a strong group. In fact many of my favorite performances of the year just missed the cut. Shout outs to Michael B. Jordan, Robert Redford, Tom Hanks and even Joaquin Phoenix -- who I am often hot and cold with -- for giving Oscar worthy performances but not getting a shot a glory.

Who will win: Matthew McConaughey. I think this will be his open armed embrace from the Hollywood establishment, he's paid his dues and emerged a respectable actor and it's hard to quibble with his performance in 'Dallas Buyers Club'. It's not my favorite performance in this bunch -- but he seems to have all the momentum right now.

Who should win: Chiwetel Ejiofor. It's a the performance that probably moved me more than any other I saw this year. The range of emotion, the expressiveness in his eyes, the pain, the indignation. It was a poetic piece of acting and it was glorious to watch a movie star being born before my eyes. 12 Years a Slave is my favorite film of the year and his performance is vital to its success.

Dark Horse: Leonardo DiCaprio. Some are calling it his best performance ever and they may be right. It's certainly up there with his best work. He has deserved to win in the past and been snubbed far too many times -- if anyone can upset McConaughey I think it's him. I loved Bruce Dern's performance and in a weaker year he'd have a shot, same goes for Christian Bale, but for me it's McConaughey for the win with DiCaprio nipped at his heels and Ejiofor a distance third.

BW:

Next up is Best Director.  Often, director and picture seem to go hand in hand.  That was not the case last year as Ben Affleck was mysteriously left out of the race, and the award went to Ang Lee (who directed the hell out of Life of Pi).  I think this will be the case again this year.  We have a strong group of directors who were instrumental in creating the rich worlds we saw portrayed on the screen.  I think this is Alfonso Cuaron's award to lose and if there's anything as close to a lock in this year's awards race, it's this.  He created one of the most exciting, technically perfect films in recent years.  Gravity was a labor of love for him that took years to bring to the screen.

Best Director:

David O. Russell, "American Hustle"

Alfonso Cuaron, "Gravity"

Alexander Payne, "Nebraska"

Steve McQueen, "12 Years a Slave"

Martin Scorsese, "The Wolf of Wall Street"

Who Will Win: Alfonso Cuaron - You sent me an article recently that said the race is pretty much decided.  It's unfortunate for the other directors (especially Steve McQueen) that this is Cuaron's year.  I think they all did a magnificent job... it's just not their year.  Without Cuaron's vision, Gravity never makes it to the screen.

Who Should Win: Cuaron or Steve McQueen - In a perfect world, they split the statue in two and both men walk away with a tie.

Dark Horse: Steve McQueen:  With 12 Years A Slave getting serious (and well deserved) frontrunner status as Best Picture, could McQueen pull off the upset?  Probably not, but there's always a shot.

How about you?  Where do you stand, and do you think that they should expand the Best Director pool to include more nominees similar to how what they've done for Best Picture?  It would seem like they would go hand in hand.  There were plenty other directors that got left out who did a marvelous job (I'm a big Paul Greengrass fan).

AH:

I too think there will be a split this year. My anal retentive nature makes me hate that -- I like to see the best picture winner also take home best director, it makes more sense to me. But this year there are clearly three films: American Hustle, 12 Years a Slave and Gravity -- that have Oscar voters torn and while one of them is going to come up empty handed they can still still do something for two of the three.

Who will win: Alfonso Cauron. I think the Director's Guild victory sealed it for him. He's a great story -- first Hispanic director to win, took a chance on a personal project that took years to make and became a bonafide blockbuster. It was a also a great, visionary movie -- so he's deserving.

Who should win: Steve McQueen. It would also make history (no black filmmaker has ever won best director and only two have been nominated before), and I think he made the best picture of the year. I actually love all these directors (Scorsese is my all time favorite) but his film lasted with me the longest and he was able to pull off incredibly challenging subject matter without being sentimental or relentlessly depressing.

Dark Horse: David O'Russell. The largest block of Academy voters are actors and this movie and director are very friendly to actors. So is 12 Years a Slave, but it's not as stacked with stars and Gravity really only has two actors in it. I think it's between McQueen and Cauron at this point and I'll be shocked if Cauron doesn't win.

Also on another random note -- I hope Alexander Payne is recognized SOMEDAY. I think he's always at a disadvantage because he does smaller films that are character driven -- they occasionally make decent money (The Descendants and Sideways were hits) but they're not blockbusters. Obviously, a lot of genius directors never won an Oscar for directing in their lifetime: Kubrick, Altman -- even Hitchcock, but I think Payne makes such an important contribution to adult cinema, i just hope he gets his due.

BW:

So i realize that I skipped the screenplay awards.  I would say that Original Screenplay is a tighter race than Adapted.

Let's quickly get through these before we move on to Best Picture.

Best Original Screenplay:

"American Hustle"

"Blue Jasmine"

"Dallas Buyers Club"

"Her"

"Nebraska"

Who Will Win: American Hustle - I think David O. Russell walks away with this one for doing his best Scorcese immitation.  I thought the strength of this movie was its acting, and that was because they had such a fun script to work with.

Who Should Win:  Her - I have yet to see this movie, but from all accounts, it's a completely fresh and original screenplay by Spike Jonze.  I would like to see it rewarded on Oscar Night.

Dark Horse:  Nebraska:  I don't think Alexander Payne's quirky black and white dramedy will get the attention it deserves on Oscar night, but it may be able to pick up an Original screenplay award.

Best Adapted Screenplay:

"Before Midnight"

"Captain Phillips"

"Philomena"

"12 Years a Slave"

"The Wolf Of Wall Street"

Who Will Win: 12 Years A Slave - This screenplay should win this award in a landslide.  The writer was able to perfectly bring Solomon Northup's story to life.

Who Should Win: 12 Years A Slave - I think this was a perfect movie, with the script being the core that allowed everything else to happen.

Dark Horse: The Wolf Of Wall Street - This was Scorcese's best movie since Casino.  They took Jordan Belfort's autobiography and turned the volume up to 11 for 3 hours of debauchery.  Leonardo DiCaprio has never been better and it was all due to Scorcese's vision and the incredible screenplay.  I think it could have a (slight) chance to unseat 12 Year A Slave in the Adapted Screenplay category.

AH:

Best Original Screenplay

What Will Win: Her, I think the Oscars will want to reward Spike Jonze in some way for pulling off such an unusual premise.

What Should Win: Her also happens to be the most "original" off all the five nominees, although I am a fan of all these films, I think this screenplay was the most surprising and ambitious of the five.

Dark Horse: Blue Jasmine. I could see Hollywood closing ranks behind Woody Allen right now as his name is being drug through the mud a lot right now.

Best Adapted Screenplay

What Will Win: 12 Years a Slave, I think the academy will have to recognize the feat they pulled off here. You don't heat the usual quibbles about its authenticity or veracity and that alone makes it a safe bet.

What Should Win: 12 Years a Slave, John Ridley made a several hundred year old memoir feel fresh and relevant in 2014, he deserves it more than anyone.

Dark Horse: The Wolf of Wall Street. The only one I could see upsetting Slave, mainly because Hollywood would want to thumb their nose at all the squares bitching about the nudity and the profanity.

BW:

Going back to your earlier point about split director/picture winners, I totally agree with you.  It's weird to me that one film could win a bunch of awards and then lose out when it comes to Best Picture.  That certainly seems to be the case this year with Gravity an almost certain lock to win Best Director and not take home the grand prize.

So we have finally come to the end of the Oscar nominees list.  I would like to sincerely thank you for doing this with me.  It was a lot of fun and something I hope we can continue in the future.  It's always great to talk movies, and there is no better time of the year than Oscar season.  It's the movie nerd Super Bowl (and with this year's Super Bowl being a total turd sandwich, it will most likely be a better television event) and I'm really excited for the Academy Awards to air.

I would also like to send a big congrats to you on your blog (Which you can read here).  You have a really great writing style and I would love to be able to get something going in terms of a podcast or maybe another email back-and-forth in the future.  With that being said, it's time to share our picks for Best Picture.

2013 was an incredible year for movies.  We have nine films that are nominated, but they probably could have chosen 5 more and there still would have been some snubs.  Here are the nominees:

Best Picture:

"American Hustle"

"Captain Phillips"

"Dallas Buyers Club"

"Gravity"

"Her"

"Nebraska"

"Philomena"

"12 Years a Slave"

"The Wolf of Wall Street"

Who Will Win: 12 Years A Slave - Simply put, it's the best movie of the year.  I would even argue it's the best film I've seen in maybe a decade.  The acting, writing, directing, cinematography are, in one word, perfect.

Who Should Win: 12 Years A Slave - I think there are a few potential challengers to the throne (which I will detail below), but I think this film stands a top an incredible list of movies from the year 2013.

Dark Horse: I have two that could potentially dethrone 12 Years A Slave.  The first being American Hustle.  Every year there seems to be a move that comes in and challenges the frontrunner.  American Hustle seems to be that movie.  I wasn't as high on it as you were, but if it wins I wouldn't be totally disappointed.  It wouldn't be an upset on the level of Crash (maybe the worst movie to win Best Picture) over Brokeback Mountain, or Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan (a top 5 movie of all time for me), but it would be an upset.  The other movie I could see squeaking in and winning this thing is Gravity.  It's going to clean up all the technical awards and will win Best Director.  It was my second favorite movie of the year behind 12 Years.  Does it have enough momentum to win the big award?  I'm not sure, but it's a possibility.

Who walks away with Best Picture on your ballot?

Again, I really want to thank you for helping me out.  It was a blast and an honor to have you contribute to the Too Fat Oscar Pick-a-palooza.

AH:

It's been my pleasure. I think we're pretty much on the same page about all of this year's awards and yes, the Oscars as hyped as they are will remain for me this undeniably exciting, infuriating and fascinating phenomena. I think for better or for worse they set the standard of what the Hollywood establishment deems great and that can be both frustrating and encouraging. For example, I was thrilled when the academy embraced the Coen Brothers and dark, challenging film like No Country for Old Men and just as disappointed when The Social Network was passed over for a decent but totally conventional movie like The King's Speech. And again, I just want to reiterate that this has been a lot of fun for me too.

Best Picture

Who Will Win:

12 Years a Slave. I think it's close and I wouldn't be totally surprised if it gets upset because it hasn't been the biggest commercial hit, there seems to be this mysterious resistance to it within the Hollywood community and American Hustle and Gravity seem to have more support. But ultimately I think they will not want the headlines they'd get it they rejected this acclaimed movie which tackles the subject matter of slavery.

Who Should Win

12 Years a Slave, I think it's the best film of the year and not just because of its subject matter or its intensity. It was just the greatest story, the most emotionally compelling, the acting was sensational and I think it's a movie I will watch again and again for years and still get a lot out of. Great movies stand the test of time. This will be a film that will be watched and re-watched for decades.

Dark Horse

Gravity. It't the biggest commercial hit in the mix and Cauron seems to be the front runner for director. It was pretty much universally liked so I think there would be less griping if it won. I think with it's all-white cast if American Hustle beat 12 Years a Slave it would not look so good. But with its Hispanic director and writer, Gravity at least feels like a more politically correct choice. I also think it's the groundbreaking choice and it'd be the first sci-fi film to ever win. 

So there you have it folks.  Tune in to the big show on March 2nd to see how we did.