Scattered Frames: The Contenders – Part I

February 7, 2015

Hello everyone! I’ve upped my cinematic intake considerably in the last few weeks in preparation for Hollywood’s biggest night, but I’m still trying to find the time to write about them and get back to regular posting. I seriously do not know how you all do it! RESPECT! Anyhoo, here’s the first batch of short and sweet reviews about some of this year’s main award contenders. Hope you enjoy!

Whiplash: An energetic exercise in holding the viewer’s attention, and them holding their breath for an hour and a half. Sharp, expertly written and anchored by a scorching performance by J.K. Simmons, Whiplash instantly became my favorite film of 2014 and I doubt any other will be able to top it. Fantastic cinematography and, of course, soundtrack, to boot. Joins the select list of films that I actually wish were longer. 4.5/5

Into the Woods: It is so sad to think that the man who directed this disappointing mess is the same who made the flawless (yes, you read that right) Chicago. Into the Woods is long, mostly boring and stuck in a very awkward place between dark and family-friendly. But, most infuriating of all, it’s so stupid: the songs, the dialog, the characters’ actions. Skip this one; after all, you can see Meryl Streep and Emily Blunt being awesome in much better movies. 2/5

The Theory of Everything: Straightforward biopic gets extra points for eschewing the genre formula and focusing on the love story (and both of its protagonists) instead of Hawking’s achievements as a physicist (there’s plenty of that too, don’t fret). The eye-popping cinematography perfectly frames two of the year’s strongest performances: Felicity Jones as Jane Hawking, whose book this film is based on; and Eddie Redmayne, who pretty much becomes Stephen Hawking (aren’t you tired of hearing that already?) 3.5/5

Still Alice: Julianne Moore is superb as a woman losing herself to Alzheimer’s disease at the young age of 50. She expertly conveys the terror and helplessness of such a situation and is the reason why this otherwise disposable film will be remembered from here on out. Alice’s predicament made a teary mess of me several times, I’ve got to say. One thing that surprised me, though, is how no one talks about Kate Bosworth’s performance in this? Very solid supporting work. 3/5

Category : Awards Stuff, Film Reviews, Scattered Frames

Tags : 2014, 2015, academy awards, alec baldwin, Alzheimer, Alzheimer’s disease, anna kendrick, award contenders, award nominees, blog, bloggers, blogging, broadway, Charlie cox, chris pine, christine baranski, committed to celluloid, critic, Damien chazelle, Damien chazelle whiplash, eddie redmayne, eddie redmayne Oscar, eddie redmayne Stephen hawking, emily blunt, felicity jones, film, film blog, film rating, film recommendation, film review, films, golden globe, golden globes, into the woods, j.k. simmons, j.k. simmons whiplash, james corden, james marsh, jazz drummer, jazz drumming, jazz drums, johnny depp, johnny depp wolf, julianne moore Oscar, kate Bosworth, kristen stewart, meryl streep, meryl streep oscar, meryl streep witch, miles teller, miles teller whiplash, movie, movies, musical film, oscar, oscars, review, Richard glatzer, rob marshall, Stephen hawking, stephen sondheim, still alice, the theory of everything, wash Westmoreland, whiplash

← Born Into Film: 1990

From and Inspired By: Fifty Shades of Grey →

25 thoughts on “Scattered Frames: The Contenders – Part I”

ruth on February 7, 2015 at 6:43 pm said:

Hi Fernando! Nice mini reviews man. I feel the same about Into The Woods, but then again I had low expectations given the director. I did like some scenes but overall it was a big fat meh. Still need to see the other three. Sounds like Julianne Moore is the shoo-in winner in the Oscar race.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 8, 2015 at 12:10 pm said:

Thanks, Ruth! I actually had high expectations for ITW, despite being disappointed by Nine. Oh well, I think Marshall must have gotten really lucky behind the camera for Chicago or has somehow lost his touch. And you need to see the others, if only for the great performances. I agree it’s Moore’s year.

LikeLike

Reply ↓

Keith on February 7, 2015 at 6:47 pm said:

Solid takes on each of them. Whiplash seems to be the one that is universally loved. And it is safe to say the Moore has her Oscar in the bag. She is winning everything leading up to Oscar’s big night.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 8, 2015 at 12:11 pm said:

Thanks! I’m so glad that Whiplash has been so well-received. I absolutely loved it. I do agree that Moore’s taking the gold man but I actually prefered Marion Cotillard.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓
- Keith on February 8, 2015 at 12:24 pm said:
  
  Ahhh yes. I ALWAYS prefer Cotillard! 😉
  
  LikeLiked by 1 person
  
  Reply ↓

Three Rows Back on February 8, 2015 at 4:08 am said:

Nice roundup matey!

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 8, 2015 at 12:11 pm said:

Thank you kindly, Mark!

LikeLike

Reply ↓

Mark Walker on February 8, 2015 at 6:19 am said:

Good to see you rate Whiplash so highly, Fernando. It’s a great film. Can’t say I was all that impressed with Into the Woods either,

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 8, 2015 at 12:12 pm said:

Thanks, man! I can’t praise it enough. And yeah, I think we are collectively underwhelmed by Woods.

LikeLike

Reply ↓

Abbi on February 8, 2015 at 8:13 am said:

I haven’t seen Still Alice but we agree on the others. 🙂 It’s so good to have you back.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 8, 2015 at 12:14 pm said:

That’s so sweet, Abbi! You should check out Still Alice if only to witness what will surely be Moore’s Osca-winning performance.

LikeLike

Reply ↓

Tom on February 8, 2015 at 2:44 pm said:

Nice man, it’s good to see you again!!

I cannot wait to get to Still Alice. I know it’ll be a tough watch but worthwhile for Julianne Moore. Can’t get enough of her.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 8, 2015 at 2:48 pm said:

Thanks. And yes, a tough watch but worth it for Moore.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓
- Tom on February 8, 2015 at 3:24 pm said:
  
  More Moore is always. . .moorish.
  
  LikeLiked by 1 person
  
  Reply ↓

Andrew on February 9, 2015 at 8:44 am said:

Fantastic little reviews here! I have yet to see any of these films, but I will soon.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 10, 2015 at 2:22 pm said:

Thanks, Andrew. Hope you enjoy them!

LikeLike

Reply ↓

vinnieh on February 10, 2015 at 11:49 am said:

Nice work Fernando.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 10, 2015 at 2:26 pm said:

Thanks, man! 🙂

LikeLike

Reply ↓

Pingback: Scattered Frames: The Contenders – Part III | Committed to Celluloid

Pingback: Lock ‘em in: final predictions before the 87th Oscars! | Committed to Celluloid

Pingback: Oscartime is here! | Committed to Celluloid

Beer Movie on February 25, 2015 at 4:42 am said:

Ugh. I was just not a fan of The Theory of Everything at all. I thought it sort of tried to be both a biopic and a love story, but failed miserably at both.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 25, 2015 at 10:04 pm said:

I can see your point. I thought it was more love story than biopic. I wasn’t blown away by it, but I did like it.

LikeLike

Reply ↓

martin250 on February 27, 2015 at 5:34 pm said:

nice posts Fernando. I’ll be watching The Theory of Everything very soon mainly because of Eddie Redmayne. I’ve only seen him in Jupiter Ascending and it got me curious about his acting potential.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply ↓

fernandorafael on February 27, 2015 at 5:59 pm said:

You are in for a treat, then! He was awful in Jupiter but so good in Theory. Definitely deserved that Oscar.

LikeLike

Reply ↓