Karl Delossantos

Hush Movie Review — Another slam dunk for Blumhouse

Mike Flanagan follows-up Oculus with an equally menacing and thrilling movie in Hush

Blumhouse Pictures has become a horror-movie machine and the latest one off the conveyor belt is Mike Flanagan’s Hush. Most people were probably introduced to Flanagan after his second feature Oculus, a movie that we loved. While Hush strips out the supernatural elements that Oculus had, what it maintains is the dread that made it so successful. Both take place in pretty much a single-setting with limited characters, but it’s that aching that there’s something around the corner or behind you that make both must-watches.

Hush introduces us to Maddie (Kate Siegel), a deaf and mute author living in the woods writing her next novel. She is essentially isolated save for her cat (appropriately named “bitch”) and her neighbor and friend Sarah. It is the perfect location for a psychopathic murderer with a bow and arrow to stalk his prey and that’s exactly what Maddie’s unnamed assailant (John Gallagher Jr.) does (I’ll be calling him “The Man” from here on out).

However, what makers this movie different from You’re Next, another home invasion movie that I love, is that the man would easily be able to get into the house, but doesn’t. Instead, he toys with her.Unlike You’re Next or Aubrey Hepburn’s Wait Until Dark, the man isn’t seeking anything. He assaults her both physically and psychologically. He is simply there to terrorize, which makes him all the more terrifying. He is a simply psychopath.

Hush is not the most original in its concept. However, what it lacks in originality it makes up for in pure technical achievement. The editing and cinematography assist in the film’s goal to set unease and the production design makes you fear that this could happen in the most peaceful of places. Yet, it’s the sound design that really elevates the craft. Since Maddie is deaf, it’s expected that the movie would lack dialogue. But what Flanagan does instead is play with noise. For example, we watch the opening in two perspectives. First, with sound and what we would normally expect when someone is cooking a dinner. Then, we hear it from Maddie’s perspective, which is unsettling and reminds us of her isolation and disadvantage in the situation.

Although it would have been great to have a deaf actress play the lead role, co-writer Kate Siegel is alluring enough to put us on her side and actually cheer whenever she has a victory, no matter how small. However, the clear revelation here is John Gallagher Jr. who turns in yet another great performance this year after stunning me in 10 Cloverfield Lane. Despite his average stature, he towers as a psychopathic villain, which is refreshing after his string of nice guy performances.

Hush isn’t reinventing the wheel, but it is proving that the genre still has legs. If you’re looking for an entertaining and knuckle-whitening thriller, then you won’t be disappointed.

6.5/10

April 11, 2016
Get In Trouble Book Review — A quirky and fun short story collection

There are a few gems among Kelly Link’s short story collection Get In Trouble that are certainly worth the trouble of reading

I wasn’t sure what to expect going into Kelly Link’s short story collection Get In Trouble. I never read a short story collection before it and I had my apprehensions. However, after just hearing praise after praise about the book and watching the anthology movie “Wild Tales,” I was convinced.

Diving into the book, I didn’t know what to expect. All I knew was that each story has a supernatural element to it. Reading the first story “The Summer People” was a great representation of the rest of the stories in the book. It tells the story of Fran, a teenager in rural North Carolina who takes care of the homes of the people who come to vacation in the town in the summer. However, after her mother mysteriously disappears, she is in charge of taking care of the “summer people,” a group of fairy-like creatures who enjoy playing tricks, but also help provide you with the magical remedies you may need.

The story sets up Link’s distinctly “en media res” style that gives you more background on the characters and stories that take some novels 50 pages to do. Despite the high-concept of a lot of the stories, Link anchors each in the characters.

For example, “Origin Story” opens on a 15-year-old from Iowa, as she arrives at a hotel to meet up with an older man she met online. At the hotel, two vastly different conventions are occurring: a dentist convention and a superhero convention (like actual superheroes with superpowers). However, the girl thinks nothing of the superheroes. That’s the thing with Link’s worlds. What would be abnormal or supernatural in ours are mundane in hers. The superheroes fade into the background and in the forefront is this “who am I?” exploration of this 16-year-old girl.

However, there is one thing that I couldn’t get past that hurt the book as a whole for me. While each story is such incredible deep dives into the characters, and the worlds are realized with such soft strokes but are still easily visualized, the plots of each story don’t seem to hold up. I understand each story is its own short character study, but each story doesn’t feel like it has a payoff. They almost feel incomplete save for a couple that felt full circle.

Maybe I’m just not built to read short stories or maybe I tried too hard to find some satirical meaning behind each narrative, but if you enjoy them then, by all means, you might love Get in Trouble.

Despite my issues with some of the stories, I will say that Link’s prose is some of the most beautiful I’ve read in recent memory. Passages like,

“The boy is loved. The loved one suffers. All loved ones suffer. Love is not enough to prevent this. Love is not enough. Love is enough. The thing that you wished for. Was this it?”

After this wave of YA, easy-to-digest prose, it’s refreshing to read such mature writing that doesn’t patronize the reader. Kelly Link is such an incredibly talented writer. Her world-building is unlike any other author I’ve read recently. She does it with such ease and without the bulkiness of exposition. If you’re looking for an impeccably written set of quirky fairy tales, then Get in Trouble will do the trick. But if you’re looking for twists and payoffs, then I’d stay away.

7/10

Get Get in Trouble on Amazon!

April 11, 2016
2016 Emmy Predictions: Limited Series
This year, Limited Series is a surprisingly competitive category this year. There are feasibly nine legitimate competitors for the five slots. At the top of the list is FX’s “The People vs. O.J. Simpson”. They are going to feasibly be the nominations leader with multiple nominations in each category and it has the cultural clout that you don’t often get with a limited series.

Right behind them is the early frontrunner and last year’s winner, “Fargo”. It surpassed reviews from last year as well as buzz. I can see them going toe to toe with “The People vs. O.J. Simpson” in almost every category. It’s going to be one of the closest races on Emmy night.

Closely following the two frontrunners is “American Crime”. It had a great year last year including a win for Regina King, who is certain to return. However, the one thing against it is that it doesn’t have nearly as much buzz as the first two series I mentioned. It’s going to have to cover a lot of ground to overcome that.

The above three series are pretty much locks. However, these last two spots are going to be a fight. It can be a combination of six shows that are all in contention. “Roots”, which is a reimagining of the 1977 miniseries that famously was nominated 37 Emmys, could go one of three ways: it is nominated only for Best Limited Series and a few other categories, it is nominated in several categories except for Best Limited Series, it is a nomination juggernaut.

Right now, I am leaning towards the first option. I don’t think it’s going to be a huge factor in nominations, but it is going to get a few that will justify a series nomination. I can also see it easily missing.

Then there’s the question of the ever confusingly nominated “American Horror Story: Hotel”. The show has been consistently nominated since inception, but never seems to have caught on with wins. The “Hotel” season was probably the least lauded, but last year they hit a high in nominations. Sadly, I can’t see it not being nominated, but it could be bumped out because of the crowded year.
1. “The People vs. O.J. Simpson”
2. “Fargo”
3. “American Crime”
4. “Roots”
5. “American Horror Story: Hotel”
  ———————–
6. “The Night Manager”
7. “Show Me A Hero”
8. “Flesh and Bone”
9. “11.22.63”
10. “True Detective”
April 8, 2016
Zootopia Movie Review — One of the smartest and timely Disney animated movies

The most recent installment in the Disney renaissance, Zootopia, is also easily their most timely and political. Basically the movie could be described as “let’s talk about racism with animals,” but like the best animated movies it mixes social subtext with genuinely hilarious moments and interesting characters.

Zootopia starts on an elementary school play starring rabbit Judy Hopps (Gennifer Goodwin) about how animals became anthropomorphic. She dreams of becoming a police office one day despite her parents’ objections and the fact that a rabbit has never become a cop. Despite this, she graduates at the top of her class and is assigned to district one of Zootopia, a city where animals of all kinds, predator and prey, can live together in peace. However, she is assigned to parking duty since her boss, Captain Bogo (Idris Elba), a water buffalo, doesn’t believe she can make it as a real cop since she’s a rabbit.

However, she is able to finally pick up a case involving predators who have gone missing. She is tasked with finding an otter who is one of the missing. She coerces the help of a con-man fox named Nick Wilde (Jason Bateman) to help her in the case.

The narrative itself would be enough to make the movie a good entry in the Disney cannon. It features smart writing, incredible visuals that make the world come to life, and great central characters that spit off banter like the best procedurals on TV — though much credit has to be given to Goodwin and Bateman on their voice work. However, it’s the fact the the movie doesn’t shy away from a political subtext that makes it a great, and maybe even the best, movie in this new age of Disney.

Throughout the movie, there are eerily familiar parallels to real life, like a lion running for mayor with a sheep on the ticket to shore up the prey vote or a sheep yelling, “go back to the forest, predator” to a cheetah who replies, “I’m from the Savannah!” or a rabbit mother moving her child closer to her when a lion gets on board a train. Maybe for adults the racial subtext is a little bit obvious, but what’s more important is that it trusts that its younger audience will pick up on its message of inclusion and the danger of stereotypes.

Past the racial commentary, the movie – like Frozen – features a female central character whose main storyline doesn’t involve a romantic interest or dream to find true love. Her dream is to be a police officer despite the adversity she encounters.

As a comedy, there are moments of just brilliance. At the center of that is a scene involving sloths at the DMV and incredible spoofs of Breaking Bad and The Godfather. It is moments like that that prove that animated movies don’t have to be made either for kids or adults. It could be both.

Zootopia may be a “kid’s” movie, but its message is one that garners a high-level of thought. It comments on prejudice in a time of fear and calls for peace and tolerance instead of panic. It couldn’t seem more timely with the recent rash xenophobia and racism that has plagued our country. Zootopia may not change the world, but it can at least teach our children that we should not succumb to fear, but instead work together toward peace.

8.5/10

Get Zootopia on DVD, BluRay, or digitally over on Amazon!

April 6, 2016
2016 Emmy Predictions: Lead Actress in a Drama Series
Refreshingly, Lead Actress in a Drama Series is the more competitive of the lead categories on the drama side. However, there doesn’t seem to be much movement from last year’s group. Reigning champ Viola Davis (“How to Get Away with Murder”) is sure to return along with last year’s near winner Taraji P. Henson (“Empire”).

After them, Robin Wright (“House of Cards”) will return and could actually win it all this year if she selects the right episode (she’s had a problem with that thus far). “Chapter 49” shows Claire at her most vulnerable and gives her some incredible scenes and a great closing speech that could put her over the edge.

As the “Homeland” Renaissance continues, Claire Danes is assured to return especially after the strong year they had at the Emmys last year.

After these four, the category gets a little more confusing. Tatiana Maslany (“Orphan Black”) finally reaped a nomination last year after two years of being snubbed. I could see her being a one-and-done nominee, but I can also see a scenario where she becomes a perennial nominee in the category. I think she still has some residual support left that’ll help her sneak in, but there is a chance she is snubbed.

The last spot is a little trickier. The smart money would be on two-time winner in this category Julianna Margulies (“The Good Wife”) returning, especially since this is the show’s last year. However, she has been on shaky ground in this category. She was nominated three years in a row (winning once), then snubbed, then returned and won, and then was snubbed again. Will she really return for an average season of the show? I don’t think she will.
Most people would predict Michelle Dockery (“Downton Abbey”) to return for the show’s final season, but I think that Keri Russell (“The Americans”) will finally get an overdue nomination in the category after three years of snubs. The show was finally nominated in its first major category last year (in writing), which could open the floodgates for more above the line categories (a la “Friday Night Lights”).

Dockery, Kerry Washington (“Scandal”), and Eva Green (“Penny Dreadful”) (mostly wishful thinking) have chances to return as well.

Check out our 2016 Emmy Predictions!

Rankings
1. Viola Davis, “How to Get Away with Murder”
2. Taraji P Henson, “Empire”
3. Robin Wright, “House of Cards”
4. Claire Danes, “Homeland”
5. Tatiana Maslany, “Orphan Black”
6. Keri Russell, “The Americans”
  ——-
7. Julianna Margulies, “The Good Wife”
8. Eva Green, “Penny Dreadful”
9. Michelle Dockery, “Downton Abbey”
10. Kerry Washington, “Scandal”
April 4, 2016
Wild Tales Movie Review — An anthology film that lives up to its name

Wild Tales is certainly crazy, but every single vignette is a unique take on revenge and the animalistic urges we all have.

Unlike a lot of foreign language films, the English title for Argentina’s “Relatos Salvajes” is a direct translation to “Wild Tales.” I point this out because this, along with the opening title sequence (a montage of various wild animals), perfectly sums up what the movie is about. It’s about the animalistic side all of us have. The six short films in this anthology are connected by their themes of vengeance and, as horrible as it sounds, it shows the things that we wish we could do to the people we think have wronged us.

Anthology films, which are usually reserved for the horror genre, are often a mixed bag. You never know what you’re going to get. Sometimes, especially if each vignette is directed and written by different people, the quality is inconsistent at best. Also, often times the constant switching of stories makes the movie lose any momentum it has built. However, “Wild Tales” is able to get past these drawbacks. First, all the stories are written and directed by Damián Szifron, which helps make each of the stories consistent in quality, but more importantly stylistically consistent.

In addition to being connected thematically, each vignette has a wholly satisfying black humor that makes you want to keep watching. Each 20 minutes section could be watched without the others and still be lauded for its quality. But it’s the message that the sections together portray that make the movie great.

SPOILER ALERT: After the jump I’m going to be talking about each story. You’ve been warned.

The first tale, a cold open if you will, is called “Pasternak”. It opens on a model (María Marull) as she boards a plane, she finds out that she’s unable to get frequent flier miles for her ticket since someone else paid for her ticket. While talking to a fellow passenger, she finds that they both know a man named Pasternak, she was his ex-girlfriend and the other passenger a music criticized his work. Then, another passenger reveals she’s connected to him. It can’t be a coincidence. So, what is happening?

The next tale is one of morality called “The Rats”. A man walks into a diner. The waitress (Julieta Zylberberg) instantly recognizes him as a corrupt official who drove her father to suicide. She would love to tell him off or rid the world of his evil, but the thought doesn’t became a realistic plan until the diner’s cook (Rita Cortese) suggests she poison him. The waitress is torn. The cook makes it sound so easy, but it’s obviously immoral… right? Well, in this world, revenge is a dish best served with french fries and fried eggs.

Check Out: “The Wave” Movie Review: An American disaster movie in Norway

Easily the most shocking of the tales, “The Strongest” opens on a young businessman (Leonardo Sbaraglia) driving his new sports car through the desert. As he passes a dingy pickup truck, he yells insults as the driver. However, when he gets a flat tire further down the road, he must confront the driver who doesn’t take being insulted lightly. As their fight escalates, we realize, quite terrifyingly, that this is what we would want to do when someone gives you the finger on the road.

“The Strongest” kicks off a series of stories that talk about class relationships. In that film it’s rich vs. poor, in “Bombita” it’s citizen vs. government. Simón (Ricardo Darín), a demolition expert, is picking up his daughter’s birthday cake when his car is towed. He goes to the towing company complaining that he was not aware it was a towing zone since it wasn’t marked. From there, that one even effects every aspect of his life, from his marriage to his job. As the story unfolds, we realize we’ve felt the same way every time we get a parking ticket or have to stand in line at the DMV.

“The Proposal” goes back to rich vs. poor as it follows a family that has to figure out what to do when the son hits a pregnant woman in a hit-and-run accident. They offer their gardener $500k to take the fall, but when the number of people they have to pay off increases, the patriarch (Oscar Martínez) has to decide how much is too much. It becomes a tale of morality and responsibility. Will the son take responsibility, or will daddy make it go away?

The final story is the perfect topper to this ridiculous, darkly comic movie. “Till Death Do Us Part” starts at a wedding reception. It’s perfect. The guests are excited, the bride and groom look like they could fly to the moon. That is until the bride (Érica Rivas) discovers that her newly minted husband (Diego Gentile) cheated on her with one of the guests. At first she’s heartbroken and even suicidal, but she quickly learns that you shouldn’t get sad, you get even. And did she ever. If you take anything away from the story, it’s that hell hath no fury like a woman scorn.

In the end, “Wild Tales” is a cautionary one. It warns us of the savages we become when we are driven by vengeance. Damián Szifron tells each story with a specific visual flair that helps make “Wild Tales” the best anthology movie I’ve ever seen. 8.5/10

March 31, 2016
10 Cloverfield Lane Movie Review — A Hitchcockian thriller with a twist

10 Cloverfield Lane easily one of the best early movies of the year with nail-biting tension that rivals Hitchcock himself

I think Cloverfield is a movie that got better with age. Despite the questionable decisions of characters and odd editing choices, it was a generally entertaining disaster movie. However, its “spiritual sequel” is changing the way we see franchises. 10 Cloverfield Lane has the same DNA as Cloverfield. It has the same mood, but it is not found footage or directly connected to the original in any way. It is simply placed in the same universe. However, I wouldn’t call 10 Cloverfield Lane a monster movie.

10 Cloverfield Lane tells the story of Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), a young woman who never seems to stop running away from her problems, as she leaves New Orleans after an argument with her boyfriend. She gets into a horrifying car crash (and I truly mean horrifying) and wakes up shackled to a bed in a concrete cell. She is told by her captor, Howard (John Goodman) that the country has been attacked and that the air is toxic. He pulled her from the wreck and brought her to his fallout bunker that he has been developing for years. He also casually drops that they may be in there for 1-2 years. From there, trust is a currency between Michelle, Howard, and the bunker’s third occupant, Emmett (John Gallagher Jr.). The latter two are trying to determine whether Howard is telling the truth or whether he is a crazed man that is head deep in his own delusions.

That last sentence is just one comparison to draw to Hitchcock’s Psycho. Outside the obvious fact that both films follow a woman who is running away from her problems, stylistically director Dan Trachtenberg heavily borrows from Hitchcock. The opening scene is the best example. The first 15 minutes or so of the movie is almost completely devoid of dialogue and the first five is scored with an epic, sweeping orchestral overture by Bear McCreary, who is best known for his work in television. The entire story is told through visuals. We don’t know why Michelle is running away right at the beginning, but we know she’s frantic. It’s not until we hear a call from her boyfriend (voiced by Bradley Cooper), that we know why she’s running away.

Also, just like Hitchcock, Trachtenberg pays as much attention to sound as he does the absence of sound, which is best exemplified in the opening sequence when the music drops out as Michelle stops at a gas station. She knows something is off and so do we.

The movie is structured like a three-actor play. It was filmed chronologically, which I think added to the performances. Mary Elizabeth Winstead seems to elevate the material she’s given. With movies like “Final Destination 3” and “The Thing” on her resume, she’s easily the best part of either of those movies. So when she’s given great material like in this movie or in the Sundance movie “Smashed,” she really shows her skills as an actress. She show’s Michelle’s insecurities, but also hints at moments of bravery. She’s the best kind of protagonist because you root before because you truly care about her rather than being forced to care about her. It’s also refreshing to not have to yell at the screen when your main character does something stupid.

John Goodman, the greatest supporting actor as some have called him, perhaps gives one of the best performances of his career. So much of the film hinges on whether or not you trust Howard. And trust me, Goodman does an incredible job making you question yourself. He is legitimately terrifying but has enough depth for you to understand his internal struggle. He grabs you, shakes you, and leaves you still questioning what happened to Howard to make him this way.

With two heavy hitters to contend with, John Gallagher Jr. held up as the heart of the group. Emmett, whose journey into the bunker seems almost as hectic as Michelle’s, demonstrates the movie’s ability to balance so many genres. His line, “I live my life in a 40-mile radius,” sums up this theme of regret that runs through the character study vein of the movie.

However, the movie itself is hard to classify. Yes, it’s a character study, but it also works as a psychological thriller, horror, and sometimes even a comedy if you look at the camp of it. 10 Cloverfield Lane is one of the few great early year movies. However, there’s so much in play that made it that. Its adaptation from its original screenplay that was titled “The Cellar” also stripped away some of the inevitable twists that are so often engrained in psychological thrillers and opts instead to use its characters to ratchet up tension. Is the Cloverfield connection really necessary? No. Not by a long shot. But that’s what makes the movie even more satisfying in the end. “10 Cloverfield Lane” shows that sequels can truly standalone without anything owed to its predecessor. Take note, Hollywood.

8.5/10

10 Cloverfield Lane is available on DVD, Blu-Ray, and digital on Amazon!

March 29, 2016
Tell the Wolves I’m Home Book Review — Unflinching and Raw Coming-of-Age Story

One of the best debuts from a writer, Tell the Wolves I’m Home is an emotional tour du force

Once in a while a book comes around that reminds me why I love books. It reminds me why I love books about real people. It reminds me why I don’t need an epic to feel like I’ve lived an entire life through a book. Tell the Wolves I’m Home is one of those books, which is even more impressive considering it is a debut.

Tell the Wolves I’m Home tells the story of June Elbus an appropriately weird 14-year-old girl from New York. Her love for the middle ages, which includes her going into the woods and pretending she’s from that time wearing medieval boots, is really only understood by her Uncle Finn, a retired artist from New York City. Her relationship with Finn is one that she believes no one else can understand. She loves her uncle in a way that most people love their spouse. That’s why his slow decay due to AIDS is affecting her in a way that no one else seems to understand.

However, her uncle still communicates with her through notes that he left her that are being delivered by a man that her family seems to despise. One of the notes tells her to “take care of him,” which June does out of respect for Finn, but eventually begins a relationship with the man that makes her understand what it is to love.

Coming-of-Age is a hard genre to master without falling into a formula, however where any other novel would zig, Brunt seems to zag. Her portrait of June is one of the deepest character studies I have ever read. June’s insecurities and growth are so beautifully captured in prose instead of using big set pieces. One of my favorite instances was a passage where she describes what going to a party is like for her:

“That’s what being shy feels like. Like my skin is too thin, the light too bright. Like the best place I could possibly be is in a tunnel far under the cool, dark earth. Someone asks me a question and I stare at them, empty-faced, my brain jammed up with how hard I’m trying to find something interesting to say. And in the end, all I can do is nod or shrug, because the light of their eyes looking at me, waiting for me, is just too much to take.”

Brilliant passages like that are given throughout the book and encompass so many themes. June’s relationship with everyone in her world was drawn out with so much detail. From her relationship with her mother whose own grief doesn’t seem understood to June, her relationship with Finn that represents true love, to her complicated relationship with her sister, Brunt has an understanding of the way humans interact with each other.

In the end, Tell the Wolves I’m Home is an epic meditation on love, grief, change, and the necessity of growing up that disguises itself as a young adult coming-of-age. Though the tropes of our odd heroine, major life event, and life-changing relationship are there, Brunt uses them in a way that I don’t think has been committed to the page before. 9/10

Tell the Wolves I’m Home is available in paperback, hardcover, and e-book on Amazon!

March 21, 2016
5 New Shows That Could Break into the 2016 Emmy Race

The Emmys are often slower to pick up to new shows than other awards, however this year there are a few that may make it into the race. Here are five new shows that could break into the Emmy race this year.

Also, check out our early Emmy predictions for Outstanding Comedy and Drama Series!

Mozart In the Jungle

Mozart in the Jungle pulled off two wins at the Golden Globes earlier this year, which proves that Amazon’s other comedy “Transparent” wasn’t just a one off. The online streaming service is making a strong play for the awards races and “Mozart in the Jungle” seems to be their next big contender. The Golden Globes have been pretty consistent in predicting a nomination for a show on the comedy side. Winners of Best TV Series, Musical or Comedy tend to go on to receive at least a nomination. Still, they might have a hard time in the series race because of the strength of the comedy field this year. However, they could possibly pull off a nomination for Lead Actor for Globe winner Gael García Bernal if perennial nominee Don Cheadle drops off like Jim Parsons did last year.

Master of None

Aziz Ansari’s Netflix comedy “Master of None” made a huge splash with audiences and critics to become one of the best new series of the year. It won the award for Best Comedy Series at the Critics’ Choice Awards, which is not a prerequisite, but it certainly helps. However, the biggest plus for it is the fact that Netflix will be pushing the show extremely hard. Plus, its popularity has been slow, but building.

Aziz Ansari has a great chance of reaping both writing and Lead Actor nominations. The show itself is a strong contender for Best Comedy Series despite the crowded Comedy field this year. It’s going to surprisingly be one of the less divisive new shows that are in contention this year. As for other categories, I could see a directing nomination if the show really catches on with voters as well as a well-deserved Nöel Wells.

Crazy Ex-Girlfriend

Another network that has been having some surprising recent success is the CW, mostly because they’ve become extremely brave in their programming. Last year, Gina Rodriguez (“Jane the Virgin”) pulled off a win at the Globes, but failed to repeat her success at the Emmys. This year, Rachel Bloom won Best Actress at the Golden Globes and the Critics’ Choice Awards. While that doesn’t guarentee her a nomination (see: Gina Rodriguez), “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” is a far more accessible show that Jane the Virgin and has similar acclaim.

Rachel Bloom has a great chance of showing up in Lead Actress in a Comedy Series and the show is definitely in the running for a writing or directing nom. However, an Outstanding Comedy Series nomination is going to be more difficult to come by with the crowded field. The show should also do well in the below the line categories like Outstanding Music and Lyrics, Choreography, and Sound Mixing.

Narcos

Since “House of Cards,” Netflix hasn’t been able to get another one of its drama series into the race. While “Bloodline” received two acting nominations, that’s really been the extent of their Emmy success. “Narcos” has similar reviews to the first season of “House of Cards” and has also had a slow and steady building of buzz. While it doesn’t have the strong names behind it like “House of Cards,” it’s a sweeping series that comes at a time where the cartel has become a common interest in books and movies.

It’s going to have a tougher time than “Mr. Robot” to break into the Drama Series race, but Wagner Moura, who plays Pablo Escobar, could make it into the weaker Lead Actor race.

Mr. Robot

The most likely show to break into the drama categories is USA’s “Mr. Robot.” The show has garnered huge acclaim and has already won at the Golden Globes, Critics’ Choice, and reaped a SAG nomination for Rami Malek. While USA has yet to really break into the Emmy race, “Mr. Robot” feels like the kind of drama that the Emmys can actually latch onto.

The series is an extremely strong contender for Drama Series, Writing, Directing, Lead Actor for Rami Malek, and Supporting Actor for Christian Slater. It can even make a strong showing in the Creative awards, particularly Cinematography and Editing. It could be among the nomination leaders for a new show similarly to the way “Transparent” was last year.

March 8, 2016
Egregiously Early 2016 Emmy Predictions: Comedy and Drama Series
The Oscars are over, which means it’s time to turn our attention to the Television kudos, the Emmys and our 2016 Emmy Predictions! Last year was an odd year for the Emmys with several different changes giving us surprise winners. Of the most important changes:
1. During the nomination process in lead and supporting categories, there will be six nominees as usual. However, there can be seven or eight nominees if the seventh and eighth place person on that ballot comes with 2% of the sixth place person. That’s why we had seven nominees in Lead Actor in a Comedy Series and Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series
2. Instead of panels reviewing submitted episodes of the nominees, the full Television Academy is able to vote.
The second rule showed the most obvious effect with winners like Peter Dinklage (“Game of Thrones”) and Allison Janney (“Mom”) winning by lazy name checking rather than their tapes. Jonathan Banks (“Better Call Saul”) and Anna Chlumsky (“Veep”) easily had the best tapes in their respective categories.

This is why this year at the Emmys is going to be the most interesting. Now that we’ve seen how this new system affects the winners and nominees, we can better predict the winners. On the drama side, Emmy heavy-hitter “Mad Men” opens up spots in several categories. Most importantly, Best Drama Series.

This year has been a particularly weak one, so there won’t be much movement.

Last year’s winner “Game of Thrones” will easily make it back into the race as well as perennial nominees “House of Cards” and “Downton Abbey.” First-time nominee “Better Call Saul” will make it back in as well following a strong year of nominations last year. Despite only receiving three nominations last year, “Orange is the New Black.” which was moved to drama after a new rule defining dramas as an hour-long, should make it back in because of the weak field.

That leaves two spots open. Golden Globe winner “Mr. Robot” has the best chance of any new show this season of breaking into the race. With the lack of contenders, it should be able to do it. That leaves the last spot to either previous winner “Homeland” and Netflix newcomer “Narcos.” Both series received generally positive reviews this year. However, the buzz for the former just doesn’t seem to be there

BEST DRAMA SERIES
1. Game of Thrones
2. House of Cards
3. Better Call Saul
4. Mr. Robot
5. Downton Abbey
6. Orange is the New Black
7. Narcos

8. Homeland
9. Vinyl
10. The Good Wife

The comedy side is quite the opposite. There is an abundant of contenders. However, it’s certain that previous winners “Veep” and “Modern Family” will return. “Transparent” will also come back following a great performance in nominations last year. After those three contenders, the waters get a little murky. Aziz Ansari’s highly acclaimed Netflix show “Master of None” has a great chance of breaking into the race after nominations at the Golden Globes and a win at Critics’ Choice. Perennial nominee “Silicon Valley” still seems to have legs, so the HBO show should come back along with a nominee last year, “Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt.”

The last spot could go a few different ways. Golden Globe winner for Best Comedy Series and Best Actor in a TV Series, Comedy “Mozart in the Jungle” could make it in, especially after Amazon proved extremely successful with “Transparent.” However, until the Globe win I didn’t hear much buzz about the show. So I don’t think it will make it in too easily. Former perennial nominee “The Big Bang Theory” could make it back in after its 200th episode this year. Then there’s “Black-ish,” which had Anthony Anderson nominated last year and “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend,” the little CW show that could, which won a Golden Globe and Critics’ Choice for it’s lead actress. However, I’m going to go with Fox’s “The Last Man on Earth.” It had a great year last year with four big nominations for both writing and directing, as well as lead actor and editing. It feels like a series nomination is the next natural step. Then again, that’s what I thought with “New Girl” and we know how that ended up.

BEST COMEDY SERIES
1. Veep
2. Modern Family
3. Transparent
4. Master of None
5. Silicon Valley
6. Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt
7. The Last Man on Earth

8. The Big Bang Theory
9. Mozart in the Jungle
10. Crazy Ex-Girlfriend

Check back here for more 2016 Emmy Predictions!
March 3, 2016
Steve Jobs Movie Review — A sleek and well-acted character study

Danny Boyle’s Steve Jobs is the biopic about the late Apple founder we wanted. Michael Fassbender and Kate Winslet gives a career-best performances.

The biopic is a very hard genre to do well. So often do films fall into the familiar formula of hard childhood, humble beginnings, major setback, and success. That’s what exactly went wrong with the Ashton Kutcher-led Jobs. There was no innovation behind the film, which is disappointing considering Jobs is arguably one of the most innovative entrepreneurs to have ever lived. He was also an incredibly complex man who was oversimplified in Kutcher’s portrayal and in the film itself. It became over-sentimental. However, a writer like Aaron Sorkin knows how to remove the self-importance of a story and just allow the characters to affect the storylines as much as the people involved.

What’s so refreshing about the movie is that it is so kinetic. Exposition and character building so often bog down biopics, but Steve Jobs thrives off of it. Under the direction of Danny Boyle, the film moves at lightning speed. It helps that Aaron Sorkin loves the walk and talk because it really keeps the film moving. No matter what the characters are talking about there is some movement. Whether they are walking or throwing papers or fiddling with computers, we are always moving.

Cinematographer Alwin H. Küchler and Boyle used this to their advantage by focusing your attention to what is more important. When the film is dynamic you are getting exposition or the plot is moving forward, but when we stop you pay attention more because what is being delivered is important to either the character or story.

However, one of the most important choices that really made this film come alive was the decision to present the story in a three-act structure, each of which took place at three product launches in Jobs’ career: the Apple Macintosh, NeXT computer, and iMac. We know Jobs from these events. Up until the year he died we associated him with the black long-sleeve shirt, jeans, holding a clicker presenting the next Apple innovation. However, instead of focusing on the launch itself, the movie turned its attention to the time before the event. That’s where the story takes place. The movie took what was familiar about Jobs and gave us a behind-the-scenes look while also giving us an idea of him as a person.

Steve Jobs becomes even more impressive when you dig into the details of the production. Because of the three-act structure that really felt like a play, it was filmed in chronological order, which is already a feat in itself. It was also filmed in the actual theaters where the launches were held with people that attended them. It added to the energy of the already frenetic production.

The three-act structure was bolstered with the decision to film each act in the aspect ratio of the time, giving it an authentic vintage feel. The 1986 intro was particularly fun with its blast of colors that remind us of the ever hopeless style of the 80s and approaching 90s. Despite the time period, it never feels like a period film. The topic is very much alive. Whether it’s because Jobs’ death was so recent or because Danny Boyle took note to make the film feel important doesn’t matter. What matters is that you feel a part of what is happening in the film. You feel Jobs’ urgency and that what he’s doing is important. Maybe you don’t realize it on a technical level, but on an emotional one you know that he cares. His genius is confusing, even to those people in the film, but you understand it because Sorkin wants you to understand it.

Sorkin’s screenplay, as I’ve mentioned, is the lifeblood of Steve Jobs.It is truly electric to hear the actors spitting our dialogue a mile a minute without wavering. It’s elevated by the fact that the script doesn’t worry itself with characters’ motivations or emotional attachments. The dialogue tells the story, but the characters’ actions tell the heart. Instead of Jobs explaining why it is so important to break fire code and turn off the exit signs in the theater, his cantor and tone is what tells how important it is.

What bogs down biopics so often is the fact that they include the information that doesn’t matter. Despite the huge amount of dialogue in the film, Sorkin only leaves the most important information. A major plot line of the movie is Jobs’ illegitimate daughter, who at the start he denies is his. Where most biopics would give all the backstory on when he met the mother and how he found out about his daughter, the movie skips all that and throws you straight into the action seamlessly.

That’s also why Michael Fassbender’s portrayal of Jobs is so incredible. He has proven time and time again his commitment to a role, however his career best comes in Steve Jobs. He’s so graceful in his portrayal of Jobs, but never for a moment feels as if he’s acting.

While Fassbender really contributes as much to the success to the film as Boyle and Sorkin, the true heart lies in Kate Winslet who gives what I consider the best performance of her career. She transforms into her role both physically, vocally, and emotionally. Joanna Hoffman, Apple and NeXT’s marketing director, is arguably the only person Jobs will give in to. She grounds him with reason and reminds him that other people have feelings. When he sees people, who have IQs at genius levels, as idiots, she reminds them that they don’t have the confidence he does. She reminds him that not everything is based in numbers. If Jobs is the head of Apple, then Hoffman is the heart.

[Tweet “#SteveJobs proves that style and substance aren’t mutually exclusive in a film.”]

Steve Jobs is a film that I could watch over and over and still catch things I never saw the first time. From camera angles to staging, it’s a film that speaks on so many levels. It proves that style and substance aren’t mutually exclusive, they can live together in a film successfully. If you’re looking to get a “this happened, then this happened” telling of Steve Jobs’ life, then this isn’t the film you’ve been looking for. But if you want to watch a story about a complicated man who wanted to change the world, then Steve Jobs will meet and exceed your expectations.

9/10

Steve Jobs is available on DVD, Blu-Ray, and digital on Amazon!

March 1, 2016
2016 Oscar Predictions: Final Predictions

The Oscars are this Sunday, which means it’s time to give you our FINAL 2016 Oscar Predictions. This means that from this point forward I are sticking with out picks and not changing at all. Now, while I try to use the most analytic process to choose who I think will win, sometimes you just have to go with your gut. So there may be some out of left field choices here, but bear with me. I’ll make sure I explain any outlandish picks.

I’m going to start out with the technical categories and make my way down. So, if you want to just read the top five categories, click ahead!

Best Foreign Language Film

Will Win: “Son of Saul”
Could Win: “Mustang”
Should Win:”Son of Saul”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Goodnight, Mommy”

There are two very clear frontrunners for this category. The first is “Son of Saul” which became the early frontrunner our of Cannes. It has the advantage of being a holocaust movie, which do well at the Oscars. It also won the Golden Globe, which isn’t a requirement, but it doesn’t hurt. However, France’s “Mustang” has been this slowly growing contender that has a lot more mainstream appeal than “Son of Saul.” I still think “Son of Saul” has it, but “Mustang” is going to put up a fight.

Best Documentary Feature

Will Win: “Amy”
Could Win: “What Happened, Miss Simone”
Should Win:”The Look of Silence”
Should’ve Been Nominated: N/A

Ever since this category expanded voting to the whole Academy, the crowd-pleasing movie has won over the arthouse pick. “20 Feet From Stardom” over “The Act of Killing” and “Undefeated” over “Paradise Lost 3” are recent example. That’s why I think that if there’s an upset in the category it will “What Happened, Miss Simone” rather than “Cartel Land” like many people are predicting. “Amy” is still who I’m predicting though. It has a lot of buzz and it is a more traditional music documentary, which is popular in this category.

Best Animated Film

Will Win: “Inside Out”
Could Win: “Anamolisa”
Should Win:”Inside Out”
Should’ve Been Nominated: N/A

This is pretty much an open and shut category. With “Inside Out” landing a Best Original Screenplay nomination and coming from the Oscar titan Pixar, there’s almost no way it could lose. Plus, it really deserves to win for making a complicated subject both entertaining and understandable.

Best Film Editing

This is a hotly contested category partly because the winner of this category could help determine Best Picture at the end of the night. Usually the film with the “most” editing wins, which is why “Whiplash” won last year, so “The Big Short” should win here. It also helps that they did win the ACE Eddie Award even though it was in the comedy category and not competing with the other films nominated. If “The Big Short” wins here then they will almost certainly win in the top race. Nevertheless, I think that “Mad Max: Fury Road” is going to take it with both ACE Eddie and BAFTA wins under its belt.

Will Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Could Win: “The Big Short”
Should Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “The Martian”

Best Costume Design

“Mad Max: Fury Road” won the BAFTA award for this category which has been a strong predictor for the Oscars for that last eight years. Yet, I don’t think a win is going to be as easy as that. I think that “Carol” is going to give it a run for its money. The winners of this category tend to be the cleaner period pieces. In the last 20 years, a non-period film won this award only once in 2010 when “Alice In Wonderland” won. However, that film clearly had the most costumes of the category. I’m going to predict “Fury Road” but I won’t be surprised to see “Carol” taking it either.

Will Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Could Win: “Carol”
Should Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Crimson Peak”

Best Production Design

Like the costume design category, Production Design usually goes to a period film, however fantasy does have a better track record here. “Mad Max: Fury Road,” which won here at the BAFTAs should take this quite easily barring a “The Revenant” sweep even though nature did all the work.

Will Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Could Win: “The Revenant”
Should Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Jurassic World”

Best Makeup and Hairstyling

Not only did “Mad Max: Fury Road” take the BAFTA, it also took the Makeup and Hairstyling guild award. “The Revenant” has a chance, but “Fury Road” should take this pretty easily.

Will Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Could Win: “The Revenant”
Should Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “The Hateful Eight”

Best Cinematography

Emmanuel “Chivo” Lubezki has won this category twice in a row (and should have won a fourth time for “The Tree of Life”) and should win handily this year as well. Although there was inspired work in this category in “Mad Max: Fury Road,” the only film I can really see stopping him is “Sicario” which would give Roger Deakins his long due Oscar. If I had been voting in this category though, I would give it to the gentle but incredibly smart cinematography in “Carol”

Will Win:”The Revenant”
Could Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should Win: “Carol”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “The Assassin”

Best Sound Mixing

The sound categories are surprisingly a bit of a mystery this year. Usually they’re open and shut. However, this year with “Mad Max: Fury Road” and “The Revenant” fighting over the tech categories, it’s not as clear. “Fury Road” had the more clear sound mixing because of its chaotic nature. “The Revenant” is more subtle, but could win in a sweep. Also, it won Best Sound at the BAFTAs. I think this could be a rare year where the sound categories are split and I think “The Revenant” takes this one.

Will Win: “The Revenant”
Could Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should Win: N/A
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Love & Mercy”

Best Sounds Editing

Sound Editing usually goes to the loudest movie like “Gravity,” “Inception,” and “American Sniper.” This year, the loudest film is by far “Mad Mac: Fury Road” so I think that’s where this category is going.

Will Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Could Win: “The Revenant”
Should Win:”Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Inside Out”

Best Original Score

Ennio Moriconne is seen as a lock for his score for “The Hateful Eight”. He’s the consensus choice, a veteran, and the sweeping oventure in the opening is very impressive. However, I think pundits are really overlooking Carter Burwell for “Carol”. He is also a veteran and his score for the film is the most affective and effective of the nominees. I’m pulling for him to take it and I think he could, but I’m sticking with “The Hateful Eight.”

Will Win: “The Hateful Eight”
Could Win: “Carol”
Should Win:”Carol”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “It Follows”

Best Original Song

Lady Gaga and Diane Warren seem to have been the preordained winners of this category for “Til It Happens to You” (“The Hunting Ground”). Lady Gaga has had a huge year and Diane Warren is overdue for a win. It also helps that they lost the Golden Globe since the winner of that award rarely wins at the Oscars. It’s only happened twice since 2000. With that statistic, Sam Smith’s “Writing’s On the Wall” (“Spectre”) probably won’t win. If one nominee is going to upset, it would be the Weeknd’s “Earned It” (“Fifty Shades of Grey”). He’s had a huge year and voters might be wanting to vote for a person of color after #OscarsSoWhite. What holds it back is that if it wins it would mean “Fifty Shades of Grey” is an Oscar winning movie.

Will Win: “Til It Happens to You” (“The Hunting Ground”)
Could Win: “Earned It” (“Fifty Shades of Grey”)
Should Win: “Manta Ray” – Racing Extinction
Should’ve Been Nominated: N/A

Best Visual Effects

“Mad Max: Fury Road” vs. “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”. This is going to be one of the hardest categories to call. Either the Academy goes with the film with the most effects, “Star Wars.” Not only is it the biggest box office hit of the year, it would also be their place to honor it. However, “Mad Max” is going to go on a sweep of the tech categories and this would be another one on the way. Although, since there was so much press about it using practical effects voters might not be able to pay attention to the CGI. The other viable contender is “The Revenant.” If it wins, it would solely be for the bear attack scene. I’m going with “Star Wars.” It’s too big of a movie to go home empty-handed and stays in line with the “most effects win” trend.

Will Win: “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”
Could Win: “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should Win: “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Everest”

Best Original Screenplay

I think you could make arguments for “Straight Outta Compton” and “Inside Out” in this category, but this is “Spotlight’s” to lose. If it loses Best Picture, this could be its consolation prize.

Will Win: “Spotlight”
Could Win: “Straight Outta Compton”
Should Win:”Spotlight”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Anamolisa”

Best Adapted Screenplay

Similarly to Original Screenplay, this category is all but locked up by “The Big Short.” I’d love to see Drew Goddard’s brilliant treatment of “The Martian” win, but “The Big Short” has the precursors and a possible Best Picture win behind it.

Will Win: “The Big Short”
Could Win: “Room”
Should Win:”The Martian”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Steve Jobs”

Best Actor

This is Leonardo DiCaprio‘s race to lose. He’s at the point in his career where he’s due an Oscar in a larger than life role in a movie that is a huge contender. If he doesn’t win, then someone at the Academy hates him.

Will Win: Leonardo DiCaprio, “The Revenant”
Could Win: Brian Cranston, “Trumbo”
Should Win: Michael Fasbender, “Steve Jobs”
Should’ve Been Nominated: Michael B. Jordan, “Creed”

Best Actress

Brie Larson (“Room”) is at the point in her career where she is also due a win. She’s won everything so far and should take it pretty easily.

Will Win: Brie Larson, “Room”
Could Win: Saoirse Ronan, “Brooklyn”
Should Win: Charlotte Rampling, “45 Years”
Should’ve Been Nominated: Teyonah Parris, “Chi-Raq” or Emily Blunt (“Sicario”)

Best Supporting Actor

Sylvester Stallone (“Creed”) has all the momentum behind him. He has a great narrative, good enough performance, and no clear competitor. However, a part of me is telling me that Mark Ruffalo (“Spotlight”) is finally going to get his first Oscar. I don’t know if it’s going to happen and I really don’t have precedent to back me up. I’m going to save my gutsy pick for Supporting Actress, but if Ruffalo does win I’ll be kicking myself.

Will Win: Sylvester Stallone, “Creed”
Could Win: Mark Ruffalo, “Spotlight”
Should Win: Tom Hardy, “The Revenant”
Should’ve Been Nominated: Idris Elbar, “Beasts of No Nation” or Benicio Del Toro (“Sicario”) or Liev Schreiber (“Spotlight”) it was a great year.

Best Supporting Actress

I don’t buy the Alicia Vikander (“The Danish Girl”) win. It just doesn’t feel right. Yes, she won the SAG, but I think she’s a very weak frontrunner and there’s a lot of support for Golden Globe and BAFTA winner Kate Winslet (“Steve Jobs”). Her performance already has a higher degree of difficulty and more successful execution. She’s also a charming industry favorite and is almost unidentifiable in the film. I’m going with Winslet as my gutsy acting prediction. Will it happen? I think it really could.

Will Win: Kate Winslet, “Steve Jobs”
Could Win: Alicia Vikander, “The Danish Girl”
Should Win: Kate Winslet, “Steve Jobs”
Should’ve Been Nominated: Alicia Vikander, “Ex Machina”

Best Director

I can’t express how much I want George Miller (“Mad Max: Fury Road”) to win this. He is the most deserving for creating this world with such detail and showing how an action film and film should be done. However, he’s going to have an extremely hard time beating Alejandro G. Inarritu (“The Revenant”), who won the DGA. The one thing working against him is that he would become only the third director to win two consecutive Oscars in this category. I think people are aware of this and don’t want it to happen. If I was a braver man I’d go with Miller, but Inarritu is my pick.

Will Win: Alejandro G. Inarritu, “The Revenant”
Could Win: George Miller, “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should Win: George Miller, “Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should’ve Been Nominated: Todd Haynes, “Carol”

Best Picture

Shockingly, Best Picture is the most difficult category to predict. Usually at this point we’d have a clear picture, but certain trends would have to be broken for any of the frontrunners to win. “Spotlight” was the early frontrunner, but it’s too small of a film to win. We learned that last year with “Boyhood.” “The Revenant“ has the momentum and won the key DGA award. However, it lost PGA and didn’t have an integral SAG nomination. All arrows seem to be pointing at “The Revenant”. However, PGA is the most similar to Oscar voting, which is why every year in the last six years has the winner of the PGA repeated at the Oscars. That give “The Big Short” the boost. It also received an integral SAG ensemble nod, which is also necessary to win (the last time the Oscar winner wasn’t nominated at SAG was when “Braveheart” won.) Any of these three films could win, but “The Big Short” seems to be the most feasible winner.

Will Win: “The Big Short”
Could Win: “The Revenant”
Should Win:”Mad Max: Fury Road”
Should’ve Been Nominated: “Steve Jobs” or “Sicario” or “Ex Machina”

Who do you think will win at this year’s Oscars? Tweet at us with your predictions!

February 25, 2016
2016 Oscar Predictions: Best Film Editing

Best Film Editing is a very important category at the Oscars. You need to be at least nominated in the category to win. Last year’s Best Picture winner “Birdman” was an anomalous case since it was edited to look as if it was filmed in one take. So ignoring that year, the last time the Best Picture winner wasn’t nominated in this category was 1981 when “Ordinary People” won. However, that usually doesn’t go for the winner. Best Picture and Best Film Editing match up about half the time. Usually, the winner tends to be the film with the most editing like “The Bourne Ultimatum,” “The Social Network,” and last year’s winner “Whiplash.”

However, another statistic that some pundits often don’t consider is that the winner often takes at least one other tech category with it. Since 1990, only two movies won Best Film Editing without taking at least one other tech award: “Traffic” (2001) and “Unforgiven” (1992). “The Big Short,” which arguably has the most editing, isn’t even nominated in another tech category. This doesn’t take them out of the conversation, but I think it’s more likely that one of the two tech heavy films are going to win.

“The Revenant” is poised to win at least two and maybe three over-the-line categories, Best Director and Best Actor, and is the frontrunner in at least two tech categories, Best Cinematography and either of the sound categories. However, it lost out to “Mad Max: Fury Road” at Critics’ Choice, BAFTA, and most importantly the ACE Eddies. I think that makes it the solid frontrunner that will make it all the way.

The only other scenario I could see playing out is that “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” goes on a streak of their technical awards and takes this category along with them.

Check out all our 2016 Oscar predictions here!

*My “if I had an Oscar ballot” pick

Rankings:
1. Mad Max: Fury Road*
2. The Revenant
3. The Big Short
4. Star Wars: The Force Awakens
5. Spotlight

Should’ve Been Nominated: “Steve Jobs,” “The Martian,” “Room”

February 18, 2016
January Reading Wrap-Up: “The Power of the Dog,” “Gone Girl,” & More

At the end of every month we are going to review all the books we read and say which ones we recommend and which we think you should leave on the shelf. Enjoy our January Reading Wrap-Up!

The Martian – Andy Weir

The year is 2035, the Ares III manned mission on Mars is forced to evacuate due to a severe storm that supposedly kills astronaut Mark Watney. The crew takes off away from Mars. The only problem, Mark Watney is alive and so begins his story of survival where he must stretch a mission that was to last 30 days to more than 3 years. NASA, the world, and most importantly, we are watching and hoping that he does.

I finally read the book after the I watched Ridley Scott’s adaptation, which Drew Goddard (The Cabin in the Woods) wrote. The movie is piercingly funny, thrilling, suspenseful, and an emotional roller coaster. If it was able to affect me in a way that made it one of my favorite movies of the year, then the book would probably do even better — and it almost achieved it. The voice that Andy Weir writes Mark Watney in is so wonderfully witty that you forget that he is alone on an entire planet. As his story of survival lurches on, it’s his personality the we cling to for salvation. However, the entire ensemble of the book is truly cast of characters.

However, part of the reason the book didn’t quite reach the heights of the film — and why Goddard deserves much praise for his adaptation — is because sometime the book goes too deep into the science. I have to commend Weir for his dedication and gratitude for science, which is really what the book is about, but sometimes the long stretches of it bog down what otherwise would be a fast-paced read. Also, there are a few too many “Mark Watney might die” close calls that also slow down the narrative, however when it’s thrilling then it’s heart-racing exhilarating.

Recommend? Yes! Despite some of its flaws, science geeks will love the deep analysis of certain decisions and book worms will love the witty writing style and fast paced plot. ★★★★

The Book of Joe – Jonathan Tropper

“The Book of Joe, Jonathan Tropper’s second novel, takes that biting humor and puts into that “return to hometown” plot. However, although those types of books and movies get tedious and cloying, Tropper’s overall wittiness and brutal humor makes it a refreshing read. The novel tells the story of Joe Goffman, a bestselling offer who did what any great writer does — write from experience. In his case, he writes about his hometown Bush Falls, the people, and his experiences. His book becomes a hit and is turned into a popular movie. He never thought he would have to return to Bush Falls again. That is until his father falls into a coma.” –from our full-review of The Book of Joe

Most of you probably know Jonathan Tropper from This Is Where I Leave You (which suffered from a subpar movie adaptation) which used the similar trope of going home to cause change in our main character. However, what makes This is Where I Leave You so successful is its incredible cast of characters that make up the Foxman’s family. In The Book of Joe, the characters surrounding Joe are hit or miss. You have quite interesting and dynamic characters in his best friend, dramatically drawn ones in his old high school’s bully, however for every great character there are some that feel too one-dimensional such as his old girlfriend and brother.

Other than some character issues, the book is phenomenally readable and surprisingly has a lot of heart. I think what makes an interesting main character is one that you’re not always rooting for. Sometimes you feel that they have to be struck down for their own good, and Joe is one of those characters. You want him to change for his own good. I think that some plot points are made simply to have fun passages of comedy, but in the end never add much to the narrative, but it’s okay because they do conjure a smile. If you’re a visual reader, then this is the book for you because it plays so much like it was written like a movie in mind, which if happened would be a movie about a book about a book that was turned into a movie. Give it to us Hollywood!

Recommend? If you’re not looking for the next Crime & Punishment and want a funny and easy read, then this one is for you! ★★★½

The Power of the Dog – Don Winslow

The Power of the Dog opens on the bloody massacre in a home filled with men, women, children, and babies. It perfectly sets the tone of the novel. Don Winslow is able to create an atmosphere with his words that is unsettling, foreboding, and almost sickening. So begins the three-decade look at the war on drugs. The novel switches perspectives through several characters throughout the novel. From a DEA-agent on a mission to right past wrongs, an Irish mobster, a prostitute who gets involved in the border war, a priest going against the Vatican, and several heads (sometimes severed) of different Mexican cartels. However, the novel mostly focuses on Art Keller’s trajectory into the DEA to starting a manhunt on an epic scale.

Don Winslow has a fascination with the cartel that I hope he never loses. Between Savages, The Kings of Cool, and his most-recent novel The Cartel, he has a way with writing about the war on drugs that is entertaining, complex, but so readable. Although The Power of the Dog stretches to 550 pages, he never wastes a single sentence. He writes with such intent that it makes the novel’s 30 years of story feel like it goes by in a flash. He has a way of tying complicated characters into a complex plot without taking from either. The book is just as much a character study as it is historical fiction as it is a thrilling crime novel. He is able to balance every single aspect with a grace and flow that most crime novelists would envy.

As the years move by and the plots get continuously intertwined, you begin gripping the book tighter. It’s what Winslow does best. He is a highly visual writer, which adds so much tension and excitement, especially when he writes action. However, even scenes that are static are written in a way that slowly burn, waiting to explode. It’s so hard to write about this book without talking about the plot, but it’s one of those books that you really have to go in with a clean slate. That’s how it’ll grip you. By the end, you’ll feel like you’ve really lived through the 30 years covered, but you’ll want to dive back into them — I certainly do.

Recommend? YES! A thousand times, yes. Not only do I think this is one of the best crime novels I’ve read. It may be one of the best novels I’ve read. ★★★★★

Gone Girl – Gillian Flynn

Amy is gone. Her living room shows signs of a struggle, the front door was left open, and her husband is acting distant. Even more interesting, she disappeared on their However, nothing is as it seems in Gone Girl. Gillian Flynn does something with Gone Girl that makes it one of the most inventive contemporary novels. Switching between present day from the perspective of Amy’s husband Nick Dunne and her private diary, we watch as the case unfolds and and their marriage unfolds. Amy’s diary tracks her and her husband’s relationship from when they meet to a few weeks before she disappeared. Reveals are made as Nick solves the scavenger hunt his wife always leaves for him on their anniversary and as Amy grows deeper into her relationship with Nick Dunne.

I watched the Gone Girl movie first. Not only was it directed by David Fincher, it was based on a book that you couldn’t go anywhere without hearing about. The movie was one of my favorites of the year and ranks as one of the best works by Fincher. So when I finally picked up the book to read, it had big shoes to fill. I think what makes the book so wonderful is that it uses the unreliable narrator trope so adeptly. We don’t know who to believe. Nick or Amy. The police or the media. It paints a realistic world that doesn’t have any clear cut answers. Flynn has found a way to draw such vivid, extremely flawed, and frankly, f*cked up characters that have motivations and feelings that are actually terrifying.

I’m going to go no further in describing the book. Just know that Gone Girl is an extremely taut thriller that is so methodically written that it feels like a puzzle, better yet, a riddle. It comments on marriage, the media, and even our society. Books that are able to change our perception of the world, and more importantly, people are in a league of their own. I am a stern believer that entertainment should make you uncomfortable and this book will have you jumping out of your own skin.

Recommend? Yes! Gone Girl is essential contemporary reading. A wonderful take on a mystery and thriller, it’s a novel that will be remembered for years. ★★★★★

Me Before You – Jojo Moyes

I ended the month on a lighter read than the last couple books, but no less emotionally charge. Me Before You centers on Louisa Clark, a 26 year-old who just can’t seem to find her place in the world. She has never left her hometown or moved out of her childhood home, but she’s content there. However, after losing her job and her parents in dire financial straits, she must step out of her comfort zone and take a job as a caregiver for a C5-6 quadriplegic, Will Trainor. Initially a man who seemed invincible, Will’s accident has taken the one thing he cherished most: his freedom. Louisa’s task is to keep him happy, sane, and feel as if he still has a life.

Romances are very rarely my kind of book. Very few have been able to break through me. The Fault in Our Stars is really the only example of one that actually affected me. However, what Jojo Moyes did was take a subject that seems very young adult oriented and inject a maturity that makes the novel as much of a romance as it is a look at life of the misguided. Louisa Clark may be one of my favorite book characters in recent memory. She’s so unapologetically different, however when you dig into why your heart will break. Her relationship with Will causes both of them to grow in the best ways possible. However, what makes Me Before You such a successful book is that Moyes is so brave in her portrayal of life. The situation the characters are in is hard and she doesn’t sugar coat that fact.

The characters surrounding the main couple are so well drawn out as well. Louisa’s family isn’t perfect by any means. The people featured are victims of their circumstance. They are not living in a world that is as romantic as we want it to be. However, don’t think that the novel is as dull or dark as it sounds. Moyes is so bitingly funny in her dialogue and in the situations she presents. She is also a highly visual author, which makes some scenes soar like you’re watching the climax of a movie or break your heart. That being said, it is wildly readable, affecting without being preachy, and romantic without being cheesy. Me Before You is the rare romance that realizes that hurt exists.

Recommend? If you’re not that into young adult plots or romances, then this may not be for you. But I certainly recommend it for anyone willing to go through an emotional roller coaster. Check out our full review here! ★★★★★

February 15, 2016
2016 Oscar Predictions: Best Original Screenplay

For the last ten years, Best Original Screenplay has gone to a Best Picture nominee. The last time it didn’t was in 2005 when “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” won. If this trend continues, then unfortunately “Ex Machina,” my second favorite movie of 2015, is out of the running. “Straight Outta Compton” would also be knocked out, but I’ll make a case for it a but further down. Another statistic that will knock out a contender is “Inside Out” since no animated film as ever won.

If “Spotlight” is the Best Picture winner like we think it is, then it needs to take at least one other award. Best Original Screenplay looks to be that award. It is also the quiet indie movie that tends to win here like “Juno,” “Little Miss Sunshine,” and “Her.”

The other Best Picture nominee in the category is “Bridge of Spies.” While it’s written by Academy favorites Joel and Ethan Coen, it doesn’t have the wider support like “Spotlight” has.

The one question mark in the race is “Straight Outta Compton” because of two factors: (1) it was probably either the number nine or ten Best Picture nominee; (2) it is really the only film that focuses on people of color nominated. I think the first factor shows that it has a base of support and the second will help get it votes from those who believe that the Oscars need to have diversity in it. Lastly, it is a well written movie and sometimes that’s enough.

I think that “Spotlight” is solidly in the front, however I think that “Straight Outta Compton” has a genuine shot at taking the win here.

Rankings:
1. “Spotlight”
2. “Straight Outta Compton”
3. “Inside Out”
4. “Ex Machina”*
5. “Bridge of Spies”

Should’ve Been Nominated: “Anamolisa,” “Spy,” “Sicario”

February 11, 2016