25 May 2020

2020 Summer Jam Week 3: Special Quarantine Edition!

Well, what's going on, now? We're still pretty quarantined, but loosening up restrictions a little bit. It's Memorial Day and time for beaches and pools to open up. It seems like we are doing so although there's no real indication that the virus is slowing down or anything or that it wouldn't come back immediately if like...we go back to what was causing it to spread. Never mind that shit, we got some hot salsa jams to get through!

Hot Jam of the Week: "Kings & QuaranQueens" by Ava Max

So this is really just "Kings & Queens" but it's a pretty good energetic pop track and I love a video that acknowledges the zeitgeist in a positive way. Ava Max is maybe underrated and this is a fun home video. We can do quite a bit at home, it's not a big deal. I'm into it. I hope this electric jam catches on and we have some fun this summer.

"Claws" by Charli XCX

Watching this just reminds me a lot of current Millennial tastes. It's purposefully kitschy, random and nihilist, since everything else in the world they've grown up in has been a chaotic disaster. It's actually pretty fun, with this grinding techno beat, chewing auto-tune and actually a nice positive drive. It's not popular or anything, but a nice diversion this week.

"Stuck with U" by Bieber and Ariana

We want to lean hardcore into quarantine this weekend and here's the capper song for everyone. It's not very good or memorable despite featuring two of the leading voices in pop music. But it's totally modern and has a nice ballad feel to it. I'm curious how much this stuff will last over the next few years. It's okay I guess.

"Supalonely" by Benee ft. Gus Dapperton

This also reeks of Millennial tastes, which is all fine. The song isn't all that memorable, but we can add being trapped at home making weird music to our list of generational standards. This song just broke and has been gaining some traction. The beat doesn't totally sync up with the lyrics or flow and could underline just about any song. Still, its nice.

"Watermelon Sugar" by Harry Styles

This song isn't that great, but it features a lot of Watermelon munching. How can you have a better summer jam than that?! Despite never listening to One Direction I tend to like Harry Styles, which might actually be related. This doesn't really do it for me, though. I wonder if my ears are starting to cave and all pop songs have become trite and interchangeable to me. No. It's the children who are wrong.

"Don't Start Now" by Dua Lipa

Dua has an early Summer Lead, but I'm thinking it might be cresting. Well, it should have crested quite a while ago, but I still dig it a lot. The big Disco ballad still gets me, though and as far as I'm concerned, this is her masterpiece. It still got plenty of references this week and is credible. Sort of. It may fade fast from here on out, but I also still enjoy it a lot so probably not.

"RITMO" by Black Eyed Peas ft. J. Balvin

"RITMO" feels very old but it's not, giving it a specific weird space to thrive in. It probably succeeds by re-purposing "Rhythm of the Night" by visionary generational voice will.i.am. Also apl.de.ap. Man the Black Eyed Peas blow. I'm giving it a lot of stock this week. It comes on and it's like, "oh, this song I haven't heard much, what is that all about!" but it's all a tired fallacy. Quarantine pop regurgitation! This song is terrible. I'm addicted.

"Blinding Lights" by the Weeknd

I was really struck this week but how good this track actually is. By the weekend, the Weeknd had me hooked. "In Your Eyes" is good, too and we highlighted that last week, but if he's going to have a run at this, he needs to consolidate his tracks. I'm not sure this fills summer ubiquity standards that will carry for the peak months of June and July, but this is in a good spot right now. I love the 80s throwback with a decidedly modern style. It's just fun as hell.

Next week...

I left a lot off this list. "Say So" is still a thing, as is the new Lady GaGa / Ariana Grande jam, but to be honest, I thought that track really sucked. That's a big collabo, though and we likely won't have heard the last of it. We put "Watermelon Sugar" on this list, but "Adore You" is still a thing as well. And Toosie Slide! Sorry, Drake.

18 May 2020

2020 Summer Jam Week 2: FOR THE MONEY!

Ahhh mid-May. A time where Summer's wave is just cresting, kids are graduating, the sun is squinting its eyes after a long sleep and the jams and movies are just heating up! Except this year. This year everything sucks! Hooray! We're kind of at a loss about jams right now. These are probably popular? What is going on? Who knows. We're all doomed. Let's listen to these slaps!

Hot Jam of the Week: Ludacris ft. Chance the Rapper

I don't think this song even has a name, or maybe it does but who knows right now. Ludacris dropped all these songs during an online instagram song that was supposed to feature Nelly, except he doesn't understand how to work a computer. Far from Tez, here. These songs may actually drop one day, but it's fitting to showcase a song that Luda apparently just had sitting around and felt like sharing during quarantine. It's an average song with an okay beat. Luda dropped a ton of unreleased songs on this show, none are very good, but I like the format of artists in quarantine just doing whatever they want.

"Toosie Slide" by Drake

This song is just kind of there, again. It's existing pretty hardcore right now. Like, it's fine, it'll get the job done, not a hot slide into the list, but not dominating anything. Great background music. In many ways, all music is background music. I put virtually no thought in adding it to this list, nor could I really recall the beat that well. Do I dislike Drake? I might.

"Adore You" by Harry Styles

I think I actually do like Harry Styles, though. This has been around for a while. For someone who spends nearly four months of the year writing a weekly pop music column I surprisingly don't pay attention to pop music. This has been around and I think I've kind of dug it without ever tuning into the specific modalities. Harry's good. He was in Dunkirk (2017). I didn't know he was so I just thought he was a good actor. This is a good track.

"In Your Eyes" by The Weeknd

Has anyone noticed The Weeknd cranking out tried and true bops recently? I guess he's just a really good artist. "Blinding Lights" is a little bit more popular right now but "In Your Eyes" is a lot hotter. He's got these funky synth rhythms that consolidate so many musical styles in one. I think it's actually generally accepted that The Weeknd is good and I'm maybe not saying anything new. I might as well be in 2012 with Kevin Garnett and Howard Ratner. I dig it.

"Level of Concern" by Twenty One Pilots

It's been a minute since we heard a crappy twenty one pilots song and this does a nice job of filling that out. I'm not sure it it was written pre-quarantine or what, but it's a nice nod for where we're at right now. It's actually a fantastically apt quarantine song. I'm curious how much more we're going to get by the time this crap is all over.

"RITMO" by Black Eyed Peas, J Balvin

The Black Eyed Peas made a bold choice by moving on without Fergie, but maybe no one cares? Or are they actually...better? The song has been rattling around in my head for a while now and I heard it a bunch this week, even though it's pretty old. Time no longer matters. This song is attached to Bad Boys 4 Life (2020) which could emerge as the #1 movie of 2020. Just think about that a little bit.

"Say So" by Doja Cat

I don't think this has actually been on the radio all that much, but it's still getting traction. What does it mean to be the #1 song in the country during quarantine? Is Doja Cat just the next Cardi B? Why can we have thousands of white boy crooners but only one black female rapper at a time and they are all instantly rivals? I love Doja Cat. This is a great song, it's accessible, interesting, and varied enough, floating from these ethereal vocals and then slamming down these harsher rap bars. It's all good.

"Don't Start Now" by Dua Lipa

Bounce to cool off that hot lava water! This has been stuck in my head for weeks. It gets the #1 spot in my brain this week. I resisted last week because it's so damn old, but I actually still like it a lot. I love how it descends into this funked out 70s beat and her grunts get all kinds of bonkers. It's great and Dua deserves a brighter spotlight.

Next week...

I left out "My Oh My" but instantly regret it. I have also been sort of kind of getting into "Supalonely" which feels like a weird Millennial video without much interesting merit, but it's surging in some popularity. Other than that, plenty of ancient songs to go around. I was thinking about GaGa's love song, but that never really took off, did it? Stay tuned, intrepid pop adventurers!

12 May 2020

2020 Summer Jam Week 1! LOCKED IN A BOX

Well, folks, it's that time of year again. It's the most glorious time of any year - it's Norwegian Morning Wood's SUMMER JAM COUNTDOWN! Each and every week we'll break down the hottest, spiciest, sauciest, sexiest jams to hit our earballs until one track is finally named the winner and champion of all 2020.

And how is Summer 2020 going so far? How about freaking terrible. We are still in quarantine lockdown due to Corona, everything is awful, and we're not getting nearly the kind of hot party jam exposure we need to. It's also a polar vortex and there's no superhero movies to watch. What kind of summer is this?!

Without further griping though, the Jams must go on. We will countdown eight hot tracks each and every week from now until Labour Day. And we're already off course because I forgot to write this yesterday. I absolutely 100% guarantee that the rest of the summer will go smooth. Corona is dead! Long live Sol!

Hot Jam of the Week: "Roses" by SAINt JHN (Imanbek Remix)

You know I sure as hell ain't spelling out the grammatical nightmoare of SAINt JHN every week. But this track dropped four years ago and didn't make many waves until this remix. See, all you need is some EDM fused sick beats and you got a banger on your hands. It's a bop for sure and maybe a little old and obscure, but those songs take some time to crawl up the charts. We'll see if it progresses. I hope not, just for the band's name.

"Don't Start Now" by Dua Lipa

Old but potent! I think my grandparents boogied to this back in their day. But it's still fresh somehow, maybe because we're not listening to music like we used to. Or just I'm not since I have no TV and no radio and don't really sit around listening to music alone. Dua Lipa has been around for a while now and has never quite seemed to reach diva level. Maybe it's her greater comfort with EDM beats like this instead of traditional pop ballads. This has hopefully elevated her and I love the "Don't stop caring-UHbout me now" and the Clapper.

"The Scotts" by Travis Scott, Kid Cudi

This is a few weeks old now, but time no longer has meaning in quarantine. Travis Scott is good but always in that unplaceable generic hip hop way. The beat is hot here, though, it's got a little twisted, melancholy bent but retains its edge. It's a fun song. We haven't heard Kid Cudi in a while, either. This could do well and has a decent 2020 pedigree but may remain in the background.

"Savage" by Megan Thee Stallion ft. Beyonce

I heard this on the radio this week and was like "Oh, that's hot." I love hearing Beyonce swear. It's just fun. It's like hearing your mom swear. It's so rare. Megan Thee Stallion is a promising new act and it's great to have Queen Bey's blessing here. I feel like Beyonce rarely actually puts out songs, but when they do it's fire. It's a treat.

"My Oh My" by Camila Cabello ft. DaBaby

This is like if a telenovela was a song. It's awesome. It's trashy and catchy and beautiful. I have been touting Camila for years now and I hope this takes off this summer. Jeez, this dropped in February? Where have I been this year? Quarantine really does mess with your head. I feel like I heard this for the first time this week. Whatever, I'm down. Maybe being in isolation inside will extend some lifetimes.

"Blinding Lights" by the Weeknd

I guess we're actually all doing classic tracks now. I'm an old man now. This is our 10th year of this crap. This song is great, it feels simultaneously like Uncut Gems (2019) Weeknd and just a straight up synth 80s song. It's a good jam and one we can trip out to or bang out to this summer. Maybe, if it hasn't spent its last breath. We might as well be just covering all the gems from Spring 2020. Soundtrack of Quarantine. Soundtrack of our Lives.

"Toosie Slide" by Drake

Unpopular opinion - Drake isn't actually that good, he was just anointed as a cool rapper in like 2011 and never messed that up. He is was in Degrassi, ya'll. Go Raptors. Anyway, this somewhere between "God's Plan" and "Money in the Grave" and that's just fine. It's kind of like "Blinding Lights" in that it just sounds like any other song from the artist, but it's still good. It doesn't push his art anywhere. But it'll do.

"Say So" by Doja Cat ft. Nicki Minaj

Doja Cat has moved up quite a bit since "Mooo!" which we proudly showcased back in the day. Her softer vocals pair up well with the intensity of Nicki and we really just need a Cardi B remix to hit a strong female rapper trifecta. Also this gets the #1 spot because she apparently promised Nicki she'd show her boobs if it hit #1 on the Billboard charts. I don't think that will happen, but that's fun. Fun stuff. It's a good song, it could hang around a while more.

Next week...

Dua Lipa seems to be coming out with a song every few days, so that's a constant threat to jump on this countdown. It's going to be tough to be all ears for new music, but I guess it's actually no different than our typical search for new jams online. We'll be searching for the hottest, sweatiest, thirstiest jams out there. Or just put up this crap again, it's all good.

30 April 2020

Political Ideologies and Conservatism in Media - Here's Post #1000!

In the eleven years that we have been doing this, we have never missed a month without a post. We are coming down to the wire on this one in April, but not sure if you've noticed, but there isn't very many movies coming out right now. Nevertheless this is a golden age of streaming and watching crap, and we are consuming quite a bit of media from every available corner. There are a few things that have gone in my brain to make me think about politics and the nature of our two major governing ideologies. This is also a nice insight about what I've been watching and reading - Rod Chernow's Grant, HBO's Watchmen, FX's Mrs. America, Netflix's Waco, Jay Roach's Bombshell (2019), and Michael Bay's The Island (2005). Not too mention shifts in current Democratic and Republican ideologies. This will be a bit of a scattershot post. Are you ready to dive into what's been going on inside my brain?

I am going to try to make this largely non-political. I admittedly lean left, and there's no way to completely hide that bias, but I want to chat a little bit about how the media is far more conservative than we tend to credit it for. Part of this conversation then is how much dominant conservative groups espouse about the mainstream leftist media. Considering the preponderance of Fox News, right-wing radio talk show hosts, and as I will discuss, the general message of most American cinema, I'm not sure that is true. I do think that painting themselves as underdogs while having dominant media voices is not only a powerful way to position oneself, but a truly American one.

This country is built on being the plucky underdog. We love come from behind stories and that stems from the American Revolution. We were down 3-28 when the patriots of this country came back in the second half... Conservative media tends to have a "woe is me" attitude that emboldens its position. This is worth some discussion of political ideology.

We ought to leave behind Liberalism and Conservatism for a second, because in contemporary American politics those enlightenment-era ideologies aren't quite as clear-cut. Liberalism is more designed around emphasize civil rights, secularism, and yes, limited government. It is difficult to picture an era where that was an option, but it grew as a response to the oligarchies and monarchies of authoritarian kings. That of course is where conservatism originates - a strong authority that limits freedoms in favor of security and a singular head of state.

These original ideas have been mixed pretty thoroughly in the past three hundred years or so. I'm most curious about working out the role of government. Now, there are many different paths to political ideology, and it works best if we think of things not so much as binary left and right, but as a three-dimensional matrix where every possible belief exists as an infinite spectrum going in every possible direction. Thus, we've started to group conservatives in with juxtaposing ideas such as a government hands off approach to guns, but a very hands on approach to abortion. The inverse is true for liberals. Neither side has an actual ideology any more, at least one that can be justified by any universal truth. Both moreover simply favor familiar and established stances on issues long accepted by either party.

This of course hasn't always been true. Yeah, I've been reading Grant, the biography of Ulysses S. Grant, General of the Army for the Grand Old Republic and 18th President of these United States. It also centers around the formation of the Republican party, which seems insane now to be established around halting the expansion of slavery while Abraham Lincoln greatly increased the power of the Executive Branch. Simultaneously they seem to be both liberal in fighting for equality for all humans (err...male humans) while emphasizing a strong central authority. The liberalism of mid-19th Century Republicans was not unlike modern Democrats. While they believe strongly in egalitarian equality, they also believe that left to their own devices, private citizens will never provide this equality.

There's some heady contradiction there. It's as if the government is strong-arming its citizens to be nice to each other. During Reconstruction the South was divided into five Military Districts under jurisdiction of Union Generals in order to protect both the newly freed black population along with white Republicans who were persecuted and murdered without prudence or consequence. The government had to step in to protect freedom.

That's tough logic and one used to justify wars, security, and large standing armies by modern-day Democrats and Republicans alike. If the power of government is derived from the consent of the governed, is the role of government also to protect the governed from each other? Hence our ideologies start to conflict with each other.

We're running into that today amidst the on-going coronavirus pandemic. Donald Trump has put his party through the ringer by first placing individual response duty on the states in an effort to avoid responsibility, and then retracting that stance in favor of strong central authority when those states took stances opposed to his worldview. In the days since General Grant the Republican Party has slid far towards a more Libertarian stance, which emphasizes limited government and a completely free market. These were of course also early tenets of liberalism, which due to the tendency of parties to define themselves by opposition rather than intrinsic philosophy, has become at odds with the Democratic Party.

Modern Republicans favor an extreme individualized position. They don't want any taxes for government services and to survive on their own. That's an admirable stance, but one that feels ignorant in a world where gaps between the select few who can afford to survive on their own and the masses of people who require government intervention to survive gets wider and wider. This is of course not the only tenet of Modern American Republicans - the default is an emphasis on big business (not changed since Grant's time), traditional American values and concepts of religion, families, and households, and a general non-interference with their attempt to recreate that lifestyle.

Thus the foundation of liberalism has been split. Republicans managed to grab the self-sufficient small government emphasis and the Democrats latched on to the secular, global understanding that the world exists outside your backyard. I am very curious how we move forward after Corona if Trump continues to favor strong deference to Federal power while individual Democratic states want to do their own thing. To further compound this, what happens when the smaller state governments exercise greater control over lives, bodies, and economies than the Federal Authority that desires non-interference?

See how ideology is broken down? There is no ideology anymore. Small or big government philosophy shifts based on what is most convenient to the party in power at the time. Democrats who had strongly opposed strong Federal Power in the Reconstruction Era fell apart from FDR to LBJ as Federal Aid programs exploded and the New Deal and Great Society created a Civil Rights Welfare State that still shapes politics today.

And what about the Nazis? What about those damn Nazis? Fascism is clearly conservative - the strong emphasis on nationalism, values traditional to one's country, and strong central authority are all conservative talking points. The socialism of National Socialism wasn't really liberal socialism at all, in that one favors strong government to protect the downtrodden people while the Nazis did not have a great Civil Rights track record. What happens, then, when these viewpoints are co-opted by Klansman and neo-Nazis today who support Republican isolationist and anti-women movements?

Well, that made me think of HBO's Watchmen. Alan Moore's original graphic novel, Watchmen (1986) crafted a unique niche by distilling philosophies into the worldview of fictional superheroes and then letting those personalities bounce off each other until the world was destroyed (or saved). The nihilistic Comedian, Manichaean Rorschach, the utilitarian Ozymandias. It's fun.

In HBO's version, set 34 years after the original graphic novel, we see some of these same people, but I'm most curious about Rorshach's legacy. Lip service was given to Rorschach's original ultra-conservative views, but the follow-up sees the logical conclusion in the Seventh Kavalry, a white supremacist organization that adopts Rorschach's mask. Okay, let's catch you up.

Originally, Rorschach's whole deal was that he was a tortured little kid who wore a black and white mask that would mesh but never mix, leading to what looked like a constant Rorschach blot on his face. Alan Moore took inspiration from Steve Ditko's Question and Mr. A who were both Randian conspiracy theorist detectives. Did you know Steve Ditko was a rabid objectivist? Yay! Objectivists believe in the superior heroic individual, the idea that you are right and everyone else is wrong. It's very emotionally fulfilling but doesn't leave much room for caring about other people.

Rorschach thus is supposed to be a satirical superhero. He's a crimefighter with no regard for the gray area of crimes and exists only in guilty or innocent, right or wrong. Black and white. Somehow he became the most popular Watchmen character, but really that's no accident. It's difficult to understand that the world comes in shades of gray and we might not always be right. It's comforting to have definitive answers to big complicated problems. For immature folks, particularly boys, that's an easy philosophy to fall behind. You don't need to care about anyone else - there is one truth and only you can find that out.

This slides in well with Rorschach's conspiracy theories, which in both Watchmen turn out to be true. As a general rule I don't believe in conspiracy theories. The worst theories, like Flat Earth or 9/11, have an overwhelming evidence to support what is generally believed to be true. The most intriguing theories, like the Kennedy Assassination cover-ups or George Soros just can't exist in a world of constant leaks.

Anyway, belief in conspiracies have become part of the Republican doctrine. There is always someone more powerful out there out to get you but only you know the truth and can save the rest of the world. It's bizarre how these things have all coalesced together. In HBO's Watchmen the natural progression of Rorschach is a more reactionary path, where the Seventh Kalvary discover his conspiracy is very much true and thus give his writings much credence. This deontological thinking natural extends to the black and white races and when only one can be good and one evil, the white Seventh Kalvary make the only choice that makes sense to them.

Mrs. America presents significant cognitive dissonance when choosing a political ideology. It centers around Phyllis Shlafly's attempt to block the Equal Rights Amendment from passing in the 1970s. Such an amendment to the U.S. Constitution would guarantee legal equality across the genders. Spoiler alert, we have no such amendment, but the show is more focused on the great irony that an extremely competent and charismatic housewife fought against this bill.

Here's another arbitrary political center piece that got caught up in ideology, misplaced by what either party thought was right. Conservatives fear change, they believe the woman's place is in the home and Mrs. America presents all sorts of slippery slope arguments as to what may happen when that supposed delicate balance is disturbed. It also presents how misogyny and racism make common bedfellows. On the progressive side, though, the women fighting for Equal Rights are presented as nearly all young Democrats, although some like Betty Friedan are older and have been fighting to exist as their own individual selves with autonomy over their bodies and rights for a long time.

Both sides have great difficulty unifying. There are enough big personalities at play that everyone wants their turn in the spotlight in addition to their common goals. The Democrats especially have an extreme range between the Black Panther sympathizing African-American contingent, the more moderate women who believe they need men to be their advocates, and the bra-burning hippies. Nothing is black and white here, despite the races involved. There is a wide spectrum and not all women fit into neat boxes of ideology. The most surprising aspect is how much a group of women in the show fight to remain complacent by their husbands' sides.

Okay, so by now you've probably spied some of my liberal sympathies. I honestly have trouble seeing both sides, but I do worry about the government overstepping its boundaries. It gets at that conspiracy thing. Have we let the fear of pandemic override our sensibilities towards liberty? Is a belief in the free market and personal freedom a truly liberal stance? Much of that comes down to simple trust in government, that they will relinquish power when the strife is over, they have our best interests at heart, and that they exist to protect the civil rights of the governed.

This becomes difficult because Republicans have crafted a narrative that has eroded this trust while simultaneously creating only one trustworthy figure - Trump. It's difficult to see strong belief in the leadership of anyone else. He rode to power on three tried and true methods: immigrant fear-mongering, goading conspiracy theories that make his downtrodden followers believe a secret truth exists that only they are privileged to know, and the constant women-hate that fuels conservative men and women alike. The leader of government constantly presents government as an intrusive, gun-stealing, mask-wearing, economy-busting demon that wants to infringe on liberty when it in fact exists to protect that liberty. In giving up free thought and common sense to a demagogue, though, his followers have crafted an unassailable central authority to rule them. What is the cost of socialist protection? At the end of the day is it any different than a war-mongering dictator? Rule of one or rule of many?

A lot of conservatism comes down to simply not caring about other people and focusing on the individual. Liberalism seems to believe that other people have feelings and needs that exist outside of your own. That's mostly at the heart of both ideologies. When conservatives are doing well, there is a natural thought of "Why can't other people do well, too? It's their fault." In recent memory this has morphed and morphed and affected one big genre: comedy.

At first you might think that of course comedy leans liberal, SNL, The Daily Show, and comics are generally thought of as extremely liberal. That's all punching up (mostly) at institutions for their own hypocrisy. But I have been watching a lot of old comedy as well, and it strikes me how much we think "Oh, you could never say that today!" It's also bizarre to me that many 90s comedians like Kelsey Grammar, Tim Allen, Adam Sandler, and Norm MacDonald lean conservative, or are out and out Republican. Comedy is difficult when you have to care about who you are insulting. For the record, I love all four of these guys. But there is a significant amount of "Oh, why aren't things the way they used to be?" feeling out of all of them and more. Even Jerry Seinfeld gets into a little bit of this and who knows why, he's like the cleanest comedian ever.

I have seen this objectivist stance bleed into pop culture more than even liberals and especially conservatives would like to admit. It's not only that Rorschach, despite Alan Moore's intentions, becomes the hero of Watchmen. You can see it everywhere. Batman succeeds in the Christopher Nolan films by superseding the rule of law through private enterprise. Tony Stark does the same. The government is incompetent and dangerous in Marvel films, literally full of secret Nazis.

The age old tale of one lone man, usually white, fighting against a shadowy corporation or hostile nation is a very old story, but one that remains extremely popular in contemporary cinema. I talked last summer about how the Old White Man Fights for his Family trope is a HUGE thing over the last few years. But there was one film that got me really thinking about this, which I saw the other day. Don't ask me why I watched it, but for the first time I caught Michael Bay's The Island.

I don't blame you if you've never seen it, it's really not great, but it is truly a conservative thinkpiece. Ewen McGregor and Scarlett Johannson have an apparently idyllic life in a post-apocalyptic socialist paradise where all food and housing is provided, the central authority monitors food intake and personal health, and everyone wears the same thing and works the same job. Little do they know that they are all actually just living organ donor clones for their wealthy counterparts in the real world.

From there it's a conservative checklist. There is a grand conspiracy. There is one man who knows the truth and is able to break free and release his world from the socialist nightmare. Scarlett Johannson is there as lip service to strong women but actually exists as a trophy without agency. It's a fascinating dive. The latter half of the movie is largely one big chase scene and it does buck the typical Michael Bay trend in that the military is the bad guy, although to be fair, they seem to be duped by the big bad socialist commander of the "utopia" created to supplicate the clone organ donors.

In the hands of another director The Island could have been memorable cinema and people may have read into it deep enough to understand its conservative propaganda. But at its bones is the fact that this is basic story structure. Not every movie is like this, of course, plenty end with an individual learning to work in a team, or to break away on a secular journey to find new adventures in the world. But that savior, individual breaking away from the constraints of a homogeneous society reeks of objectivist privilege. I look at 1999 as the year where every movie was like this - The Matrix, Fight ClubAmerican Beauty, even Office Space. And yeah, I'm bleeding blue, but I'm not in favor of this kind of restrictive society. The key liberal cornerstone has always been individual civil liberties. Conservative media tends to bypass this though, when imaging the liberal fantasy society where the government controls every aspect of our lives.

That was a long rant but it had been building up for quite a while. I typically avoid politics here, but this is just honestly how I see things. I would be very curious about your viewpoints and if I'm way off base. What do you think about any of this? Support your local food bank. Here's General Grant.

Ain't no corona in whiskey!

31 March 2020

First Impressions: STAR WARS: The Rise of Skywalker

Have you heard about this Coronavirus thing? The nation is gripped by fear and uncertainty, under a pandemic lockdown and fearing the repercussions of a widespread shut down of non-essential services. We are truly just beginning to understand what this means for us as a society and culture as well as the greatest economic shutdown in history.

But there is still something far more terrifying. That would be third film I saw over Christmas Break and am just now finding the time to ramble about it. The first film being Uncut Gems (2019), and the second being CATS (2019). The third was far, far worse. That of course, was Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker.

I put off this post for three months I think because I was afraid of how dedicated I would have to be. My Star Wars posts have been ridiculous in length and I want to get this right, because I loathed this movie in a very specific way. Certainly unintentionally this film became the nexus point for why everything about Disney's takeover of the Star Wars films became a tremendous, mutli-billion dollar misstep.

Now, time for some disclaimers and rational thought with regard to what commercial success means. First of all, success is all relative. TROS is currently the #14 domestic film of all time, one of only fifteen movies to gross over $500 million domestically. It's #32 all-time worldwide, which is still pretty good, but to be quite honest, this isn't enough for Star Wars, particularly the culmination of a new trilogy like this. The standard should be the very top of the heap.

I don't like judging a film on the money it brings in, but here it's inexorably tied to what this movie is all about. It is supposed to be a cultural phenomenon, a pervasive, permeating, ubiquitous experience that brings an entire world culture together. We didn't get that. That was Avengers: Endgame (2019) last year. TROS felt like an afterthought. We spent all our emotional energy on Endgame, and as we'll describe in more detail later, this reflects the actual plot and character energy of the film. Nothing was earned. TROS wasn't the event it wanted to be and never created an urgency to watch and see what happens.

We spend a lot of time here on Norwegian Morning Wood dissecting this concept. I am endlessly curious to figure out what makes films "events" and how they break through the cultural noise to become important pieces of the zeitgeist. Even films with strong financial success don't always make a strong landing. Why did Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018) feel less significant than Jurassic World (2015) which in turn felt less significant than Jurassic Park (1993)? I think we're in this great age of chasing yesterday, but it never feels the way we think it should. We crave new stories and innovation. We always have. But there is so much noise that we can't latch on to the new stories, and so we retreat to what is comforting, even though absent of novelty, of true vision, and of creative understanding, those comforting stories come up empty.

I am an unabashed Marvel fan. We spent a lot of time talking about this, but it's true that Avengers: Endgame really isn't even a movie. It's the culmination of many many movies. It's a brand. Having said that, it still hits incredibly sincere emotional beats - to activate them, though, you must be aligned and invested with the brand, not the film. It's a game-changer because it's not a film anymore. It rises above the noise by not only putting in the work of laying out years of planning and character work, but by self-mythologizing that work from a genuine standpoint, or at least a standpoint that appears genuine. The New Star Wars Trilogy stumbled here. It felt like an imitator, not an innovator. Even if Marvel is pulling wool over our eyes and painting by numbers, it is enormously capable of presenting the illusion that it's not, until the lines between genuine earned emotional outcomes and a corporate fabrication become indistinguishable. To some extent that matters less than what the actual reaction is, which to me is still getting choked up at "On your left" which is one of dozen immortal lines we all remember.

How do you achieve that memorable distinction? It's not the writing of the specific line. It's everything else that functions around it. Every other franchise that chases this can't understand. They imitate the look, the surface details, the hype and marketing, but fail to earn the outcomes on screen. The corporate interference becomes apparent and it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. The irony is that the corporate attempt to fabricate genuine emotional connection instead creates a pale facsimile. Instead of letting art be art, fear drives imitated art, which instead hurts the bottom line. And to be sure, the bottom line according to Norwegian Morning Wood isn't what is earned that weekend, but what happens five, ten, or thirty years down the line.

So, what's the problem? It's mostly simple market saturation. When everything is important, nothing is. The ease and proliferation of special effects have dampened creativity and the need for competent writing, as well as creating a scenario where every movie can be a "big" movie. We used to have a column here, "Road to a Blockbuster" where we would discuss the commercial, critical, and cultural prospects of every big film released every weekend. It was pretty fun. But exhausting. It's just noise after a while. Weekends and months that once seemed to be blockbuster poison are now up for grabs. A tentpole can be released any time with the right momentum.

Now, let's clarify because this is not all a bad thing, but I will admit to some bias. I loved a film like Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) which was assuredly a poor attempt to smash a lot of childhood dreams together in a cacophony of incoherent noise. It was a glib, transparent corporate shared universe cash grab. But I loved it! Why? Why did I love that movie and not TROS? Maybe it was investment in the characters. I'm a lifelong TOHO Kaiju fan and the kind of mayhem they vomited over the screen is akin to what's been in my head for decades. The human characters were shitty, but dude they always are, and the emotional pay-off (to me) has always been the monsters, not the people. The film did that well - Godzilla really had to earn his title as King and Ghidorah is a delicious villain. It builds on an already coherent universe (one might argue the original shared universe with a 50-year history), and never felt like a huge forced leap, more an update of corny rubber costumes. Almost most importantly, though, there was never a moment in that movie where I can go on and on about KotM. Maybe we should talk about Star Wars now. Only 1000 words in...

I have covered my history with Star Wars a lot. It spilled into The Last Jedi review as well. I may be like many people who have had such a close relationship to this fictional corporate property that I have my own vision as to where this should have headed. I like to think that that maybe isn't the case, but I really couldn't help it with this film. It's easy to fill in the small details, like the planets, the jokes, the character interactions, but the big emotional movements seemed far off the mark I thought they would reach. This happens all the time. Usually it's great. Movies are unexpected and that final catharsis is great and fulfilling. So often it's the little things. KotM avoided all scenes which I hated so much it took me out of the movie. TROS only had those scenes.

Let's try to go through this from the beginning, which is immediately terrible. I'm actually glad now I waited a few months for this, because we have a lot more information to go on thanks to the film's novelization. Spoiler here, it doesn't make anything better. So, Emperor Sheev Palpatine has returned for reasons that are never, ever ever fucking explained. This is more and more common with J.J. Abrams' work. With Mission: Impossible III (2006) and Star Trek (2009) this energy felt really fresh and exciting. It felt new, but ultimately it's become emblematic of all the problems with these new re-booted franchises I mentioned earlier. There's no actual substance, so the pace and flash replaces everything else. There is an excuse that we didn't have a lot of information going into the Original Trilogy, but there is a significant difference about not needing a lot of info on someone we don't know much about and needing some catch up on thirty years of missing history. Also, last we saw him he was fucking dead.

Side note here - the Sequel Trilogy seems to bend in the opposite direction of the Prequel Trilogy in many ways. Those films clearly went too far in the other direction, overexplaining everything in many ways that made no sense (We don't complain enough about how Darth Vader built C-3PO. What the fuck is that). The Sequel films seem to think we need no explanation of any kind. And it's not like we're craving poorly place exposition, but rather some clearly thought out, coherent, and transparent motivation. There is an overwhelming assault of lore and it catches because it comes across so jarring it almost feels like a non sequitur to the previous films.

Try to track the conflicting motivations here. We open on Kylo Ren scouring the Galaxy for a Sith Wayfinder in order to track down a mysterious message from the long-dead Emperor Palpatine. Carrying on from TLJ this is immediately interesting because Kylo Ren is the most interesting character in this entire trilogy. He's the Supreme Leader of the First Order, but he's a still a dragon, so it's like the insane young dynamo in charge of this Galactic Superpower. It's exhilarating and dangerous and could be fun. Then it stumbles immediately.

First of all, he's apparently on the planet Mustafar, which should have huge obvious symbolic implications. Isn't it worth us watching him visit Vader's castle? It's the planet where Anakin's final transformation into Darth Vader was complete, isn't that of worth to Kylo, who worships him? But we never even know it's Mustafar. What follows is demonstrative of the single-most pertinent structural issue of this film - everything is far too easy. The film opens presenting a great struggle for Kylo to find the wayfinder. Then he just kind of finds it. It's supposedly a huge dangerous journey to navigate to Exegol. Then he just kind of goes there. This happens again and again. JJ never challenges his characters. He presents quick threats that they defeat immediately. Nothing is ever earned.

So, right from the beginning, if I was writing my own film, I want to see Kylo struggle to balance governing the First Order, see the tension between him and Hux as the former would clearly see Kylo's active dragon role as unbefitting of a Supreme Leader (in both a practical and ideological sense) and to see Kylo in turn struggle with what he wants to do with what he needs to do. This is a common experience for a lot of young people in prominent roles. I'm there right now in my professional career. You see older people fail and you think it's easy to cover those mistakes, but it's not. Look at that, we're relating to a character, whose personality is so outrageous while simultaneously faces no accountability. It's raw and brutal and INTERESTING. While in this position of Supreme Leadership his desire to quash the voice of Palpatine makes a lot of sense. Why not have him tête-à-tête with Rey and continue to develop his ideals as he attempts to track the message down?

Instead he travels immediately to Exegol and meets Palpatine. My own nerdiness took me out of this, too. Why wasn't this Byss? Or Korriban? It seems like in addition to a crippling fear of association with the Prequel Trilogy the Sequels also like to avoid all references to the original Expanded Universe, despite having a wealth of locations and concepts to draw from. Anyway, Palpatine is there for no reason, along with clones of Snoke in big tanks that are I guess his backstory? This doesn't help.

The novelization has revealed that the Palpatine we see in this film is a clone. Okay. This also doesn't help. Why then was Snoke in the position he was? Was he an imperfect Palpatine clone? That's like...what a parody of the Sequels would do. Like, that was literally his function in the story - a shittier version of Palpatine in every meta sense. But Palpatine was a clone who I suppose, couldn't contain the power of Palpatine? Clones are so bad in fiction. It removes all possible tension. Even if we kill him, does that then mean that he could just return again? Did we kill all the clones of Palpatine in the universe?

This undoes a lot of Return of the Jedi (1983) in the worst ways. It cheapens Vader's sacrifice and position as the Chosen One. It lessens the intimate bond forged between Vader and Luke. As we will see later, this also means that Palpatine's goading of Luke to kill him was very genuine so he could transfer his spirit and when Vader's lightsabre interjected in one of the most famous shots in the film, it was actually against Palpatine's wishes. Just, what the fuck. More on that mess as we move to the climax.

As we move on, the same issues continue to mix and feed off each other. Kylo's motivation changes without any conflict or challenging progression. Palpatine tells him to kill Rey and he's cool with it, despite their will-they / won't they love and seems ready to bow to Palpatine despite his own 1) Worship of Darth Vader and 2) position as Supreme Leader. It just doesn't make any fucking logical sense as to where these characters have been, even in the first few minutes of this movie. It's JJ's continual desire to be cool and ingratiate to fans while bankrupt of ideas.

And maybe we can side-step again for a second and talk about how maybe this isn't totally JJ's fault. It is completely astounding to me to slowly realize that Disney had absolutely no plan of any kind when it came to this Trilogy. They threw out what George Lucas came up with. They through out all Extended Universe ideas. They let JJ do whatever he wanted with The Force Awakens (2015) and then Rian Johnson could do anything with TLJ. Bringing in Colin Trevorrow to do whatever he wanted and then trashing that as well. By all accounts they just decided to make this up as they went along, which is baffling considering how well they've handled a steady guiding hand with the Marvel movies.

This isn't entirely a bad thing except that Johnson and Abrams couldn't be more different filmmakers and going back and forth feels like cinematic whiplash. Abrams was all about reconnecting with the Original Trilogy and is generally a filmmaker who attempts to emulate his directing heroes, but is ultimately soulless. Johnson is a director who pushes hard against conventions and doesn't idolize or bow to nostalgia at all. It doesn't gel or flow, and Rise of Skywalker feels like the correction of a course that did not need adjusting (I will forever believe that TLJ was the most brilliant Star Wars film of all time - the epitome of all the noise-breaking we mentioned earlier). The end result is a series that feels rushed, disjointed, and always trying to restart itself.

Anyway, while I clearly dislike Abrams, he got a bum job with this film. After producers were dissatisfied with Trevorrow (some blame the script, I blame The Book of Henry [2017]), Disney through it back in Abrams' court who had two years to write and film one of the most anticipated film conclusions of all time from scratch. The end result is a cobbled together mess of ideas that largely don't work. Some kind of vision, allowed to develop and gestate would have resulted in a better experience - or at least someone who actually has his or her own ideas instead of Abrams, who it seems at a desperate point gave up and went with Palpatine.

This is the core of most of the issue with this movie. It seems like Abrams didn't know what to do with a Star Wars film without a major Sith Lord baddie at the core, and Johnson took care of Snoke. Maybe a little of this has to do with SOLO (2018)'s relative failure, but no one seemed to want to acknowledge how strong of a villain Kylo Ren is. Let's get back to this mess of a movie.

One aspect that has always felt false is how this movie seems to want all its characters to be best friends with the camaraderie of the Original Trilogy but again, it never quite earns that kinship. In his first video essay, Film Crit Hulk describes this in significant detail by way of analyzing A New Hope (1977). Interactions and meetings are organic, need-based, and crystallized through shared experiences triumphing through adversity. This Sequel Trilogy has always rather had its characters split up. Poe Dameron has suffered from this the most. He seems like a cocky Han Solo-type in TFA until he's presumed dead, but then he comes back fucking midway through the movie. He never shares experiences with Finn or Rey. In TLJ  he's stuck on the ship (while the movie brilliantly pins holes in all his Han Solo-esque misguided masculinity. Yeah, TLJ is the only movie to understand what to do with this trope character) while Rey and Finn have adventures with Luke and Rose respectively. No one has a chance to bond.

Thus beginning this film with a "Oh, here we go again!" sense of adventure feels so incredibly hollow. Not only that, but these characters aren't even allowed to grow together on their own adventure. So much is assumed. The characters travel to the Burning Man Planet for bizarre reasons but again always move on without consequence. They are found out by the First Order and then just kind of escape them. Then they get trapped in quicksand! But it's okay, it's just a cave. But then there's a big monster snake! Don't worry, Rey calms it down. But then they're trapped! Just kidding, there's a hole this Sith Assassin never found in years of searching and they escape. There is never a moment of real danger. A little later on I was struck by them charging through a hallway blatantly shooting Stormstroopers and thought back on A New Hope when Han does much of the same thing, only to be totally outmatched and run back the opposite way. The movie has such a desire to just move on and move on that there is no struggle at all.

They are always chasing a MacGuffin. Again to the point of parody. MacGuffins aren't terrible, Marvel gets a lot of flack for them, but there are hundreds of classic movies that feature them and they're a great trope when it forces audiences to focus on how the characters react to this arbitrary item, not the item itself. In TROS, though, it's obnoxious. They literally search for MacGuffins in order to translate MacGuffins that allow them to find other MacGuffins. It's contrived, and again, just far too easy. We don't get to see any character TESTED and we therefore don't get to understand anything about them. It becomes boring, we lose investment, and thus cultural potency.

The movie is also terrified of real consequences to any of its characters, especially its legacy characters. There is a complete fake-out of Chewbacca's death that's bungled so severe I was actually relieved when we find out Chewie is okay, just because it's completely insane to give such a beloved character an accidental off-screen death. We don't even see how it really affects the characters. Again, the audience knows Chewie is alive, which diffuses all tension with the characters. It's angrifying. At one point C-3PO needs his memory wipe so he can speak aloud the Sith language. It's played up as a sincere emotional moment (that makes no sense because he doesn't know any of these people), but then moments later R2-D2 backs up his memory. There is no lasting consequence. This is time to go for broke!

My mind wanders again to Avengers: Endgame, a film with arguably more to lose by retiring a horde of its core characters. It gains respect because of its boldness. TROS is a timid mess. We hardly get a moment to grieve Leia. Of course Carrie Fisher's passing impacted the film and there was little they could do, but she seems like she dies for no reason here. Her passing does have a monumental effect in that it sways Ren back to the light, but the jump of both her death and his turn are again, completely unearned and rushed.

Due to Carrie Fisher's death, Maz Kanata seems to take that role, which gets to a cringey bit of fan service where she gives Chewie his medal right before the final battle. Like... does anyone fucking understand how a story works here? Does anyone understand why it's important to receive a medal AFTER the big action story beats? Like, why it's important that Leia, in a position of both friend and authority, give Han and Luke their medals? Maz is fine, but like, who is this person? What experiences does Chewie have with her? We are again supposed to assume they had some off-screen adventure. It's insane and empty.

There's a lot in the film that continually make no sense. They go to Keri Russell's planet, who has some history with Poe and it's supposed to be a big deal that Poe was a former smuggler. It's just full of interactions that make no sense. Why is this controversial? How did it not come up before? It's layering character attributes quickly over characters who had none. Might this be a good time to talk about Poe and Finn? Sure.

They're so damn gay. And Disney is so completely afraid of how gay they are. There is no other reason for their inexplicable and immediate chemistry, their genuine love for each other, a continual need to impress each other and stay with each other. The movie lovingly tries to give both potential love interests to prove that they aren't gay. Poe gets Keri Russell, who becomes a distracting Abrams cameo more than anything, and Finn gets another black girl, because surely it'd be inappropriate for him to date white Rey. I want to get into both of this. Actually, three things here. There's a lot.

For the hundredth time, I want to acknowledge my anti-Abrams bias, but I was really distracted by the cameos from his friends. Greg Grunberg, Keri Russell, and Dominc Monaghan just don't work here. I don't know why this bothers me. Maybe because they aren't even cameos, they're just kind of there. Directors always have friend cameos. I think of Bruce Campbell showing up in Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies or John Ratzenberger in Pixar movies or basically everyone in every Tarantino movie. Why am I so bothered by Abrams stuff?

Maybe it's because Greg Grunberg is the most uninteresting actor of all time. Or that Keri Russell is perfectly capable and should have been either all in or all out, not a random side character. Same with Dominic Monaghan. We again talk about transparency. We all know that every decision here is a corporate one designed to increase our interest in a property designed to make money. Bruce Campbell is a niche weirdo who brings a lot of fun to any movie he's in. I don't think Dominic Monaghan is that level. Maybe I'm a curmudgeon here. Call me out.

Okay, black girl. Her name is Jannah, which I had to look up. She comes in near the end as the leader of a troupe of former Stormtroopers, rides some horses on a Star Destroyer, and helps bring down their communication tower. It's all fun and there's a not-that-subtle nature vs. technology vibe that works fine and aligns with some light side one-with-the-universe themes this universe enjoys. But then it's heavily HEAVILY implied that she's Lando's daughter, and he then also kind of hits on her. What the hell is going on here? Are black people so rare that they must all be related? It just feels so Abrams. Johnson made an entire movie whose cogent them was that everyone has the potential to be special and we make our own destiny. Abrams just lives in a world where every single named main character HAS to be related to someone else. It breaks my brain.

Maybe now is a good time to get into fan service. This film is just full of it. Let's got to Endgame again because that movie is crazy with fan service. Cap and Thor's hammer. There. Why does it work there but not here, though? It's again about earning your service, moderating your service, and focusing it in service to the story. Chewie's medal is thrown in in such a way that it distracts from the story. As does Lando's daughter. Endgame's fan service is either in support of or in addition to, never at the expense at. That's a lot of prepositions, but at its core it's still about story and character.

Finn. Fucking Finn. I can't believe they dropped what he was going to say to Ray. That's not even a Chekov's Gun. That's literally just a dropped plot point. It's unbelievable. On a more racist note it seems like they couldn't admit this black kid was force sensitive, even though it's something I had assumed since the very first scene in The Force Awakens. It's pretty clear by the end of this film that Finn has force powers and it would have been awesome to seem him use them. I always thought this new trilogy was going to be about the both of them, and that never really happened. It's frustrating.

Rose. Hey - Rose! How the hell did she get the Jar Jar Binks treatment. Seriously - it's as if Abrams cowered to a minority group of online male harassers and wrote her out of this movie. It's part of blatant distancing from TLJ that recesses rather than innovates. There are a few more moments of shade, like Luke's ghost catching his own lightsaber instead of chucking it aside. It seems devoid of the heavy symbolism of the progression Johnson imbued in the character for a cheap potshot. This keeps happening throughout the whole film.

So this goes on for a while. Our characters chase MacGuffins and rally the troops and eventually wind up on Exegol in a last-ditch effort to stop the Final Order (the combined forces of the Sith Eternal and The First Order. Yeah, we need some explanation there, too, like who the hell are all these people). There is a little bit of TLJ here in that the universe rallies against the evil of Palpatine, and that's a nice message, but it makes no practical sense.

See, JJ really really doesn't care about logic. Like, how did Lando and Chewie fly the Millennium Falcon across the entire Galaxy to rally everyone against the Sith in like...what, fifteen minutes? This happens a lot. It's readily apparent that he doesn't understand that you can't see planets from space, after both Star Trek and TFA features characters witnessing planets being destroyed despite being across the Galaxy at the time. He likes playing with established universe rules. He messed with beaming all the time in Star Trek (to be fair, that often added to tension and excitement), but he really loves playing with the force. There are a lot of new abilities added here, from life force draining to the Dyad. The Dyad is cool, but also again just makes things so easy, like when Rey is able to give Kylo a lightsaber in his fight against the Knights of Ren. Let's get into those two Force things and how they ruin everything. This is a fun column.

Force Heal isn't without precedent, although it's pretty recent. It popped up in The Clone Wars and The Mandalorian before TROS. It's not even that crazy if it's something long forgotten Rey uncovered in the Ancient Jedi texts Luke gave her. Still, it's set-up and pay-off. Just set the scene up. Show Rey reading, learning, discovering. Instead we just see her doing it to a random sandworm on Burning Man Planet. It comes off like Rey just instinctively knew this stuff that would have been essential to like...every Jedi that ever existed ever. That's the thing about messing with mythos that have, if you want to conservatively begin with The Phantom Menace, has 67 years of canonical history. I know it's all fictional and this is the kind of thing that annoying fanboys bring up, so maybe I'm just adding to that pile, but when you add a cop-out healing technique this late in the game it begs the question why characters couldn't do this earlier. Once again, it's writing that exists without consequences and a Qui-Gon Jinn is still dead.

Knights of Ren. What is the deal with these guys? Again - set-up and pay-off. Show them doing something actually cool! What is the threat here? We are TOLD so much in this movie. It's like Captain Phasma. Who is this person, what is her motivation? I went into this film still believing Phasma would return because we saw no body and of course why would she be gone? We need something more. Again, because RJ killed Phasma, JJ needed the Knights of Ren. They stand around, do nothing, and then Kylo executes them all like punk bitches. They're stormtroopers. They could have been stormtroopers. When your characters are interchangeable there's no reason for them to exist.

Apparently there is a lot more interesting facts to read in supplementary material like the Visual Dictionary, the novelization, and hell, interviews with JJ Abrams. This is all terrible. Movies should exist as a text upon itself without the need for additional context. More and more films are leaning this way, in part because it promotes good synergy, and also because films like this simply move too fast to bother fleshing out context in a coherent way. Or they're too complex for their own good.

My mind again wanders. Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) is very much in this vein of revisited properties in a shallow cash-grab, but the result was not only a piece of art, but one that surpassed its original material. It establishes a boffo world quickly but with simple elements that viewers can immediately understand and relate to. Every action sequence raises stakes. Every beat is a set-back or move forward. It's one of the best constructed action films of all time. There isn't a reason why TROS couldn't be this. You don't have to explain everything but also don't have to rely on outside context.

Heading down this path, some of the issue is that there is no leap to be made to get to Fury Road. Not only is every Mad Max film connected only through its protagonist, but it explicitly makes an effort to work on its own merits. There is too great of a jump from the prequels to the OT to the sequels for this to work. I think a lot about the First Order. Their presence or power makes no sense in the world set up from Return of the Jedi. In my own head I liked to believe that they were a cult of Empire-worshiping insane misguided youth, like Neo-Nazis who are trying to emulate the look of the Empire without really understanding the refined class of Tarkin, the restraint of the Emperor, or the calm presence of Vader. That was always an interesting angle to me and sometimes in TFA this is blatant. They don't have a compelling reason to destroy a planet, they just kind of want to. This concept could obviously be developed a little more and it'd be fun to see them a little scrappier instead of inexplicably in possession of the most powerful navy in the Galaxy, but a lot of good ideas are there.

Palpatine's Final Order both feels a lot older, even more inexplicably powerful and resource heavy, and with a much less transparent mission and methodology. What did Palpatine actually want? Seriously. His motivations change every minute in the final moments of the film. He originally wanted Kylo Ren to assassinate Rey because she was a threat. Then he wanted Rey to kill him so that his spirit could take her over (was this always a thing? Wouldn't his spirit have taken over Vader, then? Or Luke when he attempted to kill him?). But then he decided to drain her life force. Again, this all proved to be no consequence. A drained Rey just got up and then killed him. Oh yeah - she did kill him! Why then didn't anything happen?! I felt like my brain was melting. Did it not count because it was his own Force Lightning directed back at him? Why didn't it just roast his face like in Revenge of the Sith (2005) or do nothing like Luke in RotJ? Why didn't he just....stop? Because then Rey would strike him down. THAT'S WHAT HE WANTED. My blood is getting agitated. I don't know what to do with this movie.

I hate getting caught up in these details, but understanding basic character motivations is one of the hardest things to do, and I can't remember a movie this big that fumbled so blatantly and so hard. It's indescribable. What did anyone want in this movie? It's all surface. Who was finding themselves? Where did we end up?

Rey is the main character and I haven't mentioned her at all. That's because the film gives her nothing interesting to do despite thrusting upon her one of the biggest revelations and giving her the biggest temptation. Except...no, she's not tempted at all! It gets back to Abrams' destiny thing. Luke was tempted by the Dark Side because he's impatient and childish and he wanted to save his friends and saw that as an easy means to do so. Anakin was tempted because he's angry and afraid and saw it as an easy way to save his wife, Padme. Rey certainly has an edge here, but where does it come from? Her love of Kylo? Her desire to save him? Her hatred of the First Order? The murder of her parents? No, none of these really holds weight. She sees a vision of herself as a dark side user that falls completely flat. She is most tempted by the Dark Side from the knowledge that she's Palpatine's granddaughter.

And we haven't mentioned it at all at this point, but your first thought at that should be...Palpatine fucks? And sure, he must, right? He's a powerful guy. But no, the novelization even eschewed that, citing that Rey's father was actually another clone of Palpatine. It's an unreal level of fucking up. It's astounding. It's a really weird feeling, actually, craving the maddening campiness of Ian McDiarmid's Prequel performance over his creepzilla take here. It's honestly more compelling! It's scarier when he's just a dude with machinations over the entire Galaxy rather than an all-powerful Sith God. It's so stupid. I'm so upset.

There is one more bit that the novel managed to screw up. For no reason. We weren't asking it to. At the end we finally get a Reylo kiss, which we have been dying for since Johnson dialed up the shirtless sex appeal in TLJ. Star Wars seems terrified of love or sex, though. How is the best love story we've gotten here Anakin and Padme and the sexiest thing they did was Force Slice pears and roll in the hills with shaaks? Is that why nerds like Star Wars so much - they can be fully invested and not worry about uneasy sexy time? So they removed any romance and made it a "kiss of gratitude." What is going on? Why can't we have nice things? Did Abrams understand the underpinning sexual tension in this movie? It just falls apart.

If you made it this far, congratulations. Suffice it to say that I did not care for this movie. It comes down to a core misunderstanding of both where the Star Wars universe has come from and to be honest, basic story structure. There is an obfuscation of character motivation, a petty script that rushes scenes instead of developing ideas, and a devotion to surface level fan service and action ahead of resonant themes or interesting characters. It's a mess on every possible level and although any Star Wars sparks a renewal of the backlog, it will not be fondly remembered years on down the line.

What makes this even more difficult is that this film premiered alongside The Mandalorian which is a show that did everything opposite of TROS and you now what happened? We're still getting Baby Yoda corona memes.

What do you think? Am I too petty and harsh? Let's chat below.

09 February 2020

First Impressions: CATS

This is a first for Norwegian Morning Wood - I am actually live-blogging the Oscars right now while simultaneously writing this post about CATS (2019), which feels all kinds of fitting. We'll see which one I can finish first! For some reason Hollywood has forgotten CATS on its most magical night, so it's time we acknowledge it.

CATS was the second of three films I saw in theaters over Christmas. The first being Uncut Gems (2019), which was equally snubbed - you may read my impressions here. As I mentioned in that review, I am reviewing these films in chronological order, which is also the order that I liked them. Yes, I liked the last film less than CATS. Much less. We'll get there.

Kitty titties ties AVABAR (2009) for
horniest CGI effort of the decade.

But there are many, many films I enjoyed less than CATS. CATS was amazing. It's a different kind of amazing, though. First off, this is definitely not a good movie. There is no part of this that's good. It's not quite in that "so bad it's good" zone, either. It's objectively a movie that fails at just about everything it tries to do. Normally that's our greatest criteria for judging a film. We may judge an adult character drama by very different standards than a summer tentpole. Now, I argue that a summer blockbuster still needs grounded characters and a coherent plot to go along with the roller coaster spectacle, but there's certainly a lot more leeway and forgiveness if the latter is done well while the former suffers. A comedy film may have a cookie-cutter plot but can be successful if it's actors are charismatic and the jokes land. Those films are successes, regardless if they don't adhere to strict standards of what the visual medium otherwise calls for. SPOILERS here, but who cares, this film is better if you know what you're getting into...

Nothing works in CATS. Absolutely nothing. The plot is nonexistant. The visual effects are terrible. The cast is mostly a series of stunts that don't work. It's not a character study. As a musical it has catchy songs but they don't advance the plot or convey inner feelings or monologues. It even fails at presenting itself as a fun diversion that you can turn your brain off and enjoy for two hours. So, why did I love this so much?

I was horrified at the first trailer. It just hit me like something very deeply disturbing and misguided. Obviously it was a great mine shaft full of joke gold. That's probably what first attracted me to the worst film of 2019. How can you let a movie like this pass you by? The film is so obviously a bad idea on every level. How was this ever made?

Hollywood is a bizarre institution. Supposedly risk-adverse and run only by committee these days, occasionally there's a film that slips through the cracks. It's impossible that this made it past test screenings unscathed. Someone pushed this through. Someone was trying to be an innovator and a maverick and wanted this on screen. I would love to watch a film in twenty years made about the making of CATS. It must read like Ed Wood (1994). "Sir, are you sure about this?" "Yeah, no one will notice!"

This is what makes it so compelling. Every second - literally every second this movie is playing in front of you is completely and utterly baffling. How did any of these decisions pass by an army of producers and test audiences? It may be the most misguided movie ever made. The core conceit, the actual concept driving the movie is so completely flawed. Maybe we should back up.

CATS of course is based on Andrew Lloyd Webber's inexplicably long-running musical of the same name, which is in turn based on T.S. Eliot's book of collected cat stories called "Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats." This is where dreams come from, people. Film Crit Hulk has much more background than I could possibly provide, because I'll admit that my entire basis for understanding CATS is mostly from Unbreakable Kimmie Schmidt. As far as I know, it's just a parade of homeless people and out of work actors adding themselves to the cast and no one ever really notices.

I definitely didn't realize that was actually the LITERAL plot of CATS. To catch you up to speed if you haven't seen this, because of course you actually haven't, this play and subsequent movie are just about a series of alley cats with weird names singing a song to introduce themselves so that one of them can die. That just seems insane, right? The movie lays that out very specifically. It's not an inference. These Jellicle Cats, which should never be questioned, all take turns singing their introduction songs until Judi Dench chooses them to ascend to heaven and die. Maybe it's a nine lives thing, I don't know.

That's literally the movie. I knew going in not to expect any more and neither should you. It's just a parade of wacky characters and then it just sort of ends. This is a nice excuse to have a ton of cameos and big actors / musicians like Jason Derulo and Taylor Swift to pop in, sing their song and pop out. They don't even need to be in costume, just mo-cap suits. It's a nice way to get a lot of big names attached to this terrible movie.

How did this play become so popular? I don't know. Groupthink? For whatever reason, CATS the play became THE Broadway Play to see in New York. It was a big tourist thing. It was weird and different and "Memories" is pretty good. The production and costuming was garish and distracting from how weird the actual plot is. It's just a series of fun songs, most of which work, if not a little blatantly Andrew Lloyd Webber-ish. Big, bold, grand - hitting emotional beats but in such a calculated way that it reads as false. It works to put butts in seats.

Why can't one of the biggest theatrical productions of all time become one of the biggest films? Well, this ought to be a great example of why and how media are different. CATS may have been fine if they had chosen the costume route - or at least mostly costumes with minor digital tweaks to smooth out fur transitions. Instead, the biggest barrier to enjoying this film is the uncanniness of the people-felines that the film fills itself with.

Apparently they did in fact use motion capture, but you could have convinced me otherwise. There are literally moments where characters' eyes are floating in their faces, unable to stand still. We were lucky enough to watch the original theatrical version, which you can tell by keeping a look out for Judi Dench's big wedding ring on a very human hand. We thought we'd have to be eagle-eyed viewers to see the one scene where this happens. No, it's evident in every single scene she appears in. And before here all the cats have human hands. Every single one. We just seem to exist on a line here, and maybe that is the Hollywood meddling - afraid of commitment one way or the other. Are they humans? Are they cats? We can't make a decision. Instead they are cat-sized human-cat people that are endlessly freaky.

The baffling choices don't end there. There are also mice-people and cockroach-people. The mice-people are played by children, which has all kinds of disturbing implications, and Rebel Wilson-cat feels very comfortable eating cockroach-people. Why wasn't this changed? Giant monsters can eat people. People can eat nameless, faceless things. Smiling people, who are have names, faces, personalities, and charisma eating equally smiling cockroach people is fantastically disturbing. It borders on sociopathy. It's entirely devoid of what the general populace of human society believes to be normative behavior.

In addition to hands and faces there are many more tragic visual effects choices. Most cats are colored like cats, so even though they're definitely all naked, they just seem like cats. Idris Elba, however, even though he's largely depicted in a big coat as magic evil cat Macavity, inexplicably takes his coat off near the end of the film and just seems really weirdly naked. I think it's because the brown fur matches his natural skin color, so instead of looking purple or gray, it's just a buff gyrating naked man. His CGI really needed to match hair, not skin, which gets into all sorts of problematic elements.

Problematic. That's a fun word for this movie. I don't think Jason Derulo's bulge removal is a huge deal, but James Corden's Bustopher Jones exists solely as a fat joke. Rebel Wilson strips her fur to reveal a costume over her other fur. Judi Dench's end monologue is longer than Return of the King (2003). Maybe we're getting into nitpicking individual scenes, but every time you think this movie can't get more ridiculous something else happens. Literally right up until the end when Judi Dench just won't stop talking, all the while while every other cast member keeps the same awed expression on their face.

Speaking of things that go on forever, we need to talk about Magical Mr. Mistoffelees, which first of all, should be an indicator that he's secretly an evil cat - does Andrew Lloyd Webber know who Mephistopheles is? Or did he just think it was a cool name? This should be foreshadowing - okay, we're getting off track. He tries to use magic to bring back Judi Dench from the hands of Macavity (who stole all the other cats so that he could be the Jellicle Cat and finally die [except no, he didn't even do that, Jason Derulo was still available. Nevermind.]), and everyone is like, well, Mr. Mistoffelees can just magic her back. He obviously can't. So they just sing encouragement to him again. He fails. They sing it again. He fails. They try one more time - maybe it'll work this time for some reason! Each time is such a let down! He does it. Great. I see your wedding ring, Judi.

At some point it's like they are all vying to by the chosen one to die just to get out of this movie.

Beyond the people cats, the rest of the effects are truly terrible. I was most put off by the compositing, which looked straight out of the 90s. Characters fluttered across their obviously green screened backgrounds, lighting and shadows didn't even attempt to match. The whole affair was maddeningly weightless, every leap, every pounce felt like nothing. In the same year where Marvel was constructing sets so good out of CGI you never even questioned that they weren't real this is less and less acceptable in a major studio release. Hell, this wouldn't really be acceptable in 2002.

Is the terrible CGI in service of the plot? As in, does nonsensical production design match a nonsensical plot? Maybe. I am pondering this movie a lot, because I enjoyed it. But it's not like I enjoy watching really bad movies like I'm Tom Servo. I do think that everything comes together here. If the effects were amazing it just wouldn't be the whole experience. It creates a more coherent narrative that this was the least thought out, most rushed, poorly judged, misguided modern blockbuster in recent memory.

What's important is that last word - memory. I remember many scenes from this film. I remember more than I do from Bumblebee (2018) or The MEG (2018). I couldn't tell you a thing that happened in those and I watched both a mere seven months before CATS. It's distinctive, there is a clear vision here. It's just that that vision is absolutely insane and off the mark of good receptive taste.

In terms of worst movies ever, CATS is unique. It's not trying to be a really self-serious film that falls on its face like Gigli (2003). It's also not quite trying to be a goofy comedy whose jokes don't land like Movie 43 (2013). It's not terrible because of its low budget or bad acting like The Room (2003). It's something else, and in that mystery is what makes it so intriguing. It's as if while making all these obvious production choices they could have gone with something else and just refused every single time. Maybe that carefree attitude is liberating.

I also have a theory that this and more movies will start existing just for the memes. Memes are bigger than any movie or TV show. I have the same suspicion about Sonic the Hedgehog (2020), but they seem to have unfortunately course corrected that one. It's a shame. These films are produced to be bad and ridiculous on purpose to then let the population (or industry plants) re-purpose their ridiculousness as "making fun of the serious film", but that was the original intention in the first place. This is how marketing in the 21st Century now works, people. It's a fine line to walk. The original media needs to exist unironically for users to then apply their own smug irony and cynicism. Or to actually glorify with new sincerity. Millennial tastes escape me a bit. But I still buy into the conspiracy that this film was nuts on purpose - if played straight it would have just been another Bumblebee. Forgotten, lost, an adaptation that no one cared about.

But does it fail? I had fun watching this and laughing all along. Not quite along with the film, certainly at it, but fun is fun, right? It's an age old "so bad it's good" debate. What does going to the movies mean, really? I liked it a whole lot more than the next movie I saw. That counts for something, right?

I have a lot more thoughts about this. I need to dissect more why I didn't hate this objectively awful movie but generally liked it - somewhat unironically. Like, I liked it for the mess it is, not in spite of, but not in a hateful way. Maybe I'm overthinking it. But you should definitely go watch it.

What do you think of CATS? Do you prefer dogs? Hamsters? Leave a comment or just go on about your life.

They Say Hindsight is OSCAR 2020 LIVE blog!

Okay people - I do not own a television so basing this off Twitter. This should work out fine. I always have terrible predictions so I went really off the rocker with a few of these categories this year. That should work out, right?! I think JoJo Rabbit (2019) is winning screenplay instead of The Irishman. Official predictions remain solid, but I think that will happen now and I wanted to say it. I will definitely get all of the shorts categories right, though.

Stay tuned for updates all night and we'll see how I do!

Supporting Actor:

Tom Hanks, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
Anthony Hopkins, The Two Popes
Al Pacino, The Irishman
Joe Pesci, The Irishman
Brad Pitt, Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood

Official Prediction: Brad Pitt
Offical Winner: BRAD PITT!

Okay, this was an admittedly easy one to start off with, but it's still exciting. Yeah, yeah, Pitt has an Oscar for producing 12 Years a Slave (2013) and all that, but this definitely feels like a good capper for him. It's exciting. He's had a fantastic career and continually commits to smaller, independent films and roles while being in a position where he could have been Tom Cruise and made six Fight Club (1999) sequels if he wanted to. The only comic book movie he's appeared in is Vanisher in Deadpool 2 (2018). This is a good award.

Score: 1/1

Animated Feature:

How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World, Dean DeBlois
I Lost My Body, Jeremy Clapin
Klaus, Sergio Pablos
Missing Link, Chris Butler
Toy Story 4,  Josh Cooley

Official Prediction: Missing Link
Official Winner: Toy Story 4

I hate to say that I'm so done with Pixar. The magic at this point is long gone and I'm over it. I maybe could have predicted this but thought I saw some cracks with Toy Story 4 not really dominating precursors, but it's by far the most recognizable nominee here, and a lot of times that's all it takes. Can't wait for Toy Story 5 to win in six years.

Score: 1/2

Animated Short:

“Dcera”, Daria Kashcheeva
“Hair Love”, Matthew A. Cherry
“Kitbull”, Rosana Sullivan
“Memorable”, Bruno Collet
“Sister”, Siqi Song

Official Prediction: "Hair Love"
Official Winner: "Hair Love"

Haha, I miss Animated Feature but got Animated Short. Damn straight. This was definitely the cutest nominee and I'm glad that was enough. This is huge for my predictions. Too bad Sisqo didn't win.

Score: 2/3

Original Screenplay:

Knives Out, Rian Johnson
Marriage Story, Noah Baumbach
1917, Sam Mendes and Krysty Wilson-Cairns
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood, Quentin Tarantino
Parasite, Bong Joon-ho, Jin Won Han

Official Prediction: OUATIH
Offical Winner: Parasite

This is...an interesting development. Parasite was favored to win a few categories but this was not one of them. This doesn't bode that well for Tarantino, unless it's a consolation prize and it can surge somewhere else. Might this be a big night for Bong Joon-ho? Three writing awards for Q is probably a little much.

Score: 2/4

Adapted Screenplay:

The Irishman, Steven Zaillian
Jojo Rabbit, Taika Waititi
Joker, Todd Phillips, Scott Silver
Little Women, Greta Gerwig
The Two Popes, Anthony McCarten

Official Prediction: The Irishman
Official Winner: Jojo Rabbit

See above. Screw my life. Great win, this makes me feel a lot more happy than my prediction. I still count this against me. The Irishman will likely officially win nothing and I might say this will be it for Jojo Rabbit, but we could see - it seems to be surging lately. My score is terrible.

Score: 2/5

Best Live Action Short Film:

“Brotherhood,” Meryam Joobeur
“Nefta Football Club,” Yves Piat
“The Neighbors’ Window,” Marshall Curry
“Saria,” Bryan Buckley
“A Sister,” Delphine Girard

Official Prediction: "Nefta Football Club"
Official Winner: “The Neighbors’ Window”

I actually watched both of these, "Neighbors' Window" was lame as hell. Whatever. These are typically a crapshoot. Good to get my boffs out early. Maybe. I am way down, folks. Please no upsets. This is terrible.

Score: 2/6

Costume Design:

The Irishman, Sandy Powell, Christopher Peterson
Jojo Rabbit, Mayes C. Rubeo
Joker, Mark Bridges
Little Women, Jacqueline Durran
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood, Arianne Phillips

Official Prediction: OUATIH
Official Winner: Little Women

Are you telling me that the kind of movie that always wins this category actually won this category!? And that I should have predicted one of the easiest categories of the night?! Oh, whatever. This is already turning into an awful night for me. Well deserved, though. We knew this would happen. I am mathematically eliminated from tying my best prediction night, so...good.

Score: 2/7

Best Documentary Feature:

American Factory, Julia Rieichert, Steven Bognar
The Cave, Feras Fayyad
The Edge of Democracy, Petra Costa
For Sama, Waad Al-Kateab, Edward Watts
Honeyland, Tamara Kotevska, Ljubo Stefanov

Official Prediction: American Factory
Official Winner: American Factory

I just watched this! Good win, this was a really interesting doc and most importantly, is the first step towards saving my night. In hindsight this had a lot of backing behind it - I did NOT realize the Obamas had a hand in this until this morning. See, my prediction is even better. I never get anything wrong.

Score: 3/8

Best Documentary Short Subject:

“In the Absence,” Yi Seung-Jun and Gary Byung-Seok Kam
“Learning to Skateboard in a Warzone,” Carol Dysinger
“Life Overtakes Me,” Kristine Samuelson and John Haptas
“St. Louis Superman,” Smriti Mundhra and Sami Khan
“Walk Run Cha-Cha,” Laura Nix

Official Prediction: “Learning to Skateboard in a Warzone"
Official Winner: “Learning to Skateboard in a Warzone"

Yay! This was a great documentary, fantastic job fighting off "Walk Run Cha-Cha"! Yes, I got into that rivalry. I am doing a great job of nailing some difficult categories and blowing the easy ones. Let's keep this streak alive.

Score: 4/9

Supporting Actress:

Kathy Bates, Richard Jewell
Laura Dern, Marriage Story
Scarlett Johansson, Jojo Rabbit
Florence Pugh, Little Women
Margot Robbie, Bombshell

Official Prediction: Laura Dern
Official Winner: Laura Dern

Thank goodness for these non-existent races this year. Laura Dern is the kind of actress that you think about and think, "She has an Oscar, right?" NOW SHE DOES! She was also 26 years old in Jurassic Park (1993). This is a great win for an actress who seems like she's only built a career in Indie films but has also been in some of the biggest movies of all time and just always puts in consistent work. She's also in a ton of movies lately. This is another great win.

Score: 5/10

Sound Editing:

Ford v Ferrari, Don Sylvester
Joker, Alan Robert Murray
1917, Oliver Tarney, Rachel Tate
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood, Wylie Stateman
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, Matthew Wood, David Acord

Official Prediction1917
Official Winner: Ford v Ferrari

This is a significant dent in 1917's Best Picture campaign, but not a death knell. Ford v Ferrari seemed underrated going into this night as a movie that did reasonably well, had reasonably good critical reception, and a general public liking. It didn't set anything on fire, but DID have race cars. Good for sound I guess. This category really loves war pictures, this win will make future predictions such a pain in the ass.

Score: 5/11

Sound Mixing:

Ad Astra
Ford v Ferrari
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood

Official Prediction1917
Official Winner1917

Well, look at that. This category split, and we got it. I wonder when these categories will merge, even though they're totally different skills. Best Sound has a good ring to it, though, don't it? At this rate I'm on pace to shoot right down the middle and tie my all-time worst. Magical night.

Score: 6/12

Film Editing:

Ford v. Ferrari, Michael McCusker, Andrew Buckland
The Irishman, Thelma Schoonmaker
Jojo Rabbit, Tom Eagles
Joker, Jeff Groth
Parasite, Jinmo Yang

Official PredictionParasite
Official Winner: Ford v. Ferrari

WHAT IS HAPPENING? Screw everybody. I don't know what this means for Parasite. Where is Ford v. Ferrari coming from to ruin everybody's party? Maybe this doesn't mean a whole lot, it's just splitting a lot of categories the big pictures were supposed to sweep. And my predictions are so terrible.

Score: 6/13

Visual Effects:

Avengers Endgame
The Irishman
The Lion King
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

Official Prediction: Endgame
Official Winner: 1917

Unreal. I might have picked this as the least likely to win this category. The Academy seems really adverse to big blockbusters in this category for some reason. For a while this was at least the consolation category. How does Endgame not win this? That was a legitimate landmark movie for its effect work. Maybe folks don't want to admit that's the future of filmmaking. Does this push 1917 in better position for Best Picture? Or is it just the only film in this category folks would vote for?

Score: 6/14

Makeup and Hair:

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil

Official Prediction: Bombshell
Official Winner: Bombshell

Good win, following all protocol and precedent. I remember this happening every year. I always get so desperate to get back on track. I think I'm on lock for at least four more. I've never gotten less than 50% but it's possible this year. Yay.

Score: 7/15

Best International Feature Film:

Corpus Christi, Jan Komasa
Honeyland, Tamara Kotevska, Ljubo Stefanov
Les Miserables, Ladj Ly
Pain and Glory, Pedro Almodovar
Parasite, Bong Joon Ho

Official Prediction: Parasite
Official Winner: Parasite

Perhaps the biggest lock category in modern times. This helps. We knew this would happen - the question is, can Parasite keep winning categories typically foreign to foreign films?

Score: 8/16


The Irishman, Rodrigo Prieto
Joker, Lawrence Sher
The Lighthouse, Jarin Blaschke
1917, Roger Deakins
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood, Robert Richardson

Official Prediction: 1917
Official Winner: 1917

Deserved because the Academy loves Oners even though this totally should have been The Lighthouse. In fact the Film Independent Spirit Awards should just be the Oscars. Anyway, Deakins is deserved here, and even though his Blade Runner 2049 (2017) made up a little for decades of snubs, he could just win every cinematography award from here until he dies and it wouldn't be enough.

Score: 9/17

Original Score:

Joker, Hildur Guðnadóttir
Little Women, Alexandre Desplat
Marriage Story, Randy Newman
1917, Thomas Newman
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, John Williams

Official Prediction: 1917
Official Winner: Joker

Yeah, yeah, I know. Everyone else and their mother predicted Joker for this. I didn't. I was wrong. Dud. I should have more wins than I currently do. Solid gold predictions have been wrong before! 1917 isn't quite clicking, but I probably shouldn't have counted Joker out from anything. Yeah, I did, fuck Joker.

Score: 9/18

Original Song:

“I Can’t Let You Throw Yourself Away,” Toy Story 4
“I’m Gonna Love Me Again,” Rocketman
“I’m Standing With You,” Breakthrough
“Into the Unknown,” Frozen 2
“Stand Up,” Harriet

Official PredictionRocketman
Official Winner: Rocketman

This seemed like a shoe-in and so I actually predicted it. Look at me! Was Rocketman actually good? I should get at least two more categories right and at least tie my worst ever effort at this.

Score: 10/19


Martin Scorsese, The Irishman
Todd Phillips, Joker
Sam Mendes, 1917
Quentin Tarantino, Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood
Bong Joon Ho, Parasite

Official Prediction: Tarantino
Official Winner: Bong

I can't believe that Tarantino leaves empty handed. What does he gotta do to get his hands on this statue? Don't get me wrong, this win is huge and well-deserved. While this seemed for a long time like it would mean Parasite is in charge of Best Picture, it's more common to now proclaim a split. Does 1917 have a chance?! Or will the Academy honor Tarantino after all and award BP to OUATIH? Ugh this ceremony.

Score: 10/20

Production Design:

The Irishman, Bob Shaw and Regina Graves
Jojo Rabbit, Ra Vincent and Nora Sopkova
1917, Dennis Gassner and Lee Sandales
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood, Barbara Ling and Nancy Haigh
Parasite, Lee Ha-Jun and Cho Won Woo, Han Ga Ram, and Cho Hee

Official Prediction: OUATIH
Official Winner: OUATIH

Okay, I admit, I feel asleep on this one and totally missed the Twitter notification. I was kind of wondering why they were taking so long with Production Design. Like, saving it until after Best Director? Anyway, well deserved here, and boosts my tally. Cheers all around.

Score: 11/21

Lead Actor:

Antonio Banderas, Pain and Glory
Leonardo DiCaprio, Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood
Adam Driver, Marriage Story
Joaquin Phoenix, Joker
Jonathan Pryce, The Two Popes

Official Prediction: Joaquin Phoenix
Official Winner: Joaquin Phoenix

Listen, I love Joaquin, he's one of my favorite all time actors. I love how much he doesn't give a crap about being famous, how insanely he throws himself into roles and how much he eschews his own regard for his reputation. But Joker wasn't great, and he's not great in it. I said it. It's great that he has a second Oscar, he joins rarefied but deserved company. This is the second Oscar someone's gotten for playing the Joker, which is really bizarre and a little unsettling. Still, obvious pick and I've tied my all-time low, guaranteeing I don't do worse. Yay.

Score: 12/22

Lead Actress:

Cynthia Erivo, Harriet
Scarlett Johansson, Marriage Story
Saoirse Ronan, Little Women
Charlize Theron, Bombshell
Renee Zellweger, Judy

Official Prediction: Renee Zellweger
Official Winner: Renee Zellweger

It occurs to me that the CATS (2019) post I also wrote tonight simultaneously while writing this post was technically published afterwards, all these are just edits, so it will be pinned to the top. All things as they should be. I don't think anyone cared about Judy and her momentum was always kind of weird, and she already has an Oscar, and hasn't been relevant for a while, so this is fine. Predictable, fine, I get a point.

Score: 13/23

Best Picture:

Ford v Ferrari
The Irishman
Jojo Rabbit
Little Women
Marriage Story
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood

Official Prediction: 1917
Official Winner: Parasite

So, the streak continues! I haven't correctly picked a Best Picture winner since 2013. Why are any of you still checking in on this blog? I've hit 13 correct predictions four times in the past six years, three times in the past four years, and twice in the past two years! This is pretty bad! I think I cold have easily squeezed out three, probably four more correct picks from Jojo, Little Women, Toy Story 4, and Joker's score. I should have known better. I feel like when I think I know better I fall on my face anyway. The face of depression. But a lot of this Ford v. Ferrari crap no one saw coming. Oh well. That's a wrap on 2020 Oscar season.

Past years:

2010: 12/24

2011: 14/24
2012: 16/24
2013: 14/24
2014: 20/24
2015: 13/24
2016: 14/24
2017: 13/24
2018: 16/24
2019: 13/24
2020: 13/24
Related Posts with Thumbnails