Oscars® Nominations: 2019

It’s that time of year again – it’s award season, which means its time to start cheering that our favorite movies are being recognized and moaning because other really great movies, and the people who made them, are getting snubbed. With viewership falling every passing year, last year’s rather boring show, and no current host in sight (a little more than a month before the show), this year’s Oscars could be a very big deal in terms of how the show runs itself over the next few years. This year’s list of movies could end up being the most important – or it could be just another year to play it safe. How many have you seen?

The list of ReelTalk reviewed films is included at the end, and the list of Best Picture Nominees will hopefully be finished by Oscar’s airtime on February 24.

Venom Works Hard, But Falls Short

Part of a movie doing well is knowing what your audience wants and giving it to them. When Venom was announced, part of its appeal was because this was to be the opposite of a superhero film. The tagline was “The World Has Enough Superheroes”, and Venom as a character is known to be one of the scariest anti-heroes in the comic book world. Sure, he sometimes does good things, but mostly he is a force of darkness. The trouble with this film is that no one seemed to know how to play Venom as a villain without making him a hero by the end. The movie itself had some fun moments, some great visual effects, and nice fight scenes. But there still had to be someone worse than Venom, even if he was subpar, and Venom still had to save the world, even though he’s not a “superhero.” Overall, it feels like the studios promised audiences something they couldn’t quite deliver on, and the end effect made the movie fall flat and end up a lot less inspired than it really wanted to be. A lot of people seem to be griping about how a Venom movie doesn’t work without Spider-Man, his opposing force, but that’s not the problem with the movie, at least not really. It’s okay for Venom not to have a Spider-Man – as long as he has something else to make his movie his own.

A Star Is Born Aims for the Awards

If A Star Is Born is nominated for any awards this year (which, let’s be honest, it probably will), I hope someone in their speech talks about how it also deserves the award for “Most Rebooted Movie”. The story told in 2018, starring Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga, is actually the fourth time that the title A Star Is Born has been used. In 1937, the story starred Janet Gaynor and Fredric March, telling the story of a farm girl from North Dakota who dreams of making it in Hollywood and falls in love with a famous actor. In 1954, Judy Garland and James Mason took the title roles, also telling the story of actors. It wasn’t until 1976, with Barbara Streisand and Kris Kristofferson, that the story switched to the music industry, where Cooper and Gaga have picked it up in 2018. Though the same basic story (and ending) is used in all four movies, the idea is that audiences will still see enough differences because of the time period changes that the basic story will still hold true and touch hearts. Much like the musical that dominated the 2016 award season – La La Land – A Star Is Born plays on the public’s love of music and stargazing, admiring the life of the arts that most dream of, even if it’s a secret, impossible dream. And, like La La Land, this vision of the arts and the life surrounding them is fine to watch, but doesn’t make quite the impact that it intends to.

The Crimes of Grindelwald: The Magical World Walks a Thin Line

Part of the trouble with planning a cinematic universe is running the risk that the films you plan to enhance that universe end up hurting the story more than helping. With the continuation of the Harry Potter universe, told through the eyes of Newt Scamander and his tale of fantastic beasts, the problem may have been announcing a five-movie line-up just from the get go. Though the first film was a relatively decent opener, the second part of the story – The Crimes of Grindelwald – ends up feeling like 2 hours worth of story that barely moves the story along. Not only can the writers not decide which story they want to tell – the story of Grindelwald versus the story of Newt and his creatures – but the characters don’t seem to move forward in any meaningful way, and overall it just seems like the story could have been compressed and put into the next film. Sure, the Harry Potter fans of the world are looking forward to three more movies about the magical universe they know and love, but can those additions at least mean something to the story being told?