Here we are again, at the end of what was a stellar year for movies,
assuming you were in the right place at the right time, had the right
streaming subscriptions, exhibiting spaces, etc. And like last year,
making a final Top 10 proved too arduous a task. So, seeing as I have no
stakes, you won’t mind if I cheat a little. Still, the Honorable
Mentions list is replete with titles that have every right to be on any
other hypothetical Top 10 (but some of these kids had to die, so). And
the final 10, or 12, or 14, can honestly be rearranged however you
please, and I would still be happy. There’s been a fair share of
tweaking and maybe contradictions. I was very lukewarm about The World’s End
until I revisited it on disc, and though it still has its problems,
there are few movies with which I just want to “hang out” and have a
drink, or 12. American Hustle also initially underwhelmed me,
though a second viewing played much better and I will refrain from
joining the estimable David O. Russell Hate Club, even if Hustle doesn’t have the sting of Behind the Candelabra (or Soderbergh’s unjustly forgotten The Informant! for that matter) and it amounts to, I don’t know, Midnight Run with a comb-over (I know some Midnight Run fans
won’t appreciate the comparison, so I apologize). There’s also a
purgatory containing highly esteemed titles that didn’t particularly
move me one way or another: All is Lost, Mud, Museum Hours…I
hate when the word “overrated” is pulled, so I’ll just call this drawer
the “Shrug File,” where you’re perfectly welcome to adore the contents,
but they’re just not my type of pizza toppings. And then there are the
films I haven’t seen, like Leviathan, or August: Osage County. Or, of course, Grudge Match. Errrm.
Anyway. Without any more delay, let’s get on with it.1. THE ACT OF KILLING (Director’s Cut), Joshua Oppenheimer
- “The Act of Killing”
The Act of Killing is Joshua Oppenheimer’s
extraordinary exposé of a person’s soul, or as the filmmaker calls it,
“a documentary of the imagination.” Its staged recreations of
50-year-old Indonesian atrocities are probably less illuminating about
concrete historical incidents than they are about the veiled and jagged
contours of the perpetrators’ inner lives. This is a film that
understands the power of images, the viewfinder reaching inward, the
undertaking an exercise in psychological voyeurism not only probing into
the mystery of a mass killing, but also the dark heart of how we now,
presently, reflect on the creation and ingestion of moving pictures –
how they influence us, how we see ourselves in them, and how we want to
use them to project our inner lives. In filmmaking, a monument is given
to memory, and the anti-heroes in The Act of Killing are
play-acting through memories quite happily, emulating the Hollywood
films that inspired and entertained them. But we also see how the
process of “seeing” may, Hamlet-like, set up the mousetrap to
catch conscience and provoke a deep and painful reflection. The film
forces us to excavate this mystery further, transcending its setting
with perennial questions of identity and guilt. Is the guilt real, when
heinous past deeds have given power and happiness? Or is it
performative, even in cloistered intimacy with only the watchful gaze of
one’s conscience? The film’s anti-hero, former gangster and executioner
Anwar Congo, is the year’s most memorable film character, and arguably
the year’s best performance (depending on your interpretation), as
tragically compelling as The Godfather trilogy’s Michael Corleone. READ FULL COLUMN HERE
2. A TOUCH OF SIN, Jia Zhangke /// THE WOLF OF WALL STREET, Martin Scorsese
Neorealism erupted in 1940s Italy as a reaction to the war, fascism,
and escapist ideals and aesthetics perpetuated through the motion
pictures of Mussolini’s Italy and Hollywood. The filmmakers aimed to
wake up a slumbering audience and ignite change and revolution, turning
their lenses away from White Telephone frivolities and luxury and to the
common streets of struggling laborers, where viewers could recognize
themselves and be stirred to empathy instead of just disappearing in a
whirlwind of entertainment. 60 years later amidst global
economic turmoil and deepening chasms between the realms of the very
wealthy and of the poor, Jia Zhangke and Martin Scorsese, with
authority, irony, and flexing currents of frustrated rage, approach
contemporary capitalism’s obscenities, pessimistically acknowledging the
acceleration of sociopathic, systematic greediness, as the ideals of De
Sica and Zavattini have been flushed away.
- “A Touch of Sin”
An anthology of stories set in modern China, A Touch of Sin is
a heart-wrenching and smog laced canvas of gritty social realism,
electric circuit high-def futurist beauty, and sudden, horrifying
violence. Jia ponders the spiritual weight of the past set against a
fresh free-market flow that mutes meaningful human contracts, where
lonely statues of Mao cross hairs with Christian iconography, both
dwarfed by fast jets, cars, trains, and hyperreal environments possessed
by the elite few able to buy themselves applause along with leisure.
It’s a film about powerlessness, with four protagonists who wind up in
movie-like fantasies of violent revolt, lifeless desolation morphing
into the aesthetic of car commercials and Kung Fu spectacles of
violence. Out of time, these people are stuck in China Year Zero (and
one climactic leap of despair certainly recalls Rossellini’s Germany Year Zero).
With its motif of animals (monkeys, snakes, tigers, whales, and hey,
even the Turin Horse makes a cameo!), the thing that differentiates
human beings from the wild kingdom is that touch of sin.
- “The Wolf of Wall Street”
On the other side of the globe, The Wolf of Wall Street has
the Hollywood studio system’s greatest living director making another
New York story, veering away from his famed mean streets and instead
peering into the ether of “fairy dust,” geographical space evaporating
into capital flux while stock traders submit to self-abandon in orgies
and narcotics. It’s an epic of three hours, but an implosive one
deliberately without an arc, where the focus squeezes tight on Jordan
Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio), an individual whose prosperous existence
disintegrates into a cartoon. Wolf of Wall Street begins at the
end of the financial world (1987’s Black Monday) and concludes, so the
aspect ratio tells us, during the recent advent of Smart TV. It’s
unfortunately been compared to Goodfellas and Casino, and though there are similarities, it’s more spiritually attuned to the discomforting absurd wackiness of King of Comedy–except everyone (except
straight-laced FBI man Kyle Chandler) is Rupert Pupkin and
successful. The neorealist-influenced filmmaker, hijacked by his main
character (Scorsese tellingly voice acts as Belfort’s first penny stock
victim), flees from movie realism and is at the submission of the most
unseemly of his characters, probably the closest the director’s come to
portraying the Devil. The corrupt Long Island brokerage firm of Belfort
is not unlike Dr. Strangelove’s War Room, where real people
become expendable abstract data; the fact-based world is so ridiculous
that satire is impossible. With The Departed, Scorsese made the present a futurist cyborg thriller in the vein of William Gibson; in Wolf of Wall Street,
recent financial archeology is Monty Python’s Crimson Permanent
Assurance. But even if, at 71, Scorsese’s filmmaking has more rhythm,
stomp, and kick than savvy filmmakers decades younger, beneath it all is
the lament of a wise old sage.
- “Inside Llewyn Davis”
Inside Llewyn Davis is not a 1961 time capsule channeling the
spirit of the Greenwich Village folk revival. It’s a character study
about a man who is predestined to be apart from the
“folk.” Llewyn Davis (Oscar Isaac, who gives my favorite leading
performance of 2013) launches the film by singing “Hang Me” at the
Gaslight and, 100 minutes later, winds up close to where he began. But
it’s not a gotcha trick structure so much as a question of what we’re
perceiving: honestly, not to get all Coast to Coast Art Bell on you, but
has Llewyn traversed between dimensions? Is the structure of Inside Llewyn Davis,
with its looping device, really a noose, where Llewyn is sacrificed
again and again, a Prometheus or Sisyphus doomed, like other Coen
heroes, for defying the gods? Set over the course of a week, as Llewyn
deals with an unexpected pregnancy with a colleague’s wife (Carey
Mulligan), a road trip to Chicago with a Santeria-devoted jazzman (John
Goodman), judgment from an illustrious club owner and promoter (F.
Murray Abraham), and the responsibility he feels for an escaped feline, Inside Llewyn Davis is an interior movie,
an odyssey that’s less Homeric than Joycean. The Coens take us to a
particular time and place with its fact-based pop mythology, but through
all the spaces and songs, there’s a haunting and unsettling mysticism
that refuses to be a part of collectively endorsed history (no wonder
Greil Marcus hates it, while a statement by Dave Van Ronk’s ex-wife
reads like one of those fake intros the Coens used to write for their
Faber & Faber screenplay publications). Few films handle the curse
of creativity—along with the stifling reality of failure—so adeptly,
movingly, and elliptically. “I’m so fucking tired,” Llewyn says in
defeat, ready to give up music and head on out to the merchant marine,
“just existing” like the rest of us. But the gods won’t let him escape.
Thomas Mann lays out Llewyn’s cursed vocation in his story “The Hungry”:
“Ah, to be not an artist but a man, if only once, if only on a night
like this! If only once to escape the inexorable doom which rang in his
ears: ‘You may not live, you must create; you may not love, you must
know.’ Ah, just once to live, to love and to give thanks, to feel and
know that feeling is all! Just once to share your life, ye living ones,
just once to drink in magic draughts the bliss of the commonplace!”
Creativity, sentimentalized as something enlivening, is damnation, and
the “folk” collective is something a hungry egoist, even against his
better judgment, just won’t—or can’t—embrace. (I also want to mention
that among Inside Llewyn Davis’ many feats is that it gets Marcus Mumford to jump off a bridge).
- “12 Years a Slave”
Director Steve McQueen tells Solomon Northup’s (Chiwetel Ejiofor) story, and 12 Years a Slave
feels less like a period film relating to important historical issues
than a startling confrontation with a long-muted past. This past may
feel more foreign than that to which we are accustomed, but it also
carries exponentially more weight. It’s strange, but much more
immediate–history made uncanny. The heaviness of the past when we think
about the passing phenomena of sounds, images, and people in
Solomon’s unfortunate adventure, is crushing as it is fleeting. The
images sink in deep and hurt. John Ridley’s excellent screenplay is
resolute in maintaining an unfamiliar vernacular with its period
dialogue, important for a film highlighting the significance of
language. The characters define themselves by their means to expression,
while the infrastructure surrounding the slaves disdains the
forthrightness of any verbal address. McQueen is stressing the urge for
the Past to express itself, and if not be heard, be at least seen.
Paper, carrying a list which Solomon delivers to a grocer from a
plantation, is a temptation, the recognition of words a sin meriting 100
lashes. For slaves, expression has been perverted into something
diabolical. McQueen, using Ejiofor’s face (modeled on silent film
acting), wakens us to the nightmare of history. READ FULL COLUMN
- “To The Wonder”
The two most beautiful films I’ve seen this year, To The Wonder and Upstream Color,
premiered on iTunes and Video-On-Demand at roughly the same time they
hit theaters (in a very limited exhibition). Both are gorgeously shot
and edited, with a symphonic rhythm calling out to each other as
cinematic brethren, as if DIY directors old and young, Terrence Malick
and Shane Carruth, were content to be mutually accelerating on this new
celestial sphere with the camera eye registering the various phenomena
of nature, drawing from the forgotten gospel of Dziga Vertov’s Kino Eye
philosophy of the 1920s, life “caught unawares” by omniscient lenses
canvasing the totality of space, offering a gesture of the soul. The
Kino Eye references something transparently religious in Malick and his
cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, but Carruth’s more secular
sensibilities, while hinting at the sci-fi conceptualism of David
Cronenberg, also bend to something Transcendental, as both filmmakers
are engaged with cosmic loops: Malick’s God whose “seeing” the
director’s boyhood alter-ego yearns to identify with in The Tree of Life,
and Carruth’s pig-farming Sampler (Andrew Sensenig), recording sounds,
creating (analog?) synth melodies, and, so it seems, associated with the
invasive trickster deity, the malevolent Thief (Thiago Martins), the
two of them manipulating and reformatting the narratives – and so
identities – of their clueless victims.
- “Upstream Color”
To The Wonder and Upstream Color are
already notorious for their narrative obliqueness. They’re destined for
limited audiences who will likewise debate the merits and debits of
both films. The masterly control that strings both pictures together,
not only in images but in two extraordinary sound designs, really
demands the sanctuary of the theater, of an imposing and overhanging
flux of flickering great light and encompassing sound. Shuffled on to
immediate streaming access, To The Wonder and Upstream Color are
the efforts of two filmmakers who, in addition to those large
questions we always hear about in reviews, are wondering where their
vocation of cinema is going–a vocation they’ve both mastered, yet
have been seemingly reluctant to embrace at full-force: six films over
forty years for Malick, while Upstream Color is only Carruth’s second picture, coming almost 10 years after the startling, $7,000 cult time-travel marvel Primer. READ FULL COLUMN ON UPSTREAM COLOR
6. BEFORE MIDNIGHT, Richard Linklater
- “Before Midnight”
“Every generation believes they’re witnessing the end of the world,”
says the revered writer Patrick (Walter Lassally) to the dinner guests
of his Greek isle summer house. He wearily undercuts the practicality of
hindsight, saying, “But I feel that I’m actually living it.” The new
Vesuvius eruption is more abstract than viscerally cataclysmic. The
world that’s changing is the notion of what is human, and how they
relate to each other. This eschatological thought is from probably the
central conversation of Richard Linklater’s Before Midnight, the third film in the trilogy that began with 1995′s Before Sunrise and 2004′s Before Sunset.
This pivotal section is the moment when the series opens up beyond its
principle characters of American writer Jesse (Ethan Hawke) and the more
jaded but politically activated Celine (Julie Delpy), the
twenty-something lovers who met on a Vienna train in 1994 and had a one
night stand, then met nine years later in Paris, disappointed with where
their lives had drifted, dreaming of each other (Jesse writing a book
of that Vienna one night stand, Celine a song) while attached to other
partners. Now, on the precipice of middle age, we see that Jesse and
Celine have long been in a committed relationship — though they remain
unmarried — with a pair of twin girls. They live in Paris and struggling
to make time for Jesse’s son from his failed marriage, Hank (Seamus
Davey-Fitzpatrick). On holiday, the couple again reflects on romance and
existence. Their romantic ideals now long ago consummated, they’re no
longer the only two people in the world, as it were, and the fulfillment
of longing brings no finality to regret and uncertainty. We’re with
them. A generation of moviegoers has grown up with Jesse and Celine,
and Before Midnight reminds us how the world — romantically,
existentially, technologically, cinematically — moves on without us, a
thought that is both simple and horrifying. Linklater has made the first
interactive film trilogy. READ FULL COLUMN HERE
- “Drug War”
Drug War has a title lending itself to the genre simplicity of
a modern crime film. We have the expected participants of devoted cops
matching wits with desperate criminals, a jittery-cool percussive
guitar-synth score skipping along with grey urban metal and smokey noir
nights, and information technology gadgets underlying the movement
toward explosive violence. But all that, assuming that it’s under the
masterly guiding arrangement of a director like Johnnie To (moving from
his usual terrain of Hong Kong to mainland China), reminds us how good
an honest genre picture can be, and how rare it is that Hollywood would
allow one to glow with such a controlled slow-burn, the heated sensory
alertness of frenetic action playing alongside cool precision and
measured restraint, packed with blistering suspense from start to
finish, though the film’s first gunshots aren’t heard for nearly 65
minutes. Focusing on a drug manufacturer (Louis Koo), whose only way
out of an immediate death sentence is to collaborate with a brilliant
and multifaceted police captain (Honglei Sun), Drug War is a
lacerating procedural of cops infiltrating cartels, a diamond bullet
dazzler of existential dread and undercover play-acting through
insurmountable criminal layers where the players are pawns on a
draconian police state grid. For both sides, action on the board is
insanely desperate, but still futile. READ FULL COLUMN HERE
- “Blue Jasmine”
Blue Jasmine has Woody Allen’s most remarkable character since Martin Landau’s guilt-stricken eye-doctor Judah Rosenthal in 1989′s Crimes and Misdemeanors,
and his most potent woman since Farrow. That’s not to say Jasmine (Cate
Blanchett) is as lovable or exudes the integrity of Farrow’s best
creations, but she’s the richest ink-blemish born from Allen’s antique
typewriter in many moons. A woman absorbed in overactive delusions, much
like the New Age fancifulness lightly parodied through Gemma Jones in You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger,
Blanchett dazzles as someone who initially reads like a Blanche DuBois
reprint, a hungry ghost assaulted by passing shades of departed
happiness. Her wealth went away with her conniving Madoff-like husband
Hal (Alec Baldwin), incarcerated for unethical financial behavior.
Tapped out and babbling incoherently about her life, she pursues an
artificial dream. After Allen opens with a CGI airplane, she name-drops
Horace Greeley, “Go West.” She’s fleeing her infamy and worn-out
prospects, but her spirit is stuck in the past, in Manhattan, and in her
wealth. Even though the government has taken everything she’s got,
she’s still somehow splurging, flying First Class with the best luggage
and casually giving her cab driver $100. Unable to be independently
prosperous–plagued with the “freedom” of free enterprise– she’s
increasingly rattled and alone with the damning consciousness of her
self-made undoing. Allen effortlessly relaxes the film in a perfect
rhythm of downward spirals and beaming prospects, through San
Francisco’s Inferno with flashbacks of Manhattan’s 1% Paradiso. Through
different times, places, and economic conditions, Blanchett could be
playing two women. But she’s not. Indeed, she’s not playing one or
three women either. What we come to understand in Blanchett’s
performance is that Jasmine is an assorted myriad of drives acting and
reacting, groping and adapting. Constructed by the contagion of wealth,
there’s not really a “there” there. READ FULL COLUMN HERE
- “Gravity”
Alfonso Cuaron makes myths. His newest film, Gravity, is an
astounding 3-D visual feat where Cuarón’s troubled Earth is a beautiful
background mural. His hero, Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock), is a novice
astronaut who finds herself disconnected and adrift in the inhospitable
and silent void of outer space after an unexpected satellite explosion
cuts off NASA’s transmission and destroys her mission’s spacecraft. As a
bare bones thriller, the picture is a triumph of finely crafted
intensity, with Ryan moving from one module of inhospitality to another,
the perils of debris, physics, time, and technology working against
her. But what lingers long after the visceral excitement fades, and is
palpable throughout the levels of daring and contingency, relates to the
divide between space’s infinite silence and isolation and what’s
happening down there on the crowded Earth, so serene from the
stratospheric vantage. This is a story about opening our eyes and
registering who and what is around us. It’s referenced that Stone and
Kowalski’s mission involves testing “a new set of eyes to scan the
universe” (Stone has been recruited because she’s an imaging specialist
at her hospital), and the filmmakers’ camera-eye draws attention to its
own optical wizardry. It’s a presence, a there-ness,
unseen but watching with sentient interest, its reality demonstrated by
drops of water colliding with the lens and, in more than one instance,
becoming Stone’s perspective as it crosses the threshold of her mask and
assumes her eyes. Looking at the huge screen and the things human
engineering have wrought, it’s hard not to be impressed, but Cuarón and
cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki have given us an impression of the
whole universe in their exciting 90-minute microcosm. Boundaries
broken, the world moves from an “It” to a “You” for Stone, and possibly
for many cinema viewers also. With fertile receptivity, Cuarón makes a
little myth about our rebirth. READ FULL COLUMN HERE
And at last, the two “final” (so it’s been alleged) feature film
offerings of Steven Soderbergh, which I’ve generously decided to make
#10 (edging out Beyond the Hills). Soderbergh has made several films in the last few years that I’ve loved (The Girlfriend Experience, The Informant!, Contagion, Haywire, Magic Mike), but they still all had to settle for Runner Up slots. Not this year, baby!
- “Side Effects”
“Being happy isn’t all that great,” Andie MacDowell says to her therapist at the beginning of Sex, Lies, and Videotape, Soderbergh’s 1989 breakthrough. Compare Ann to Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara) in Side Effects,
another dutiful housewife with a dopey husband, Martin (Channing
Tatum). She may be suffering from depression — or she may not be. A
suicide attempt lands Emily in the care of Dr. Jonathan Banks (Jude
Law), a psychiatrist who’s quick to prescribe various anti-depressants.
But in the sleek world of Side Effects, mental medication
isn’t only for the legitimately sick. This is a Huxleyian Somasphere,
where seemingly everyone is taking something, including the doctors and
their families. As wife Dee (Vinessa Shaw) grows anxious before an
important job interview, Banks puts a blue pill in her hand. “What does
it do?” she asks. “It doesn’t make you anything you’re not. It makes it easier for
you to be who you are.” There are prominently displayed billboard signs
for a drug called Ablixa which promises to help patients “take back
tomorrow.” Human existence is constantly under a sort of feel-good
surveillance with steady modifications. Instead of dealing with sadness,
why not just eliminate it? Subjectivity is calibrated by how people
tamper with their biology – and for a film audience, often restricted to
one character’s perspective (and, like with great psychosexual
thrillers like Psycho or Dressed to Kill, that perspective migrates in Side Effects), that’s a significant resonance. Soderbergh tampers with his movie and modifies our experience with various characters. Side Effects
could have been one sort of didactic pharma-commentary, but becomes a
more encompassing and melancholy gesture, wickedly linking the unchecked
parasitic sicknesses connecting various modern institutions — medical,
economic, and judicial. READ FULL COLUMN HERE
- “Behind the Candelabra”
“I was the first person to look directly into the camera,” Liberace
(Michael Douglas) gloats to his boyfriend Scott Thorson (Matt Damon) in Behind the Candelabra,
Soderbergh’s (for now) final motion picture. The HBO-produced biopic
is not merely an impeccably detailed period film about an eccentric and
enigmatic showbiz personality, loudly publicized for having household
name hetero actors like Douglas and Damon playing gay characters. As its
title suggests (and like Soderbergh’s Magic Mike), Behind the Candelabra anticipates
an audience’s voyeuristic appetite and the tired apathy that goes along
with indulging in the reflective mirror hall of entertainment, the
glean of artifice obscuring the corporeal decay of time. Liberace
looking at the camera and proclaiming, “Too much of a good thing is wonderful,”
is the empty and placating reassurance of the “Entertainment” industry,
which manufactures identities: Liberace can easily look into the camera
because he’s assimilated with the illusion. Though its action is
removed from us by 30 years, Behind the Candelabra presents its
glitzy excesses as an analog to the market of rampant modification –
and futile transcendence of reality – of the modern digital terrain that
offers immediate alteration, physically and psychologically. The
filmmaker casts comedians in otherwise serious roles (Dan Aykroyd, Tom
Papa, David Koechner, Paul Reiser), amplifying the sense of a farcical
clown mask gaudily struggling to smile through something empty,
grotesque, and lonely. Behind the Candelabra flashily begins
with its own snazzy HBO logo in disco rainbow flair digging into the
synthetic beats that overtakes the air with sonic fuzz, beating American Hustle‘s
similar–though admittedly more light hearted touch–by several months.
The kind of entertainment Liberace represents is one of transcendence,
“to dream the impossible dream,” dodging pressing realities by
disappearing into the Rhinestone simulacrum. The final shot of Thorson’s
plasticized mannequin face, the Frankenstein’s Monster of Liberace, is
one of the most horrifying things I saw this year.
“Computer Chess”
The Act of Killing–theatrical cut (Joshua Oppenheimer); After Lucia (Michel Franco); American Hustle (David O. Russell); Apres Mai (Olivier Assayas); Bastards (Claire Denis); Beyond the Hills (Cristian Mungiu); The Bling Ring (Sofia Coppola); Blue is the Warmest Color (Abdellatif Kechiche); Byzantium (Neil Jordan); Captain Phillips (Paul Greengrass); Computer Chess (Andrew Bujalski); Enough Said (Nicole Holofcener); Frances Ha (Noah Baumbach); The Grandmaster–Chinese cut (Wong Kar-wai); The Great Beauty (Paolo Sorrentino); Her (Spike Jonze); Like Someone in Love (Abbas Kiarostami); Nebraska (Alexander Payne); No (Pablo Larrain); Paradise: Faith (Ulrich Seidl); Prince Avalanche (David Gordon Green); Spring Breakers (Harmony Korine); Stoker (Park Chan-wook); Stories We Tell (Sarah Polley); ‘Twixt (Francis Ford Coppola); The World’s End (Edgar Wright).
“The Lone Ranger”
FAVORITE PERFORMANCES
“Nebraska”
Julie Delpy, Ethan Hawke, Before Midnight
Oscar Isaac, Inside Llewyn Davis
Wu Jiang, Zhao Tao, A Touch of Sin
Olga Kurlyenko, To The Wonder
Myles Paige, Computer Chess
Cate Blanchett, Sally Hawkins, Andrew Dice Clay, Blue Jasmine
Chiwetel Ejiofor, Lupita Nyong’o, Sarah Paulson, Michael Fassbender, 12 Years a Slave
Bruce Dern, Nebraska
Greta Gerwig, Frances Ha
Julia Louis-Dreyfus, James Gandolfini, Enough Said
Leonardo DiCaprio, The Wolf of Wall Street
James Franco, Spring Breakers
Sharlto Copley, Old Boy
Amy Seimetz, Upstream Color
Val Kilmer, Bruce Dern, ‘Twixt
Dwayne Johnson, Pain and Gain
Rooney Mara, Side Effects
Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Jennifer Lawrence, Jeremy Renner, Bradley Cooper, Louis CK, Robert De Niro, American Hustle
Tom Hanks, Barkhad Abdi, Captain Phillips
THE HALL OF DISAPPOINTMENT
“Elysium”
INDIVIDUAL CATEGORIES
“The World’s End”
Editing: The Wolf of Wall Street (Thelma Schoonmaker); Side Effects (Mary Ann Bernard); Drug War (Allen Leung, David M. Richardson); 12 Years a Slave (Joe Walker); Blue Jasmine (Alisa Lepselter).
Sound: Upstream Color (Shane Carruth); To The Wonder (Erik Aadahl); Gravity (Niv Adiri, Ben Barker).
Music: Upstream Color (Shane Carruth); Inside Llewyn Davis (various); To The Wonder (various); Spring Breakers (various); The Bling Ring (various); The Wolf of Wall Street (various); The World’s End (various).
No comments:
Post a Comment