A Guide to the Oscar Best Picture Nominees for Everyone Else

It’s no secret that I like movies . . . love movies . . . love movies a lot. For nearly every week of the year, you can find me in the dark of a cinema, be it with a summer blockbuster, a silly comedy, a sappy romance, or an artsy indie flick. Really, I don’t discriminate much in what I’ll see, as long as it’s good.

But there’s no time of year that I love more for movies than what is commonly known as awards season. From September to January, studios roll out their films that drip with innovation, artistry, significance, or all the above. And like a coach choosing his winning team, Hollywood execs aim these films to win awards, hoping to up their profit margins. (Yes, at the end of the day, it’s still all about money—but that’s a discussion for another time.)

Having said that, I am aware that the vast majority of people often feel a disconnect from awards season films. What do they care for those obscure, high-brow titles that sometimes they’ve never even heard of? How could they have seen them when they only ran at that one theater downtown where they show all the “weird” movies? Or worse, why see movies about what those “liberal elites” want them to believe and think?

And I get it. Film is not everyone’s thing. Some people go to the movies solely for entertainment, not for an artistic experience, and there’s nothing wrong with that. (All I ask is you all admit there’s also nothing wrong with me not getting the big deal about watching a bunch of guys throw a ball around.)

Still, if I can stand to watch the best football teams play in the Super Bowl, everyone else can add at least one Oscar-nominated film to their to-watch list.

I’m a firm believer that new experiences are what make us better people. So, I challenge those of you who don’t venture beyond the latest summer popcorn flick to step out of your cinematic comfort zone for a moment.

To help, I have created this list, ranking the Best Picture nominees for this year from Least to Most Accessible to Mass Audiences. My gauge here is my friends and family who don’t examine films and simply want to see a good, agreeable movie (i.e. my mom).

 

9. Phantom Thread

Who Will Like It: Fans of the director, Paul Thomas Anderson, costume design nerds, and auteur cinema aficionados.

Who Won’t Like It: Pretty much everyone else.

Look, I love artsy, unconventional films more than most people. But even I struggled to get through this one. If your biggest gripe about Oscar films is that they’re slow and boring, run as far as you can from this one.

 

8. Call Me By Your Name

Who Will Like It: Anyone wanting to see the rare creature that is superior LGBTQ cinema; the beauty of Northern Italy will delight globetrotters too.

Who Won’t Like It: Obviously if you bristle at the sight of two dudes kissing or getting it on, you’re going to struggle here. The age difference might bother you too; it did for me a bit.

This is a gorgeous film, and easily the most noteworthy gay romance since Brokeback Mountain. But even if the gayness doesn’t bother you, Call Me By Your Name is a risque art film, through and through. Even if it were a hypothetical straight couple in the same story (impossible as that would be), this film still might be too much for Joe Popcorn.

 

7. Lady Bird

Who Will Like It: Daughters who have a complicated relationship with their moms, and anyone who can sympathize with that.

Who Won’t Like It: Those annoyed by “mumblecore”—low budget films where teens and young adults talk a lot and not much happens in the plot. Many feel Lady Bird is the best mumblecore ever made.

Lady Bird sports awesome performances from Lucas Hedges, Laurie Metcalf, and, of course, Saoirse Ronan. It also, for a while, was the best reviewed movie in Rotten Tomatoes history. Still, funny as it is, you have to enjoy a dialogue-heavy, slice-of-ordinary-life movie to like this one.

 

6. The Shape of Water

Who Will Like It: If a darker, more adult, and more science-fictiony retelling of Beauty and the Beast sounds like your thing, do not miss it.

Who Won’t Like It: Make no mistake, Shape of Water is the weirdest entry this year. It’s simple: mute lady falls in love with amphibious fish-man. Does that sound too out there for you? That’s the least bizarre part about it, so skip it if it does.

I cannot tell you how much it pains me to put this one so low on the list, as Shape of Water is my number one movie of the year. It’s gorgeous, emotive, and a far more relevant LGBTQ film than Call Me By Your Name (yes I said it #sorrynotsorry). But I have to be honest: the subject matter is just going to be too weird for most (not to mention it’s the most sexually explicit of the list . . . yeah, it goes there).

 

5. Get Out

Who Will Like It: Even being the latest in the burgeoning indie-horror-flick-with-something-to-say-about-society category (which is what the best horror has always been anyway), Get Out will still appeal to anyone who enjoys a good scary movie . . .

Who Won’t Like It: . . . unless you’re the type who believes that films should never have any political or social commentary whatsoever . . . or you think Black Lives Matter is a hate group . . . please don’t ever admit to me if it’s the latter.

I struggled whether to put this one at number four or five. But I figured a horror film holds less wide appeal than what I did place at number four. Still, if the violence or scares don’t turn you off (it wins goriest award on this list) you should add Get Out to your to-watch list.

 

4. Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Who Will Like It: This is all around a great movie with socially relevant ideas that everyone can relate to. Honestly, everyone could use a dose of this film in our troubled and divisive world.

Who Won’t Like It: Without giving too much away, Three Billboards isn’t going to satisfy audiences who have to have Hollywood endings.

Don’t let its spot on the list fool you: Three Billboards is not your run-of-the-mill drama. Still, it earns number four by being laugh-out-loud funny with a hero audiences will instantly like and root for. Be advised though that it earns the roughest language award of the list (only I, Tonya could have beaten it).

 

At this point we’re moving on to the only three nominated films that are not rated R. And yes, I did this on purpose. Let’s face it, broad mass appeal includes appealing to a variety of age groups.

 

3. Darkest Hour

Who Will Like It: Watching Gary Oldman become Winston Churchill is the draw here (hence all his awards). Your history buffs might also enjoy yet another take on the trusty subject of World War II. (Then again, they may hate its fudging of facts.)

Who Won’t Like It: Gary Oldman’s near-perfect recreation of Churchill’s mumbling might frustrate some. And since it’s about the conversations that go on in strategy rooms, it’s not exactly your typical war movie.

Every year the Academy picks at least one film they would have nominated fifty years ago. Darkest Hour is that pick this year. It has everything you think of when you think “Oscar movie”: career performance from veteran actor, WWII, “based on real events”, relatively safe choices, WWII. True to form, Darkest Hour (note there’s no “the” in the title) is not the most exciting film. Be sure you’re well-rested.

 

2. The Post

Who Will Like It: Do you like films about journalism like All The President’s Men? Do you want to see one woman take on a group of men who thinks she’s incapable in the best “get it girl” moment since Wonder Woman? Fancy political intrigue and think Nixon is the worst thing that ever happened to this country? If any of those apply, check it out.

Who Won’t Like It: I’d like to say that three of Hollywood’s most respected names didn’t come together to make a statement film about our current president. That it’s not film about feminism. That it’s not a film about the vilifying of the free press, nor what a transparent government should look like . . . but that’s exactly what it is. Your politics may hate them for it.

You can almost feel how badly Spielberg and crew wanted to make this film. I’d be curious to know how long this script has been around and if it was only picked up because of current events. Regardless of how relevant it is, The Post is a solid film that only suffers from not living up to the potential of those involved . . . and it ain’t no Spotlight.

 

1. Dunkirk

Who Will Like It: The idea here is that most everyone will, in my humble opinion, find something to enjoy about this one.

Who Won’t Like It: The one caveat is that if you’re not crazy about movies where people don’t talk a whole lot, where there is no true main character, or with Nolan’s creative story structure, you might still find it tedious.

Up until I saw Shape of Water, this film was number one on my list and is still number two. I think many have forgotten in the ensuing months how incredible a film Dunkirk is. Nolan uses his non-linear plot to thrilling effect. The cinematography is spectacular. It’s the best sound design and sound editing I’ve heard since Fury Road. Most of all, it possesses a universal expression of war and survival that most anyone can relate to, even if they’ve never seen a battlefield. And I pity you if you missed this one in IMAX.

 

Now for some honorable mentions of films that were clearly gunning for Oscars and are worth checking out:

Mudbound: I am stunned and frankly upset Phantom Thread and Darkest Hour were nominated for Best Picture over this. Be advised this film has a tough scene to watch (I was ugly-crying).

I, Tonya: This could have had Phantom Thread‘s place, too. Watch out for the 100+ f-bombs though.

The Big Sick: Best rom-com I’ve seen in years.

Molly’s Game: For the Sorkin fans out there; perhaps his most “fun” project ever.

Coco: Okay, if you haven’t seen this one yet, drop everything and see it now. Best Pixar film since Inside Out.

The Florida Project: Not for everyone, but beautiful in its own way.

 

So there you have it. And remember, many of these are coming back to theaters for limited “Oscar marathons” so you may still catch them if you missed out the first time.

See you at the movies!

Why You Should Read This

Because the FCC is going to kill net neutrality.

Imagine your power company charging you more for using your electricity to power a TV or computer instead of a radio or hair dryer. That’s what will happen if the freedom of the Internet is handed over to the ISPs. We will enter a new age of robber barons like Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Vanderbilt; instead of oil, coal, and steel, however, their monopolies will be over what you information you have access to.

ISPs will be able to charge you more for certain sites. Think of it like satellite or cable TV. Do you want to have to pay for the “premium package” just so you can have access to Facebook and Google? Do you want the news outlets you have access to determined by which media companies your ISP has deals with?

You may hate government oversight and interference into the free market. You may think the federal government is evil and hell-bent on destroying all your freedoms.

I don’t have time to explain why net neutrality is not that. You’re just going to have to trust that I’ve done my homework on this and know what I’m talking about.

Call your representatives. CALL THEM. Today. Call this number – (202) 224-3121 – and they’ll put you in touch with your Senators and House rep. Call all three. TODAY.

To My Fellow Utahns

Oh, hello there, fellow Utah voter. I was hoping we could have a little chat.

You see, a poll released earlier this week of about 1,000 of you by Public Policy Voting has me, to put it bluntly, baffled. When asked who of the current presidential candidates you would vote for if the election were today, here’s how the numbers turned out:

Donald Trump: 39%

Hillary Clinton: 24%

Undecided: 14%

Gary Johnson: 12%

Evan McMullin: 9%

Darrell Castle (who?): 2%

Jill Stein: 1%

 

Perhaps even more telling is the question of who you would vote for if your only options were Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump:

Donald Trump: 53%

Hillary Clinton: 33%

Not Sure: 14%

 

Or who you would pick between Donald Trump and Barack Obama:

Donald Trump: 49%

Barack Obama: 39%

Not Sure:12%

 

SIGH.

Look, I get it. Utah is a red state. Utah has been a red state for as long as anyone alive can remember. Trust me, the child of two Democratic-leaning parents was painfully aware he was in the minority while in elementary school during the Lewinsky scandal. I recall back in 2012 when Utah was declared red before any votes for Mitt Romney had even come in.

But these poll numbers are pure madness. I mean, I do live in Utah, right? The state that prides itself on its commitment to family values, moral behavior, and, in the simplest of terms, being a kind, decent, respectful human being . . . that is the state I still live in, right? That’s the state that apparently wants to give its electoral votes to Donald Trump?

Hmmm, Donald Trump . . . let’s reminisce for a moment on a few of the greatest hits of his campaign so far, shall we? Keep in mind this is nowhere near an exhaustive list . . . we’d be here all night if I attempted that.

• The Wall – to date, he has not backed down on his plans to build a border wall, a project that, according to John Oliver, would conservatively cost $25 billion to build and another $25 billion to maintain over seven years. And somehow Mexico is going to pay for it. Never mind the fact that people can, you know, climb over walls and that most drug cartels use tunnels to cross the border.
• The Nuclear Weapons Comment: According to Joe Scarborough (who, in case you didn’t know, is a conservative, Republican news anchor), Trump asked a high ranking foreign policy expert three times why the U.S. doesn’t use its nuclear weaponry. Now, granted, that information is third-hand, but if there is even the slightest possibility this conversation actually happened, that alone should disqualify anyone.
• The Proposed Muslim Ban: In December 2015, Trump called for a complete ban of Muslim immigration to the United States. In July 2016, he expanded on that idea, suggesting that no one from any country affected by terrorism be allowed in the country. Trump has vacillated on this issue, but you would think it would give pause to a state whose history involves being driven out of where they wished to live because of their religious beliefs.
• Racist Comments About Mexican Immigrants: This one comes from the very first day of the nightmare that has been his campaign, when he claimed that the individuals who come to America from Mexico are not good people, that those who come are criminals, drug dealers, and rapists. Not only has this statement been shown as lacking any basis in fact, it might not be the most Christian statement ever made.
• Remember That Time He Mocked A Reporter With A Disability?
• He’s the Biggest Liar of All This Cycle’s Candidates: Pulitzer Prize-winning PolitiFact gives him the biggest “Pants on Fire” rating among all the GOP candidates and between him and Hillary Clinton by a wide margin in both cases. Yes, this includes the email scandal.

Let us also not forget everything we know about Trump from before he announced his run for president: the Trump University scandal, his four bankrupted companies, infidelity allegations (coupled by three separate marriages), his history of racist behavior (seriously, just Google “Is Donald Trump racist?”), and all of his failed business ventures from vodka to steak to a magazine to an airline.

If after taking all of that into consideration you still think your best course of action is to vote for Donald Trump in November, I have one question for you:

What the f— is wrong with you?

“But Blake!” I can hear you say. “I have to vote for Trump or else Hillary will win! And she’s so much worse!”

Okay, there are two facts you need to come to grips with right now: First, Hillary Clinton is already winning. According to the professional statisticians at fivethirtyeight.com, she currently sits somewhere in the 80 – 90% range of winning in November.

Now, you might say that’s all the more reason why you should vote for Trump, but here’s fact number two: Utah’s influence on the actual outcome of the presidential election is almost non-existent. We have six electoral votes. That’s just over 1% of all the electoral votes and just over 2% of the 270 votes needed to cinch the election.

The likelihood that the presidential election comes down to what Utah decides is beyond remote. Especially when you consider that Clinton is winning even with the assumption that Trump will take Utah.

So what does your vote really count for, Utah voter? You’re not in a position where you need to think about voting strategically since you’re not likely to become a tipping point in the election. And you don’t carry enough political weight to be on either Trump or Clinton’s radar beyond editorials to the Deseret News.

So what is your vote good for? Well, here’s the best part:

You get to vote entirely on pure and unadulterated principle. Without the burden of political consequences, you have the opportunity, with your vote, to simply declare who you believe should lead the country. You don’t have to worry about how your vote will affect the election as a whole, because let’s be honest, it’s highly unlikely that it will.

But, and here’s the part where I really need you to listen, even if your vote does next to nothing to affect who ends up in the White House, Utah’s vote can have an effect on the country’s political paradigm . . . but only if our electoral votes don’t go to Donald Trump.

How? The 2016 race is unparalleled in the unpopularity of the major candidates. The general consensus among most citizens, especially people I talk to in Utah, seems to be that our choice is to determine who of all our bad options is the least awful.

Do you want the establishment to know you’re not happy with that choice, Utah?

Do you want them to recognize how insane the entire circus has become?

You Republicans, do you want your party to shape up and fix the mess they’ve created?

Do you want to witness to the country that in Utah, principles come before politics?

That what is right is more important than what is popular?

Then your course of action should be clear: rock the establishment, shatter the status quo, and do not allow Utah to go red in November. 

A state that has gone red for all but three elections (barring the FDR years) choosing a candidate other than the GOP nominee would send a clear message to both the Republican party and the Washington elite: enough is enough. Otherwise, you’re simply doing what everyone already expects you to do, and only further validating the insanity that is Donald Trump as the GOP candidate.

“But . . . but . . . Clinton!”

Relax. All I am asking is that instead of voting for Trump simply because you hate Clinton, you vote for who you actually think should be President of the United States. Several ways you can do this that have nothing to do with voting for Clinton include:

• voting for Gary Johnson
• voting for Evan McMullin
• writing in Mitt Romney
• writing in Bush, Cruz, Rubio, or another GOP candidate you preferred over Trump
• abstaining from the presidential vote (just don’t stay home on election day; we have some important down-ballot matters like the governor’s race and a Senate seat)

“But . . . but . . . a third-party vote is a wasted vote!”

Is it really? Let’s take the 39% from that poll that are voting for Trump and divide them into three equal groups: first, 13% being those who truly believe that Trump is the best man for the job . . . also known as the people who cause me to weep at night; then another 13% being those who don’t like Trump, but dislike all of the other candidates more; and one more 13% being those who really don’t like Trump but feel they have to vote for him in the misguided thought that doing so will somehow stop Clinton.

If we remove that last group of 13% from Trump, his number drops to 26%. Now add that 13% to Gary Johnson, throw in a few of the undecideds to his camp and congratulations, Utah . . . your electoral votes are going to the Libertarian party. A similar scenario could work for Evan McMullin (albeit with more of the undecideds), and even a write-in candidate could grab the votes if a movement for such a candidate gained any traction.

My point is, fellow voter, that if there is any state where the “third-party vote is a waste” argument does not hold water, it’s ours. And again, if Utah does go to a third party, it’s not going to be the nail in the coffin for Trump, and it’s not going to help sink Hillary.

And even if it doesn’t work and all third-party voting does is split enough of you so that Clinton takes Utah, again, that’s of very little consequence in the overall election scheme, and the intended message of being fed up with the status quo is still sent.

This election is a defining moment for you, Utah. You have a chance to show the country what really matters to you. Is it a political party? One that has elected an immoral, racist, fear-mongering demagogue to its helm? One that some of you have irrationally clung to for all these years solely, for the most part, because of its stance on abortion, LGBTQ rights, and drug legalization?

(You know what I find interesting about my Republican family and friends who actually understand why they’re Republicans and ascribe to more than its stance regarding those three issues? Not one of them plans to vote for Donald Trump, and some are considering leaving the party.)

Is the Republican Party so important to you, Utah, that you’ll cast your vote for a man who any decent, rational person has to conclude is not only inexperienced and unfit for the office, but also prejudiced, egocentric, contentious, impetuous, and erratic? Are you going to stick by a party that you feel best represents your morals, when that party has chosen a man to lead it who may be the very antithesis of those morals?

Or are you going to show the country that Utah is still a place where integrity and humanity matter? Where we don’t tolerate bullies, where we take the moral high ground, where a potential leader’s character is just as important to us as any political affiliation  and experience? That we’re better than the madness of this election?

Will you show that we espouse the ideals of love and compassion for all people, and that we are a people of hope and faith, not a people of fear, anger, and hatred?

What’s it going to be, Utah voters?

– Blake L.

I Was Never “That” Mormon

Today’s post is  short and a little rambling, but just some thoughts I’ve had recently.

In the past 24 hours, I have come across two pieces that address the extremist culture of Mormonism, both of which I recommend:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mette-ivie-harrison/the-impulse-to-cultism_b_9190028.html

http://www.saltyrachel.com/blog//im-not-a-mormon-anymore-but-im-still-a-member-of-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints

Reading these posts I’m struck once again with the realization I’ve had over and over and over again at various moments in life – childhood, grade school, high school, my mission in Brazil, college, adulthood – especially while navigating the difficult terrain of being a gay Mormon:

I was never “that” Mormon.

How to explain what I mean by that? Well, perhaps some examples will help:

• My best friend for the first eight years of grade school was one of only a couple non-LDS peers in my grade.Since then, I can’t think of a single point in my life to date where my closest friends were exclusively LDS. And I don’t just mean inactive or formerly LDS or ended up converting – I’ve always had at least one close friend who was not born LDS nor has any intentions of investigating the Church and becoming a member.
• The Word of Wisdom was never taken in my home to the extremes it often was/is in many LDS households, because my mom was and is an avid Diet Coke drinker.
• I never have choked up or become teary-eyed speaking or testifying of Joseph Smith, The Book of Mormon, or current Church leadership, something I saw almost every day at the MTC.
• Scouting was never my bag; I only ever made Tenderfoot. Even as a child I thought the Church’s ties to it were ridiculous.
• My family made allowances for the occasional R-rated film.
• With a bit of help from my sisters, I never had any desire to attend BYU, despite being accepted for admission.
• I never really socialized much with my peers from my ward growing up. I didn’t know what that was like until college. Granted, my ward growing up had at most one or two active young men and about as many active young women, but still.
• I never went to EFY, even though I grew up in Utah.
• My family growing up always had a democratic/liberal leaning to it, making me at times the only 6th grader at Morgan Middle School in 2000 who thought Gore should win.

I guess my point is that so much of Mormon culture was never a part of my life. Don’t get me wrong, my family has always been and is devout to the Church, but so much of what made members of the Church “peculiar” was lost on us.

From a young age, I learned that people can have a different way of living and still be good, happy people. I learned that people who drank wine or coffee were not bad people or even necessarily wrong. I learned that not every practice or institution of the Church is a requisite for salvation or exaltation. I learned that hypocrisy and self-righteousness, sadly, are alive and well in the Church. Most of all, I learned that I was ultimately a Christian first and a Mormon second, and that at the end of the day, all men, regardless of position or calling, are fallible beings, each of whom is probably guilty of at least one terrible thing.

But please don’t misunderstand. I don’t say these things because they make me feel superior to others. Quite the opposite, actually. You see, growing up, I always thought it was being gay that made me so different from others. But, having interacted with countless gay Mormons and gay ex-Mormons and gay post-Mormons and gay whatever-Mormons, I’ve realized that no, being gay is not what made me so different from others.

Many of the gay Mormons I’ve encountered were once as entrenched in Mormon culture as any of the looking-beyond-the-mark members I’ve met. One of the greatest and saddest ironies of my life is that had I wanted to have a lot of gay friends in college that could have formed my post-college social circle, then I made an enormous mistake not going to BYU.

Many, many times I have wished that I could have grown up as “that” Mormon. That I could have found a home much more easily in the Church than I ever did. Not just so I could fit into it now, but because of how “not-fitting” has affected the rest of my life.

My theory is that people who live on the fringe, in those liminal spaces, as it were, grow accustomed to being in that place, even subconsciously. The space between becomes their home, even if they consciously yearn to be in the village, at the tribal fire with all the others. That tie to their home out on the edge is so strong that even when they summon the courage to approach the fire, or even when they encounter someone who has left the village to find a different one elsewhere, something about them screams that they’re out of place, both internally to themselves and to those they encounter. The people at the fire may be as friendly as can be, or those passing by those on the edge as they venture off to find a different village may be decent, wonderful people – but they can sense it. They can sense that those they found on the fringe belong neither where they are nor where they’re going.

So I’m left asking myself, have my early experiences poisoned me from ever finding my village? Has not being “that” Mormon set me in a state of perpetually never feeling at home? Will this post only further alienate me from others?

I sincerely hope not.

My apologies for the rambling.

– Blake L.

My Top Three Films of 2015

Full disclosure: this list was originally supposed to be a top ten list. I sat down with a list of all the films released in 2015, picked out the ones I had seen that I ascribed a certain level of quality to, and then began the task of ferreting out which were my ten favorites of the year.

Except I couldn’t pick ten. I got to about eight, and then I felt myself stuck with many worthy contenders left to choose from, but couldn’t decide out of all of them which were the two that outshone the others.

So I decided to instead go with a list of five. Out of the eight I picked, I had four that immediately went to the top of the list . . . except I couldn’t pick the fifth out of the remaining four.

Now, I could have just gone with four, but three is such a clean number. So I dropped the fourth that was probably most influenced by my own personal experiences and less by its actual quality (we’ll get to it in a sec) and finalized my top three.

I’m actually happy to have had this conundrum. Why? Because it shows that 2015 was an excellent year for film. So many of the films this year were of an exceptional quality, and what’s more, they were all quite likeable. This year is the first where I can honestly say that I actually enjoyed all of the Oscar nominees for Best Picture and would happily watch any of them again.

I think I mostly have The Force Awakens to thank for this: being faced with the inevitable box office juggernaut that film would be (and has proven to be), I think most producers and studio execs chose this year to focus less on box office draw and more on films that may not be raking in the crowds, but are of a high-quality nonetheless.

So, first up, here’s all the films I considered that didn’t make my top eight, but were still excellent films that I’d recommend to most cinephiles:

Black Mass—Johnny’s best role in years.

Bridge of Spies—great, but I wanted so much more out of a Spielberg/Cohen Bros collab.

Brooklyn—in a word, charming.

Carol—Cate Blanchett is a goddess . . .

The Danish Girl—and Eddie Redmayne is a god (need to get those two in a film together).

The End of the Tour—Jason Segel can act! Who knew?

Ex Machina—best “actual” sci-fi of the year, featuring Poe Dameron and General Hux!

It Follows— best horror about horror since Scream.

Me and Earl and the Dying Girl—the thinking man’s Fault in Our Stars.

Room—powerful, but brutal. Probably the “heaviest” film I saw this year.

Sicario—underrated. Has one of the most well-paced scenes I’ve seen in a long time.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens—issues I have with it aside, thank the Lord for Rey.

Steve Jobs—Aaron Sorkin really only does one thing, but he does it so well.

Straight Outta Compton—gangsta rap makes more sense to me now. I rest my case.

Trainwreck—Schumer and Apatow punked their fans and made a chick flick—success.

Trumbo—I hope Bryan Cranston gets more work like this . . . he’s far too talented for less.

The Walk—an odd but visually stunning heist film/tribute to the Twin Towers.

---

 

And now for the four films that were in my top eight but I couldn’t decide between for the fifth spot in my never-to-be top five:

The Big Short—this movie pissed me off, which I guess was the point, but it also used some clever and out-of-the-box methods to explain the financial crisis. This film is one that I think every person in America should watch, but I think few who actually need to will.

Creed—I was genuinely shocked how much I liked this movie. I don’t like sports movies generally, I really don’t like Sylvester Stallone, and I haven’t ever seen a Rocky movie. But, there’s a sincerity and positivity here that you can’t help but love, and Michael B. Jordan.

The Martian—I think Matt Damon stands the best chance to steal Leo’s Oscar. What I think I enjoyed the most about this one was its ability to inject quite a bit of honest humor into a dire situation, which was refreshing for this kind of story.

The Revenant—For the love of all that is good and holy, just give the man his Oscar already! What more must he do? Actually get attacked by a bear? Beyond that, this film sports some of the best nature cinematography I’ve seen in a long time.

---

 

And now for the film that is technically part of my top four, but I let slide for aesthetics:

Love and Mercy—I had been waiting for this film for such a long time. Not just when I knew it was being produced, but from the moment I first learned of Brian Wilson’s struggle with mental illness and the abusive relationship he had with his “therapist” Eugene Landy. I always felt it was such an important story, the kind that isn’t told nearly enough. And while the film was solid, with an innovative double casting of Wilson with John Cusack (some of his best work) and Paul Dano (always great), excellent supporting performances by Elizabeth Banks and Paul Giamatti, and amazing recreations of the Pet Sounds studio sessions, I have to admit that much of my enjoyment of this film comes from my fandom of The Beach Boys and the personal notes a story about dangerous therapeutic methods hit for me. Still, I think it’s one of the more underrated films of the year, and I recommend it to anyone who loves music, has dealt with mental illness, or has ever written Brian Wilson off as “crazy.”

---

 

And now, without further ado, in alphabetical order, my Top Three Films of 2015 . . .

Inside Out

Undeniably Pixar’s best film since Up (yes, that includes Toy Story 3). I still remember when I saw this film in theaters and being absolutely blown away at how deep and meaningful a children’s film was diving. Moreover, I’ve never seen anything explain so completely yet so simply what is going on in the mind of someone broken by depression, anxiety, stress, insecurity, or just plain growing up. The animation is nothing short of gorgeous, the voice-acting is pitch perfect, and the screenplay is one of the most original ideas Pixar has ever had. Granted, this year has been an emotional one for me, and I did see this less than 48 hours after publicly coming out, so perhaps my perspective is a little skewed, but I truly believe this one will become known as one of Pixar’s greatest triumphs.

Mad Max: Fury Road

Never before in my life has a film more pleasantly surprised me than this one. Actually, joyously stunned and gobsmacked is a better term. Seriously, where in the hell did this come from? Mad Max was supposed to be some lame summer-crowd action film that would maybe have a nice opening weekend and then sputter out. Never, and I mean never, did I expect something like this. From the opening frame until the closing credits, this gem is an unyielding, all-stops-pulled-out, balls-to-the-wall, adrenaline-fueled masterpiece of an action film. I could go on and on about what makes this film so freakin’ amazing: the practical effects, the feminism, the guy with the flame-throwing electric guitar, the cinematography, Charlize Theron, the script, the pacing, my boyfriend Tom Hardy, the weird stilt-creatures, the commentary on blind devotion to religion, “who killed the world?”, the freakin’ guy with the flame-throwing electric guitar, the expert camera work during the chase scenes, “oh, what a lovely day”, those long pole-swingy things . . . oh, and did I mention the freakin’ guy with the FLAME-THROWING ELECTRIC GUITAR??? (Which I recently learned was also a practical effect: that guitar really did do that). Just . . . I don’t know what else to say. This movie kicked a**, and I pity anyone who didn’t see it.

Spotlight

There are many types of well-made movies, but two particular categories are the “well-made movie that is very much aware of how well-made it is and can be kind of pretentious about it” and the “well-made, but unassuming movie that isn’t so much interested in impressing  you with how well-made it is but would rather just get back to telling a story.” Understandably, directors almost can’t help showing off, so this latter category is rare but is one of my absolute favorite kind of films. Spotlight is that kind of film. No bells and whistles in the film-making itself, but everything there—the cinematography, the editing, the visuals—is top notch. No stand-out, hand-me-my-Oscar performance from any one actor, but not a weak or phoned-in treatment from any cast member can be found. Nothing in this film is out to impress—all of the elements work to the singular aim of telling an effective story, much like the reporters the film itself is about.

And if I had to guess why, it’s because of the strongest element of this film: the script and the subject matter it handles. When dealing with an issue so powerful and so horrific, any self-awareness or self-promotion feels like exploitative grandstanding. At the same time, never once does the film try to shy away from the reality of what it’s talking about: terms like “abuse” or “misconduct” aren’t used to sugar-coat the dark and sobering nightmare the Boston Globe team uncovered. The film strikes that perfect balance of telling the stark, unadulterated truth without resorting to shock-value or extreme methods to tell that truth. I’m thinking this one might end up your Best Picture of the Year at the Oscars, and for good reason.

---

So there you have it . . . now on to 2016.

– Blake L.