Why "The Hunger Games" is Worth the Hype by a Former Tween

As the final box office numbers were tallied, no doubt remains of the power The Hunger Games has wielded over contemporary pop culture. Well received by fans and critics alike, the movie can boast action like Harry Potter without the extensive CGI and tension like Twilight minus the nauseating love triangle, horrendous acting, and questionable heroine. Instead, there is something dirty, gritty, and real to the lead character of Katniss and to THG itself that both of its contemporaries lack despite the fact that it actually takes place in the future. How is this possible? It is my belief that a clandestine combination of an engaging story, great casting, and savvy marketing that transcends this film from it's young adult genre to something that all ages can appreciate and enjoy.

With a story that takes a dystopian society a la George Orwell's 1984 and a shocking battle-to-the-death like that of Japan's Battle Royale, Suzanne Collins novel blows any other coming-of-age tale out of the water. What makes it so shocking and relatable at the same time is that it is uniquely American and prays upon our ideals and cultural insecurities. Again, all this sounds like it could easily become a horrible read but that is when a fiercely like able protagonist becomes imperative. Katniss Everdeen, the girl in fire, is the girl all the girls want to be and all the guts want to be with. She is intelligent and perceptive to a fault, not to mention a huntress and provider for her family. A true role model who struggles with doing what's right and not just what is expected of her as a woman and as a child. The lynchpin, then, in this entire process was the female actor that would embodied all this - someone unconventional, smart as hell, and with some serious acting chops. Jennifer Lawrence is Katniss Everdeen and even though the book gives us the entire story in first person, Lawrence is able to deliver every iota of emotion, humor, and tension that we as an audience need. If the book is what brought people to the theater, her performance kept them in their seats.

Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen

The real credit to the commercial success of this movie lies with the marketing. It's a tough sell, when you look at it, kids killing each other and all. Lionsgate could have easily taken the beaten path and played up the love sick teens - it worked for Twilight, right? Well, if you have seen the numbers, THG beat not one but all the opening weekend numbers held by Twilight and is now the third biggest behind the last HP film and The Dark Knight. How this happened is Lionsgate knew they had the teens in the bag so they decided to go for the "25 and over" group. With a trailer that seemed more indie that blockbuster and a focus on the stark reality of the game, they were able to entice slightly older crowd - including me. In a sense, they wanted the Harry Potter crowd, those who were a decade older and harder to impress than the Twi-hards. By understanding the difference in what each group was looking for, they were able to appeal to both.  Also, putting this film outside of the summer blockbuster season eludes its competition, so that adults over 25, which according to Box Office Mojo did make up over half of the population, could focus on THG and not be tempted to go see The Dark Night Rises or Men in Black 3 instead. What, then, becomes of the Twi-hards? Well, their saga is coming to a close so they needed something new anyway. The Hunger Games provided them with a small, teasing taste of what they like whilst bringing their heads out of the sparkly clouds. 

The Hunger Games is as much about our disturbing obsession with reality TV and the horrors that await our mind numbing culture as it is a young girl trying to save those she cares about. The message is deep, especially for something that is "meant" for teens which is why I think the real triumph here is its ability to transcend genres. When I read the book, I thought, "This is so not for kids..." and upon seeing the movie I thought the same thing, (though the PG-13 rating made them tone down the gore and violence making it more kid friendly...I guess.) Like the games themselves, the movie didn't treat me like a kid. There was no playful tone or condescending music that was trying to manipulate my feelings about what was going on. They didn't need that because the story, the acting, and the execution was so clear and good. I am in for the long haul and odds are, so is the rest of the world. 

And the Oscar Goes to...

We have arrived, my friends, at the 84th Annual Academy Awards and in a few short hours we will know who Hollywood considers to be the best of the best. This is the final event and I for one can barely contain my excitement! I have seen ALL of the pictures nominated for Best Picture and quite a few more but I will only predict the categories that I am confortable with (besides, what is the difference between Sound Mixing and Sound Editing...anyone?)  Anyway, I have narrowed it down to who I feel is most deserving and why although this year has been one of the toughest to call. Without further ado, my predictions for this year's Oscars are:

Best Picture

It is one of the most celebrated films this year with the critics but still not many have ventured out to see a "silent film" writing it off as old fashioned and boring without actually giving it a chance. There loss, I say, but that school of thinking would be the only thing stopping The Artist from completing its tour de force this season.  

Best Actor

Jean Dujardin in The Artist

Exquisite does not even begin to describe Dujardin's performance as the fallen silent film star George Valentin. His ability to communicate everything without use of language is in itself Oscar worthy but that he also teaches us how us simply superb. The only one that could take this away from him is George Clooney for The Descendants. His portrayal of Matt King as he struggled through unimaginable circumstances with humor and what remained of his dignity was honest and oddly refreshing. These two have been neck and neck all season so regardless of who wins, it will be interesting just to see who will cross the finish line.

Best Actress

Viola Davis in The Help

Where do I begin? Viola Davis is beyond a doubt one of the most amazing actresses of our time. In The Help, she spoke the truth through Aiblene with power, dignity, and incredible humility and gave what I believe is the performance of her career. It's the kind of thing you felt when you saw it, like you were seeing a character be brought to life for the first time. It's almost haunting and will stay with me probably forever - for that alone, I believe she deserves every award she is nominated for this season. Meryl Streep is the best actress of our generation, no argument there, and I have yet to see The Iron Lady. However, I find it hard to believe that anyone can top what Ms. Davis did. It is her time and hopefully the Academy can see that.

Best Director

Michel Hazanavicius for The Artist

This is one of those categories where ALL the nominees were phenomenal so seriously, how can you choose between Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, Alexander Payne, and Terrence Malick?? I had a hard time because what each of them did was so different and equally wonderful but I chose Hazanavicius because of how hard it must have been to bring us The Artist. It is a silent film, after all, but he was able to transcend that genre entirely (he made it to the Oscars didn't he?) If I had to choose someone else it would be Scorsese for his incredibly impressive technical masterpiece Hugo. 

Best Supporting Actor

Christopher Plummer in Beginners

Heartwarming and charming as ever, Christopher Plummer shows in both the film and in real life, age should never inhibit you from getting what you deserve. I loved Beginners and really felt it slipped under the radar with many people but as Plummer shows, it's never to late to make a lasting impression.  I will say that I thought Kenneth Branagh was superb as Lawrence Olivier in My Week With Marilyn and had it not been for Plummer, the Oscar would be his.

Best Supporting Actress 

Octavia Spencer in The Help

Octavia's portrayal of Minny Jackson in The Help was the perfect ying to Viola Davis' yang. She was everything a supporting actress should be while still shining in her own right. Without a doubt, she was that sassy, back-talking but fiercely loyal Minny who stole our hearts and said everything we were thinking. An honorable mention should go to Jessica Chastain who played Celia in The Help, giving an sweet, beautifully innocent performance.

Cinematography

Emmanuel Lubezki for The Tree of Life

What really made this film the mind-blowing, hard-to-wrap-your-head-around-it-because-it's-so-visually-demanding experience that it was was indeed the cinematography and the Academy would have to be asleep not to think so. Still, crazier things have happened so in that case, my vote would go to Hugo although there might be a dark horse War Horse (sorry I had to.)  

Best Art Direction

Oh, Hugo, you will probably win every technical award this year, starting with this one, and you deserve it. I was both impressed and delighted by everything I saw and will not be surprised if you rack up quite a few, seeing as you have the most nods. Your biggest competition will be War Horse, I believe because it, too, accomplished some amazing technical feats. 

Best Original Screenplay

If there were such thing as a sure thing, this would be it. Besides the fact that he already has won almost every award this year in this category, Woody Allen's prose shines through his characters in a way that really is, well, Oscar worthy.

Best Adapted Screenplay

This one came out of left field (Ok, I'll stop) but I really feel strongly about Moneyball. Steven Zaillian, Aaron Sorkin, and Stan Chervin really worked at this and there was a good while when it looked liked this would not be made. Maybe this is me just cheering for the underdog but hey, sometimes they do win. 

Best Original Score

When there are no words, music can say it all. In no other film this year was this put to the test and proven correct. Ludovic Bource's score was essentially the narrator of a beautiful story and as this is his first nomination - I say job well done!

***

That's it, my darlings! I'm off to get some champagne and hors d'oeuvres for my Oscar bash. I will be tweeting throughout the night so keep up on @themixxchic! Here's to what will be a fantastic night!!

Cheers,

the mixx chic

Oscar Movie Review: Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

To say that Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close tackles a lot of sensitive issues is probably the understatement of the year. Yes, it's about 9/11 and its aftermath. Yes, its about a child with Asperger's coming of age and learning to accept who he is after the death of his father. And yes, it asks it's American audience to see this particularly sensitive version of events through an unconventional lens. It was difficult to watch this emotionally challenged young boy try to understand what had happened to his father. He simply could not fathom the idea that there is not an answer to every question in life. Instead he pours every ounce of energy he has into completing the impossible task of finding the lock to a key he found in his father's belongings. It's the only way he could give meaning to the situation but what he did not expect was to build relationships with the people he met along the way. It is in these encounters that he grows into someone that his father would be proud of which is really all he wanted in the first place.

Alarming, emotional, and a bit uncomfortable, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close did not find a sweet spot with viewers and critics like all the other nominated films did this year. This isn't surprising considering the subject matter and the way in which the story is told. It isn't easy to forget some of the things this precocious child does and says but there is a palpable undercurrent of forgiveness and understanding. Based on its critical reception, I doubt this will be much of a threat to the rest of the pack. Still, I do feel it is worth seeing as it asks a lot of its viewer but gives back almost as much as it takes.

Oscar Movie Review: The Tree of Life

The Tree of Life is a cerebral journey that demands of its viewer a visceral response. It truly takes "stream of consciousness" to a whole different level exploring religion, creation, and the universe to answer the ultimate question: what is our purpose? This and all of life's big questions are raised after a family loses a child and his absence is still felt years later by his brother played by Sean Penn. What we are unsure of is if what we are seeing is real or just speculation. Writer and director Terrence Malick takes us through memories as they truly feel, detailed yet unfinished. Memories, however, are unreliable and because this young boy is still growing and developing as is his father, played by Brad Pitt, a man with dashed dreams and a musical soul that is hindered by circumstance and ignorance. Complexity doesn't even begin to describe their relationship as it truly is like life itself in all it's intricacies.

This was one of those movies that you can't really "like." It was more of a rare experience - a true film. I can definitely see why critics and viewers struggled with it as well as why it did well at Cannes winning top prize, the Palme d'Or. Hollywood, on the other hand, has yet to show any real love for it until now. The question is them will it win any of the three categories is nominated in? It's best chances are in Best Cinematography because it really was a visual masterpiece. Emmanuel Lubezki was last nominated for Children of Men and has pretty much taken every cinematography award this year with The Tree of Life. This could be his year and I would say that it would undoubtedly be well deserved. 

Oscar Movie Review: Midnight in Paris

Midnight in Paris, Woody Allen's latest (and possibly greatest) foray into fantasy, is a delightful mix of humor and surrealism. It has elements of a classic Woody Allen picture, namely a neurotic protagonist, but it does not try to be more than what it is; a light, simple story that only require's its audience to suspend their version of reality for 90 minutes or so. What makes this film special, or rather, worthy of four Oscar nominations? That, too, is simple because only Woody Allen can expertly craft a tale of unexplainable time travel that is charming, romantic and ultimately a joy to watch.

Adriana (Marion Cotillard) and Gil (Owen Wilson)

The key to Midnight in Paris is really not to expect a deep, life changing experience - it really is what it is. Owen Wilson's character Gil is an easily distracted yet somehow very successful Hollywood screenwriter that has a bad case of writer's block as he tries to write an actual novel. On a trip to Paris with his uptight fiance Inez (Rachel McAdams) and her obnoxious parents, he finds solace with the likes of Cole Porter, Salvador Dali, Henri Matisse, Pablo Picasso, T.S. Eliot, Ernest Hemingway, Gertrude Stein, and Zelda and F. Scott Fitzgerald. Guided by a jaded muse (played perfectly by Marion Cotillard), he revels in the nostalgia of it all and tries to immerse himself into their world where art equals life. In contrast, the characters in the "real" world are dismissive of his work, coming off as very two-dimensional. I understood this to be a choice made by Allen to question our own definition of reality. It is in this seemingly simplistic journey, with a fascinating ensemble of quick-witted, well known characters, that Allen's intricate direction and writing are showcased. While I don't think Midnight in Paris will win Best Picture, the Academy would have to be mental to not award Allen Best Original Screenplay. He made something so difficult and complex seem simple and that is the work of a true artist.

Oscar Movie Review: Moneyball

Based on the book by Michael Lewis, Moneyball chronicles the attempt made by Oakland A's general manager Billy Beane to level the playing field of baseball so that those teams without big budgets behind them could have a fighting chance. Challenging the status quo of America's favorite pastime may not have been the most popular thing to do but as Moneyball shows, even a small win can have a huge impact. What Billy Beane did was change how people look at the game and what this film did was acknowledge his contribution to the modern game. In a nomination worthy performance, Brad Pitt takes on Billy Beane and paints a detailed, humble picture of a man trying to beat the odds while also keeping his head down amongst all the criticism. His performance is not overtly emotional but it still runs deep. Through all the opposition, his character he puts on a brave face but there are moments when, just for a moment, he see the weight of the entire baseball world on his aging shoulders. Pitt was Billy Beane and together with Jonah Hill (who rightly earned a nomination for his performance), they carried this film all the way with some amazing chemistry and good old fashioned teamwork.

Brad Pitt as Billy Beane and Jonah Hill as Peter Brand

Moneyball is an understated film with an excellent cast and a superb script. I appreciate the Academy's acknowledgment of a film that also had to beat the odds in order to be made although a win for it is, unfortunately, a long shot. It's best category is Best Adapted Screenplay for Aaron Sorkin, Steven Zaillian, and Stan Chervin. This is a distinct possibility as it already won the Critics Choice Award earlier this year. However, this race also included The Descendants and Hugo which will not go down without a fight.

Oscar Movie Review: Hugo

With eleven nominations, the most of any film this year, Hugo is a charming, heartfelt tale of a clever, steadfast boy who lives in the walls of a Paris train station after his father's sudden death leaves him orphaned. Both tragic and touching, the story centers on Hugo's quest to repair an automata that he and his father were working on and in doing so, uncovers the secret lives of those he slowly learns to call family. It is an uplifting anecdote based on the Caldecott winning book The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick that is actually based on the real story of French filmmaker Geroges Melies. As it is in the book, Hugo's world is visually stunning and terrifying at the same time, an effect that is expertly executed by Martin Scorsese. Much like The Artist, this film was a love letter of sorts to cinema but in a more literal way. 

Asa Butterfield plays Hugo Cabret

While I enjoyed the film very much, what stood out most for me were the technical aspects, including the seamless use of 3D technology with brilliant cinematography. This was Scorsese's first foray into the world of 3D and he has created a visual masterpiece that plays like a moving pop-up book. Mostly all of the awards that Hugo is nominated for are technical and I do believe it could take home some of the big ones like Best Cinematography and Best Art Direction. I also won't be surprised if it takes Adapted Screenplay, though I do believe that category is one of the toughest being that it is so widespread. It could be a big winner since the odds are in its favor with so many technical nods but whether it will walk away with top prize remains to be seen. 

Oscar Movie Review: The Artist

One of the most original films nominated for 10 Academy Awards this year is The Artist. Described by it's director Michel Hazanavicius as "a love letter to cinema," this film does a superb job taking it's viewer on a romantic pilgrimage during a time of major upheaval in the world of film.  Many have shied away from this movie because it is "silent" and "old fashioned" but what they don't realize (and really couldn't unless they had actually seen the film) is that those choices were made not just for pure aesthetic effect but to immerse you into the world. It is terrific experiment in which music and actors work with the film itself to tell a story that is both simple and complex. It was a privilege to see this film, like I was granted access into a secret piece of history and then left to reflect on everything that I had seen.

Jean Dujardin as "George Valentin"

As I stated before, the idea for the film is simple: George Valentin, a beloved silent film star, soon finds himself replaced when talkies come into fashion. The story is complicated when our main character, played by French actor Jean Dujardin, falls in love with a rising talkie star,  played beautifully by Berenice Bejo. George Valentin, the fallen star, in such a proud yet humbling way that really connects the audience to his dilemma. He is an artist - where is the art in just talking? This reminds me of so many of my acting teachers who said time and time again "Don't tell me the story, show me." I get it now!

While the storyline itself was not intricate or complex, it was in the execution that its brilliance shone through. For example, most of the film was indeed silent with music being one of the only audible noises. This allowed for the music to become another character and it chose the role of narrator. When sound was introduced, it was just as rewarding as it was terrifying. Since it was so foreign and jarring, we felt the way Valentin felt. I was amazed by the way in which the film did this over and over again to its audience. It was as if I was both friend and foe, toy and tool. Another example of this was when in all of the main characters' encounters. Peppy, the young starlet, does most of the talking and even though we can only read her words, we feel burdened and overwhelmed by it all. Again, we feel what Valentin feels, exhausted by her chatter and we begin to hone in on his struggle to understand and love her.  Although we could not hear them, we felt the difference in their means of communication. We were taught a language and were just as scared to learn the new one as our main character was. This fear showed that this massive change was not only cinematic, it was cultural.

I really appreciated many aspects in the film as there was a seamless use of modern and classic cinematic references. For example, the credits in the beginning of the film were just as they were for many films of that era with a slew of ellipsis connecting the character name to the actor's. The film was also black and white which keeps distractions to a minimum whilst also adding an air of authenticity. The subtitle cards were also more for feel as some the first few were necessary. After that, you were used to reading the character's lips or not relying on speech at all. As humans, we don't really need to talk in order to communicate. This film really proved that often times, words just complicate what it is we are trying to say and in the end, actions do speak louder.

George (Dujardin) and Peppy (Bejo)

Should this film take home the big prize? That I cannot say yet because I still have two more films to see but out of all the films I have seen thus far, I will say that it does deserve it. Amongst its nominations, I will not be surprised if it picks up Best Actor (Dujardin was phenomenal), Best Original Score (Ludovic Bource), Best Director (Michel Hazanavicius) and Best Picture on Sunday. It has already won in many of those categories at Cannes, the SAG Awards, Critics Choice, the Golden Globes, and BAFTA, etc. - totaling 69 awards this season so far. However, crazier things have happened so I will make my predictions once I have seen all there is to see.

In short, The Artist certainly was more than a new take on an old favorite. It provided a unique perspective that can be applied to many things and while many may think its silent nature limits its appeal, I believe it remains universal. We are not often afforded the point of view of the target of a revolution that is both charismatic and sympathetic. It is much more "American" to be on the side of the revolter, paving the way for change and those who do effect said change. However being a French film, The Artist gives us a chance to see things differently and appreciate a simple act in our technologically over-stimulated lives.

8 Days of Oscars: War Horse

Steven Spielberg's latest war epic nominated for 6 Academy Awards including Best Picture centers upon an unusual main character. As the title implies, War Horse is indeed about a horse that touches the lives of many during World War I. The story was adapted from Michael Morpurgo's 1982 children's book that then went on to inspire the 2011 Tony Award winning play with the same title, written by Nick Stafford. However, Spielberg had his hands on the project even before the play took home the Tony and while this may seem to be his sweet spot, this is the first film he has done on World War I (he has done six on WWII) as well as the first time he has worked with horses in this great of a capacity, reportedly stating "I was really amazed at how expressive horses are and how much they can show what they're feeling." That being said, can a horse really carry a film? As this remarkable piece of storytelling shows, yes, he can.

The film started slowly I soon realized that was to gradually teach the audience the common language spoken by man and horse. Like a baby learning to talk or a colt learning to communicate we, too, had to be patient. Both the central human character Albert (Jeremy Irvine) and the main equine character Joey matured together and apart throughout the story, creating a unique bond that was far beyond horse and master. They were as perfectly suited for each other as any great on-screen pair could be. Joey's journey led him away from Albert into the arms of many others and in each case, he was a strong, beautiful, yet deeply feeling creature that better understood morality during a time when right and wrong were was so incredibly unclear. There was definitely a constant transference of this knowledge in which humans taught horses, horses taught humans, and horses learned from each other. One particularly memorable scene has Joey demonstrating how to wear a plow harness  the other main equine character Topthorn, essentially saving his friends life in the process. It is in beautiful moments like that throughout the film that the real story emerges.

Jeremy Irvine and "Joey"

Ironically, War Horse was one of the most humane war movies I have ever seen, as it exposed the inhumanity of war through the eyes of, well, a non-human. Through Spielberg's effortless storytelling, he was able to show us just how war effects more than just mankind. A particularly moving scene occurs after the first battle with the shot widening slowly to depict the battle's casualties; there are as many horses slain as there are men. Also, there was not a strong political or national affiliation as is common with many war films. Instead, as Joey situation changes, so does our natural affiliation until it happens so often that it no longer matters. English, German, French - to Joey there is no difference so instead, he is loyal to those who need him most. For most of the film, the people who do need him are lost, young victims of the war just like him. These were characters from all walks of life, played by an ensemble including Tom Hiddleston, Benedict Cumberbatch, David Kross, Leonard Carow, Celine Buckens, and Toby Kebbell. Each performance was beautifully earned and maintained the story's high level of universal understanding.

In short, War Horse was magnificent and while I will not make my Best Picture prediction yet, it is definitely a worthy contender. Other noteworthy nominations are John Williams for Best Original Score and Janusz Kaminski for Best Cinematography. Addressing the former, I really felt that the music worked beautifully in tandem with the story's characters, especially the horses as a means of communication since linguistics was not afforded to them. Spielberg and Williams are probably the most celebrated Director/Composer dynamic duos Hollywood has ever scene and while this usually works out well for Williams (he has won 5 Oscars), he has not won since Schindler's List in 1994. As for the latter, Kaminski is another favorite of Spielberg and it is easy to see why when seeing this film in particular. The scenery was breathtaking and used as yet another character in the story. Kaminski's last win was in 1999 with Saving Private Ryan and the race is tight with Hugo and The Tree of Life also nominated. However, he did win the Critic's Choice Award this year which makes this all the more exciting. Be sure to check out the nominees and tune in to the 84th Annual Academy Awards on Sunday, February 26th at 7e/4p!

Movie of the Week: The Descendants

This heart string-tugging family drama had George Clooney immersed in a role we don't usually associate him with - a dad. Always an intensely-handsome-yet-complex character, Clooney took on a lot in this one and even added layers that I'm not sure were there originally. This silver fox found a humbling rhythm in what will definitely be considered one of the best performances of the year. In addition, Shailene Woodley who plays Clooney's troubled, eldest daughter gave a solid, honest performance in a role that could have easily been a cliché. Instead, she finds herself nominated for a Golden Globe along with Clooney - not bad for her breakout role.

The story begins mid stride, following Clooney's character Matt King as he tries to stay afloat despite the present unfortunate circumstances. In addition to his wife being in a coma, his nonexistent relationship with his daughters and his legal responsibilities as the primary beneficiary of his ancestors estate, he's just a hard working yet not entirely content guy. Something is off and it isn't until he discovers, courtesy of his eldest daughter, that his wife had been having an affair and planned to leave him that his world actually shatters. Fragile and beyond devastated, he is convinced that finding the stranger that would have destroyed his family had it not been for the accident will bring him some sort of closure. Relying on the counsel and assistance of his daughter, her absent-minded yet at times profound best friend, he walks the thin line between being that strong father figure and the broken down victim, stumbling more than a few times on either side. Together they pull each other through a bumpy grieving period and come out a family more resilient and beautiful than we found them.

More than anything, this was the story of a father learning how to parent and it touched me in a way I didn't expect. Perhaps it was that I was seeing things from the father's perspective instead of the daughter's. Maybe it was just that Clooney was that invested that his performance spoke in a language I could truly understand. Either way I will definitely make a point to watch this again, this time with my dad. Yes, it's that kind of movie and together with the spectacular scenery -which is a character in itself - "The Descendants" is definitely one not to be missed.