Parks and Recreation: Saying Farewell to One of Television's Finest

I started watching Parks and Recreation during a Christmas break away from college back in early 2011. With nothing better to do, and all of my favorite TV shows on winter hiatus, I decided to check out a few shows that had always looked interesting to me, but that I had never picked up the habit of watching for various reasons. Back when Parks had premiered, I watched the first two episodes and thought they had potential, but nobody else in my family seemed very impressed, so I didn't watch beyond that point. When I started watching again, the show was just about to start its third season. In many ways, this was a re-branding point for the show, and the perfect time for a new viewer to come in and start watching. The end of season two was the introduction point for beloved characters Ben Wyatt and Chris Traeger. It only took me a few episodes to become a full fledged fan of the show. I started watching on a weekly basis, and bought the previous seasons on DVD to catch up on what I had missed. It was unlike any other show I had seen before. This show managed to be funny, smart, and sincere in the best way. 

A few nights ago, I decided to watch my all time favorite Parks and Recreation episode in preparation for tonight's series finale. It's a season 3 episode titled "Flu Season." After I watched this episode for the first times, I knew I was a fan of the show. Picking it as my favorite episode was a no-brainer. In the episode, many of Pawnee's citizens are coming down with the flu, but Leslie has a big presentation she must pull off in able to fund a large project. Amy Poehler, Rob Lowe, and Chris Pratt all deliver some of the show's best jokes ever, and the rest of the cast does top notch work here as well. I'm particularly fond of Leslie Knope's flu medication induced alter-ego "Leslie Monster," who apparently hosts Nightline. From a more serious standpoint, what really makes this episode great is that it shows just was Leslie Know is capable of doing. Despite having a severe flu, and having taken so much medication that she believes, "the floors and walls just switched places," Leslie gets up and delivers the perfect speech at the perfect moment. 

Leslie Know is superhuman in both good and bad ways. It's a quality that has made the show amazing for seven season, and has turned Leslie Knope into arguably the greatest modern TV character. A lot of shows these days create a very nihilistic atmosphere, and Parks and Recreation stands out as a beacon of hope because, like its main character, it refuses to stop fighting for what is right. That's what makes Leslie great; she would rather fight for a virtuous cause than preserve her own ambitions. We need more shows like Parks and Recreation, that make us laugh, but also show us the virtue of standing for something. I don't know how Parks and Recreation will end tonight (I'm sure it will be as on point as anything else the show has done), but I do know that we are losing one of the greats. 

2015 Academy Award Overview: Best Picture

There are a couple of factors to consider when predicting which film will win Best Picture. The first of these factors is the preferential ballot system that the Academy uses for voting on the winner. Let me break this down for you as best as I can.

Each Academy member gets a ballot. On that ballot members rank the eight nominated films in order of best to worst. After the ballots have been submitted, all of the first place votes are added up and allotted to their designated films. If at the end of this process, one nominee has over 50% of the first place votes, then you have your winner. If not, however, the nominee with the fewest first place votes is taken out of consideration. So let's say that hypothetically Whiplash gets the fewest number of votes. It would then no longer be eligible to win best picture, and every ballot that had Whiplash in the number one spot would then move on to the film that is listed as second best on the ballot, and those votes are added to the totals for their designated films. This process continues on until one film has more than 50% of the votes for best picture. So hypothetically, Birdman could get 40% of the first place votes, but a film like Boyhood could eventually surpass it in the voting as more films are eliminated from contention.

Another factor to consider is who votes. The Academy is made up of industry members who have been invited to join. The nominations are determined by each separate voting body within the Academy. So actors nominate actors, directors nominate directors, animators nominate animated films, and so on. When it comes to voting for a winner after nominations have been set, the entire Academy votes on every category. The biggest voting block in the Academy is the actors branch. So, when looking at a Best Picture nominees chances, you often have to consider what kind of movie it is. Actors love actor driven movies. Gravity won just about every technical award it could last year, but when it came down to Best Picture, Gravity is a movie with one main actor, and 12 Years A Slave is a movie with a large ensemble. The same thing happened to Avatar when it lost to The Hurt Locker in 2010. If your film can't gain the support of the actors branch of the Academy, then you can probably forget winning Best Picture.

Best Picture:
American Sniper
Birdman
Whiplash
The Imitation Game
Boyhood 
Selma
The Theory of Everything
The Grand Budapest Hotel

Who will win?
This is a close race this year between Birdman and Boyhood. Leading up to the Oscars, Birdman has won the Best Ensemble SAG award (which is basically that guild's equivalent of Best Picture), as well as the top prizes from the Directors' Guild and the Producers' Guild. In most cases this would make Birdman a sure bet to win this year. The last time a film won all three of those awards and didn't win the Oscar was Apollo 13 back in 1996. This is also an actor driven movie, so it probably will not be hard for it to gains support among the acting branch members. Boyhood has racked up its fair share of praise too. It won the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture - Drama, the Critics Choice award for Best Picture, and the BAFTA for Best Picture. What makes the BAFTA win significant here, is that they use a preferential ballot system like the Academy. So Boyhood might benefit from this voting system more than Birdman. If I had to guess, I'm going to say that the Academy will end up giving this to Boyhood. The story behind how Boyhood was made, makes it an easy film to vote for, and I think the preferential ballot system will have it close to the top of most of this year's ballots.

Who should win?
1.) Selma
Selma tells the story of how Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. organized the March from Selma, Alabama to the state's capitol in an effort to bring an end to laws that were keeping minorities from being able to register to vote. This is an incredibly well crafted film. The cinematography is stunning, the direction by Ava DuVernay is best work any director did this year, and David Oyelowo gave the best performance by an actor in any film. The fact that all of those elements were neglected by the Academy shows that there are flaws in the nomination system. Not only is this the most well crafted film in the category, it's also the most culturally relevant. Some people have said Selma should be happy to be recognized here, but the best film of 2014 deserved more recognition.

2.) Birdman
Birdman tells the story of an actor who is making his Broadway debut in an attempt to regain his artistic relevance, but who is slowly losing his mind to his growing need for fame. There are a lot of moving parts to a film like Birdman, that make it a marvel to watch. The cinematography is excellent (and will probably win an Oscar), the film has a kinetic energy, and Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's direction of all of these moving parts is impressive. Michael Keaton, Emma Stone, Edward Norton, and Naomi Watts all give Oscar worthy performances. This film asks complex and interesting questions about the nature of art, and the people who are creating it.

3.) Boyhood
Boyhood tells the story of a young boy and his family over twelve years of their lives. The director and cast dedicated 12 years of their lives to making this film, which would be impressive enough, even if the film hadn't turned out to be very good. It turned out to be an amazing film that features a sense of realism unlike any other film I have ever seen. The story has universal qualities any viewer can relate to, and excellent work from a cast that makes each character feel believable and real. Richard Linklater deserves a lot of credit for having the vision to make this film work.

4.) Whiplash
Whiplash tells the story of a young drummer who wants to be the best, and his legendary teacher who uses questionable methods to drive his students. This film is a masterful work of contained chaos. Actors J.K. Simmons and Miles Teller are forces of nature here, and it is amazing to watch them play off of each other here. The film asks a lot of questions about the teacher/student relationship and how far is too far in the pursuit of success. Simmons' character uses unethical methods to bring the best out of his students, but he is also arguably the only person who can bring the best out of these students. There are no simple answers here, just thought provoking questions.

5.) The Imitation Game
The Imitation Game tells the story of Alan Turing and a team of code breakers who worked to break the Nazi Enigma code during World War II, so that the allies could win the war. Early on this was considered a strong contender to win this award because its a crowd-pleaser that focuses on a true historical story. It does fit that criteria, but beyond some fine acting by Benedict Cumberbatch and Keira Knightley, this film doesn't quite live up to past historical films (such as The King's Speech or Argo) that have won Best Picture. It's a worthy nomination, but this film shouldn't be winning this award.

6.) The Theory of Everything
The Theory of Everything tells the story of Stephen Hawking the progression of his career and relationship with wife Jane Hawking, while suffering from ALS (also commonly known as Lou Gehrig's disease). This is a case of a somewhat mediocre film being elevated by the performances of its actors. There are some impressive details to the film-making such as the cinematography and the score, but what's lacking here is the screenplay, which really drags at some points. Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones give two of the best performances of any actors this year, but it's not enough to make this an actual contender for this award.

7.) The Grand Budapest Hotel
The Grand Budapest Hotel tells the story of a hotel concierge and his faithful lobby boy who try to clear the concierge's name after he is falsely accused of killing one of the hotel's patrons. I've never been a fan of Wes Anderson's directing style, but I have to admit this film has some impressive qualities. The actors work perfectly in time with Anderson's pacing as a director, the cinematography looks impressive, and the screenplay is the best of any Wes Anderson film I have ever watched (which admittedly isn't many). I don't think this should be nominated for Best Picture, but the film isn't without its virtues.

8.) American Sniper
American Sniper tells the story of Chris Kyle who has the most verified kills of any American sniper, and how being a soldier affects his personal life. Bradley Cooper gives a great performance here, that in all honesty is much better than anything else the film attempts to do. This is a pretty limited film that lacks the complexity that is demanded by handling the subject of war, on film. It never goes quite as deep as it should into how war affects the soldiers who fought it, once they return home. I also think that it comes across as a very narrow minded approach to the subject matter. An amazing article about that can be read here. There are more deserving films of a nomination this year, but like The Grand Budapest Hotel, this film isn't without its strong points. It will likely at least come away from the Oscars with a sound award (a common win for war films).

Snubs:
Gone Girl
Nightcrawler
Wild
Foxcatcher
How To Train Your Dragon 2

For my analysis of Best Actor/Actress awards, click here.
For my analysis of Best Supporting Actor/Actress awards, click here.

2015 Academy Award Overview: Best Actress/Actor in a Leading Role

Best Actress in a Leading Role:

Rosamund Pike in Gone Girl

Felicity Jones in The Theory of Everything

Reese Witherspoon in Wild

Julianne Moore in Still Alice

Marion Cotillard in Two Days, One Night 

Who will win?

Julianne Moore. This one is a done deal. Moore has won every major award (maybe even every award period) for this performance. This is also a case of the academy wanting to finally give a win to a long time nominee and favorite. 

Who should win?

1.) Reese Witherspoon

First and foremost, I think this is a strong group of performances this year. Many of the nominated performances could be winning performances in any other year. The reason that Witherspoon's performance impressed me the most is that she creates the most complex character of any of these performances. This performance is at times vulnerable, bold, funny, furious, and heartbreaking. That is owed to the dedication that Witherspoon put into this role. In Wild, Witherspoon plays a woman who is hiking the Pacific Crest Trail so that she can find peace after her life took a downward spiral as a result of her mother's death. This is the most uncomfortable I've ever seen Witherspoon be willing to get with a performance. In this role, she's playing someone very broken, and watching her develop this character shows a side of the actress that wasn't even present in her Oscar-winning Walk the Line performance. 

2.) Julianne Moore

Julianne Moore is going to win the Oscar for this performance, and I'm more than okay with that. Witherspoon already has an Oscar, and this role is a very deserving one for Moore. In Still Alice, Moore plays a world renowned linguistics professor who learns that she is suffering from early onset Alzheimer's disease. I went into this movie expecting that, due to the subject matter, the film and Moore's performance might feature some heightened dramatics. I respect, that as an actor, Moore didn't take the easy way out by playing up the dramatic elements of the character. Her performance is subtle, which makes her character's increasing sense of loss even more powerful. There is a scene where Alice gives a speech about how Alzheimer's has changed her life, and Moore brings down the house.
3.) Rosamund Pike
It was hard to decide between Rosamund Pike and Felicity Jones for this spot, because both performances are great, but completely different. In Gone Girl, Pike plays a woman who goes to extremes to get out of a marriage she no longer wants to be in. It's hard to pull off this kind of character, without making her into a caricature. Pike's performance is truly horrifying, and I mean that in the best way. This character is a sociopath, and it takes a very talented actress to pull off a performance like this. I don't think this character works in the hands of any other actress, and this film definitely hinges on this performance.
4.) Felicity Jones
A lot has been made of Eddie Redmayne's performance in The Theory of Everything, but for me, it's Felicity Jones' portrayal of Stephen Hawking's wife Jane, that carried the movie. Jones' performance is a subtle one, which is exactly what is needed in this situation. Jane and Stephen are very different people, and yet Jane has made a commitment to stand by Stephen through all of his medical issues and his professional successes. In Jane, Jones has in interesting balancing act to pull off. She has to convey that Jane was a loving wife, while also conveying how her longing to maintain her own identity under the pressure of being her husband's caretaker, changes her over time. I don't think there's any one "Oscar moment" for Jones here; just a strong performance that Jones sustains throughout the entire film.
5.) Marion Cotillard
In Two Days, One Night, Marion Cotillard plays a woman suffering from depression, who learns that she has one weekend to persuade her co-workers to forgo their bonuses, so that she may keep her job. While I certainly see some of the virtues of Cotillard's performance, this nomination is a big stretch for the Academy. There are points in the film where Cotillard is very strong, but what holds the performance back is the way that Cotillard tries to oversell her character's emotional state. There's nothing subtle about it, and I think it's the wrong approach to this role. What makes emotive performances such as Witherspoon's and Moore's work is that they show great restraint in how they portray the highly emotional situations their characters are dealing with. When they break down, it seems believable, because they have been more realistic and subtle leading up to that point. I don't see that here with Cotillard. It's a shame, because I've really enjoyed a lot of Cotillard's work, and think she's a better actress than this role allows her to be.

Snubs:
The fifth nomination in this category should have gone to Jennifer Aniston for her performance in Cake. Aniston's character is very similar to Cotillard's in a lot of ways. They have both suffered hardships, dealt with serious medical issues, and have mostly given up on believing that human beings can be good, compassionate, people. The difference in the performances is that Aniston performs with a subtlety that Cotillard does not. It makes Aniston's portrayal come across as more realistic and human. Proof that Aniston should have earned a nomination here? She was nominated for every other major award this year (except the BAFTA, for which she was not eligible). It appears that the Academy took the "safe" route (and not just in this category) by nominating Cotillard, who has won before in this category.

Best Actor in a Leading Role:
Steve Carell in Foxcatcher
Benedict Cumberbatch in The Imitation Game
Bradley Cooper in American Sniper
Eddie Redmayne in The Theory of Everything
Michael Keaton in Birdman

Who will win?
This is probably the most competitive race outside of Best Picture, this year. Michael Keaton started out with a lot of praise and momentum for his work in Birdman. Keanton has racked up some wins to support his status as a contender, too. While he has been nominated in this category for every major award, so far he has won the Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Comedy/Musical, the Critics Choice award for Best Actor, and has been recognized for Birdman's Best Ensemble wins at both the Critics Choice and SAG awards. The recent momentum, however has belonged to Eddie Redmayne. Redmayne's performance in The Theory of Everything has earned him the Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Drama, and the BAFTA and SAG awards for Best Actor in a Leading Role. The late shift in momentum plays to Redmayne's favor, and odds are he'll win the Oscar. I wouldn't count Keaton out, though. Cooper is a wild card here, because he hasn't been nominated for any other awards, but the box office numbers for American Sniper have been huge. I'll be surprised if he wins here, but he very well could siphon off votes from one of the two front-runners and affect which of them wins.

Who should win?
1.) Michael Keaton
In Birdman, Michael Keaton portrays a once famous actor who is slowly descending into madness because of his desperation to be a relevant actor. What is impressive about Keaton's performance is that much like Juilanne Moore in Still Alice, he finds a way to portray a character in decline that still feels more like a real person than a big screen exaggeration. There are some ridiculous elements to the portrayal, but Keaton performs them in such a darkly comic way that they never detract from the character. That's what impresses me the most about Keaton's performance. It's just as hard to pull of well timed comedy as it is too pull off an emotionally affecting dramatic performance. Jennifer Lawrence did it with her Oscar winning portrayal in Silver Linings Playbook, and while Keaton's performance is drastically different, he pulls it off here as well.
2.) Eddie Redmayne
This year's performance by Eddie Redmayne is probably one of the most physical performances I have seen by an actor in a long time. In The Theory of Everything, Redmayne portrays renowned mathematician Stephen Hawking and his relationship with his wife Jane, as he struggles with ALS. It's a very demanding performance, and Redmayne does an amazing job not only of showing how ALS physically affected Hawking, but of how Hawking's identity showed beyond his illness. This performance is at times heartbreaking, clever, and inspiring. My only complaint is that while Redmayne gives an amazing physical performance, I don't think that he shows quite as much emotional complexity as other actors this year. That being said, if Redmayne wins, it won't be undeserved.
3.) Bradley Cooper
I have a little bit of a hard time with these last three nominees, becuase while all three did great work, I personally wouldn't have picked them to be the nominees in this category. In American Sniper, Bradley Cooper plays Chris Kyle, a sniper during the Iraq war with more confirmed kills than any other American. This is a case of a great actor working within a limiting role. War is arguably one of the most complex subjects a film can take on, so the portrayal of someone who is in combat should be complex. I think that Cooper's performance adds more complexity to the character than was actually written for him. There is a sense that Cooper respects the complexity of what this character should be, and I respect that he is able to bring so much out of a role that is written in such a one dimensional way.
4.) Benedict Cumberbatch
In The Imitation Game, Benedict Cumberbatch portrays Alan Turing, the man whose work was fundamental in breaking Nazi codes during World War II and in laying the groundwork for the computer. Cumberbatch's work here is a little hit and miss. There are times when his work here is on par with Keaton and Redmayne. The final scene of the film is a very emotional one that Cumberbatch pulls off flawlessly. The part of the performance that doesn't work for me is how the character is put in the "mildly autistic genius" box. That isn't Cumberbatch's fault, but in the scenes where his character is written this way, his performance does nothing to take the character beyond the stereotypes of that worn out trope. Cumberbatch is successful in making this character very clever, and that gives the performance some life beyond the limitations the film puts on it. Cumberbatch does some great work here, but it's too uneven for a win.
5.) Steve Carell
I always think it's great to see traditionally comedic actors gain recognition for dramatic roles like this. I just don't think that Carell's performance is one of the five strongest of the year. In Foxcatcher, Carell plays a wealthy man who wants to become famous by creating the best wrestling program in the world. There are some great qualities to this performance. All signs of Steve Carell the comedian are gone here. Carell nails the habits and mannerisms of this character who is descending into an unhealthy mental state. It's a very transformative performance. Carell looks, sounds and acts very different here than anything else he has been in. That being said, overall the performance feels much less grounded and human than the other nominees this year. There isn't much subtlety here, and that causes this portrayal of a real person to come across as a little cartoonish at times.

Snubs:
There are some big ones this year. David Oyelowo's performance as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in Selma, should have won this award this year. Oyelowo isn't just acting here, he totally inhabits Dr. King, the same way Daniel Day-Lewis inhabited Abraham Lincoln with his Oscar-winning performance in Lincoln. Another standout was Jake Gyllenhaal in the film Nightcrawler. If you take the best elements of Rosamund Pike and Michael Keaton's performances this year, you get Gyllenhaal's haunting performance as a man whose ambition turns him into a monster. While Steve Carell got most of the praise for Foxcatcher this year, I was actually much more impressed with Channing Tatum's performance. Tatum is at a point in his career where you can tell he is seeking serious roles, and when he is given one here, he gives it his all. He's the much more subtle and affecting counterpart to Carell's often over the top monster. Miles Teller is also great in Whiplash. J.K. Simmons' performance dominates the film, but Teller has rightfully gotten critical praise for his work here too.

If you missed my analysis of the supporting actor/actress categories, check it out here. 

2015 Academy Award Overview: Best Supporting Actor/Actress

Two of the most clear-cut categories for the Academy Awards this year are the Actor in a Supporting Role and Actress in a Supporting Role categories. There's no question who will win here, but we'll get to that in a little bit. What I like about this year's supporting categories is that they are full of fairly meaty performances. There have been years when it seemed like most or all of the nominees in these categories had small roles in their given films. That's not the case this year. Each of these actors and actresses has a very meaningful presence in the film for which they are nominated. I would be happy seeing any of these performances earn an award.

This year in my "Who Should Win" section, I'd like to try ranking the nominees rather than just giving one answer to that question. In most of the categories I feel like all of the nominees have some argument for winning, so I want to be able to break it down individually. A little bit of disclosure: the one performance I have not seen out of this group is Robert Duvall in The Judge. It became obvious after the first reviews of The Judge started coming out that the film would not be the Oscar player that some thought it might be, so for that reason I never made it a priority when trying to watch the nominated films and performances this year. For this reason, I obviously cannot accurately discuss this performance, but that shouldn't affect my overall analysis of the supporting actor category.

Best Actor in a Supporting Role:
Robert Duvall in The Judge
Mark Ruffalo in Foxcatcher
Ethan Hawke in Boyhood
Edward Norton in Birdman
J.K. Simmons in Whiplash

Who will win?
Like I said, this one is clear-cut. J.K. Simmons will join the list of actors who have won Oscars, this year. If you have any doubts, Simmons has won the SAG Award, Golden Globe, Critics Choice Award, and the BAFTA for this performance. It also doesn't hurt that he's a well known and beloved actor in the industry who rarely gets such recognition.

Who should win?
1.) J.K. Simmons:
Whiplash doesn't work as a film if Simmons doesn't give a perfect performance here, and he does. Simmons plays a teacher at a prestigious music school, who produces some of the best musicians. His method of motivation, however, is using various forms of mental and physical abuse to make his students fall in line with what he wants. It's a brutal performance, but Simmons sells it the whole time. It's also a very layered performance. Simmons isn't only excellent at playing the tyrannical side of this character, he also sells the softer side. There are moments in the film where this character flips the switch and presents himself as a charming and approachable person. The fact that Simmons can sell this as well as he sells the monster under the surface is proof of how excellent he is here.
2.) Edward Norton:
What impressed me most about Norton's performance here is how it truly epitomizes the "supporting" aspect of the role. In Birdman, Norton plays a narcissistic method actor whose presence rattles all of the other actors involved in the production he is performing in. Many of the other actors in the film have their best scenes in he film with Norton, or as a result of a scene they have just performed in with Norton. He brings out the best in every other actor in the film.
3.) Ethan Hawke:
In Boyhood, Ethan Hawke plays the main character's father, who isn't always around, but is never completely absent either. Every character in Boyhood goes through a personal evolution over the course of the film, but Ethan Hawke does one of the best jobs of selling that evolution. What I like about Hawke's performance is how he makes the character feel real. This man isn't the primary caregiver to his children, but he still shows strong paternal instincts, in the film. At various points during the film he operates in a range between "deadbeat Dad" and "father of the year" without ever getting stuck in either of those extremes. It's a strong, but understated performance.
4.) Mark Ruffalo:
I could probably argue that Ruffalo's performance in Foxcatcher is just as powerful as Norton or Hawke's performances in their given films. There's a thin margin separating all of these performances, in my opinion. Ruffalo seems to have a little less to do in this film than the other two actors do in their films, but he makes the most of his time on screen. In the film he plays the older brother and wrestling coach to the main character. I think Ruffalo really sells the brotherly, and at times almost fatherly, bond between these characters. That believability is key to making the film work as a whole, and also makes audiences feel the impact of the film's conclusion more deeply.
5.) Robert Duvall:
Again, I can't comment on what I haven't seen.

Snubs:
There were no glaring omissions in this category this year. The actors nominated are all deserving.

Best Actress in a Supporting Role:
Meryl Streep in Into The Woods
Emma Stone in Birdman
Keira Knightley in The Imitation Game
Patricia Arquette in Boyhood
Laura Dern in Wild

Who will win?
This one will be going to Patricia Arquette. Like Simmons, Arquette has won every major award for her performance in this film.

Who should win?
1.) Emma Stone:
I completely understand the praise that Arquette has gotten this year, but overall I think Emma Stone gave the best performance by a supporting actress this year. In Birdman, Stone plays a recovering addict who works as the assistant to a washed up actor, who also happens to be her neglectful father. Stone has many great scenes with Edward Norton in the film, and when the film puts the spotlight on her character, Stone gives the character a beautiful complexity. The moment in the film that should earn her an Oscar is a monologue in which she eviscerates her father and the delusional world he is trying to build up around himself. The way that Stone balances both the contempt and understanding that her character has for her father is impressive, and showcases some of her best work as an actress.
2.) Patricia Arquette:
While I believe Emma Stone should be winning this award, I'm not upset in the least that Arquette will be winning it. Her performance as the main character's mother in Boyhood, is one of the strongest performance of the year. Some performances thrive on big moments, and others thrive on sustaining a character's growth throughout a film. This performance is one of the best examples I have ever seen of the latter kind of performance. Arquette fosters a growth in her character that is more than just the product of a good script or good direction. There's a very personal nature to how Arquette portrays this character, and it makes her feel very real. That's not to say that she doesn't also have some killer scenes in the film, because she does. If Stone can't win, I'm happy it's Arquette going home with the prize.
3.) Laura Dern:
Dern's nomination here came as a little bit of a surprise to many, because she had been neglected by most major awards up to this point. I think it's a very deserving nomination for a performance that hasn't gotten enough credit. In Wild, Dern plays the main character's mother whose death sparks a downward spiral in her daughter's life. What's tricky about this performance for Dern is managing to make this character into that catalyst, while also making her feel like a whole character on her own. Dern pulls this off excellently. What I like the most about this performance is how Dern manages to make this character exude joy for life while also being very vulnerable and aware of the many pains she has suffered in life. I'm glad Dern got some recognition for the role.
4.) Keira Knightley:
In The Imitation Game, Keira Knightley plays one of the people selected to help break the Enigma machine being used by the Germans in World War II. While I think the performances listed above are distinctly stronger, this performance is definitely worthy of a nomination here. Knightley is playing a woman in a man's world here, and she does so very effectively. She brings a wit to the character that reminds audiences that she is one of the smartest people in any room she walks into. With a character like this, there's a fine line between the character coming across as an embodiment of a social statement, and the character coming off a real person. Knightley keeps the character human by showing a lot of vulnerability in her performance.
5.) Meryl Streep:
There are times when I think that Streep is nominated for awards more on reputation than on the merit of her performance. This isn't one of those times. Into The Woods is a movie with a lot of flaws, but Streep's performance is one of the elements that holds the film together. Streep turns the witch into a character that is very menacing, but at the same time displays very real vulnerabilities and desires. Should Streep win for this performance? No, but it's definitely worthy of the recognition it is getting by being nominated here.

Snubs:
Carmen Ejogo gave one of the year's best performances as Coretta Scott King in the highly under-appreciated film Selma. Rene Russo also gave a powerful performance as a desperate news producer, in Nightcrawler, that was worthy of recognition.

Review: Black or White

The issue of race relations came to a head in 2014. If last year made anything clear, it is that there are a lot of discussions about race that America still needs to have. The lines of communication are down, and America has suffered a lot of pain because of it. While we struggled to have this discussion as a nation, two critically acclaimed films gave voice to complex racial issues in 2014: Selma and Dear White People. Based on the publicity for Black or White, it seems that a lot of people behind creating the film, thought that it would fit next to the aforementioned films as a thoughtful discussion of race relations. The problem is, where Selma and Dear White People were complex films with very specific things to say about racial identity, Black or White is a film that never knows exactly what it wants to say or how to say it. 

The film opens on Elliot (Kevin Costner), a man who has just found out his wife died in a car accident and that he now has to raise his granddaughter Eloise (Jillian Estell) alone. Elliot's law partner, Rick (Bill Burr) and his inexplicably stupid girlfriend Fay (Gillian Jacobs) show up to comfort Elliot in his time of need. Elliot and his wife had been raising Eloise since their daughter died during labor, and Eloise's father, whom Elliot hates, has struggled with drug addiction for years. Worried that Elliot can't take care of Eloise by himself, Eloise's paternal grandmother, Rowena (Octavia Spencer) asks her brother (Anthony Mackie), who is a successful lawyer, to help her get custody of Eloise. What ensues is a muddled family drama that isn't exactly sure what it is trying to achieve. 

The cast here is impressive. Costner is a screen legend with a couple of Oscars, but his recent career choices have stuck him in an acting rut. Here he manages to take what could be a very complex character, and turns him into a one note drunk that for some unexplained reason audiences are supposed to root for to win sole custody of his granddaughter. Octavia Spencer, another Oscar winner, does the most with what she is given here, but that's not much. Hollywood seems determined to shove here into the role of "black woman with a big personality," but Spencer's best work is more subtle as can be seen in Fruitvale Station, her best scenes in The Help, and her guest starring stint on the sitcom Mom. Anthony Mackie has the ability to command attention on screen, and I find myself looking forward to every role he takes on because of it. Like Spencer, he does his best, but his character is a flat and at times offensive stereotype of an educated black man. One of the biggest wastes of talent here is Gillian Jacobs. Her character here is an inhumanly stupid woman who is placed in the film for no other discernible reason than to be a verbal punching bag for Costner. I imagine Jacobs' Community alter ego Britta Perry would have a lot to say about a female character like this existing on film. Jillian Estell is adorable here, and when they let her do something with the character, she is the only humanizing force in the film.

The true problem of the film is that it never knows what kind of film it wants to be. There are lots of references to race being a major issue in the story, but the reality is that outside of some very awkwardly placed lines in the script, this film offers no true commentary on racial identity. At times the film seems like it wants to tackle the issue of addiction, but really this just becomes a dramatic plot tool that the characters can use against each other in court. While the film thinks it is tackling these very serious issues, it also has the misguided notion that it can pull of being funny at the same time. Many of the jokes are pointed at Jacobs' character, and given the context of them, it comes across as more mean spirited than anything. Maybe if the jokes were actually funny, and if this film had fully committed to being a family comedy, then there might have been hope for the film as a whole. Instead it feels a lot like watching somebody try to do a stand-up routine at a funeral. By not committing to any one format, Black or White becomes a film that never has any sense of identity.

Rating: C-