The 10 nominees for Best Picture at the 2023 Academy Awards, aka The Oscars, ranked in order, with my own personal take on and rating for each:
1. Everything Everywhere All at Once
Let’s cut to the chase…this is the Best Picture of the year. It’s a wild, imaginative, inventive, and thoroughly entertaining romp. It has style to spare as the filmmakers work with a freedom and bravery that is always apparent on the screen. The scriptwriting is superb, the acting is layered and poignant and impressive – I think the cast should win Best Actress (Yeoh), Best Supporting Actress (Hsu), and Best Supporting Actor (Quan). And he production design is some of the best I’ve seen in recent memory.
I don’t want to say too much about this film as I want anyone who may choose to watch to go in as blank and as open as possible to it. Don’t buy into the hype of what you may hear or take away from this review. Just give it a shot. It was the last of the 10 nominees that I watched this year and it was a wonderful finish for me and, in so many crazy ways, a reminder of why I watch these films and make this commitment to these silly Oscars every year. Sometimes, when you open yourself up and you least expect it, despite all that might be working against you…the magic of the cinema still happens.
Rating: 96
2. All Quiet on the Western Front
Brutal, beautiful, and harrowing. I don’t know how you can call a film like this entertaining or consider it worthwhile viewing but it is. War is hell and this film drags you through the mud and the blood and the bleakness and the worst of it in a wildly immersive experience. Incredible cinematography, a haunting (and I mean haunting!) score, and measured, lived-in acting performances are the hallmarks of this war film.
It’s an amazing, ironic, poignant, brilliantly captured slice of history – from the losers’ perspective (which makes for an interesting empathetic viewing experience) that I can’t recommend to anyone – outside of simply saying that if you want to see what the First World War may have looked like in all its gory spectacle, give this a go.
Rating: 92
This is a warm, reverent picture of an auteur’s childhood and teenage memories. Too often I’ve seen this approach to a cinematic story by an accomplished filmmaker get rewarded with an Oscar nomination for the film (Roma and Belfast immediately come to mind) and too often the result is underwhelming. I typically find the subject matter in those cases to not be worthy of the film treatment. I would say that this story – Spielberg’s thinly veiled autobiography – doesn’t really deserve that treatment either, just from a surface level description of it. But in the hands of this director, who has such a trained and instinctive eye and ear for storytelling and what the audience wants…this very personal story comes alive – but not in an overly fawning, egotistical way.
The film is beautiful, well acted, exquisitely shot, and full of heart. With rare exception, it treats its characters with a nuanced and respectful approach. It genuinely flies by despite its 2-and-a-half-hour run time – I never found myself bored and I was genuinely wanting more when it came to an end. And that is the mark of a good film to me…to satisfy me AND leave me wanting more of it. What a beautiful paradox. It is far from perfect, but it is perfectly fine with being what it is. I liked this film a lot more than I was anticipating doing so. It reminded me of my own love of art and storytelling and the magic and wonder that they stir inside you.
Rating: 89
This is a well-made, wild, unflinching, unrelenting, unexpectedly comical tour de force (and tour de farce). At no point in my viewing of this film did I know where it was going next and that was an exhilarating experience. A refreshing mix of dark comedy with suspense and tension and atmosphere.
It’s a full-throated commentary on class warfare and socialism vs capitalism. Great acting, confident, brave scriptwriting, and an even, almost documentary approach to the cinematography at times. The ominous score is a treat, as well. I’m not sure I can recommend this one, but it surprised me and entertained me. These days, that’s really all I ask from a film.
Rating: 88
I saw this nominee in the summer during its opening theatrical run in a crowded, enthusiastic theater. That’s the kind of experience this film deserves. It’s a well-made, reverent piece of nostalgic cinema that manages to build on its iconic predecessor while delivering something new and exhilarating. It’s faithful to the story and characters of the original Top Gun and rewards the fans of that film with wonderful callbacks here and there.
The filmmaking is awe-inspiring with incredible stunts and superb sound, cinematography, and editing. I loved the first film (a staple of my childhood) and my only expectation for this one was for it to not fumble the legacy. It does not. It soars and delivers an epic and worthy sequel. I don’t think it will win Best Picture – it’s more a popcorn flick that elevates itself to something greater – but I’m happy to see it nominated.
Rating: 81
6. Tár
A slow, methodical film. I found it interesting and watchable but not altogether engaging or entertaining. To watch a revered, powerful character slowly unravel does not make for too pleasurable of a cinematic experience. It all feels a bit pretentious but there’s an aspect to all of it that the film is is in on the joke. Blanchett does an incredible job (and might win the Best Actress award) delivering a mesmerizing performance of someone who never truly endears herself to the audience and yet we, the viewer, must go along for the ride with this, our forced-upon protagonist. The film does build to an ultimately satisfying crescendo (much like the orchestral pieces performed in the film) and delivers a soft, quiet, ironic conclusion.
Breaking the film up into the 3 acts, you can see the deliberate nature of the world-building of the first act but goodness is it a tough, boring slog. The second act is an ever-tightening squeeze of tension and conflict and the third act swells and breaks and delivers the most entertaining parts of the film, in my opinion. I can’t shake the feeling that the director, Field, has somehow punched a card with the Academy to always have his films nominated. It feels as though the voters see this as both high-brow, aristocratic content but at the same time, a mockery of it all. This is well-made film and it’s affecting, but it has a hollowness that keeps it from becoming more. I think I liked it, when it’s all said and done, but I can’t really recommend it.
Rating: 79
This is a high concept, large scale action flick with a extra ounce of emotion and drama thrown in to elevate it slightly above the typical popcorn fare. The plot feels a bit too contrived and overt to hold up under the weight of such a mammoth movie franchise. It’s like the director, Cameron, brought his 1980’s script writing into present day and just said “this will do just fine.” Plus the character archetypes are just too black and white, lacking any nuance.
All that being said, this film is still an impressive visual spectacle. And the 3D is, once again, immersive – like it was in the original. But 15 years later, it doesn’t feel like any new ground was broken (it feels very much like a retread). In fact, the film feels bloated in its excess of technical wizardry and cinematic innovation. The filmmakers are flexing their muscles but it’s all so overdone and overly long that it started to numb me as I watched it. For as negative and critical as this review is, though, I can still say that I enjoyed it. It’s an entertaining film. I think the visual effects and art direction are stellar but I honestly didn’t feel the entirety of the project deserved a best picture nomination (it actually feels like a toss-in for the Oscars to strategically appeal to a larger audience).
Rating: 77
This was decent, well-acted, overly written, and ultimately tedious film. It deals with difficult subject matter in a respectful, measured way. The direction and storytelling have flourishes of a masterful hand as more and more context is provided over the course of the film. It is a beautifully stark, gray world rendered here. But I couldn’t help but feel a bit bored and more than a bit frustrated with the characters for not moving their proceeding along at a faster, less “stagey” pace. Then I became frustrated with the filmmakers for not properly conveying WHY it would take them so long in their discussions. These are meant to be simple characters who know little about the world outside their own. But the way their dialogue is written and how their scenes are acted, you wouldn’t know that. They come across as bright and strong. The result is a bit of a fumbled delivery. Decent…that’s about the best I can give this one.
Rating: 72
9: Elvis
This film hums with an energy and pulse that becomes exhausting across the course of its run time. The cinematography and editing blitz you with style and imagination but it’s all a bit too much. By the end, the film is struggling and limping and I felt the same way watching it. This is a depressing film, with few moments of joy, amped up drama, and a constant state of dread. I liked it more than I thought I would but it still left me wanting. Butler gives an incredible impression of a performance. He’s fun to watch but it’s a facsimile of Elvis. I’d rather watch the real deal and the film acknowledges this fact right at the very end. Still, it’s a decent if flawed recreation of an amazing entertainer’s story.
Rating: 68
This movie went from immensely likable to quite unlikable with a quickness for me. Quite the tonal shift in the middle of it – one that I wasn’t ready for. I see not-so-subtle allusions to the Irish civil war that serves as an off-in-the-distance backdrop to the events of this film. And sure, that probably makes for a fine story to tell. I just didn’t really care for it here. It felt like the rug got pulled out from under me…slowly at first and then with an absurdist, nihilistic jolt. It’s a beautiful film with lovely Irish vistas and lovely, thick Irish accents – and some truly funny moments and deep emotional, chords. But the film’s dour second half pulls it down in a way that’s irredeemable, in my opinion. In an interview, it’s main actor, Colin Farrell (who delivers a solid performance) said this film is about the disintegration of joy. That’s an accurate description but it should also serve as a warning to would-be viewers of it.
Rating: 66
So that’s it. That’s my take on the 10 nominees for this year. I enjoyed this year’s crop of films. I found them to be a good collection of films and solid cinematic entertainment. I also purposely told myself to not take this endeavor as seriously this year and to be less analytical and critical than I have been in recent years when doing this. Reading over last year’s recap, I wrote, “There was not a lot of joy or entertainment for me as I worked my way through these reviews,” and that made me sad to realize I’d gotten to that point. So it makes me happy to know the pendulum swung back the other way this year. I enjoyed this Oscar Adventure…and at the end of the day, why else would I do it?
Here are my Should Win/Will Win predictions for the top prizes this at year’s ceremony:
Best Picture – Should Win: Everything Everywhere All at Once; Will Win: Everything Everywhere All at Once
Best Director – Should Win: Daniel Kwan & Daniel Scheinert, Everything Everywhere All at Once; Will Win: Daniel Kwan & Daniel Scheinert, Everything Everywhere All at Once
Best Actor – Should Win: Austin Butler, Elvis; Will Win: Austin Butler, Elvis
Best Actress – Should Win: Michelle Yeoh, Everything Everywhere All at Once; Will Win: Cate Blanchett, Tár
Best Supporting Actor – Should Win: Ke Huy Quan, Everything Everywhere All at Once; Will Win: Barry Keoghan, The Banshees of Inisherin
Best Supporting Actress – Should Win: Stephanie Hsu, Everything Everywhere All at Once; Will Win: Kerry Condon, The Banshees of Inisherin
Best Adapted Screenplay – Should Win: Rian Johnson, Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery; Will Win: Edward Berger, Ian Stokell, and Lesley Paterson, All Quiet on the Western Front
Best Original Screenplay – Should Win: Ruben Östlund, Triangle of Sadness; Will Win: Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert, Everything Everywhere All at Once
Let me know what you think in the comments. What was your favorite film? Am I wrong on some of my takes – or spot on? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
This marks the 26th year of this hobby of mine. I’ve carried on this “Oscar Adventure” of seeing each Best Picture nominee each year since 1997. When the films that have been nominated for the Academy Award for Best Picture are announced, I make a point to see all of them before the Oscar telecast (which for this year, takes place Sunday, March 12th).
The criteria I use to judge the nominees is a long, convoluted mix of cinematic artistry and entertainment. I try to go into each film viewing with zero expectations and as little knowledge of the plot as possible. And I always try to form the basis of each review immediately after the film is done, jotting down notes that I later turn into these write-ups.
Thank you for taking the time to read them. I love this annual tradition. I hope you’ve enjoyed reading it as much as I enjoyed watching the films and writing about them.
Leave a Reply