This marks the 27th 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 10th).
Here are the 10 nominees for Best Picture at the 2024 Academy Awards, aka The Oscars, ranked in my order of preference, with my own personal take on and rating for each:
1. American Fiction
This was a thoroughly enjoyable film. It’s smart, funny, nuanced, and original. It was a welcomed cinematic experience for me. Superb scriptwriting, excellent acting, and a casual, lived-in cinematography are the hallmarks of this film. It’s not flawless (there are some storytelling clichés here and there, with a tendency toward contrivance) but it does a damn fine job of telling a wholly unique story in a wholly unique way (with a slight nod to, of all things, Wayne’s World). I have a long shot hunch this one might win best picture and if it does, I think that – with regard to its story and message – would be a perfectly on-the-nose ending.
Rating: 92 (out of 100)
2. Oppenheimer
If there was an award for MOST Picture, then this film would definitely win it. It is loaded with big-name and recognizable, actors, big art direction and big cinematography, and a big swing at big ideas. Once again, a main character who is so enigmatic that we never truly learn anything about him. This film was directed with precision and care and reverence and acted with aplomb, nuance, and skill. Simply put, though, this was too long and too indulgent; too many characters and too many names to remember and too many plot lines (and I consider myself somewhat capable in those arenas) – and to be honest, too much gratuitous nudity – but if you’re willing to commit to it, it’s a solid, quality film. It will most likely win BEST Picture and I guess I’m fine with that.
Rating: 87
3. The Holdovers
This is a wonderful, quiet, controlled film. Well-acted (for the most part, in spite of some early jitters), well written, and beautifully photographed. I enjoyed this film. It was nice combination of contrivance and unexpectedness, wrapped up in 1970 delicately crafted, film aesthetic nostalgia. Alexander Payne delivers a small, restrained, poignant, personal adventure that kept me engaged and entertained throughout.
Rating: 86
4. Past Lives
This is a slow, deliberate film. It felt like it could have been shorter by about 15 minutes or so but that filler is a collection of beautifully captured reflective cinematography and pensive pillow shots of Seoul and New York, providing a sumptuous cityscape backdrop to a very personal story for the main/only characters. This film is measured and mature as it lays out a simple story that never veers into cliché melodramatic nor played for sentimentality as its third act builds to incredibly strong finish. I enjoyed it, though it’s a slow, delicate, very particular piece of cinema that’s not for everyone.
Rating: 84
5. The Zone of Interest
This film is an interesting look at the banal day-to-day life from the Nazi perspective of Auschwitz. But make no mistake, it does not glorify – nor ask the viewer to sympathize with – the subject. It is actually quite boring. There is an air of dread as death and war take place all around, but always off screen. This makes what we actually see even more mundane – which is, I believe, the filmmakers’ intent. There are some curious stylistic choices and editing/shot framing techniques that upon first viewing seem to symbolize nothing more filmmaking flourishes. The score is impressively oppressive, I must say. My overall take: This film chose to dive into World War II Germany, and it chose a viewpoint that had not been shown in detail before. Though brave, that does not exactly make for a great movie. It is, instead, merely a good movie that has all the trappings of something greater, and thinks itself something more than it is. The final scene, however, and all the force and sadness across time that it implies, is noteworthy – and I feel that single scene is the reason for this film’s Best Picture nomination.
Rating: 78
6. Poor Things
What a strange film. It is equal parts inventive, unique, irreverent, unnerving, raunchy, overlong, sweet, and scary. It is a fantastical film (it brings to mind the work of Wes Anderson on a bad acid trip) and it operates with a hollowness about it, reminiscent of its main character. Emma Stone gives a wild, brave performance but there is something altogether icky in watching her story play out onscreen. The sex in this movie is astounding and borderline pornographic (never have I thought more about an intimacy coordinator on the set of a film while watching it). Grand ideas and fractured enlightenment are shoved into an impossible story (and the female empowerment and liberation elements feel somewhat askew considering the original novelist and the scriptwriter are both men). The cinematography, art direction, and costume design are all standouts and the screenplay is quite brave and witty. But make no mistake…this film made me feel like I needed to take a shower when it was complete. I was entertained by it but I honestly can’t say I enjoyed it.
Rating: 76
7. Maestro
These are my notes, as I wrote them upon seeing this film, before it was ever nominated:
– Hollow and systematically superficial
– Music is secondary, personal life focus;
– Reductive from a relationship standpoint
– Bernstein’ personal life seems just standard nowadays…wild and sultry then but run of the mill now. Not worth a biopic.
– Good cinematography. And the church performance was incredible to watch. Overacted. A clear actors’ showcase.
– Main character remains enigmatic. Why was there so little about his musical genius?
– Carry Mulligan gets the Oscar (NOTE: I no longer think this)
– Last 20 minutes were supremely impactful and emotional but ultimately a cheating payoff to what was sleight of hand of film.
– Maestro is a decent swing at a great film but I think it misses. But still, it was well done.
Rating: 75
8. Killers of the Flower Moon
This is a long, listless, overindulgent film. I can’t really say I enjoyed it or was impressed but it but I can say that a LOT of effort went into it. To me, it just feels like a highbrow, Oscar-bait misfire from Martin Scorsese. There is just something off about it…it feels soulless and without an anchor (and I think that has a lot to do with choice to shift the perspective from the original novel; plus the fact this is a Native American story told from an outsider’s perspective). It relishes in details and lingers for far too long at each and every turn. I can’t help but feel like it could’ve been a full hour shorter than its 3 and half hour runtime. Regardless, the length of a film should not be how it is weighed but here we are… The film features some good acting and solid cinematography (and an ever-present, churning bass beat score) but the script is blunt, the story is choppy, there is little to care about or even root for, and I grew tired of staring at DiCaprio’s frown and ever-furrowed brow for such a long time. I understand its Best Picture nominee pedigree but I don’t think it has any business being in the conversation for the top prize.
74
9. Anatomy of a Fall
I started this movie too late on a Friday night when I was only half-interested in knocking out an Oscar nominee. I feel like I made the wrong choice in doing so. I did not enjoy this film. It’s well-made, for the most part, intentionally (I think) ambiguous, and the first half is engaging and somewhat imaginative in its storytelling. But the second half gets bogged down in overly scripted he said/she said/they said/the dog said particulars and courtroom procedurals. My two main takeaways from this half English/half French film are stellar, lived-in acting and a rekindling of my love for the French language in cinema. But those two do not a Best Picture nominee make. I’m honestly sort of puzzled as to how this Best Picture nomination came to pass (and after some internet research about some French pension reform politics and a possible Best Foreign Language film nomination snub, I think I know why). Maybe I should have watched it at some other time.
Rating: 73
10. Barbie
Barbie is a cute, smart movie that leans into being meta. It’s simultaneously warm and slick, providing a nice balance between style and heart. There’s some solid acting, wonderful set and costume design, and some comedic moments here and there. But ultimately, the whole affair is a bit too surface level masquerading as “deep” for my tastes. I enjoyed it and it was wildly popular for the mass public (and I think that’s why this Best Pic nomination happened) but I would have to categorize it simply as decent.
Rating: 71
So that’s it. That’s my take on the 10 nominees for this year. I enjoyed this year’s crop of films. I debated not doing this adventure this year. To be honest, the thought of having to sit through TWO 3-hour-plus movies (Oppenheimer and Killers of the Flower Moon) had a lot to do with tempering my enthusiasm for diving into this once again. And the fact that I watched the first 8 of the nominees from my couch via streaming didn’t help matters – it has felt less and less like a go-to-theatre commitment in recent years to see all the nominees and that, to be honest, takes a lot of the fun and majesty out of it. Ultimately, though, I decided to commit to it once again and I’m glad I did. There was some solid entertainment across the spectrum of film here. Though the overall average quality across all 10 nominees seemed to be a tick higher than recent years but I can’t help but feel the Best Picture nominees should be better than this. Then again, maybe I’m being TOO critical.
Here are my Should Win/Will Win predictions for the top prizes this at year’s ceremony:
Best Picture – Should Win: American Fiction; Will Win: Oppenheimer
Best Director – Should Win: Christopher Nolan, Oppenheimer; Will Win: Christopher Nolan, Oppenheimer
Best Actor – Should Win: Paul Giamatti, The Holdovers; Will Win: Cillian Murphy, Oppenheimer
Best Actress – Should Win: Emma Stone, Poor Things; Will Win: Lily Gladstone, Killers of the Flower Moon
Best Supporting Actor – Should Win: Ryan Gosling, Barbie; Will Win: Robert Downey Jr., Oppenheimer
Best Supporting Actress – Should Win: Da’Vine Joy Randolph, The Holdovers; Will Win: Emily Blunt, Oppenheimer
Best Adapted Screenplay – Should Win: Cord Jefferson, American Fiction; Will Win: Christopher Nolan, Oppenheimer
Best Original Screenplay – Should Win: Celine Song, Past Lives; Will Win: Bradley Cooper and Josh Singer, Maestro
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.
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