Favourite moments from the 88th Oscars

You know what? It's been 24 hours since the Oscars ended and I am still riding an Oscars high. That was the funnest Oscars I've seen during my adult life, and though I am under no illusion that watching that show is as fun as seeing a comedy special on HBO, I had a great time, only got angry once or twice (which if you know me is a real record) and laughed a lot! I also sobbed twice because I'm PMSing, drank a lot of red wine, and have a chemical reaction to beautiful sadness when I see the innocence of children and/or underdog narratives. (Don't ever bring up the movie Inside Out unless you want to watch me weep and console me for at least half an hour).

Usually when I meet new people, I tell them that the Oscars are my favourite day of the year. I know this is absurd, but my hobby is Hollywood, pop culture, and film. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand and appreciate the ridiculousness of the Oscars, and their unimportance in the grand scheme of things, but I also find them so immensely interesting as a cracked up showcase of everything repugnant about American culture.

This year, I sort of dreaded them. I suspect a lot of people did. As I wrote the other day, I struggled a lot with how to feel about my superfluous relationship towards the "last Sunday in February" guilty pleasure. I wasn't surprised by the lack of opportunities and/or recognition for people of colour, women, and other groups who do not make up the old, white, male Academy, but that problem, and the feeling that the problem is just the way it is, finally reached a tipping point, and shit really needed to be burned down in order to recognize how fucked up the whole thing really is.

And I think Chris Rock burned it down as best he could. Honestly, he exceeded my expectations. He was funny and made people really uncomfortable which I love. I mean, I laughed so hard the whole way through, and don't understand why most of the people in that theatre didn't just decide to have fun and roll with it. Laugh! Clap! Do it! Sigh...

Missed the monologue? Here you go!



Now, for some of my favourite moments:

1. Hands down my ab fab moment was Leslie Jones re-cast in the Revenant, "THERE ARE NO BLACK ACTRESSES IN THIS MOVIE!!!"

2. Finally seeing Michael Fassbender and Alicia Vikander acknowledge that they're dating. We all know it! You don't need to pretend! (Though she didn't thank him in the speech...come on!)



3. Everything to do with Jacob Tremblay. Especially his red carpet interview when he said that he was going to go to the after parties, even though his bed time is 8pm. But for reals, when these kids came on stage while I was on my 4th wine of the night, they really killed me with the feelz! This was when the water works really came pouring out. They are so lovely and precious and I love them and I'm going to cry again if I keep thinking about it.

How excited he was to see BB8, C3PO, R2D2? so fucking cute, I just can't. 

4. Tina Fey and Steve Carell, because Tina Fey is perfection, obvs:

5. This bad ass bitch, Jenny Beaven, winning Best Costume Design for Mad Max!

Oh, and see the Vine below for further proof that Iñárritu is a miserable asshole:

6. Chrissy Teigen's hand gently pushing John Legend's bum to get some Girl Scout Cookies:

7. Spotlight winning Best Picture.
I'd like to take a minute to brag: On September 26, 2015, I predicted Spotlight would win Best Picture on this very Blog stating, "Spotlight was the best movie I saw at TIFF this year (I think it's going to win Best Picture-bold statement to make in September, I know, but mark my words as an early prediction for Oscar." No Big Deal...

    

    

Why do I feel so vindicated that The Revenant didn't win Best Picture?

And Leo needs a whole post of his own, so I'll leave it at that for now...What did I miss?

Red carpet disappointments and disasters

As already stated, the red carpet was underwhelming for me last night. A few key people whose looks I was so excited for (I'm looking at you Rachel McAdams) were really disappointing!

There were some looks where there was something a tad off to me, making me not love the entire look.

Example: Olivia Wilde in Valentino Haute Couture. There are a lot of things I LOVE about this dress: the colour, the pleated skirt, the winged shoulder that falls over her back. I don't love the plunging neckline though, I think its the rectangular-ness of it, that it is such a hard horizontal line across her waist.

Daisy Ridley in Chanel Haute Couture: I think this dress needed to be an inch shorter, and that her hair is too severe looking.

Rooney Mara in Givenchy: So I actually like the dress, but I hate everything about the styling. Those 1995 Le Chateau platform shoes are horrid. And the slicked back hair with the mini bun nubbin is again too severe.

All I have is love for RM (even though she hates me by association. Yes, she knows who I am, and many moons ago her best friend in TO dated my ex-bf while we were broken up, and then he left her to get back together with me, and he also happened to be building a deck at Rachel's house b/c he's a carpenter, and he accidentally dropped a 2x4 through her skylight.) Anyway, I've been loving her fashion choices during this campaign. Let's reflect shall we?

Noam Hanoch jumpsuit at Gotham Independent Awards; Elie Saab beaded gown at Critics Choice:

My personal favourite looks from this season: in custom-made pink Prada at the Oscar Nominees Luncheon; in white Elie Saab at the Santa Barbara Film Fest.

So, I was expecting her to bring it at the Oscars...and then it was this (by August Getty Atelier):

I mean its not horrible, but not worthy of her style and beauty. The back of the dress was great: I love the train and I love the colour. But the front was a MESS. You cannot wear a dress that creases like that across the tummy to the Oscars. Bad planning. Her makeup was good (and is usually done by her sister who is a makeup artist, which I think is so cute) but I thought her hair, which is normally so great (see: above) was horrible. It looked sort of crusty and frizzy all at the same time. I wish she'd have just rocked her wavy bob. Her look at the after party I thought was an improvement, but it's still just a pretty dress:

Now onto the winning actresses, decked out in their Disney princess wear. Lainey put it pretty perfectly last night:

just let out a collective groan over Brie Larson's dress. She's going to win the Oscar. And lose the style off #priorities #etalkRedCarpet

— Elaine L. (@LaineyGossip) February 29, 2016

What I don't understand is, when you know you are going to win, why wouldn't you pick a dress that is timeless; that is always going to be beautiful (just to be clear, I'm not saying that either of the dresses below are beautiful now-I actively HATE both of them-but there is an argument to be made that perhaps they thought this was a good 2016 look). These are pictures that are shown for the rest of their careers/lives. Why pick a ruffled seam bedazzled Belle the princess dress (it is custom made Louis Vuitton), or an under the sea, mermaid costume with chastity belt (it's Gucci)? Le Sigh...

I really feel like I don't have enough time to actually express what is wrong with these dresses (and the fact that both have been on most of the "best dressed" lists I've read today is appalling) I look at these 2 dresses together, and all I see is IKEA. Here are my initial reactions from last night:

A gathered ruffle on a yellow bedazzled cupcake? You're gonna regret that one in 5 yrs, Vikander. #Oscars2016 #RedCarpet #oscarsTO

— Astrid Mrkich (@The_A_Mrk) February 29, 2016

Brie larsons look hurts: mall makeup, little girl hair, and chastity belt is a bad look for winning your 1st Oscar. #Oscars2016 #oscarsTO

— Astrid Mrkich (@The_A_Mrk) February 29, 2016

They are both so Michael's Craft store, especially whatever that Christmas dinner at your aunt's house centerpiece is around Brie Larson's waist.

And the hair, good God, the hair:

Brie Larson has the hairstyle I spent ALL of grade 4 trying to accomplish.

— Duana Taha (@Duanaelise) February 29, 2016

The frustrating thing is that both of them looked SO MUCH BETTER at the after party (esp Vikander). I don't even mind that Brie Larson implemented George Costanza's "drape myself in velvet" strategy:

I won't waste a lot of time on Reece, as I never expect her to wear anything good, but this is droopy-boob Barney parachute hell (Oscar de la Renta would roll over in his grave):

Reese Witherspoon just made me SO happy with her dress choice. And im happiest when I'm a miserable asshole. #etalkRedCarpet

— Elaine L. (@LaineyGossip) February 29, 2016

Onto Jared Leto...what does one follow a Dumb and Dumber powder blue Jesus look with (see last year's outfit here)? A goth bell hop pyjama suit, obviously!

When you're the Joker but only until Mom says it's time to put on your pjs. pic.twitter.com/KawEjVA05k

— Dave Itzkoff (@ditzkoff) February 29, 2016

Then there's this:

1. Why was Heidi Klum at the Oscars? 2. What in the name of care bear acid trip hell is she wearing? Oh right, it's Marchesa, nuff said. 

My absolute least favourite look of the night? That honour goes to Kate Winslet, in a glad garbage bag/novelty store wrapping paper special (it's Ralph Lauren; How? I don't know):

All I have to say is Why Kate? WHY???????????? I mean I really don't know how you put this on and none of your team says, we could do better. 

Oscars 2016: Best dressed (I guess?)

I was a tad under-whelmed with the fashion last night to be honest. Other than a few looks that I liked, most were just, well, fine. There wasn't anything that made me wanna punch myself in the face with fashion porn envy-(except for maybe Elizabeth Banks' outfit at the after party, but I feel like that can't really count b/c it wasn't an "Oscar" look per se).

The after party looks were a lot better (as they tend to be) b/c there is less pressure and scrutiny on the actresses so I feel like they opt for the cooler, riskier fashion choices. I just wish they would opt for those looks for the ceremony proper, instead of saving it all up for those after parties. 

If you've been reading my blog long enough, you know that all of my favourite red carpet Oscar looks are courtesy of Cate Blanchett, who in my opinion can DO NO WRONG Re: the fashion. To be honest, had this dress (by Armani Privé) been on someone else, I wouldn't have liked it as much, but on Cate, who is so elegant and interesting in her fashion choices, I really like it. And also, it's the colour sea-foam which I love (and reminds me of All Apologies by Nirvana, so clearly, that's an added bonus). 

Next up is Charlotte Ramping in this Armani Privé dress (I guess I'm really into Armani lately?) I love this so much. I'm a sucker for a pocket on a dress (even if in this case they are on the boobs). And seriously, long sleeves are vastly under-rated. Love the earrings, and the fact that she cut her own hair before the ceremony (b/c she thought it was an inch too long). The only thing that would have made it better is if the ballet slipper shoe was truly a flat (instead of a tiny heel). 

I surprisingly liked this Marchesa dress on Chrissy Teigen. Surprising because I normally ABHOR everything Marchesa (look at what Heidi Klum wore last night for an example). I suspect that my like for this outfit has more to do with my love of Chrissy Teigen and John Legend, than the actual dress, but I'm fine with that. It's hard to do pregnancy red carpet fashion well, so kudos (and they had to sew her belly into the dress which is super cute!)

#Oscars belly

A photo posted by chrissy teigen (@chrissyteigen) on Feb 28, 2016 at 3:22pm PST

Priyanka Chopra is gorgeous, and the Zuhair Murad dress she wore to the ceremony was beautiful (and I normally hate a tight mermaid dress). The only thing I'd say is that it looked a little too tight in the bust. I love her look at the Vanity Fair party (by Jenny Peckham) even more. 

So this pick might be a bit controversial (as I've already read the WWF belt comparisons online) but I really like what Sunrise Coigney (Mark Ruffalo's wife) wore last night-I can't figure out who the designer is...But, Come on! that belt is way better than whatever the hell Brie Larson tied around that blue dress last night! I actually have no clue why I like this (I know it is sort of objectively tacky) but I'm into it.

This Ralph and Russo caped jumpsuit is the most beautiful thing I've seen in FOREVER. I love this so much it hurts. Elizabeth Banks is on top her game.

My favourite overall look of the night though? Saoirse Ronan in Calvin Klein. Great hair and make up, the colour is beautiful on her, and earring game on point! She looks fantastic!

Different coloured earrings? Yes please!

Thoughts? Did I miss any?

On the Oscars, and my 2016 picks

I've been struggling with whether or not to write anything about what is usually my fave season/day this year because of how utterly gross/eye-roll-y/idiotic the Oscars are this go around. I mean, I am under no false pretence that they aren't idiotic every year, but this year is really something...

Am I surprised by any of this though? No. I didn't expect to see any people of colour in the acting noms, or women in any of the categories other than actress, because having unofficially studied the Oscars for many years, I know how fucked up the Academy is, and how the whole awards season works. When the membership of an elitist, self-congratulating, ego-crazy group of millionaires is
94% White, 76% Men, and has an Average Age of 63 Years Old, I really expect nothing. But the fact that I expect nothing is, largely, the problem. Despite being someone who tries to always think critically about privilege and discrimination, I am still used to seeing the same old (white, male) shit on movie screens and at the Dolby theatre.

The Academy, with it's statistical makeup stated above, has never wanted to recognize film that isn't white, straight, male, or traditional Oscar bait, and when they have, it's been on their own terms and housed in their own kind of white, straight, male narratives. Because it's not just the nominations that are the problem right, its the whole system, top to bottom, and bottom to top. When will there be a Best Picture nominated movie made starring a black man or woman that isn't about slavery, or the civil rights movement? (Obviously those are important stories to tell, but they shouldn't be the only stories that feature people of colour). When you don't have (m)any films that provide meaningful opportunities to people of colour or women, it will obviously be that much harder for any of those people to be recognized for their work; the work is non-existent.

The one thing I am pleasantly surprised about this year is how the conversation surrounding #OscarsSoWhite (and I recognize that issues of diversity and inclusion shouldn't be reduced to a stupid hashtag) has continued past the first news cycle of Oscar nominations being announced. That it has sparked much conversation (although some of it horribly knee-jerky and mis-guided) about the lack of inclusion and opportunity for those who aren't 63 year old white men in LA, is something to welcome. And I really can't wait to hear Chris Rock's monologue.

Anyhow, I know that I'm not really adding anything new to this conversation (and that this here little Oscar blog ain't that special) but I would really feel as though something was amiss if I went on posting about the Oscars this year without acknowledging all the horrible things about the whole shebang. Also, I want an excuse to post this John Oliver bit:

And with that my friends, Oscar weekend is upon us, we will soon no longer be subject to the embarrassing campaign of Leo and The Revenant (though I am shamefully a Leo apologist and #fangirl4life)...and so here are my final picks:

TIFF 2015 review: Spotlight

As mentioned in a previous post, Spotlight was the best movie I saw at TIFF this year (I think it's going to win Best Picture-bold statement to make in September, I know, but mark my words as an early prediction for Oscar). It was also a super hot ticket to get a hold of, which, surprised me a little, as there wasn't a whole lot of buzz about this coming into the fest, although there's been a lot of buzz about it coming out of the fest.

It tool me multiple approaches to secure tickets to this one, including a psychotic exchange with a scalper on craigslist, who after I offered him $110 for a pair of tickets (which is just over the face value) he told me that he wouldn't even sell me one ticket for that price, and then I had a full blown rage attack on him-told him it was people like him that ruined the festival for true movie lovers, he should get a real job, stop ripping people off etc. to which he countered that he would sell me the tickets for the price I offered even though he had offers for more. (Needless to say, I declined to buy them as I was pretty sure he might murder me in real life, and also, fuck scalpers).

So, I had to rush it, and my Rush line experience was excellent! Thankfully my brother took the first shift (as I was at a screening of Jonás Cuarón's Desierto making eyes at Gael Garcia Bernal-more on that in another post). I waited the final 2 hours in line with a really nice 40-something Mom, who had never rushed a movie before (and maybe never even been to TIFF before). We talked for quite some time, and eventually she revealed that her husband was an actor who was in the movie! It turns out that Spotlight filmed all the interiors in Toronto, and so all of the reporters/newspaper employees in the movie are Toronto actors. I asked her why on earth was she in the rush line if her husband was in the god damned movie?!? We never really did figure that one out... Eventually her husband joined us in line and he told me about his experiences on set. He was so humble about it all and kept saying, "who knows if I'll even end up in the movie. they probably cut my scenes which happens all the time when you work as an extra." Well not only were his scenes in the movie, they were pretty crucial to the plot! I think he's the only newspaper employee other than the main cast who has any lines! Just a regular humble Canadian Dad actor! When you see the movie, his character's name is Peter, and Peter is told to "get out" of the room. What a cool guy (and an entertainment lawyer to boot!). If only I could be an entertainment lawyer/Toronto actor...

The movie is based on the real events surrounding the investigative reporters who worked at the Boston Globe and broke open the Catholic church molestation/child abuse scandal in 2001. For a movie based on something we all already know about, it is a compelling film. This is why I think it's so excellent and really has a shot at Oscar. To be able to take a subject that is very hard to think/talk about (child abuse) and place it in a setting that can be slow, painstaking, and uneventful (long term investigative journalism) and get an incredibly tight, well paced, gripping and weighty film is really quite the feat. I think that movies are normally good for 1 of 2 reasons: they either entertain, or have something important to say. When a movie is able to do both is when it is great.

The movie is a true ensemble cast and the acting is superb. I recently read that all of the actors--Mark Ruffalo, Michael Keaton, Rachel McAdams, Liev Schreiber etc--are going to be submitted in the Best Supporting categories for the Oscars. It will be interesting to see who is able to get the nomination, and if multiple are nominated for best Supporting Actor, if they'll split votes and not win (this is what often happens when more than one person from the same movie is nominated in the same category).

Also, let's look at Rachel's outfit. 

The Q&A after the film was a huge love fest. All the actors were there, and the nice thing is that they brought out the real journalists who they portrayed in the film. The actors couldn't have had nicer things to say about the journalists, and vice versa. (I also love how the actors were the ones taking pics on their phones while on stage with the journalists)

Take a listen to the Q&A with the director, actors, and journalists below. 

TIFF 2015 Review: The Lobster

The Lobster was the movie I was most looking forward to at TIFF b/c the plot sounded like one of my fantasies comes true: all single people have 45 days to pair up with a romantic partner, and if they don't find someone, they get turned into the animal of their choice and released into the wild.

This idea is very attractive to me. I'd basically be living my best life if given the opportunity to do this. Although I wouldn't waste any of the 45 days searching for a partner (haven't I been doing that for years anyway to no avail?) I would however spend the 45 days thinking long and hard about what animal I would want to be turned into, so that I could make the best choice. Now, having already spent a few weeks ruminating on this, I'm really leaning towards a sea turtle. Let me tell you why: they live a really long life (100+ years), they spend most of their life in the ocean, though they can be on land too, and despite there always being environmental dangers for turtles (pollution, destruction of habitat etc), I feel like no one really fucks with the turtles (versus, whales or sharks for instance).

Anyway, The Lobster wasn't what I thought it was going to be. Maybe that's because I was in such anticipation to see it (My brother Alex never watches trailers for movies he really wants to see in case it ruins it for him-maybe I should have implemented this rule for this movie). The film was MUCH darker than I had expected it to be, and that's not to say that it was bad, or that I didn't like it, I just had the impression the movie was going to be more of a satire/dark comedy. Don't get me wrong, there are funny/absurd moments in the film, but overall it is pretty bleak. The film follows Colin Farrell's character whose wife has recently left him, and as a result he must check into (and surrender himself to) the singles hotel (where all of society's singles are sent) and its strict rules. While there, you are given your meals, your clothes, your schedules etc and are not allowed to masturbate (and if you're caught doing so, as John C. Reiley's character is, it aint pretty). Each day singles are taken out to hunt the humans who have escaped the hotel. The more runaways you capture, the longer you are given at the hotel (i.e. you can buy your time and add to your initial 45 days by being a ruthless killer--see, this shit is a lot darker than I thought, right?) Also, in order to form a couple with someone at the hotel (and thus have a chance to leave the hotel and return to real life) you need to have a common characteristic with the person you pair with: i.e. you each have frequent nose bleeds, a limp, or are short-sighted etc.

Eventually Colin Farrell's character escapes the hotel and joins up with a seemingly rebellious militant group that lives in the woods (run by French actress Lea Sedoux) and are staunchly against coupling (also, they only listen to electronic music b/c there is to be no dancing with others!) Basically Farrell's character goes from one extreme to the other, though both groups are equally controlling and crazy (I think probably one of the director's points re: society). It is in this group where he meets Rachel Weisz' character (who like him, is short-sighted!) and they fall in love (strictly forbidden!) For the rest of the film they have to navigate their relationship and figure out what they'll do/can do in order to be together.

It's not that I didn't like this movie, it's just that with it's incredible premise (the world having no use or patience for single people) I thought the story could have gone in a much different  (lighter and funnier) direction.  I mean, my whole life is an exercise in the painful, inconvenient reality of being single amidst a world of couples. (Think: I am the lone injured bird circling above Noah's ark while all those animal duos board). That shit can be really funny, and would make for a great movie (a la "They Shoot Single People don't they?"). But instead, this movie focuses on the nature of controlling people's behaviours and an exploration of human nature can gets really dark really fast. So, this movie seemed like a bit of a missed opportunity for me. Also, there's a scene where a wonderful dog is killed, and that will always make me not love a movie, because obviously animals > humans.
(The weird thing is that 3 movies I saw at TIFF this year had scenes where dogs were murdered. WHY world, WHY???)

Another disappointment (especially since I was still reeling from the Tom Hardy no-show the night before) was that only member from the cast who showed was Rachel Weisz. No Colin Farrell, or Lea Sedoux (both who I've seen previously at TIFF) or John C. Reiley. Though Rachel did do an outfit change during the screening, so I at least got to see 2 different looks:

 

I prefer the first outfit. You?

All in all, this movie is worth a watch. I think it has some interesting things to say, just be prepared for some bleak shit.

To listen to the Q&A with Director Yorgos Lanthimos and actress Rachel Weisz (including a question asked by yours truly!) click below. Also, they reveal what animals they would be if they had to chose (answer: Rachel would like to be pony owned by a 13 girl in England and Yorgos would like to be an eagle).

TIFF 2015 Review: Hitchcock/Truffaut documentary

There are always sacrifices that have to be made during TIFF; sometimes you must forgo one movie to see another. Most of the time it's a roll the dice moment. And at the end of night 1 of the fest, after hearing the reactions to Michael Moore's new documentary "Where to Invade Next," I know that I made the wrong choice going for the British musical "London Road" instead. Damn the lure of Tom Hardy (who ended up only being in one scene of the movie and didn't come to the screening-AHHHHHHHHHH!). I done fucked up! (Though with Hardy's uneasy relationship with the press, maybe I'm glad I didn't hear him interviewed in person: see here).

But first, I want to talk about Kent Jones' amazing documentary Hitchcock/Truffaut.

This is an absolute must see for anyone who appreciates the mastery of Hitchcock and what he did (and continues to do for film). The film uses the seminal film text "Hitchcock/Truffaut" as a jumping off point. For those unfamiliar with it, it is a fantastic book put together by Truffaut, a French filmmaker who was very fond of Hitchcock, and began a long-distance friendship with him through letters, that eventually turned into an 8 day interview between the 2 men (the audio recordings are 27 hours) where they discussed each of Hitchcock's films and basically ruminated on the art of film. This interview makes up the text of the book, which also includes photos of the 2 directors from the 8 days, and many stills/story boards from Hitchcock's films. My brother gave me a copy of the book years ago, and it is excellent; a great book to have in your film library!

The film interviews a few famous directors-David Fincher, Wes Anderson, Richard Linklater, Marty Scorsese- on their thoughts about the beauty of Hitchcock's filmmaking. It's really quite illuminating to hear these directors speak about Hitchcock-in their comments you realize that 1. They are so observant of every detail of film (which makes sense, considering they're directors but regardless, it is impressive) and 2. Despite the fact that those speaking about him are some of the best film directors of today, their talent is nothing compared to the genius of Hitchcock.   

Both my brother and I actually wished that the film had been longer (which isn't something either of us feel often at the end of a movie) and the only criticism I have is that the film focused too much on Vertigo (a film that although beautiful, kinda sucks as the plot and story makes no sense at all) and not enough on Hitchcock's better films, like Psycho, Rear Window, North by Northwest etc. But, that was the director's choice (and speaking with him afterwards, it was clear that he loves Vertigo). Regardless, definitely worth a watch when this comes out. 

If you're interested in hearing the Q&A with the director, Kent Jones, listen below: