Who should win Best Picture at the 95th Oscars?
By Ben Mitchell
BlueDevilHUB.com Staff––
The 2023 Oscar awards ceremony has a slew of excellent films vying to win Best Picture on Mar. 12. These 10 films represent 24 hours of viewing time. That’s why the HUB is bringing you mini-reviews so you can choose how to spend your time!
“Everything Everywhere All At Once” – 5 stars
“Everything Everywhere All At Once” is a story every bit as jam-packed with ideas as its title would suggest. It defies an easy summary of its plot, and overflows with style, novel concepts and love for the craft of filmmaking; if there was an award for creativity it would wholeheartedly deserve it. But more than that, “Everything Everywhere All At Once” expertly grounds its insane moments with two incredibly empathetic performances from Michelle Yeoh and Ke Huy Quan, giving the movie more of an emotional core than most of its competition this year. There’s not a whole lot to say about this movie; to pick out any moments would ruin the magic of the film, and to make any broad statements would fail to capture just how clever and entertaining it is. Go watch it.
“The Fabelmans” – 4.5 stars
On its face, “The Fabelmans” is a semi-autobiographical retelling of director Stephen Spielberg’s childhood amidst an increasingly unstable home life. At its core, it’s really a movie about talent and art. Sam Fabelman, that stand-in for Spielberg, is caught between his artistically-inclined mother and his more scientific father. Anyone with a passing familiarity of the name Spielberg knows how that turned out, but the movie takes the less obvious route of showing how both of Sam’s parents influenced who he grew up to be, a storyline that is helped by two strong performances from Michelle Williams and Paul Dano. But the real magic of “The Fabelmans” is the love for filmmaking that is plainly evident throughout. In its goal to be a sendup of filmmaking and art, “The Fabelmans”is often times protracted and cheesy, but who can complain when it’s so effortlessly entertaining.
“Tár” – 4.5 stars
“Tár” follows a world-renowned conductor, Lydia Tár, whose arrogance and manipulative nature begins to overshadow her genius for her craft. Of all the movies nominated for best picture, this one has the most believable characters; at times it seems like you’re eavesdropping on real people, not watching a movie. This effect is enhanced by a masterful performance from the entire cast, who never felt anything less than completely real. However, while “Tár” undeniably deserves credit for its writing and acting, it’s still not enough to blind the viewer to the film’s flaws. The biggest problem with “Tár” is that it asks audencies to merely exist in its world as it slowly meanders, ultimately arriving nowhere and accomplishing very little in the way of story. Despite its flaws, Lydia Tár remains a terrifically fascinating character, who all but makes up for a script that might otherwise have been called bloated.
“Triangle of Sadness” – 4.5 stars
“Triangle of Sadness,” written and directed by Ruben Östlund, is a satirization of class hierarchy, wealth and influencer culture. The film follows two influencers who attend a luxury cruise populated with an assortment of comically oblivious and self-absorbed ultra-wealthy vacationers. Thanks to a biting script from Östlund, these characters come alive in all of their arrogant glory. This makes the filman entertaining watch, but at times it’s hard to avoid the feeling that the film is not quite as smart as it wants to be. Östlund repeatedly introduces an interesting idea, but before he can really dissect it he moves on, never really giving enough time to any of these fascinating ideas. Admittedly, a sharp left turn in the third act does allow some of these themes to be revisited in a satisfying manner, but of all the oftentimes self-indulgent, ponderous films to be nominated for Best Picture, this is the only film I wish had been a little bit longer.
“Top Gun: Maverick” – 4 stars
They really don’t make many movies like this anymore. “Top Gun: Maverick” may not be as complex or as emotionally charged as some of the other movies on this list, but it is every bit as entertaining as the best of them. It’s one of the most fun movies of the year, in the vein of the classic 80s action film, brought to us by Tom Cruise, whose commitment to old Hollywood style blockbusters makes him one of the last true living movie stars. After all the nostalgia-baiting remakes of beloved intellectual property to be released in the last few years, many people may have had a cynical outlook on Maverick. But do not be fooled; this one is a great movie in and of itself. Beautifully shot and unnecessarily well-acted, it’s better than an action movie about guys flying planes has any right to be.
“All Quiet On The Western Front” – 3.5 stars
“All Quiet on the Western Front,” adapted from the 1928 novel of the same name, follows a German recruit during World War I as he navigates the Western Front of WWI. Telling one of the most famous anti-war stories of all time, the movie portrays the violence of WWI in a suitably grim manner. Featuring gruesome depictions of the war’s violence in vivid detail, it’s safe to say that the film does not hold a lofty opinion of war, and the movie is at its best when its characters are in the immediate vicinity of the war; the sections of the film that drift away from the conflict noticeably sag, as the audience is asked to spend time with overtly one-dimensional characters and the viewer becomes increasingly aware of the film’s 2 1/2 hour runtime. The problem is its subject matter, which, while remarkably well-produced, is also my greatest criticism of the film: it’s just not saying anything new.
“Banshees Of Inisherin” – 2.5 stars
“The Banshees of Inisherin” is a film about very human characters going through very human struggles–which unfortunately are of little real interest. A technically solid film, it lacks the emotional core of other films that debuted this year. The result is a very intelligent, meticulously crafted, beautifully shot film that feels completely cold. Actor Colin Farrell’s character Pádraic endures a truly miserable series of events, and yet not once does his character–or any of the other unhappy characters that populate the isle of Inisherin–inspire any sort of sympathy. “The Banshees of Inisherin” ultimately feels like a puzzle with the center missing. The writers take great care to set up all the pieces in this meticulously crafted movie but forget to bother making a connection with the audience. The end result is a finale that leaves the viewer feeling numb to the plight of the central characters.
“Elvis” – 2.5 stars
Nobody will ever accuse Baz Luhrmann’s “Elvis” of being dull. The camera soars through roaring stadium sand incandescent carnivals; every moment is punctuated with rapid-fire cuts, never giving you an opportunity to breathe. Whether on purpose or not, the film does succeed in making the audience share in Elvis’s exhaustion by the end of the film’s nearly three hour runtime. That being said,I find it unlikely that I’ll ever watch “Elvis”again. The thing about this movie isn’t even that it’s the worst thing in the world. The film is undeniably artistic, albeit tiresomely maximalist in its approach, and it features a compelling performance from Austin Butler as the King of Rock and Roll. If “Elvis” were an hour shorter, maybe it wouldn’t leave me with such a bad taste in my mouth, but Luhrmann never once exercises a modicum of restraint, and “Elvis” is all the worse for it.
“Women Talking” – 2 stars
In the vein of classic dialogue-focused films such as 12 “Angry Men” and “Before Sunrise,” “Women Talking” follows the women of a Mennonite colony as they discuss what to do after several men in the community are arrested for a series of sexual assaults. The structure is the most notable thing about the film, and it relies heavily on its writing. The problem is that the dialogue it’s built upon is bland and inauthentic. Conversations circle without any clear sense of headway and everyone speaks with a precision that is hard to believe would come from “uneducated” characters. That lack of authenticity in the script is alienating, a flaw which is exacerbated by an uneven collection of performances and an over-reliance on narration. Some films can make a movie with this structure interesting, but “Women Talking” has neither the artfulness nor the realism to keep the viewer’s attention, despite an intriguing core premise.
“Avatar: The Way Of Water” – 1.5 stars
Why this was nominated for Best Picture over more notable films like “Aftersun” or “The Whale” is a mystery to me. The follow-up to James Cameron’s iconic Avatar is just as superficial as its predecessor; “Avatar: The Way of Water” is a shallow action adventure that exists only as a vessel for the film’s admittedly impressive visuals. At the very least, Cameron’s attention to detail and love for the world of Pandora is evident, if only it had translated to a more sophisticated and challenging story. Cameron wants to deal with big themes about conservation and protecting the environment, but the script falls short of saying anything particularly interesting or new about these ideas, and instead falls back on trite messages about family ripped straight from the pages of a Fast and Furious movie. If you’re looking for some pretty visuals, “Avatar: The Way of Water” won’t disappoint, but don’t expect anything else.
