And the Oscar goes to...

It has been nearly a week since the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced the nominees for 2015 films in the next Oscars telecast on February 28.  This will be the 89th annual Academy Awards ceremony, the most prestigious and important night for the motion picture industry centered in Hollywood.  It also happens to be one of the few awards shows I tend to watch as much as I can: they easily run overtime.  So, what do I think of the nominations this year?

For the past three years, after Roger Ebert passed away, I have been attempting to see movies that I know will be excellent.  That fortunately results in getting to look at movies year round that are quite good and are easily Oscar caliber.  That is not to say there were some clunkers I saw this past year, but they were few and far between.  In this regard, I was able to see many of the nominated movies this past year; the most recent of which is the Lenny Abrahamson movie Room, which I highly recommend though it is not for the faint of heart.  A great deal of these movies that I saw have one thing in common:  the filmmakers and people involved with these movies are lily white mostly.  Half of the films I saw this year only had white people.  This was not a choice of mine; the fact is the bulk of what is considered best in 2015 were what we may consider white movies.  There are exceptions: the newest Spike Lee masterwork Chi-Raq, Straight Outta Compton, Creed, possibly Sicario, and I would surmise Star Wars: The Force Awakens.  Those movies dealt with issues and people that are minorities.  Let it be known, I have not yet seen Quentin Tarantino's new film The Hateful Eight.

I want to take notice of Chi-Raq for a moment.  Any one that has seen Spike Lee's latest joint would immediately consider this not only among the best of 2015, yet perhaps Mr. Lee's most coherent and innovative movie in recent years.  I tend to think all of Spike Lee's movies, including recent films like Oldboy, are interesting and innovative.  By the way, I hope the three hour plus director's cut of Oldboy is released soon enough.  Back to Chi-Raq, it was a marvelous film; Teyonah Parris is a star in the making, Nick Cannon can actually act, and anytime Angela Basset, Jennifer Hudson and Samuel L. Jackson appear in a movie of this sort you know to expect some of the best method acting around.

And I watched it on Amazon Prime.

Yes, Amazon Prime.  Indeed, Jeff Bezos of Amazon teamed with Spike Lee's 40 Acres And A Mule Filmworks along with Roadside Attractions in financing this film.  Rather than what would be perceived as a one time deal; online streaming and financing is going to be the future of how we view movies.  We are seeing this in the realm of American television, wherein Netflix, Amazon, Vimeo, YouTube, Apple and other providers are not only distributing shows; these businesses are financing newer talent and taking the risks to produce quality series that networks are not prone to carry.  As a result of the web's omnipresence, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (Golden Globes) and the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (Emmys) have allowed web shows to qualify for their respective awards.

Up to now, there has not been a need for the Oscars to look at this web presence.  However, that is going to change; what with Chi-Raq being shown on Amazon and Netflix co-financing Beasts Of No Nations, a movie I have not yet seen.  Rest assured, as the trend continues for most multiplexes to show only the movies guaranteed to fill the box office, more important and thoughtful films will be exhibited online first.  And I am sad to say, this will affect African-American cinema; notably non-action based films by African-Americans.  It is already a rare sight when a black culture film like Dear White People is able to be released to theaters nationwide, much less been seen willingly by white people.  I mentioned that when I saw that movie, which by the way also starred Teyonah Parris, there were about a dozen or so in the theater seeing it; maybe two people in there were white, including me.

This brings me to something that has been brought to my attention, along with others recently.  The membership of the Academy happens to be some 80% white, and 76% of that 80% being men.  The average minimal age for most Academy members is 60.  As well, as much as we do not like to admit this, nearly all Academy members have not gotten over the end of the New Hollywood era; that period of time when the studios and their parent companies allowed free reign in what movies were made. Thus, the voting members tend to look at awarding people from that time (1963-1993) or those that remind the voters of that time period.  A noble and understandable gesture; yet it has been 23 years since what I consider the end of New Hollywood, when Steven Spielberg changed course in his movies starting with Schindler's List.  I hope to explain why I think it marked an end of an era later on.

It is rather obvious that, in this post Roger Ebert, post movie house era of films, AMPAS will need to alter their membership and outlook.  There have been small steps recently, including Spike Lee receiving an honorary Oscar and Cheryl Boone Isaacs becoming the first female African American President of the Academy.  Yet those are just small measures; far more important will be issues pertaining to qualifications for movies shown online or on demand first.  This will go along with a greater emphasis on independent films and more avant garde choices.  Perhaps there will be a newer New Hollywood that can emerge.

That being said, what are my Oscar predictions?  Well in short, I thought the best movie of 2015 was the Tom McCarthy directed Spotlight.  Quite obviously, Spotlight is a movie that fits the paradigm of what New Hollywood represented, and has the ability to show risk taking in a blockbuster or nothing environment.  It is my hope that Spotlight wins Best Picture, Tom McCarthy wins Best Director, and Mr. McCarthy along with Josh Singer win Best Original Screenplay at least.  I would like to see Leonardo Dicaprio win Best Actor in The Revenant, and I do hope Brie Larson or Soairse Ronan win Best Actress in either Room or Brooklyn, respectively.  I have not yet seen the Charlotte Rampling movie 45 years, yet I do consider Ms. Rampling to be one of the more iconic screen presences in her lifetime.  I think Rooney Mara should win Best Supporting Actress in Carol, though I have yet to see the Quentin Tarantino film The Hateful Eight which nabbed Jennifer Jason Leigh her first nomination.  Mind you, I did like Rachel McAdams in Spotlight.  And this might be a bit controversial; yet I think Tom Hardy is most deserving of a Best Supporting Actor win in The Revenant. Though of course, Mark Ruffalo is a great actor himself, particularly in Spotlight.

  Best Adapted Screenplay is a bit of a push: I liked what Emma Donoghue accomplished in writing her own screenplay to Room based on her novel.  I was also amazed at Adam McKay and Charles Randolph adapting Michael Lewis' book The Big Short into an impressive film.  Either one would be fine by me.  Best Cinematography should go to Roger Deakins who shot Sicario, though I would also think John Seale for his involvement with Mad Max: Fury Road would be a wise choice.  Best Editing should go to Margaret Sixel who edited Mad Max: Fury Road, though I was impressed with Tom McArdle and his approach to cutting Spotlight.  And I would like to see Carter Burwell finally win an Oscar for his musical score used in Carol.

There are of course other nominees and other categories to consider.  And I will be doing that in the week or so running up to the February 28 awards ceremony.  Right now, these are my inferences and hopes for who will take home the prize.  Just to let it be known: I will be watching and I do hope to either live blog the event or perhaps even record my reactions on video while it is still ongoing.  I commit to not delaying the live blogging like what happened last year; albeit that was also due to getting laid off from my previous job the day after last year's Oscars.  This time should be quite different.

One other thing I want to mention.  I am a subscriber to YouTube's Red paid membership site.  I am pleased that I can see content that otherwise would be restricted or ad driven on the free site.  None the less, I am hoping YouTube Red will be allowed to start streaming movies through the subscription service.  As of now, some movies of importance are allowed without paying extra.  Most of these films though are of this quality.

These are the sorts of films I watch when snow weekends are here.

One more week until the first primaries: stay tuned for my thoughts,

Robert

And then I woke up...

Something has been on my mind for a while now.  It deals with breakups and reunions.  I suppose this started when the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame announced 5 of their inductees for 2016.  Of the 5, only Steve Miller is going in individually.  Albeit, this will be the first induction for Dr. Dre when the rap super group N.W.A. get inducted this year; Dr. Dre will likely go in on his own shortly after.  So that leaves us with three active bands that could reunite with past members.


Cheap Trick in its current incarnation (Robin Zander, Rick Nielsen, Tom Pettersson and Dax Nielsen) are probably going to reunite with an original member (Bun E. Carlos).  Of course, this will not be easy; Carlos' interview with Rolling Stone magazine explains why.

Chicago will be for this one time reuniting with Peter Cetera.  Indeed, Mr. Cetera has been willing to initiate the summit.

Deep Purple is the clear uncertainty.  I am not sure if they will perform, and obviously Ritchie Blackmore is someone that will make sure bridges stay burned.

With that in mind, a similar hypothetical reunion is taking place at Coachella in April.  This is to go with the actual LCD Soundsystem reunion James Murphy has decided.  I am speaking of course on the purported Guns N Roses reunion.  For any GNR fan that is anxiously waiting for Axl Rose and Slash to be on the same stage in 23 years: do not hold your breath.  We will know it when we see it.

Like minded people come together when it appears joining forces will be most beneficial to create magic.  And there are times when someone decides to get involved with a budding or established project, hoping to improve upon the concept and add their input.  And yet, it only lasts for so long.

I think back to the era of the great american songbook; when Broadway was the place to be to hear new standards in song craft along with acting.  It was also the time when movie musicals were the highest form of entertainment for the masses.  It was an era of songwriting partnerships, buoyed by the likes of Rodgers and Hart along with Kern and Hammerstein.  The partnership of Richard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart was one of the better songwriting tandems for some 24 years.  By all means, Rodgers' melodies and Hart's sophisticated lyricism were the standard for proper collaborative songwriting.  And yet, Lorenz Hart had some difficulties in his life: namely not freely revealing his sexuality and coupled with his chronic alcoholism.  Just before Hart died in 1943, the Rodgers and Hart partnership had ended due in no small part to Richard Rodgers no longer finding the nerve to put up with Lorenz Hart's increasing erratic behavior.  Sadly, the loss of the partnership and Hart's mother earlier in the year prompted Mr. Hart to go on a two day drinking binge which ended in his death on an operating table on November 22, 1943.

Though not having the same amount of years or even exclusivity, Jerome Kern and Oscar Hammerstein II were frequent collaborators for some 15 years.  By that point, Kern had the most impressive lyricist to work with and Hammerstein had the most interesting composer to be involved with.  That partnership ended at about the same time the Rodgers and Hart team disbanded, albeit Jerome Kern had other partnerships and interests to attend to. Thus in 1943, Oscar Hammerstein II became the lyricist for a project Richard Rodgers had started with Lorenz Hart but later needed to be changed.  The ensuing musical was Oklahoma.  For 17 years onward, Rodgers and Hammerstein held a partnership that eclipsed their other collaborations with other songwriters.  Several great musicals came from this tandem; not to mention a considerable amount of songs to add to the great songbook.

Rodgers and Hammerstein's partnership ended in 1960 when Hammerstein passed away from stomach cancer.  Throughout the remainder of his life, Richard Rodgers would collaborate with other noted lyricists.  And yet, while the songs were quite good, Rodgers never did reach the same heights as he did with Hart and Hammerstein.  Yet in a way, the fact that two well established and acclaimed songwriters teamed up and eclipsed their past partnerships was a better fit to combine their fine artistry.

I then think back to a band that formed in the late 1960's and were making inroads with an increasing popularity by the middle 1970's.  It was 1974-1975 and Genesis had completed a 2 LP concept album that is still considered their peak of creativity: The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway.  The making of the album was not an ideal setting to begin with, wrangling over the writing and creative process.  Yet in all fairness, The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway, like much of Genesis' output up till then, was pretty much Peter Gabriel's idea.  Indeed on The Lamb, Gabriel wrote the liner notes and story, wrote all lyrics except for one song which Tony Banks and Mike Rutherford wrote, wrote half of the title track with Banks, composed music for a few songs solely (namely The Carpet Crawlers), helped in producing the album and being credited with, along side singing, voices and flute "variations on the above and experiments with foreign sounds".  By that it meant, Peter Gabriel either overdubbed and/or played live every instrument and new soundscapes at any given point.

Starting around Thanksgiving and continuing through May 1975, Genesis went on tour with an elaborate stage show; which was fully functioning maybe 20% of all the shows.  They performed the whole album live and in sequence, buoyed by Gabriel's singing, costume changes and iconic stage presence.  This created a long simmering schism between Steve Hackett, Tony Banks, Mike Rutherford and Phil Collins on one end and Peter Gabriel on the other end.  That may not be entirely fair to say this: Gabriel and Hackett collaborated often enough and Banks, Rutherford and Gabriel began their music careers as schoolchildren.  And, despite what some may say, Gabriel and Collins were quite chummy with each other.  Still, the concerts and ensuing media attention focused on Peter Gabriel to the exclusion of the other Genesis members.  As well, a schism had emerged with respect to the band's approach of their songs and albums through 1975.  It still persists, with some of the Genesis members (namely Tony Banks) having clear reservations on the Lamb yet applauding everything else; while Peter Gabriel feels Supper's Ready and The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway (the whole album and tour) were the high watermarks of his Genesis years and not thinking as highly on the other songs and albums.

The tour ended in early May, and with that so did Peter Gabriel's tenure in Genesis.  Steve Hackett left in 1977 based on similar artistic differences approached regarding Wind And Wuthering.  In all honesty, the four man lineup and the three man lineup were more commercially rewarding and artistically interesting.  I happen to like all Genesis eras, including the Calling All Stations late 1990's period when Ray Wilson was in the band in place of Phil Collins.  Indeed, I think Genesis were able to last as long as they did due to averting a band implosion with Gabriel leaving when he did.  I also feel Steve Hackett was able to expand his horizons by leaving Genesis.

And then of course, there is Peter Gabriel.  It has been 41 years since Mr. Gabriel left Genesis, and not once has he felt the need to go back.  Indeed, since 1979, although it has been hinted at, Peter Gabriel when he performs live does not perform any Genesis song.  Honestly, he does not need to.  Peter Gabriel's influence and excellence has eclipsed the influence and excellence of Genesis, a feat that does not often happen.  Look at it this way: Peter Gabriel has been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame twice; with Genesis in 2010, and on his own in 2014.  He did not attend the Genesis induction, yet accepted and performed at his own induction four years later.  In fact, the presenter, Chris Martin, mentioned Genesis a lot more than Peter Gabriel did (once in his speech, in passing.)  And that is quite alright, in part because a reunion of the classic lineup of Genesis involving Gabriel has no chance of ever happening.

Even when there are reunions of the five, as can be seen in the documentary Sum Of The Parts; everyone is quite nice and all, yet Banks, Rutherford and Collins pretty much have no intention of willingly allowing Gabriel and Hackett to be the lead figures in detailing the history.  Heck, Steve Hackett's post Genesis work was completely overlooked in the documentary.  And it felt like the interviewees were going over Peter Gabriel's individual works only because they really had to.  I can remember watching it on Showtime and the obvious realization that the Genesis that made The Lamb have no intention of ever reuniting in full probably sunk in more than any other time.

Those are just two examples.  In the end for both examples, the breakup of one partnership signaled the beginning of more fruitful experiences with either other partnerships or more often finding greater rewards and artistic merit as individuals.  I can understand that as well.  Not long ago, I became involved with groups and organizations that came at the right time for my growth and experience.  It went all so very well; this included some really great days and events to remember.  Everything went into an orderly and functioning process that involved budding friendships and a sense that the partnerships would last .

And then I woke up...

When I did, then and now,  newer options came about.  And it became clear that the partnerships and groupings had ended.  Reluctantly or with hope, we realize that we must change partners yet again

Do not worry, fellow readers.  I am still here and still blogging; perhaps that long-awaited video and multimedia output for future essays and commentaries will happen.  What I mentioned is relative to a a community involvement that has run its course.  This weblog has not and will never run its course!

Talk to you all sooner than later,

Robert

PS.  The Oscar nominations were announced two days ago.  And yesterday, I saw The Revenant.  I will have a lot more to say on these matters shortly.

A tale of two Halls of Fame

On Wednesday, the National Baseball Hall Of Fame, dedicated to presumably honor the greats in Major League Baseball and American Baseball at the highest levels, announced the results of the vote taken late last year by the BBWAA.  The BBWAA are the organization of sports writers devoted to covering MLB and making their slack-jawed opinions known whether we want them or not.  Every year, a select number of recently retired ballplayers who have been inactive for at least five years are voted by these writers to receive this prestigious honor.  And in most cases, ballplayers that deserve the honor are routinely denied the honor of having a day devoted to them and a permanent plaque in Cooperstown, NY.

For 2016, only 2 ballplayers will receive a plaque.  These players are Ken Griffey Jr., one of the better center fielders of the 1990s and early 2000s who totaled more than 620 home runs and a slew of personal records; and Mike Piazza, perhaps the best hitting catcher of his era with over 420 home runs and 2600 hits.  Being from New York, most of the attention is on Piazza getting in; more so now since he will go in as a Met.  By the way, Junior Griffey is going in as a Mariner, but that was a given.  It is all well and good, until you realize the amount of ballplayers and off-the-field leaders who are not in the Hall of Fame, either still alive or since passed away.

I was going to provide a list of these oversights, yet that will be for another time.  Suffice to say, these oversights, brought forth by a collection of sportswriters and self-proclaimed moralists who think only the purest of pure shall be granted induction, have greatly delineated most people's interest in the Hall of Fame beyond a regional level.  I will have more to say about this one day.  It might though be a multi-part examination of the Hall of Fame which I know few of you have interest in reading about now, so perhaps in the summer this will suffice.

Now, onto a more lively and exciting Hall of Fame discussion.  One day after the Baseball Hall of Fame announced their inductees, the Pro Football Hall Of Fame announced the 18 finalists for their Class of 2016.  The 8 inductees will be revealed at the NFL Honors one day before Super Bowl 50, February 6, 2016.  Now right then and there, the reveal carries a lot more weight in the NFL than MLB cares to be involved with.  As well, the 18 finalists are of such great importance that any of these finalists could be inducted this year and no problems would be had for who went in and who did not.  The 18 finalists are:

Morten Andersen
Steve Atwater
Don Coryell (1924-2010)
Terrell Davis
Edward DeBartolo Jr.
Tony Dungy
Alan Faneca
Brett Favre
Kevin Greene
Marvin Harrison
Joe Jacoby
Edgerrin James
John Lynch
Terrell Owens
Orlando Pace
Ken Stabler (1945-2015)
Dick Stanfel (1927-2015)
Kurt Warner

With that in mind, discussion these next few weeks will turn to who gets inducted, when we are not following the playoffs and being armchair quarterbacks.  As I mentioned before, 8 of the 18 finalists are likely to be inducted.  4 of them are certain locks.  These would be Brett Favre, Ken Stabler, Dick Stanfel and Edward DeBartolo Jr.  Stabler and Stanfel made it to be Senior Committee nominees, and Debartolo Jr. is the Contributor nominee; that means three of the eight slots are to be reserved for these specialized candidates. I am certain all three will go in.  It also goes without saying that Brett Favre is a certain lock, and I need not explain why.

So that leaves 4 finalists to be inducted.  Here is how I see the direction this will go. From what I gather, the four I would choose to go along with the obvious locks are as follows:

Kurt Warner:  I do realize we are talking about inducting three quaterbacks getting in one year.  However, there have been no quatrerbacks inducted since 2006; so the Hall of Fame is in need of ending the quarterback drought.  Warner's backstory and accomplishments speak for themselves I believe.

Kevin Greene:  when Kevin Greene retired after 15 years following the 1999 season, Mr. Greene amassed 160 quarterback sacks.  Not only was it the third best total of that era; it was and still is the most sacks by a linebacker.  Only Lawrence Taylor came closest with 142 sacks.  Nine times during his career, Kevin Greene led his team in sacks, and had been a pivotal component in being a defensive leader for playoff teams.  It is often hard to pick which team Greene made the most impact for, though I think it was the LA Rams.  None the less, Kevin Greene was clearly one of the more consistent linebackers and defensive play makers of his time, and should finally get the long sought induction this year.

Tony Dungy:  starting as an effective assistant coach, and then becoming a most impressive head coach with the Bucs and Colts; Tony Dungy had an impressive track record in turning around piss-poor teams and making them playoff contenders.  The results are impressive: 148 wins, 10 seasons of 10 or more wins, only one losing season, only two seasons not making the playoffs, three conference championship games, and in 2007 winning Super Bowl 41.  With that, Dungy became the first African-American head coach of a Super-Bowl winning team.  Not only that, Tony Dungy was and still is an important mentor and role model to his players and active in numerous charitable activities; not to mention his impressive transition to NBC's football coverage and analysis.

Marvin Harrison:  never the flashiest player, Marvin Harrison went on to become one of the better wide receivers in the game.  Along with perhaps the best wide receiver in Colts history.  To this day, Harrison holds the record for the most receptions in one season, set in 2002 with 143.  He also had nine seasons of 10 or more touchdowns and 1000 receiving yards, 4 seasons of 100 receptions, only one season in playing less than 10 games, 188 starts out of 190 games played, 1,102 receptions, 128 touchdowns and 14,580 yards.  Harrison is also part of the most accomplished quarterback to wide receiver tandem in NFL history along side Peyton Manning.  And yes, he did win a Super Bowl as well.

Once again, I presume these will be the eight inductees announced next month.  I do think there will be five finalists that could also get selected this year which would not surprise me.

Terrell Owens:  though having never won a Super Bowl, and not as consistent in his later years than his 49ers tenure; Terrell Owens was quite the good wide receiver.  Owens was also one of the best characters in the game as well, complimenting his 153 touchdowns and numerous records of importance.

Terrell Davis:  he only played 7 seasons, and then only the first four were fantastic.  Yet I keep mentioning this opinion:  the Denver Broncos do not win back to back Super Bowls without Terrell Davis, who came and went as if he were a bright comet.  Very comparable to the shortened career of Gale Sayers, whom by the way went in the Hall of Fame on the first ballot though never appearing in the playoffs.  If Sayers is in, Davis should go in one day.

Alan Faneca:  a great Steelers offensive lineman similar to Mike Webster and Dermontti Dawson.  Faneca also had 11 fumble recoveries and started 201 out of 206 games played.  As well, for a retired player, Alan Faneca looks much better today than in his playing years.

Orlando Pace:  Pace was the leading fulcrum in guiding the greatest show on turf during the halcyon era of the Rams.  He started 165 out of 169 games played and recovered 9 fumbles along the way.

Morten Andersen:  the all time leader in games played, points, field goals, points after touchdowns, field goals of at least 50 yards, and holds the team records for kicking in both the Saints and the Falcons.  Andersen became the prototype for the idea of the kicker to be the deciding factor in not only a win for a team, but also an identity.

I think Steve Atwater may be waiting at least another year.  Don Coryell might get a posthumous induction, though Coryell not having been to a Super Bowl is a bit of a damper.  John Lynch will get inducted one day, though it may take a few years.  Edgerrin James will likely go in one or two years from now.  And Joe Jacoby is a candidate that could be a surprise inductee, though I am just not seeing it this year.

Well, those are my thoughts on the two different Halls of Fame.  Truthfully it is really only the Pro Football Hall of Fame that my focus was on; not a surprise since I am more interested in football than baseball.

I have also been informed that this marks one year since I started this weblog page.  To all that are continuing on this journey with me; I offer my heartfelt thanks and appreciation.  2016 is promising to be a very intriguing year and one full of newer possibilities and avenues to show my opinions.  I hope you will like what is coming next.

More coming; stay tuned,

Robert