Avery Tries to be a Critic: 'Avengers: Age of Ultron'

Whoa, it's been forever since I posted! Sorry about that. Graduation + job hunt + visiting family = not much time to write. But I've got a minute now, so I thought, what the hell, I might as well spill some thoughts on Marvel's latest creation.

Like everyone else, I rushed out to see Age of Ultron when it came out. And like everyone else, I was disappointed with the lack of post-credits scene (come on Whedon, why?!?). And, okay, in the end I loved it, because Black Widow! and Scarlet Witch! and Hawkeye finally gets some attention! (About time, too!) And Danny Elfman contributed to the score! How could you not love that?

But in the end, Age of Ultron just didn’t stack up to the other Marvel movies I’ve seen, and being me, I decided the logical thing to do would be to provide a comprehensive list of reasons why. Fair warning, THERE ARE SPOILERS HERE. So if you haven’t yet seen Age of Ultron, might want to hold off.

1. There’s too many characters and not enough time to focus on all of them. This, by the way, was an issue with the first movie too. But at least with the first Avengers, the focus was mainly on the main six, and at least we had multiple other movies on which we could base our knowledge of their characters. Sure, Hawkeye got left in the dust a little, as did Fury. But we had enough to go on to actually give a shit when Coulson “died.” I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one who shed a few tears for Coulson after his tangle with Loki. Whereas when Pietro bit it in Age of Ultron, I felt like I didn’t really know him, aside from the basic “bad character who turned good.” I was more affected by Wanda’s reaction to his death, than his actual death. Others kind of got shunted to the side as well - we don’t know much about Hawkeye’s wife other than, well, the fact that she’s Hawkeye’s wife - but Quicksilver’s death was the worst offense, in my opinion. That moment packed a punch, but it could’ve packed more of a punch if he’d been developed beyond “revenge-driven, hyper-speedy smart aleck.”

2. There’s too many plotlines and not enough time to focus on all of them. There were so many great moments in Age of Ultron. Finding out Natasha’s backstory. Meeting Clint’s family. Fury and Tony’s conversation in the barn. Vision carrying Scarlet Witch in his arms through the disintegrating city. Bruce and Natasha introducing their closeted skeletons to each other. The obvious bond between Natasha and Laura. Rhodey and Sam Wilson becoming Avengers, can we talk about the fact that Rhodey and Wilson are officially Avengers? But that’s all they were - moments. A lot of the plot seemed to be either cut short, badly rushed, or swallowed up in elaborate battle scenes. And speaking of which...

3. Too many spectacle-heavy fight scenes. The great thing about Avengers 1 was the way the film expanded on the more human moments even in the middle of an intense battle sequence. There was plenty of potential for that in Ultron, but out of all the fights I can only think of one that brought that personal, emotional punch: Wanda’s moment with Ultron. The rest of the fights, like Tony-vs.-Hulk, had emotional aftermath, but seeing Scarlet Witch rip Ultron’s heart out of his chest after his actions killed her brother? Priceless. I wanted to see more of that. I know people don’t come to Marvel movies for the touchy-feely moments, but there was plenty of it in the first film and it worked a hell of a lot better than the de-humanized CGI-fests that happened in Ultron.

4. The CGI. Oh, God. The CGI. Cracked.com has a great article about the issues with CGI in today’s films. And sadly, Age of Ultron hits just about every pitfall mentioned in that article. The worst offense is the camera movement. There were so many moments in Age of Ultron that felt “ungrounded,” because where the hell was the camera? Either they expect us to believe they shot that sucker on a GoPro attached to a space probe or - more likely - they got so caught up in the spectacle and what they could do with CGI that they forgot about making the audience forget that they were using CGI. Worse, there were several very real-looking city backgrounds over which was superimposed a very cartoon-y flying Iron Man. I’m all for using modern technology, but those shots reminded me more of Who Framed Roger Rabbit than the original Jurassic Park.

5. The lack of post-credit scene was a letdown. I know, I know. I’m not the first to complain about this and I won’t be the last. And it’s not really part of the movie, but it’s part of the experience, you know? Thor: The Dark World made the most of the post-credit scenes, as did Avengers and Iron Man 3. And while admittedly Guardians was lacking in this department, at least they tried. Sure, seeing Thanos grab the empty Infinity Gauntlet was a great mid-credit set-up…but this is Marvel. Sitting through the whole credits is part of the experience. Not cool to deny us that experience, Whedon. Not cool.

6. Thor was...where, exactly? I’m not saying he didn’t play a part, but I’m very surprise Whedon didn’t play up the whole “my brother is dead” angle. Especially considering the prominence of Loki’s scepter. This isn’t really a problem, per se. The story worked fine without it. I was just surprised they didn’t use that angle. I would’ve expected to see Loki in Thor’s Scarlet Witch-induced trance, or at least see his corpse the way Tony saw those of the other Avengers.

I know I’m nitpicking. I know a lot of these issues probably seem minor, especially the last two. And do I ever know how silly it is to think this much, obsess this much, over a single movie. But hear me out.

Marvel is known for their quality control, and their efforts to give the fans what they need (not, repeat, not necessarily what the fans want, because if they tried to keep up with that they’d be putting out another four or five movies per decade, which would definitely hurt said quality control). When that control slips, even a tiny bit, it’s noticeable in all the wrong ways. I’m not the first to think that the film felt rushed. And I’m definitely not the first to feel just a bit let-down by the whole thing.

Let me put it this way: when I walked into Guardians of the Galaxy last summer, I knew nothing about the Guardians prior to entering that theater. I actually went to see it just because it was a Marvel movie. And I didn’t expect to like it, and at first I didn’t, but I quickly fell in love. This wasn’t like The Avengers, which gave us a good handful of movies to get to know the characters before we saw them work as a team. Guardians was a true origin story for not one, but five characters - and yet we knew them, we loved them, by the end of the film. And perhaps this is because, as Honest Trailers so accurately pointed out, the film follows the Marvel formula.

But maybe it’s also because the CGI-heavy sequences in Guardians looked real. Maybe it’s because they didn’t leave the camera hanging out in space. Maybe it’s because they didn’t try to cram five hours’ worth of story into ninety minutes. Maybe it’s because they chose to focus on the main characters and let the side characters be just that, instead of trying to work in every single person’s motivation and backstory. Maybe it was because that was a kick-ass script that revealed just enough about each character to make you know them, love them, and fill in the rest for yourself - I don’t know if everyone experienced this, but in my theater there was an audible reaction when Rocket cried out that he didn’t ask to be created. And when Groot sacrificed himself? My God, there was hardly a dry eye in the place.

I’m not saying Age of Ultron sucked. It didn’t. There was a lot that happened in that movie that was really, really, absurdly good. But it didn’t pull my heartstrings like Guardians, Thor: The Dark World, Avengers, or either of the Captain America films. And I really think that it’s because Marvel needed to back off from the CGI spectacle and focus on what made the other films so great: the relationships between the wonderful and complex characters that they are known for creating.

Make 'em laugh, make 'em laugh!

So tonight for one of my classes we watched Best Worst Movie. Then we proceeded to talk about fandom culture, B-movies, cult classics and overthinking filmmakers. And I was fine, until we got to that last one, because that was when a handful of the guys in my capstone class basically jumped all over the poor dude and called him "delusional." Okay, guys. Okay.

Now, I understand where they're coming from. The director and writer of Troll 2 may have had the best of intentions, but holy Christ did something get lost in translation. I can see why Troll 2 has its cult following--God knows I like my fair share of awful movies; we've already talked about this--but I'm definitely not a fan. I like my b-movies like I like my fashion: straight out of the 1950s, and Troll 2 is just a touch too 1980s for my taste. (And if you're wondering why I'm not too into the 80s b-movie scene, sit down and watch Killer Klowns from Outer Space sometime. I still have nightmares about that one.) And no, for anyone who isn't familiar with the movie, Troll 2 was not a critical hit. It's got all the excess of a bad indie film with none of the charm. Bad acting. Bad costumes. Bad dialogue--oh, yes; as a scriptwriter that dialogue makes me cringe.

But with all that being said, I also understand where the director of Troll 2 was coming from when he was interviewed for Best Worst Movie. "They're laughing at parts that were not meant to be laughed at," the bemused director points out during one screening. It's clear that he has no clue that his audience is enjoying the film in a different way than how he intended. He's taking those laughs personally, and taking offense at the fact that the audience is laughing during a scene that's supposed to be tense. Maybe the audience is having fun, but the filmmaker is not. He's not sure what they find so funny.

And at that point during the movie, my heart went out to the poor guy, because I've been there. Oh, hell yes. I have been there.

Way back in 2010, I made my first thesis movie at Interlochen. It was called Posession, and it was...okay, it wasn't my best work. Watch it here, and decide for yourself. And if you don't have time, well, I'll just tell you: my editing sucked. My dialogue was iffy, at best--I was trying to pack fifteen pages of story into five pages of script. Not a good idea, believe me. As for my directing...well, I may have had a cast of good actors, but I was too shy to demand what I wanted of them. And that just didn't end well; it made all four of us look less than stellar.

But even with all that, I was proud of what I'd accomplished. So on the night of the thesis screenings I was so excited to show off my work. Nervous, yes, but totally thrilled. It was the first time I'd gotten to see something that I'd worked so hard on shown on a big screen. And I was so, so ready to see the audience's reaction. Through the first few films that night I let my imagination run wild. For a few brief, shining minutes I entertained the hope that I'd make someone cry.

And then Possession came up, and my hope was shattered.

The bulk of my jokes, including a Blair Witch Project reference that I'd thought was just so clever, fell flat. Instead, people cracked up at all the wrong moments. The moment that Gavin, my "out" gay character, confessed his crush to his "straight" (read: gay but so not ready to admit it) roommate, the entire room erupted. This was supposed to be the moment that everyone was holding their breath (would Ronnie like Gavin back? would they kiss? was there a happy ending?), but instead, apparently, it was a Comedy Central special. I couldn't figure out where I'd gone wrong. I spent the remainder of the screening trying to hide my tears from my fellow filmmakers. And I hated myself for being so useless. I thought this was it, I'd never make it as a filmmaker.

In retrospect, I think the majority of the laughter came from the fact that these were classmates, watching a couple of guys who they knew and loved play out a scene that, quite frankly, never would have happened in real life. Alex and Andrew, my actors, got along well enough on the set, but anyone who knew them probably snickered (or, judging by the reaction I got at the screening, laughed hysterically) at the thought of them being lovers. Also considering the fact that I was showing this movie to a roomful of teenagers, most of whom probably still found the idea of sex either mysterious or borderline uncomfortable....yeah, that probably didn't help either. But you couldn't have convinced me of that at seventeen. Nope, because that one scene got the wrong reaction, I was destined to be the next Ed Wood.

I realize that I spend far too much time on this blog writing about other filmmakers' work, and not enough time writing about the experience, the thrill and the pain and the fear of actually making a damn movie. I've said before I'm not a film critic--and make no mistake, I'm not--but I've always found it easier to analyze something someone else has done than analyze something I've done. I don't want to think about my own stuff because if I do...well...I have to think about what it means about me. And sometimes, that's the last thing I want to do.

But I look back on Possession now, apart from the glow of creation and the unflinching pride in my first "real" movie (I'll probably go into more detail on that later), and I can admit that God, yes, that thing is flawed as hell. But at the same time, there is so much good in it. No, it's not the story that I originally wanted to tell, but there are enough of my little quirks in it to make the film feel like it's truly mine. I cast the actors I wanted, got the DP I wanted, and found a composer to write the score I wanted--and to hell with everyone who said you don't want that actor or that girl hasn't DPed enough or that music doesn't match your story. I fell in love with my characters and maybe that was a mistake, but if there's one thing about Possession that I'm still proud of it's my characters. They are alive. They don't do things just to move the plot forward, they're human--and damn it, that was a hard thing to pull off.

Now, granted, my movie didn't wind up with a cult following, so of course Mr. Troll 2 is totally one-up on me there. And yeah, yeah, I know. It's not the same, a microbudget horror film and a student thesis movie. But tonight I felt a moment of kinship with this guy, this lovely man who genuinely believes in the movies he makes. You know what's really cool about that? The only real cult films happen when the directors don't set out to make a cult film. That's what separates the Scary Movie V's from the Troll 2s and Plan 9 from Outer Spaces. That's what makes people fall in love with your work: when you really believe in what you're making.

So for as long as I live and breathe and make art (good art or bad art, I don't give a damn), I will put myself into it, heart and soul. I will give every film I make my all, and if it's a roaring success, well, that's wonderful, and if it's a flop, so be it. I will do what I love, and let the audience laugh and cry at whatever moments they like. If their laughter means I've failed, then let me fail again and again. In the immortal words of the Mythbusters: Failure is always an option.

A letter to my seventeen-year-old self

To the teenage girl locked in her dorm room, lonely and afraid, who thinks the only people who are capable of understanding her are other misfits, who can’t stop crying, who thinks this is her last chance to be heard--I never thought I’d be so happy to say it, but you are wrong.

Possession is not your worst failure. He’s A Rockstar is not the best film you will ever make. Alien Water Torture is a dead-end script, you’ll only frustrate yourself trying to finish it. You will have better ideas, so many better ideas that will be thrilling and crazy and make you think that you’re a genius just for thinking of them. You will write better stories. You will make better movies. Four years from now, you will look back on the films you made at Interlochen and some of them will make you proud, and others will make you smile and shake your head as you think, my God, look how far I have come.

That TV series that you started planning out when you were thirteen? You’ll finish it. You will figure out how to end the show, and you will write the pilot script, and you will feel so unreasonably proud of yourself that you won’t know how to deal with it, so you’ll celebrate by telling your mom about your show (something you’ve never told her before) while your puppy (yes, you finally get a puppy!) jumps up and licks your face.

Seventeen-year-old Avery, I know you think that you will have your life together when you are 22. You won’t. You will be on the verge of graduating college. You will be terrified. You will be exhilarated. You will be so, so ready to get out of the classroom, so ready to run and scream and throw yourself into life headfirst. You won’t be afraid to move anymore. You won’t cling to what is left of your childhood with an ironclad grip because you will know that it is safe to move on. (But you’ll never forget where you came from. I promise you, you are afraid that you will forget, but rest assured you will always remember.)

You won’t have the body of Scarlett Johansson or the hair of Lucy Hale (I know, I know; it’s disappointing, but you’ll learn to deal with it). You won’t dress like Demi Lovato--but, I mean, did you ever really want to?--and you won’t ever have Katy Perry’s singing voice. The good news is, you will find someone who loves you even though you don’t have all those things, and you will love them back. You will get engaged, and the engagement will break off. You’ll live. You’ll write about it, and you will learn from it, and you will feel better. You will fall in love again, this time with someone who loves movies as unreservedly as you do, and he will make you laugh and make you feel more wanted than anyone else ever has.

And in March of 2015, just two months out from your graduation, you will be at your college film festival with this boy. He will hold your hand while the awards ceremony gets underway. And he will be as surprised--and as thrilled--as you are when your film, the one you worked so hard on and were so proud of, wins the Student Choice Award.

Wait, back up.

You, the girl who believes she will never be worth anything because she didn’t get chosen for Interlochen Collage or end-of-year Convocation, will make a movie over the summer. And it will be good. Not, like, Sundance-worthy or anything, but good. Funnier and lighter and less self-conscious than anything you’ve made in the past, with a simpler premise and relatable characters, and it will be a lot harder to make than you think it will be (damn iPhone subtitles), but it will work, and you will be so proud of it, and you will be so damn excited to let people see it. And on March 13th, 2015, you will win an award. Not just any award--the Students Choice Award. The award that means your peers, your fellow filmmakers, voted for you. The award that means hey, other people in your demographic think you’re kind of all right. The award that gives you the validation you’ve been looking for.

Oh...and by the way, you’ll win Best Special Effects, too. What do you think of that, girl-who-thinks-you-can’t-edit-or-do-anything-technical-to-save-your-life? Pretty awesome, am I right?

It’ll just be one film festival. Just one festival, hosted by your school, with a limited selection of films playing. But it will mean the world to you, and you will feel so happy that you’ll still feel the afterglow two days later. And it will give you the confidence you’ll need to submit to another festival, outside of your school bubble. You’ll be so excited you won’t care if you look fat in the pictures your parents and your boyfriend will take after the ceremony. You will hold onto your friend and partner in movie-making crime as she laughs in delight over her own little collection of awards, and you’ll feel more happy for her than you do for yourself, and for the rest of the night you’re too happy to let anything get you down.

No, it’s no Oscar. But it’s yours. It’s something you earned, something you wanted and something you got just for being good at what you do, and it’s what you’ve been waiting for and it’s going to feel like the greatest moment of your life.

That’s what’s coming up for you, seventeen-year-old Avery. Please, wait for it. Please, don’t think you’re worthless because you haven’t gotten it yet. It’s coming. It’ll be here. And I have a feeling there’s more where that came from. So just--hold on. Just know, it’s not here yet, but it will be. and you will be too excited for words when it happens.

Just hang in there until it comes.

My own manifesto

So last week for my film history class, we read Lars Von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg’s “Vow of Chastity” and “Vow of Chastity Rules.” Now, for those of you unfamiliar with Dogme 95 (which, I’m assuming, is the majority of people who have never been forced to learn about it in film school) basically it’s a list of strict rules that must be followed in order for a movie to be “real,” or “pure” cinema. An excerpt of said rules:

I swear to submit to the following set of rules drawn up and confirmed by DOGMA 95:

1. Shooting must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in (if a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where this prop is to be found).
2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. (Music must not be used unless it occurs where the scene is being shot.)
3. The camera must be hand-held. Any movement or immobility attainable in the hand is permitted.
4. The film must be in color. Special lighting is not acceptable. (If there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera.)
5. Optical work and filters are forbidden.
6. The film must not contain superficial action. (Murders, weapons, etc. must not occur.)
7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden. (That is to say that the film takes place here and now.)
8. Genre movies are not acceptable.
9. The film format must be Academy 35 mm.
10. The director must not be credited.

Furthermore I swear as a director to refrain from personal taste! I am no longer an artist. I swear to refrain from creating a "work", as I regard the instant as more important than the whole. My supreme goal is to force the truth out of my characters and settings. I swear to do so by all the means available and at the cost of any good taste and any aesthetic considerations.

…Yeah. Okay.

Now, here’s the thing. We actually watched a Dogme 95 film, The Celebration, and believe it or not it was actually pretty damn good. I liked the style. I’ve always liked stripped-down, “indie” aesthetics every bit as much as I love the classic, big-budget Hollywood style. I’m one of those weird-ass people who will sit through Django Unchained, then go home and watch Twilight or Juno just for kicks. (So far my weirdest double feature to date is Tim Burton’s Big Fish back-to-back with Legally Blonde, which I chased with an episode of America’s Funniest Home Videos.) Point is, yes, I detest Von Trier but, as I discovered this past week, I do not, as it turns out, detest Vinterberg.

But those rules! Good God! Can we talk about those rules for a second? So restrictive. So intense. Holy crap, they even recognize right there in the rulebook how restrictive they’re being with their movies--they call it chastity, for Pete’s sake! Lord above, I could write a blog post on that alone. As if all the other movies who didn’t follow their rules were...dare I say it?...slutty.

Look, I understand that Dogme 95 is an important movement and it’s in reaction to the big-budget commercial films of the early 90s. I get that. And I understand that there are plenty of people out there who are not like me, who do not like the shiny Hollywood look as much as the gritty indie look, who absolutely despise the shiny Hollywood look and want to kill it with fire. I understand all of that just fine. And I applaud Vinterberg and Von Trier (I hate that I just said “I applaud Von Trier” in any context, but credit where credit is due) for having the balls to say, “The hell with this, let’s do something no one’s ever done before. Let’s strip that down and make it right.”

But…

But…

Well, but...when you make up a list of rules and force yourself to stick to them, simply for the sake of sticking to the rules that you yourself imposed, it gets pretty damn limiting.

And I don’t like limiting.

Here’s what I loved about The Celebration: that movie was not afraid to, excuse my language, let you know how many flying fucks it did not give about whether you liked it or not. It had the aesthetic of a found footage movie without the gimmicks. And it was a thing of absolute beauty simply because it didn’t preach, didn’t command, didn’t get all fussed about making a statement. It was like, here, take these characters, love them or hate them, but just watch them and see where this goes.

In short, it was everything that Von Trier’s subsequent work was not. Don’t believe me? Watch Antichrist (or, if you have the slightest shred of self-preservation, don’t) and tell me that movie follows those rules he wrote and swore to follow. Watch Dogville and tell me it’s not the most pretentious piece of work you’ve ever seen. Watch Melancholia and...actually, Melancholia didn’t suck. (Actually, it was pretty decent. But don’t tell Von Trier I said that.) But I’ve made my point. Von Trier wrote the rules and then proceeded to indiscriminately break all of them, yet he continues to act like he’s the shit because he has, in the objective sense, a talent for filmmaking. And that, when you get down to it, is really what fries my cheese concerning Von Trier: he acts like he’s above everyone else, and then he doesn’t even follow his own damn rules.

And yet Dogme 95 is still incredibly interesting to me and I can’t put my finger on the reason why. Maybe because it inspired so much of the independent cinema I know and love today. Maybe because without this movement we wouldn’t have Jimmy and Judy or, hell, even the silly ones like Funny Ha Ha or Hannah Takes the Stairs where you just sit and watch and wonder Jesus Christ is this movie ever going to go anywhere or develop anything vaguely resembling a freaking plot. Maybe because I find it so restrictive and so interesting and so weird. I doubt I’ll ever even attempt a film that would meet the Dogme 95 standards. But hell, maybe one day I’ll try, who knows?

But in the meantime...with all that being said, here’s my own vow. My manifesto. You know...my rules.

Here and now I promise, as a filmmaker, that I will never try to break ground for the sake of breaking ground. I won’t be purposefully “artsy” or throw in moments of shock just to get attention. I’ll write my own films, as often as I can. And for the love of God, someone smack me if I ever even think about making anything that resembles a Michael Bay film.

I promise I’ll make movies that follow a story. A real story. A real story, about real people. I won’t say now that I’ll never do a blockbuster--in this day and age, who the hell knows?--but I won’t make one just so I can say I’ve done it. I will never, ever make a movie that I can’t connect to on an emotional level, because if I can’t, God knows my audience won’t be able to.

I promise, in short, to stay myself. And in an industry motivated by fear, I know that’s even more difficult than meeting Von Trier and Vinterberg’s exacting standards.

My Oscar Predictions

It’s that time of year again, where every filmmaker and their second cousin’s sister’s great-uncle’s goldfish throws in their opinion on who’s going to win and who’s going to lose. And, okay, I’m about 98% sure no one gives much of a crap what I think about the Oscars. But I still want to put in my two cents, so here’s how I think it’s going to go down:

Best Picture

What’s going to win: Probably Boyhood.

What SHOULD win: Selma, Birdman, or Grand Budapest Hotel. Okay, if I were an Academy voter, I’d be totally torn.

Why: Boyhood has generated a shit-ton of buzz. Problem is, it’s a pretty mediocre movie that masquerades as a good movie under the guise of “innovation.” For me, it doesn’t work--I’ve seen staged one-second-a-day clickbait that was more impressive--but a lot of people, including the Academy apparently, think it deserves even more attention than it’s already gotten. Which sucks, because it’s taking away from the far more deserving films that, unlike Boyhood, actually had this necessary little thingie called a script. Which brings me to…

Best Adapted Screenplay

What’s going to win: This one’s tricky, but I’d put my money on American Sniper.

What SHOULD win: American Sniper

Why: First of all, can someone please tell me how in God’s name Inherent Vice got nominated over Gone Girl? Seriously. I really, really need to know how that happened, because Gone Girl was a masterpiece and the only thing worse than the script for Inherent Vice is the script for Boyhood (more on that in a minute). So no, I’m not thrilled that American Sniper is the top choice for Best Adapted. But you know, considering what it’s up against (SERIOUSLY PLEASE TELL ME WHO THEY BRIBED TO GET INHERENT VICE NOMINATED), I’d rather see that one take home the prize.

Best Original Screenplay

What’s going to win: Again, it’s a toss-up, but I’m going with Birdman.

What SHOULD win: Grand Budapest Hotel. (Sorry, Ian.)

Why: Because yes, Birdman was a phenomenal movie, and if Michael Keaton doesn’t win Best Actor I will probably cry, but Grand Budapest Hotel had some of the best dialogue I’ve seen in a very long time. (And that’s saying something, because I’ve seen some damn good movies recently.) The script is peppered with blink-and-you’ll-miss-it jokes--my favorite kind--and plenty of moments that reveal Gustave as the badass second-cousin to Atticus Finch that he clearly is. But, slight disclaimer here, I haven’t seen Nightcrawler, so maybe that one will sneak up and grab the Oscar, and maybe it deserves the Oscar--I don’t know. For now, though, I’m definitely rooting for Grand Budapest Hotel...and if Boyhood wins THIS category, there will be a revolt.

Best Leading Actress

Who’s going to win: Julianne Moore. Without a doubt.

Who SHOULD win: Rosamund Pike.

Why: Because much as I love Julianne Moore (and, please believe me, I REALLY love Julianne Moore), I truly hate the convention of giving the Oscar to whoever plays the sickest/most pitiable character, which is why I am going to flip epic levels of shit if Eddie Redmayne beats Michael Keaton. Yes, Moore is a great actress, but why is it this role that’s getting her attention when she’s played other, better characters in the past? As for Pike--dear God, I don’t think any villain from any horror movie I’ve ever seen has scared me the way she did. She was like a female Loki. And call me Crazy Feminist, I don’t care, but it was breathtakingly refreshing to see a girl get to play the psycho criminal--and get nominated for it--for once.

Best Leading Actor

Who’s going to win: Either Michael Keaton or Bradley Cooper

Who SHOULD Win: Michael Keaton

Why: I’ll admit I was pleasantly surprise by Bradley Cooper; up until now the most complex character I’ve seen him play was a weapon-crazy cyborg raccoon. American Sniper definitely changed my mind about him, a lot. With that said, if it were up to me, I’d still choose Keaton. He’s waaaay overdue for some recognition as the boss actor that he is, and whether it’s your taste or not you have to admit that objectively, Birdman was an absolutely amazing film. And, okay, maybe I just liked the character that Keaton played in Birdman better than the character that Cooper played in American Sniper. But that’s just me.

Best Animated Feature

What’s going to win: Hopefully, anything but How to Train Your Dragon 2.

What SHOULD win: Lego Movie…OH WAIT IT CAN’T BECAUSE IT WASN’T NOMINATED.

Why: Can you tell I’m just the tiniest bit upset about this? I mean, really. First How to Train Your Dragon 2 won the Golden Globes, and just how that happened I’ll never know--maybe the entire Foreign Press has a collective crush on Hiccup; that’s about all I got--and now this? WHY IS THIS MOVIE NOT GETTING THE CRITICAL ATTENTION IT OBVIOUSLY DESERVES? The most original, imaginative, freaking fantastic animated film of 2014 basically got flipped a big, fat bird and I honest to God can’t understand why. Seriously, can someone explain this to me? This is even more outrageous than Gone Girl getting passed over in favor of Inherent Vice. This verges into insanity. …Okay, fine. If it can’t be Lego Movie, then at least give it to Big Hero 6. Give Marvel some love.

Best Supporting Actress

Who’s going to win: Patricia Arquette

Who SHOULD win: Emma Stone

Why: The reason Arquette stands out in Boyhood is because basically every other actor in there is pretty much useless. Personally I think she was better as Kissin’ Kate Barlow than she in Boyhood--but there was no way in hell anyone was going to give her any attention for that, God forbid the Academy bestow any merit upon a lowly children’s film. And yes, I know, my slant towards Birdman is showing. But you can’t deny that the Emma Stone we see here is not the one we saw in Easy A. This is not teen-movie convention. This is not something we’d see her be honored for at the Kids Choice Awards. In Birdman, she’s a force to be reckoned with--you’d have to be, to hold your own against Michael Keaton, for God’s sake.

Best Supporting Actor

Who’s going to win: Either J.K. Simmons or Ethan Hawke

Who SHOULD win: Mark Ruffalo

Why: Because Ethan Hawke can’t act to save his life (and if you don’t believe me, allow me to point you in the direction of a one-note little gem called Before Sunrise) and Mark Ruffalo was the only thing that, for me, made Foxcatcher remotely watchable. I suppose I don’t mind if J.K. Simmons takes it home, though…admittedly I haven’t seen Whiplash in its entirety, but from what I’ve seen, he turned in a pretty solid performance. Still, I’d love to see Ruffalo take home an Oscar. (And no, that’s not a mild--and by mild I mean huge--crush on Mark Ruffalo talking. Nope, not at all.)

Best Director

Who’s going to win: Richard Linklater

Who SHOULD win: Wes Anderson (again, sorry Ian.)

Why: Look, I really don’t mean to hate on Linklater. I don’t hate him, at least, not the way I hate James Cameron or Lars Von Trier. It just seriously hacks me off that he’s getting buckets and buckets of attention for a film that is not only “pretty good” at best, but it’s not even his best work. I know independent filmmakers need and deserve all the love they can get, but seriously, what about Beasts of the Southern Wild, or Milk, or any of the other films by great independent filmmakers that were passed over in Oscars past? Anyway, bottom line: Linklater doesn’t suck. But Grand Budapest Hotel is a thing of beauty. I think I’ve already said everything I needed to say about this film, but--okay, one more: the landscape reminds me of Fearless Vampire Killers. There, I just gave you the perfect excuse to go see it.

Best Film Editing

What’s going to win: Sadly, it will probably be Boyhood.

What SHOULD win: Grand Budapest Hotel.

Why: Because Grand Budapest Hotel had better pacing, that’s why. I’ve already ranted at length about Boyhood. Moving on.

Best Hair/Makeup

What’s going to win: Grand Budapest Hotel (if there is ANY justice in this world)

What SHOULD win: ...Do I even need to say it?

Why: Foxcatcher didn’t need to be nominated, believe me--I’m actually shocked The Hobbit didn’t snag a nom, but I’m not going to start a rampage over that--and as much as I loved Guardians of the Galaxy, I’ve given up hope that a quirky, vintage-styled superhero film could win out over the breathtaking piece of art that is Grand Budapest Hotel.

Best Score

What’s going to win: Interstellar, probably.

What SHOULD win: Either Interstellar or Grand Budapest Hotel.

Why: I’ll be happy either way, but I’m pretty sure Hans Zimmer is going to take this one. Again, disclaimer though, I haven’t seen Mr. Turner, so I’m kind of withholding judgement for this category.

Best Original Song

What’s going to win: “Glory.” I’m almost 100% positive.

What SHOULD win: “Everything is Awesome.”

Why: Because if the damn movie didn’t even get nominated, the freaking Lego Movie theme song should get some love, for God’s sake. Come on, Academy. Redeem yourself. It’s not too late.

Best VFX

What’s going to win: Interstellar or Dawn of the Planet of the Apes.

What SHOULD win: Guardians of the Galaxy

Why: Because holy crap, did that movie go out of its freaking way to convince us that Vin Diesel was a tree and Bradley Cooper was actually a raccoon. Also, it convinced us that Josh Brolin was Thanos, Karen Gillian was a psychopathic Inspector Gadget, and Lee “The Piemaker” Pace is the sexiest BAMF on the planet. Oh wait...maybe they didn’t actually need to put much effort into that last one. ;)

Best Costume Design

What’s going to win: Into the Woods

What SHOULD win: Grand Budapest Hotel

Why: I kind of wish Guardians had been nominated for this category instead of Best Hair and Makeup, because the costumes in that film were damn amazing. But I wouldn’t mind seeing Grand Budapest Hotel take this one. Think about it: Into the Woods had a stage musical to go off of, while Hotel had to start from scratch. And come on, have you seen the period costumes in that movie? *swoon*

Best Production Design

What’s going to win: Into the Woods

What SHOULD win: Grand Budapest Hotel

Why: Again, I’d have loved to see Guardians of the Galaxy nominated for this, but let’s face it, that was never going to happen. So yes, I’d love to see Grand Budapest Hotel take this one--because, again, period sets. Holy crap, have you seen the period sets in that movie the whole thing even the prison looks like a damn postcard.

Okay. Now, I know I skipped a few, but I’m still divided on who’s going to win either of the Best Sound awards and I’m also purposefully leaving out any categories wherein I’ve seen none of the films, and sad as it is, I haven’t seen any of the Best Documentary, Best Foreign or Best Short nominees, except for the animated short Feast (and I don’t even have to worry about that one, I know it’s going to win). So I’m going to leave it up to the experts to discuss those nominees. I will say, though, that I have immense trust in the Academy’s taste in documentaries ever since they refused to bow to the hype and give Blackfish so much as a nomination.

Now everyone who believes in God, pray for Ian because he’s going to have to hear every single bit of my freaked-out commentary and put up with my mini-meltdowns when all my favorites lose on February 22nd.

Happy Oscars, everyone, and may the odds be ever in your favor. (Unless you’re Richard Linklater. In which case, please go make a movie that actually deserves an Academy Award. And give Ellar Coltrane some better material next time, you severely underutilized that talent. For shame. AND WE BOTH KNOW YOU CAN WRITE A BETTER SCRIPT THAN THAT. CHRIST DO I HAVE TO SPELL EVERYTHING OUT FOR YOU, LINKLATER?!?)