The Oscars 2020.

Yesterday (9/2/20) saw the 92nd Academy Awards. Known as the Oscars this traditionally marks the end of America's long popular culture season.

It always puts me in a difficult position. Of having to write detailed discussions of movies I've not actually seen.

Seriously. I've only recently watched "Get Out" from 2017. I'm still looking forward to finding the time to watch "Hidden Figures" from 2016.

This year though I decided to really confuse matters. I've actually seen one of the movies in Oscars contention this year.

So it seems appropriate I start there;

Jojo Rabbit: Aka; "The Scarlett Vengeance."

In 2014 Scarlett Johansson made a Super Bowl commercial for SodaStream. An Israeli company which, at the time, operated in the Occupied Palestinian West Bank.

As I think was both SodaStream and Scarlett Johansson's intention this invoked all the issues surrounding the Israel/Palestine conflict.

Such was the backlash it was actually never shown. The Super Bowl broadcaster that year, FOX, pulled it. Officially on the grounds that it embarassed Super Bowl sponsor Pepsi.

Honestly I think most people's reaction to the controversy though was simply to shrug and go; "Huh. Didn't realise Scarlett Johansson was Jewish."

However people with long experience of the Israel/Palestine conflict lept to Scarlett Johansson's defence. Pointing out that while SodaStream's Lehavim plant was in an illegal Israeli settlement it was amongst the least of Israel's crimes.

It acted as something of a mechanism for peace through prosperity. Boosting the Palestinian economy by providing jobs in an area where they are scarce.

Along with providing and environment where Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs worked together in peace. Helping to break down barriers and show both communities that the other isn't the sort of cartoon villian they're so often portrayed as.

The viciously anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement though responded with ferocious personal attacks against Scarlett Johansson. Both as a Jew and as a woman. Demanding that she be beaten, raped, killed etc. All the usual Twitter pleasantries.

The movie Jojo Rabbit is very much Scarlett Johansson's revenge on them.

It centres around the Hitler Youth movement in Nazi Germany, right at the end of the Second World War. A fanatical, anti-Semitic organisation which at times seems to have provided the template for BDS.

It particularly focuses on the title character; "Jojo Rabbit." A 10 year old boy who is so fanatical about the Nazi cause that he has, as an imaginary friend, an outlandish, cartoonish and frankly very camp version of Adolf Hitler. Played by the director Taika Waititi.

The fact that Taika Waititi is of New Zealand Maori descent and therefore disctintly non-Aryan just adds to the general comedic insanity of the satrical movie. Essentially it features a black Hitler.

I speculated that this fanatical Nazi child with Hitler as an imaginary friend is a reference to former US President Barack Obama. If you pay close attention there is a Nazi, Gestapo Agent Mueller. As in FBI Agent Robert Mueller.

Scarlett Johansson plays Jojo Rabbit's mother and her performance is amazing. Massively overdoing it for comedic effect in every scene.

I also don't think it would be possible for her to play the character as more Jewish. Creating the frequent spectacle of an outlandish stereotype of an overbearing Jewish mother. Marching in the HQ of the Hitler Youth and bossing them all about.

Jojo Rabbit's mother is far from fanatical about the Nazi cause as he is. In fact she's an active member of the anti-Nazi resistance. To the point that she is hiding a teenage Jewish girl in the attic of the family home.

Israel won the 2018 Eurovision Song Contest. Prompting me to joke that we'd soon find out what Netta looked like once she'd lost some weight. Because she was going to spend the next year; ""Sweating like the proverbial Jew in the attic."

This prompted people to be outraged by my anti-Semitism. Tellingly American and European leftists who support BDS were the most outraged. Demanding I be immediately silenced.

Israel, particularly their Eurovision community, responded by basically declaring me their new king.

If you know about Jewish and particularly Israeli and Eurovision culture you would know that was exactly the type of joke called for at that moment.

In the movie Jojo Rabbit discovers the Jewish teenager hiding in the attic. He rationalises his decision not to turn her in by getting her to tell him all about Jews and their culture so he can write a sort of manual to better guard against them.

She responds by telling him some of the just most ridiculous secrets about Jews. Such as how they can control people's minds, they sleep upside down like bats and have horns growing of their heads. Those horns don't grow in until the mid-twenties though. So she's still waiting for hers. Like an angel waits for its wings.

I think the main reasons I have an above average knowledge about Israeli and particularly Israeli Eurovision culture is that I've been watching Eurovision since I think before I could talk. I also spent the five years between 2014 and 2019 reading an Israeli newspaper every day.

However I did briefly date an Israeli Jewish woman back in 2001. She's sometimes dubbed; "The Israeli Meghan Fox." Due to Meghan Fox playing her in the video for the Eminem and Rihanna song; "Love the Way You Lie."

If we're being honest though Thomasin McKensie is probably more accurate casting. Or at least more accurate costume and make-up. She was, after all, a very dirty Jew.

As hosts Israel were represented by at the 2019 Eurovison Song Contest Kobi Marimi. Who rose to prominance playing; "Natan/Nathan of Gaza" in the musical; "Messiah Now!" The Thomasin McKensie character keeps referencing her boyfriend, Nathan.

At Eurovision 2019 Iceland were represented by Hatari. Who are Situationist perfomance artists.

Part of Hatari's two week long performance included inventing this imaginary brand of Icelandic sparkling spring water called; "SodaDream." They insisted in drinking it at all their press conferences. In clear violation of the contest's sponsorship rules.

Bringing a whole new level to the Eurovision game Hatari even created a marketing campaign, including a web presence. All for this SodaDream product which simply does not exist.

It was all done as a very clear reference to Scarlett Johansson's 2014 Super Bowl commercial for SodaStream.

So it seems highly appropriate that Jojo Rabbit ended up winning the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay.

Hustlers & The Farewell: These two movies are noteworthy because they were not nominated in any of the Oscar categories.

Both were made by female directors. Both also feature majority female, non-white casts.

So, along with Greta Gerwig not being nominated for Best Director, their omission has added fuel to the fire of the Diversity debate. This began with the Black Lives Matter (BLM)/#OscarsSoWhite campaign and expanded with the #TimesUp/#MeToo campaigns.

Rather than being snubbed I think both of these movies were deliberately left out. In order to raise some valid but overlooked elements of the diversity debate.

Hustlers is a movie about strippers. In the wake of the 2008 Financial Crash they're suddenly struggling to make the money they once did. Leading them to start drugging their Wall Street banker clients in order to rob them.

So when you stop and think about it Hustlers is a movie about sex workers and criminals. Some pretty unpleasent criminals at that. Can really imagine a comedic crime caper about a group of Wall Street bankers drugging and humilating strippers?

Sex workers and criminals are topics which make a great many people uncomfortable. In middle-America, let alone in the rest of the World. There are still people who think sex workers are criminals.

So Hustlers isn't the type of movie that normally gets made by Hollywood studios. It certainly doesn't get recognised by the Oscars which are broadcast in primetime.

These types of stories about marginalised groups though have long been the preserve of the independent film industry.

Highbrow cinemaphiles actually look down on the Oscars as too mainstream and commercial. They're much more interested in independent film festivals. Such as the Sundance Film Festival. Or the Cannes Film Festival.

Independent cinema is celebrated by Hollywood. At the Independent Spirit Awards. Which take place the night before the Oscars ceremony.

So I don't think Hustlers and The Farewell were snubbed by the Oscars. So much as given as gifts to the Independent Spirit Awards. Which could take sole responsibility for showering them with the praise they deserve.

Hustlers was produced and stars Jennifer Lopez. Who performed the Super Bowl Half-Time show the previous Sunday (2/2/20). She used this really promote the movie Hustlers.

So you'd think that huge publicity from the Super Bowl would carry over and boost the profile of the Independent Spirit Awards. Particularly the Arts side of the Academy understand the importance of supporting the independent film industry.

In part the 2020 Super Bowl show was inspired by Greece's 2019 Eurovision Song Contest entry. Which in turn was really heavily inspired by the 2001 movie; "Lost And Delirious."

Lost And Delirious was produced and distributed by an absolutely tiny independent production company called Peccadillo Pictures. This is set up specifically to tell Gay and Queer stories. The trailers for some of their movies manage to make even me blush.

At Eurovision I sort of joked that Lost And Delirious is a Lesbian Porno. In the sense that it's got about 10 minutes of sex in it and about two hours of neutrotic emotional psychodrama.

The Mischa Barton character "Mary" really functions as a cipher for the relationship between Piper Perabo's character "Paulie" and the Jessica Pare character "Tori." Slightly predatory it is clear that Paulie is gay. However it is less clear whether Tori is actually also gay or has been pressured into the relationship.

When the relationship becomes public Tori immediately breaks it off with Paulie. Denying that she is gay and making a very public display or dating men/boys in an effort to show the World just how not gay she is. That obviously destroys Paulie emotionally.

Even today I think you would struggle to find a major Hollywood studio prepared to make a movie about a teenage lesbian love story. Particularly one which has strong overtones of coercion and possible rape. Certainly nobody would touch it back in 2001 when this movie was released.

Obviously it's not my experience so I can't really comment on it. However I think if you were a young gay woman growing up in some middle-America backwater it would be really important that you would be able to see such a movie. In order for you to see it somebody first has to get it made.

There is something important that those calling for more diversity seem not to have grasped. Being inducted into the Academy, let alone winning an Oscar is supposed to be the absolute peak of a filmmakers career. It is not supposed to be the first step.

Perhaps pointedly this year saw Brad Pitt recieve his first ever Oscar. Best Supporting Actor for his role in; "Once Upon A Time In Hollywood." That is after 33 years in the business and 5 nominations.

I, for one, think the guy who does Leonardo DiCaprio's stunts should have been rewarded with much more gold. Much earlier on.

Many of those who are now at their peak as filmakers spent many long years paying their dues and learning their craft. Often in tiny independent films that were hardly seen by anyone. Let alone showered with awards.

Long before Martin Scorsese made; "Goodfellas" for Warner Brothers in 1990 he was doing; "Who's That Knocking At My Door." In 1967 for Joesph Brenner & Associates.

Straight off the back of Lost & Delirious Piper Perabo went on to do; "Coyote Ugly." While Mischa Barton went on to do; "The O.C" and Jessica Pare went on to do; "Mad Men" and; "SEAL Team." Although TV shows which perhaps lack the glamour of Hollywood they're both certainly solid acting careers.

Particularly with Jessica Pare you suspect they pay for the more interesting things she does. Just like how; "Castle" pays for the more interesting things Stana Katic does. Like the Independent Spirit Awards.

Despite all the complaints about a lack of diversity and opportunity there is currently far more opportunity for young filmakers than there ever was before. The Farewell is a good example of this.

The Farewell is about an Chinese American woman who returns to China to be with her terminally ill grandmother. It is one of those character driven pieces which is all about emotions, families and cultural differences.

For this type of movie to be recognised at the Oscars one of its elements such as directing, writing or acting has to absolutely standout. I'm don't mean simply good or even excellent. It has to be amongst the best there has ever been.

It is though the type of movie that is traditionally produced and supported by the independent film industry.

Even if you are Martin Scorsese getting any movie made is a difficult task. In the past The Farewell's director Lulu Wang would have had to line up a dozen difference financiers. All paying a small part of the total budget.

Lulu Wang actually had the luxury of being able to choose between two, large backers who each wanted to fund her movie in its entirety. An online streaming service, I think Netflix, and the A24 independent production company she eventually opted for.

So it is hard not to question whether those complaining about the lack of diversity and opportunity are, in fact, not looking at the issue in the right way. An important talent for a filmaker.

I also can't help but think that by not being nominated both Hustlers & The Farewell are being talked about in ways they just wouldn't be if they'd simply been nominated but just not won.

Parasite: Unusually for a movie nominated for six Oscars Parasite is not American. It is not even in English.
It is from the Republic of Korea (RoK/South).

2020 is of course an Olympic year. With the Summer games to be held in Tokyo, Japan. This represents something of an Asian adventure for the Olympics. Following on from the 2018 Winter Games, held in PyeongChang in the RoK.

So Parasite serves as a little test. What have we all learnt about Asia, and South Korea in particular, since the 2018 Winter Olympics. We suspect it will be on the exam at the 2020 Summer Olympics.

The first thing we've learnt about Koreans is that they are really, really funny. Not only that they have a really cheeky, mischievous sense of humour.

A group of Asians who are certainly not to be mistaken for the incredibly reserved and deferential Japanese.

For example the Opening Ceremony of the 2018 Winter Olympics began with the striking of the Sacred Bell of King Seongdeok the Great. However the press releases the Korean hosts handed out to broadcasters claimed it was the "Peace Bell." Which was gifted to the United Nations by Japan in 1952.

The Koreans just wanted to see how many foreigners they could make look stupid.

Later on the Opening Ceremony introduced us to a popular character from Korean folklore. The Dokkaebi.

Mischevious spirits that live in the forest Dokkaebi love to play pranks and practical jokes on humans. One of their favourite games is to block the paths of foreigners travelling through their part of the forest.

Obviously prior to the 2018 Winter Olympics I knew there were some funny Koreans. You even get German comedians these days.

I've seen Korean movies such as 2009's; "Thirst." This is billed as a horror movie in which a Catholic Priest is turned into a vampire and goes on a blood-thirsty killing spree.

It's really not though. It's really an absolute p*ss-take of the "Twilight" movies that were popular at the time.

Likewise I've seen 2015's; "Veteran." Which is billed as a martial-arts, police action movie.

It's not though. It's an absolute p*ss-take of all those martial-arts, police action movies. It is as if the 2011 Indonesian movie "The Raid" had been done as a slapstick comedy.

However I was never sure if these hilarious Koreans were an embarassment to their families.

Since the 2018 Winter Olympics I've learnt that no. The TV Show; "Family Guy" is basically the Korean national sense of humour.

Something worth remembering when US President Trump and Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK/North Korea) Kim Jong Un are hurling childish insults at each other.

The other thing we've learnt since the 2018 Winter Olympics is that under former President Barack Obama the US Democrats tried to rig the 2016 Presidential Election.

They did this by simply copying then South Korean President Lee Myung-bak's much more successful attempt to rig South Korea's 2012 President Election. To ensure it was won by his designated successor Park Guen-hye.

This involved inventing the threat of; "Foreign Interference." Then tasking South Korea's equivalent of the FBI to combat that "Foreign Interference." By monitoring social media and removing any messages critical of Park Guen-hye or supportive of her opponent Moon Jae-in.

Well, I say; "We." Americans were almost completely shielded from this global discussion about how the Democrats tried and failed to rig the 2016 Presidental Election. They were all suddenly distracted by the massacre at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in the Parkland area of Florida.

Roughly 20% of the Korean population have the family name; "Park." Making it the original; "Parkland."

Parasite centres around the Kim family. Dirt poor they all live in a single room basement apartment. Floating from temporary job to temporary job they are essentially con-artists. Having to rely on cons and scams to get by.

One day the son, Ki-woo, tricks his way into become the English tutor to the daughter of a wealthy family. Gradually the entire family trick their way into becoming the live-in household staff of this wealthy family. Conning and tricking them every step of the way.

So, at this stage, you would assume that the Kim's are the parasites of the movie's title. Living off, first society and then the wealthy family. Giving nothing back in return.

The wealthy family are the Parks.

In light of the US Democrat backed "March For Our Lives" which followed the Parkland massacre it is a biting satire. The parasites living off the backs of the Parks, in their own lands.

However as the movie goes on you get to see the dismissive way the Parks treat both their domestic staff and the poor in general. Making you wonder whether they are in fact the parasites, living off the backs of the poor.

It is that eternal question of who is the parasite and who is the exploited which runs throughout the social satire.

That question of; "Who's the Parasite?" no doubt provided lots of loaded and euphemistic discussions during the swirl of parties that make up the cultural season.

Given all the people who still seem to think they can get rich of my back it is a question I very much approve of. While trying to boost my profile by associating myself with the Oscars.

Parasite was the absolutely huge winner at this year's Oscars. Winning four of the six prizes it was nominated for. A 66% success rate.

At the Oscars there are the traditionally Big Four prizes; Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress. Parasite won two of these Big Four;

Best Picture and Best Director for Bong Joon-ho.

Ethnically speaking the cast and crew of Parasite are fairly typical for Korea. However they most certainly represent an ethnic minority in America. They are far removed from the supposed old, white, straight men who keep the #OscarsSoWhite.

As a result Parasite's success obviously makes a large contribution to the diversity debate.

One of the current hot topics within the diversity debate is the somewhat dubious concept of; "Unconcious Bias." Apparently members of the Academy suffer from a deeply ingrained racism. This prevents them from seeing past a person's skin colour and cultural background and understanding the brilliance of their work.

Honestly it's getting embarassing to watch Britain even try at the moment. However the British Academy of Film and Television Awards (BAFTA) now employs; "Unconcious Bias Consultants." Black people who are employed to help members of BAFTA to understand their racism.

Parasite's success really drives a coach and horses through that argument.

The Academy has been able to see past the fact that Parasite's cast and crew have a different skin colour. They've been able to see past the fact they speak and entirely different language. They've also been able to see past the fact they come from a significantly different cultural background. Meaning that the movie has a very different visual style or language to it.

That really cuts to the heart of the diversity debate. Particularly the #OscarsSoWhite campaign.

It seems pretty clear the people behind that campaign are not interested in a society free from racism. Where talented people are able to achieve regardless of their race or cultural background. Instead they simply want to carve out a special advantage for their particular ehtnic group.

In truth it probably goes even further than that. They're not even interested in their ethnic group. They just want, for themselves, the job, rewards and success they are not talented enough to earn and do not deserve.

That feeds into the wider Affirmative Action debate. Particularly over university admissions. In the name of; "equality" US universities are allowed to reject highly qualified Asian candidates in favour of poorly qualified black candidates.

There is currently a case on just this matter making its way through the American Courts. Harvard University's argument is that allowing in too many Asians would disrupt campus and collegiate life. They're argument is seriously;

"We're not being racist. We just don't like Asians." 

(Originally posted at 10:25 on 11/2/20 (UK date)).

Continues in Part 2;

19:45 on 17/2/20 (UK date).

The Oscars 2020. Pt.2.

A direct continuation of Part 1; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-oscars-2020_17.html

Joker: This was the clear frontrunner at this year's Oscars recieving 11 nominations. However it fell rather flat. Winning only two;

Best Actor for Joaquin Phoenix and Best Original Score for Hildur Guonadottir.

Amid all the talk of diversity it is worth pointing that Hildur Guanadottir is both Icelandic and female. In fact is the first solo female composer to win Best Original Score.

Joker struck me as incredibly brave movie to make. Which might seem an odd thing to say about a movie which is part of the vast D.C Comics universe and backed by the massive Warner Brother studios.

However some of you may remember another, earlier movie in the Batman franchise. 2012's "The Dark Knight Rises."

I certainly remember the July 20th 2012 (20/7/12) screening of that movie in Aurora, Colorado.

During the movie a gunman walked into the theatre and shot dead 12 people and wounded 50 others. In planning his attack the gunman had dyed his hair orange in a reference to the Joker character.

I think a lot of people involved in the D.C Comics universe would have liked to pretend that incident had never happened. Quietly resting the brand until everyone had forgotten about it.

In this movie though they decided to take responsibility and challenge it head on.

It sees a man whose dreams have failed. Further failed by the system he descends into madness and violence. Emerging as the crazed gunman, the Joker of the Batman franchise.

Particularly in pre-production and production this movie is actually a detailed investigation. Into the process by which forgotten white men get driven to such rage they carry out these appalling acts of violence.

Some, such as in Colorado, are honest and do it just because they're consumed by hate. Others try and legitimise their actions by dressing it up in some psuedo-political cause. Such as White Nationalism or this recent Involuntary Celibate (INCEL) movement.

That process is also relevant to the fight against Islamist terrorism.

Let assure you that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) are really not Muslims. They are just raged filled, often, western men. I would describe them as; "Nihilists" but honestly Nihilism is a far more developed philosphy than anything they follow.

Progressive Liberals have really railed against Joker. Decrying it as a celebration of this white man's rage and calling for it to be banned. In doing so they've revealed their true attitude towards this violence.

Particularly since 2014 and the rise of Black Lives Matter (BLM) there have been a number of these sort of attacks. Normally around the time US Democrats are campaigning for something.

Such as the June 2016 attack at the Pulse Nightclub. The February 2018 Parkland High School massacre. The October 2018 Tree of Life Synagogue shooting.

The most globally famous was of course the March 2019 Christchurch Mosque attacks. I think though that was more than dealt with by New Zealander director Taika Waititi in Jojo Rabbit. What with the black Hitler and his Agent Mueller.

Whenever one these attacks occurs the reaction of Progessive Liberals is always the same. They are not outraged, they're not disgusted. They're positively pleased. Almost overjoyed with excitement.

That's because they see these things not as a problem but as an opportunity. On opportunity to rally more people to their cause. The great, ever present danger that only they can protect people from.

Other people. People like me and those behind Joker don't see these attacks as a fantastic opportunity to further our cause. We seem them as tragedies. Problems to be solved and eradicated.

In order to solve a problem you must first understand it.

A prime example being Progessive Liberal demands that these angry white men be labelled as terrorists. When people who know about terrorism understand that affording them that level of cache and legitimacy is the last thing you want to be doing.

In fact I think it was in response to the Aurora shooting that a new rule was introduced. To deny the people who carry out these attacks the legitimacy of a name. Let alone a cause.

Throughout this cultural season the team behind Joker's handling of Progressive Liberals has been a joy to watch.

Mainly they've been antagonising them further. By comparing the movie to Martin Scorsese's Taxi Driver (1976) and King of Comedy (1982). A 77 year old white man Martin Scorsese has become this year's hate figure amongst the diversity mob.

Lulu Wang in particular attacked Scorsese over how easy it was for him to get Netflix to make; "The Irishman."

At around the same time she was announcing she was turning down Netflix to make her debut; "The Farewell" with A24. Apparently completely oblivious to the challenges Scorsese faced making his debut all the way back in 1967.

Despite the movie's wider lack of success the Best Actor Oscar is just the latest in a long list of awards Joaquin Pheonix has won for the role. He's used each acceptance speech to give voice to a different one of these pseudo-political causes these hate-filled individuals latch onto.

So at Britain's BAFTA awards on Super Bowl Sunday (2/2/20) it was racial inequality. At the Oscars it was veganism and animal rights.

Although it's the end of the season I really want him to win just one more award. So I can watch him give an impassioned speech in support of White Power.

The Aurora gunman is currently still languishing in prison.

I like to think of him getting all excited about all the pre-Oscar buzz surrounding Joker.

Only to find one word staring back at him.

1917: At it's heart the Oscars is just the end of year party for a professional association. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS).

I think part of the reason behind the Oscars long-standing success is that it never forgets that. Taking the opportunity to celebrate people who have truly furthered the profession over the past year. Even if that makes little sense to people outside of the profession.

1917 is one such movie.

At the 1998 Oscars everyone was excited by Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan." The were particularly impressed by its opening sequence. A 20 minute, seemingly continuous shot of visceral battle sequence. This was something that had never been done before.

At the 2016 Oscars everyone was excited by Alejandro González Iñárritu's "The Revenant." This featured a similar, seemingly continuous shot of a battle sequence. Something which had taken Spielberg's innovation in Saving Private Ryan and advanced it to a whole new level.

Sam Mendes' 1917 again advances the technique to what must be its natural conclusion. It is a two hour visceral war movie that appears to be one continious shot.

Some would say that Alejandro González Iñárritu already made that advance in 2014's "Birdman." However in Birdman the action occurs really within a single, indoor location - a theatre. Amid a small cast of characters. 1917 takes place amongst multiple, vast, indoor and outdoor locations. Amid a cast of thousands.

In order to do that the production team behind 1917 had to completely rethink the way that movies are made.

Normally a director will shoot the same scene a couple of different ways. Then decide which version to use during the editing process. As you can see from DVD extras they often shoot scenes that end up not being used at all.

In making 1917 it's director Sam Mendes had to plan every scene months in advance of actual shooting. This had to be done in the minutie detail. Down to not even each second but to each tenth of a second. To ensure it can all be seemlessly stitched together in the final edit.

Away from the technical accomplishment 1917 is a war movie. Specifically the First World War.

With the global fight against Islamist terror it sometimes feels as though we are currently in the grips of the Third World War. 

Particularly in Iraq and Syria this fight against Islamist terror has been done almost exclusively by Muslims. Western nations have simply been lending them some of their more expensive toys. Such as fighter aircraft.

As a result people in those western nations have really been shielded from the visceral horror of what has been taking place these past five years. In a way they were not during the First and Second World Wars when their cities were being bombed and their sons were being slaughtered in large numbers.

One of the events that did break through globally though was the May 22nd 2017 (22/5/17) bombing of a pop concert at the Manchester Evening News Arena (MENA) in Manchester, UK. Although, for the life of me, I can't seem to remember whose concert it was.

I do not wish to detract from the MENA bombing. It was horrific. However what is truly exhausting is that it wasn't even the most horrific thing I saw that day.

The visceral nature of 1917 goes some way towards conveying the horror of war to audiences who should count themselves grateful that they've never had to see it for real.

If there was one advantage to this recent war. I certainly adds resonance to the way I write about Remembrance Day.

A tradition started by Britain in direct response to the First World War. Intended to force people to reflect on the utter horror of war.

The plot of 1917 is that the German forces have suddenly retreated. Prompting British forces to plan an advance. However it is all a German trap. It is up to two soldiers to hand deliver the message to stop British forces advancing into the trap.

The movie literally follows those two soldiers across the battlefield as they race to deliver the vital message. Apparently in one continious shot.

However it is not one continious shot. That too is a trick. It's a number of short shots, stitched together to make them appear continious.

1917 is largely shot in and around Salisbury, UK. An area synonymous with the Chemical Weapons on the Skripals et al.

So it shows the scene of this supposed Chemical Weapons attack. In a movie, everything about which screams;

"It's A Trick!"

"It's A Trick!"

Reflecting it's technical advancement of the profession 1917 won 3 of the awards it was nominated for;

Best Cinematography for Roger Deakins. Best Visual Effects for Guillaume Rocheron, Greg Butler and Dominic Tuohy. Best Sound Mixing for Mark Taylor and Stuart Wilson.

Mainly though Britain's big hope this year was laregly snubbed. Often in favour of Parasite.

Judy: This is a biopic of Judy Garland.

Judy Garland is regarded as both a Hollywood legend and a gay icon. Particularly due to her role of "Dorothy" in the 1939 movie; "The Wizard of Oz."

To this day; "A Friend of Dorothy" is still a commonly used euphemism to describe a homosexual. Particularly a homosexual man.

However, rather like the Eurovision Song Contest, The Wizard of Oz is so much more than a gay movie. It is really a spectacular example of how Hollywood has a long history of telling the stories of marginalised groups. Often in a coded and subversive way.

So yes, you've got the central allegory for someone trying to come to terms with their homosexuality. Realising that you just don't fit into this world and the long quest for the thing that is missing in your life.

However there is also a sequence where Dorothy and her friends walk through a field of poppy-like flowers. Those flowers make them drowsy and they have to sleep for a while. A pretty subversive reference to Opium Poppies and Opioid use.

When the movie was made America was still a very racist place. With the lynching of black people being a common occurence. At that time a popular, dergogratory slang term for a black person was; "Spook."

The is a sequence in The Wizard of Oz when Dorothy and her companions find themselves in Spooky Forest. An unseen force suddenly lifts one of them, I think Tin Man, and holds him level with the tree branches. As if he was being lynched. A coded protest against racial violence being sneaked into the mainstream.

Amid the current hysteria over diversity it seems important to remind people of Hollywood's extremely liberal history.

In attacking the Oscars, particularly the #OscarsSoWhite crowd, frequently point to another 1939 movie "Gone With The Wind." Still considered one of the greatest movies ever made it is set in America's slave-owning south at the time of the US Civil War -1861 to 1865.

The American slave-owning south prior to the US Civil War was an incredibly racist place. It was a large part of what the war was about. So many of the attitudes on display in Gone With The Wind are quite racist.

It is most frequently attacked for the character "Mammy" played by Hattie McDaniel. Something which is viewed as an extremely negative stereotype of an uneducated black woman.

However everyone seems to forget that the former slave Hattie McDaniel won the Best Supporting Actress for the role that year.

Hollywood putting a talented, successful black woman centre stage. Celebrating her ability to transform into a character which is a clear contrast from the person she actually is. All the way back in 1940.

Which certainly doesn't sound as racist as people are claiming Hollywood is in 2020.

The movie Judy deals with a very specific period in Judy Garland's life. Her final years where she was living in London, UK performing her "Talk of the Town" live stageshow.

By this point Judy Garland is a tragic wreck of a human being. Almost totally destroyed by alcohol and drug abuse. Left bankrupt by a series of abusive relationships at the hands of abusive men.

The tragedy of Judy Garland's life was, without doubt, the result of the way she was treated by the Hollywood studio system. The way that women are treated by Hollywood is still a very relevant topic in the #MeToo post-Weinstein era.

Judy Garland first found fame as a child actor. I don't know how true it is but there is certainly a famous story that MGM deliberately malnourished her in adolescence. In order to prevent her going to through puberty and becoming too much of a woman to play child roles.

That is obviously very relevant to Progressive Liberals current obsession with Transgender issues and Gender Fluidity. This often results in adolescents being pumped full of hormone blocking drugs to prevent them going through puberty. Doing great damage to them in the process.

The 26 year old popstar Ariana Grande is another interesting talking point in this area. Any Doctor or Social Worker will look at her childlike body and instantly see evidence of malnourishment in adoselence. Either the result of an eating disorder or parental abuse/neglect.

Which is why Ariana Grande has always been a bit of a pressure point for me. Something the TV show; "The Good Place" noted in their 2016 season. Although I have to say I'm kind of done taking shots at Ariana Grande.

One of Judy Garland's lesser known roles was that of; "Irene Hoffmann-Wallner" in the 1961 movie; "Judgment at Nuremberg." Something worth remembering if you hobbies include quiz shows and shouting at the TV.

Judgement at Nuremberg deals with the International Military Tribunals held in Nuremberg. Dealing with the Crimes Against Humanity of the Nazi regime. Specifically it deals with the third set of trials known as; "The Judges' Trial."

We once again find ourselves having to set up an International Military Tribunal to deal with Crimes Against Humanity. This time carried out by ISIL and their associated groups.

People seem to need to be reminded that non-combatants who provide material or moral support to Crimes Against Humanity have, themselves, committed Crimes Against Humanity. The Nuremberg Judges' Trial should provide that reminder.

The Nuremberg International Military Tribunal led to the creation of the; "Nuremberg Code of Medical Ethics." Specifically to deal with the horrifying medical experiments the Nazis conducted on their captives. The second trial was known as; "The Doctors' Trial."

The Nuremberg Code has been absorbed into the Rome Statute of 1998. In Article 7(1)(k) - cruel and inhumane treatment.

Britain is of course prevented from participating in even the discussion surrounding and International Military Tribunal to deal with ISIL's crimes. Due to its failure prosecute British healthcare workers who have conducted unlawful medical experiments.

Which is unfortunate. Given the British government's attempts today to rush through new Anti-Terror Legislation is clearly a topic they are struggling with. And require assistance with from the more talented.

Renee Zellweger won Best Actress for her portrayl of Judy Garland in the movie.

It is of course extraordinarily difficult to successfully portray a well known public figure. It is much more difficult when that person is also an actress. Forcing you to not only act but act as they would act.

A sort of acting cubed as it were.

(Originally posted at 18:25 on 12/2/20 (UK date))

Continued in Part 3; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-oscars-2020-pt3_17.html

19:45 on 17/2/20 (UK date).

The Oscars 2020. Pt.3.

A direct continuation of Part 2; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-oscars-2020-pt2_17.html

Marriage Story: This is a movie about a marriage.

More specifically it is about the end of the marriage between Charlie and Nicole Barber. Their divorce and subsequent custody battle over their son Henry.

Every time something like the Oscars or the Eurovision Song Contest comes along I must sound like an absolute pervert. Constantly talking about sex, sex scenes, nudity and the way it is protrayed.

The truth is that sex and relationships are really the most important and complex things that humans do. Societies where it is not considered important tend not too last long.

So these topics really affect all people.

Their complexity means that they come up time and time again because it is really impossible to come up with a single correct answer. Not only do societies attitudes towards sex and relationships change over time individual's attitudes change over time.

The relationship story told in Marriage Story is likely to particularly resonate with people who work in the industry and attend the Oscars.

The Nicole charater is an actress. While the Charlie character is a director. The action is divided between New York City and Hollywood. Reflecting a traditional split betwen high class New York and low class Hollywood.

I'm also sure you won't have to work hard to find a Brexit metaphor in a movie about a bitter divorce.

Marriage Story is similar to The Farewell. In the sense that it is a character driven piece all about emotions, families and cultural differences. Although between the two coasts of America and individuals. Rather than between nations.

In discussing The Farewell I said that these type of movies are traditionally associated with the independent film industry. To be lauded by the Oscars they need to have something absolutely exceptional about them.

Marriage Story features several exceptional elements.

Firstly it is produced by Netflix. Independent film festivals such as Sundance traditionally celebrate small independent movies. While the Oscars is the preserve of movies made by the big Hollywood studios.

In the space of a few short years Online Streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon have suddenly become the big Hollywood studios. A huge shift within the industry.

Netflix and Amazon not only produce the big movies of the Hollywood studios. They also produce the small independent movies. Along with traditional TV shows.

Along with the recent rise in movie quality, so-called "Prestige TV" this has really blurred the lines between TV and movies.

It used to be that people would go to cinemas to watch movies and watch TV shows at home. Now they just stay at home and stream everything. A high quality movie like Marriage Story immediately followed by trash Reality TV like; "Love Island."

This is obviously bad news for people who operate cinemas. It has also created concerns that the artform is being cheapened amongst traditionalists who see movies as an immersive, visceral experience.

Marriage Story very much encapsulates that trend. It recieved a limited cinema release. Then a month later was available to be streamed at home. A transition which has traditionally taken at least a year.

The plot of Marriage Story is also reminiscent of the TV show; "The Affair."

That show centres around an affair between two married people. Over the course of its five seasons that affair ends up destroying, I think, four marriages. Along with all the custody battles that ensue.

The first three seasons of The Affair are set in and around New York City. However in the final two seasons the action shifts to Hollywood. The high class literary world giving way to a Hollywood adaptation of the novel. 

I obviously very much approve of The Affair. It is after all just a very long and high budget love letter to me. Seriously. The; "Whitney Solloway" character is just a woman I used to share a house with.

It is also crucially an Israeli love letter to me. Which rather undercuts the arguments of people who claim I must be abused to protect Israel from me.

Are we really surprised that Scarlett Johansson was heavily involved in both Jojo Rabbit and Marriage Story. It's as if we're both veterans of the same sh*t storm.

At it's core The Affair is an examination of the subjective nature of human memory. Each episode centres around a single event. Told first from the perspective of one character. Then told again from the perspective of another.

It is often surprising how much the accounts differ. Not just in how each character interprets events on an emotional level. Also in how they differ in their recollection of what are undeniable facts. Things like the weather conditions on a particular night, which can be independently verified.

This subjective nature of memory and the human experience is important to all forms of human interaction. However it is particularly contentious when it comes to issues of sexual harrassment, sexual assault and rape. Issues that Hollywood has been forced to deal with extensively of late.

This makes The Affair's five year journey interesting. It began in 2014, before the Harvey Weinstein and #MeToo issues exploded in 2017.

Dealing with sex and relationships it is almost essential that The Affair features sex and nude scenes. This saw it particularly targeted by campaigners concerned that the actresses involved were being exploited.

Campaigners who seemed completely oblivious to the fact that these were exactly the issues the show was trying to deal with. Several years before it became fashionable. In fact you could argue that The Affair laid the groundwork for those issues being discussed publicly.

The final season actually centres around the central, writer character being involved in what is named as a #MeToo scandal. Which seemed like a big; "Society is Eating Itself, F*ck You!" from the show to its critics.

The Affair is most definitely Presitge TV. Everything about it from the writing, direction and acting is of the highest, cinematic quality. It is one of those pieces where very little actually happens. However you are absolutely engrossed in watching the cast not do very much.

That makes is a highly relevent talking point about the blurring of the lines between movies and TV shows. You could almost say that Marriage Story is the TV show while The Affair is the movie.

That leads into a very particular industry discussion about one of The Affair's female leads. The British actress Ruth Wilson.

Amongst people in the industry Ruth Wilson is held in seriously high regard. It wasn't just me who saw her performance in 2008's "The Doctor Who Hears Voices" and thought; "Wow. She's really good." It was pretty much everyone in the British entertainment industry who saw it and thought; "Wow. She's really good."

So it is arguable that Ruth Wilson is exactly the sort of person AMPAS wants as a member. Particularly as they try to boost the role of women within their organisation. They certainly gave an Oscar to Julianne Moore for a similar feat of acting. In 2014's; "Still Alice."

The problem is that to be considered for membership of AMPAS an actor must have appeared in at least two movies; "of Oscar quality." Ruth Wilson is primarily a stage and TV actor so has not made those two movies. Therefore is ineligable for AMPAS membership.

As the line between TV and movies becomes ever more blurred maybe it is time for AMPAS to recognise Ruth Wilson's role in The Affair as a movie of Oscar quality.

The other thing exceptional about Marriage Story is that it features Laura Dern. Who, as the daughter of Bruce Dern and Diane Ladd, is considered Hollywood royalty.

As the #MeToo movement was exploding in 2017 Laura Dern was being considered as a potentional President of AMPAS. However lost out on the role to yet another old, white man. In 2019 Laura Dern did finally join AMPAS' board of governors.

So her Best Supporting Actress success here also seems to reflect her success in rising within the professional association.

Laura Dern also starred in the defintely Prestige TV show; "Big Little Lies." Alongside Oscar winner Nicole Kidman and multiple Oscar nominee Reese Witherspoon. Providing another talking point at the blurring of the line between TV and movies.

Particularly the binge-watchers amongst us might argue that Marriage Story is a two hour movie you can stream on Netflix.

While Big Little Lies is a fourteen hour movie you can stream on Netflix.

Ferrari Vs Ford: Outside of the US this was released under the less jingoistic title: Le Mans '66.

It tells the story of a feud between the American Ford motor company and the Italian Ferrari motor company.

Ford is famous as the company that brought motoring to the masses. Being the first to employ production line techniques Ford produced the first car everyone could own. Ferrari are famous for producing the cars everyone dreams of owning.

In 1963 Ford attempting to boost its prestige by buying Ferreri. Ferrari refused the offer, very publicly snubbing the son of Henry Ford in the process.

So Henry Ford II decides to take that prestige from Ferrari anyway. By building a car that could defeat Ferrari on what they considered to be their home turf. The legendary Le Mans 24 hour endurance race.

In retirement my mothers now watch a lot of movies at the cinema. They're part of almost buyers club which provides heavily discounted tickets to retired people during the day time. That obviously contributes to the discussion of how to combat falling cinema attendances in the face of the likes of Netflix.

I was visiting them in Salisbury, UK just before this movie came out. So we were chatting about whether it was worth going to see. In turn that became a discussion about how difficult it is to make movies about sport.

People who are not interested in the sport to begin with are just not going to be interested in the movie.

In 2010 Sandra Bullock won Best Actress for; "The Blind Side." About a talented, young American Football player. I can assure that no-one outside of America gave a damn about this movie.

People who are interested in the sport will probably just want to watch the sport instead.

Although I've recently lost my way with it I'm quite a big motorsport fan. I know all about the Ford GT40 from the movie and as I look up from this computer screen I see a print of Michael Schumacher's Ferrari F310B.

Yet even I thought this movie sounded like hard work.

It must be said that even amongst motorsport fans the Le Mans 24 hour endurance race is considered particularly dull. Not even the racecar drivers stay awake for the whole thing.

In order to make a movie about sport bearable, let alone enjoyable, the story-telling has to absolutely excel. The writing, direction and the performances of the actors all have to be totally top class to convey the human stories of the participants. Rather than just the monotony of the sport.

One thing that Ferrari Vs Ford had in favour is that it stars Matt Damon.

He also starred in probably one of the best made sporting movies of all time. "Invictus" from 2009. This managed to convey the immense journey the South African Rugby Union team went on to unite their nation just after the end of Apartheid.

Making Americans care about the 1995 Rugby Union World Cup is certainly one hell of an achievement.

Once you've started talking about the movie Invictus it's quite easy to start talking about The Invictus Games.

It's founder, Prince Henry of Sussex is now apparently going to break Hollywood. Despite his paramour, Meghan Markle only ever being a success in that land of really cheap productions, Toronto, Canada.

I think though the people behind Ferrari Vs Ford should feel proud. Their peers and collegues looked at the difficult task they'd taken on and were impressed by the results. The movie won both of the Oscars it was nominated for;

Best Sound Editing for Donald Sylvester and Best Film Editing for Andrew Buckland and Michael McCusker.

Best Film Editing of course being the Oscar Britain really wanted to win for 1917.

There is of course a worry. That the movie, in part, recieved its attention because people in Hollywood knew about that conversation with my mothers.

Which has got to be really worrying if you're counting on Britain being able to dazzle the World with it's cunning secret plan.

The Irishman: As directed by Martin Scorsese.

Believe it or not I've only actually seen three Martin Scorsese movies. "Goodfellas" from 1990. "The Departed" from 2006. "The Wolf Of Wall Street" from 2013.

So I've never seen "Taxi Driver" from 1976. Nor any part of the "Godfather" Trilogy. I've got a feeling they might cut rather close to the bone with me.

However I know that a lot of people have seen all of Martin Scorsese's movies and consider them amongst the greatest movies ever made. In accepting his Best Director Oscar Bong Joon-ho thanked Martin Scorsese as someone he'd studied in film school. Essentially the reason he got into movies.

Like a lot of filmmakers Martin Scorsese has a group of regular collaborators.

This is really one of the main functions of all the discussions that take place during the awards season. They're a way of getting the measure of potential new collaborators. So it's not really a question of coming up with the right or the wrong answer. So much as coming up with the same answer as the rest of the clique.

Amongst actors Martin Scorsese has three really highly-rated regular collaborators; Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci.

On some movies Martin Scorsese, Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci have all worked together. On other movies Martin Scorsese, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci have all worked together. What has never happened is that Martin Scorsese, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci have all worked together on the same movie.

So there was a lot of excitement for The Irishman amongst Scorsese fans. As the movie that would see the four all work together for the first time. With Joe Pesci being brought out of retirement to do so.

It serves almost as a career retrospective for Martin Scorsese. Bringing together his favourite collaborators for one of his classic gangster/mafia movies.

The Irishman, like Marriage Story, is also produced by Netflix. Meaning that it had a limited cinema release before being available to stream at home just a month later.

Further highlighting the blurring of the line between TV and movies The Irishman is a seriously long film. Coming in at over three hours. Creating speculation that people streaming it at home would treat it as a TV mini-series rather than a movie. Streaming it in three, one hour episodes.

Ever the traditionalist Martin Scorsese urged people to see the movie in the immersive experience of a cinema. I think nothing fills him with more dread than the prospect of people watching his epic on their phones.

One reason why the movie had to be made by Netflix is its sheer cost. It makes extensive use of this new digital de-aging technology.

I think this is a form of motion capture animation. So the faces of the actors you see in the movie are not really their faces. They are computer renderings of their faces. Made to look much youger.

This is one of the hot new technologies in Hollywood at the moment. It has been used in a couple of films this year; Samuel L. Jackson's small role in; "Captain Marvel." Along with Ang Lee's "Gemini Man." I think it's also similar to the computer rendering to give human actors feline fur in; "Cats."

Although this is one of those highly technical aspects of filmmaking that I can't even really pretend to understand.

The Irishman tells the life-story of Frank Sheeran. An Irish-American World War Two veteran who went on to work for the Italian-American mafia.

That alone makes him an interesting man. Despite both being heavily Catholic Irish-American and Italian-American immigrants have traditionally really not got on with each other.

This is a topic that Martin Scorsese keeps returning to in his work. Such as casting Leonardo DiCaprio as a member of the Boston, Irish-American mafia in The Departed.

Showing his power Scorsese's interest has fuelled a wider interest within the industry. Such as 2015's "Brooklyn." A love affair between an Irish-American woman and an Italian-American man.

As with Marriage Story I don't think you would have to work too hard to find a Brexit metaphor in all this.

Despite the situation amongst American immigrants Ireland, as a majority Catholic nation, has traditionally found itself close to other majority Catholic EU nations. Particularly Spain. Hence Britain's recent, urgent efforts to open up a Madeline McCann style dialogue with Spain.

The specific work that Sheeran does for the Bufalino crime family is that of a contract killer, a hitman. He paint's houses, with blood. Sadly since 2014 just killing people has become a worringly large part of my job description.

The movie really centres around Sheeran's claim that it was he who murdered Trade Union boss Jimmy Hoffa. On the orders of the Italian-American mafia. One of the greatest unsolved conspiracy theories in modern US history.

That rather topically links politics with organised crime and organised murder. There does seem to be a tendency for houses to get painted when the Democrats are campaigning for things at the moment. Particularly houses of worship.

In light of the Trump Impeachment scandal The Irishman has become an incredibly topical and relevant movie.

In 1964 Jimmy Hoffa was convicted of Jury Tampering by US Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy's famous; "Get Hoffa Squad." His sentenced was commuted by President Nixon in 1971. According to the movie it was his attempts to rise back to the top of the Trade Union movement that saw him cross the mafia one last time.

Robert F. Kennedy was appointed Attorney General by his brother, that Democrat hero President John F. Kennedy.

In a further act of spectacular nepotism JFK then tasked Bobby Kennedy with carrying out back-channel diplomacy to resolve the Cuban Missile Crisis. Something far beyond his role as Attorney General. Sheeran claims that he and the mafia helped organise the Bay of Pigs Invasion.

President Trump tasking Rudy Gulliani to investigate Ukrainian inteference in the 2016 Presidental Election seems positively tame, vanilla and ordinary in comparison.

The Irishman, like Joker, was one of the huge favourites going into the Oscars. Having recieved 9 nominations.

With the help of Joker this turned Martin Scorsese into the big hate figure for the diversity protesters. Yet another old, white man being rewarded by the Oscars while much more talented female and non-white filmmakers were being ignored.

It is very easy to make the argument that it was this backlash which meant The Irishman did not win any Oscars at all.

As the protesters fail to realise that Martin Scorsese has been battling to get The Irishman made for pretty much as long a Lulu Wang's been alive.

Once Upon A Time In Hollywood: This is directed by Quentin Tarantino.

I should start by pointing out that for all his previous movies Quentin Tarantino worked with this producer called Harvey Weinstein. This is the first movie Quentin Tarantino has done without Harvey Weinstein.

I think it's fair to say that the Weinstein scandal embarrassed us all. Every year much of my Oscar coverage celebrated his legendary lobbying campaigns. To get the movies he produced nominated for and winning Oscars.

Although I should point out that I never worked as closely with Harvey Weinstein as Quentin Tarantino did.

The 2018 Oscars actually clashed with the 2018 Winter Olympics held in the Republic of Korea (RoK/South). I don't think anyone in Hollywood minded at all. That was the one year they all just wanted to be left alone.

As the title suggests Once Upon A Time In Hollywood is a very Hollywood movie. All about Hollywood and the movie industry.

Set in the year 1969 it centres around the actor "Rick Dalton" (Leonardo DiCaprio) who is suddenly really unpopular within the industry. So he has to decide whether to take work in Italy in the so-called; "Spaghetti Westerns."

It is a story about his relationship with his agent Marvin Schwartz (Al Pacino). It is about his relationship with his stunt-double and sometimes driver Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt). It is also about his relationship with his new neighbours.

The real-life actress "Sharon Tate" - here played by Margot Robbie - and the real-life director "Roman Polanski" - here played by Rafal Zawierucha. Just two of the real-life Hollywood figures who are portrayed in the movie.

Roman Polanski is of course a figure just as controversial as Harvey Weinstein. For really the exact same reasons.

In 1977 Roman Polanski was convicted of the rape of a 13 year old girl. Fearing a 50 year prison sentence he fled to France where, as a French citizen he has avoided extradition ever since. There have been a further four accusations of rape against Roman Polanski involving girls under 18 years of age. The youngest being just 10.

Yet people still insist on working with him

Just today the entire board of directors of the Cesar's - France's equivalent to the Oscars - have been forced to resign. Over their decision to nominate Roman Polanski's latest movie; "An Officer And A Spy" for 12 awards.

Being all about Hollywood the movie has been extremely popular amongst all the parties and gatherings of award season. I suspect all the conversations about the, say, "Marvin Schwartz" character haven't all been about the Marvin Schwartz character in the movie.

For his performance Brad Pitt finally won his first acting Oscar Best Supporting Actor. After 33 years of trying.

I suspect there are a fair few people in Hollywood who can lay claim to having been Leonardo DiCaprio's stunt-double.

In the movie the Cliff Booth character gets into an argument with a group of Hippies. The real-life 'family' of Charles Manson.

Later the Manson family are preparing to murder Sharon Tate at her home. When they are confronted by Dalton and Booth. Recognising Booth they attempt to kill them instead.

In 1969 the real-life Sharon Tate was really murdered in the home she shared with her husband Roman Polanski. By the real-life Charles Manson and his followers. One of the most notorious crimes in American history.

I think it's well acknowledged now that Charles Manson was seriously mentally ill. Particularly Schizophrenia and Paranoid Delusional Disorder. Brought about by heavy drug use. Mainly LSD.

However I think he can serve as an example of any angry white man. Of the type so focused on in Joker.

In conducting the murders - Sharon Tate was not his only victim - Manson hoped that they would be blamed on Black Supremacists. The likes of Malcolm X and the Black Panthers. This would trigger a race war.

Not because Manson was particularly a White Supremacist. He just wanted to watch the World burn.

So suddenly we're back to Democrat campaign strategy, #OscarsSoWhite and houses getting painted.

(Originally posted at 18:10 on 14/2/20 (UK date)).

19:45 on 17/2/20 (UK date). 

The Oscars 2020. Pt.3.

A direct continuation of Part 2; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-oscars-2020-pt2.html

Marriage Story: This is a movie about a marriage.

More specifically it is about the end of the marriage between Charlie and Nicole Barber. Their divorce and subsequent custody battle over their son Henry.

Every time something like the Oscars or the Eurovision Song Contest comes along I must sound like an absolute pervert. Constantly talking about sex, sex scenes, nudity and the way it is protrayed.

The truth is that sex and relationships are really the most important and complex things that humans do. Societies where it is not considered important tend not to last long.

So these topics really affect all people.

Their complexity means that they come up time and time again because it is really impossible to come up with a single correct answer. Not only do societies attitudes towards sex and relationships change over time individual's attitudes change over time.

The relationship story told in Marriage Story is likely to particularly resonate with people who work in the industry and attend the Oscars.

The Nicole charater is an actress. While the Charlie character is a director. The action is divided between New York City and Hollywood. Reflecting a traditional split betwen high class New York and low class Hollywood.

I'm also sure you won't have to work hard to find a Brexit metaphor in a movie about a bitter divorce.

Marriage Story is similar to The Farewell. In the sense that it is a character driven piece all about emotions, families and cultural differences. Although between the two coasts of America and individuals. Rather than between nations.

In discussing The Farewell I said that these type of movies are traditionally associated with the independent film industry. To be lauded by the Oscars they need to have something absolutely exceptional about them.

Marriage Story features several exceptional elements.

Firstly it is produced by Netflix. Independent film festivals such as Sundance traditionally celebrate small independent movies. While the Oscars is the preserve of movies made by the big Hollywood studios.

In the space of a few short years Online Streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon have suddenly become the big Hollywood studios. A huge shift within the industry.

Netflix and Amazon not only produce the big movies of the Hollywood studios. They also produce the small independent movies. Along with traditional TV shows.

Along with the recent rise in movie quality, so-called "Prestige TV" this has really blurred the lines between TV and movies.

It used to be that people would go to cinemas to watch movies and watch TV shows at home. Now they just stay at home and stream everything. A high quality movie like Marriage Story immediately followed by trash Reality TV like; "Love Island."

This is obviously bad news for people who operate cinemas. It has also created concerns that the artform is being cheapened amongst traditionalists who see movies as an immersive, visceral experience.

Marriage Story very much encapsulates that trend. It recieved a limited cinema release. Then a month later was available to be streamed at home. A transition which has traditionally taken at least a year.

The plot of Marriage Story is also reminiscent of the TV show; "The Affair."

That show centres around an affair between two married people. Over the course of its five seasons that affair ends up destroying, I think, four marriages. Along with all the custody battles that ensue.

The first three seasons of The Affair are set in and around New York City. However in the final two seasons the action shifts to Hollywood. The high class literary world giving way to a Hollywood adaptation of the novel. 

I obviously very much approve of The Affair. It is after all just a very long and high budget love letter to me. Seriously. The; "Whitney Solloway" character is just a woman I used to share a house with.

It is also crucially an Israeli love letter to me. Which rather undercuts the arguments of people who claim I must be abused to protect Israel from me.

Are we really surprised that Scarlett Johansson was heavily involved in both Jojo Rabbit and Marriage Story. It's as if we're both veterans of the same sh*t storm.

At it's core The Affair is an examination of the subjective nature of human memory. Each episode centres around a single event. Told first from the perspective of one character. Then told again from the perspective of another.

It is often surprising how much the accounts differ. Not just in how each character interprets events on an emotional level. Also in how they differ in their recollection of what are undeniable facts. Things like the weather conditions on a particular night, which can be independently verified.

This subjective nature of memory and the human experience is important to all forms of human interaction. However it is particularly contentious when it comes to issues of sexual harrassment, sexual assault and rape. Issues that Hollywood has been forced to deal with extensively of late.

This makes The Affair's five year journey interesting. It began in 2014, before the Harvey Weinstein and #MeToo issues exploded in 2017.

Dealing with sex and relationships it is almost essential that The Affair features sex and nude scenes. This saw it particularly targeted by campaigners concerned that the actresses involved were being exploited.

Campaigners who seemed completely oblivious to the fact that these were exactly the issues the show was trying to deal with. Several years before it became fashionable. In fact you could argue that The Affair laid the groundwork for those issues being discussed publicly.

The final season actually centres around the central, writer character being involved in what is named as a #MeToo scandal. Which seemed like a big; "Society is Eating Itself, F*ck You!" from the show to its critics.

The Affair is most definitely Presitge TV. Everything about it from the writing, direction and acting is of the highest, cinematic quality. It is one of those pieces where very little actually happens. However you are absolutely engrossed in watching the cast not do very much.

That makes is a highly relevent talking point about the blurring of the lines between movies and TV shows. You could almost say that Marriage Story is the TV show while The Affair is the movie.

That leads into a very particular industry discussion about one of The Affair's female leads. The British actress Ruth Wilson.

Amongst people in the industry Ruth Wilson is held in seriously high regard. It wasn't just me who saw her performance in 2008's "The Doctor Who Hears Voices" and thought; "Wow. She's really good." It was pretty much everyone in the British entertainment industry who saw it and thought; "Wow. She's really good."

So it is arguable that Ruth Wilson is exactly the sort of person AMPAS wants as a member. Particularly as they try to boost the role of women within their organisation. They certainly gave an Oscar to Julianne Moore for a similar feat of acting. In 2014's; "Still Alice."

The problem is that to be considered for membership of AMPAS an actor must have appeared in at least two movies; "of Oscar quality." Ruth Wilson is primarily a stage and TV actor so has not made those two movies. Therefore is ineligable for AMPAS membership.

As the line between TV and movies becomes ever more blurred maybe it is time for AMPAS to recognise Ruth Wilson's role in The Affair as a movie of Oscar quality.

The other thing exceptional about Marriage Story is that it features Laura Dern. Who, as the daughter of Bruce Dern and Diane Ladd, is considered Hollywood royalty.

As the #MeToo movement was exploding in 2017 Laura Dern was being considered as a potentional President of AMPAS. However lost out on the role to yet another old, white man. In 2019 Laura Dern did finally join AMPAS' board of governors.

So her Best Supporting Actress success here also seems to reflect her success in rising within the professional association.

Laura Dern also starred in the defintely Prestige TV show; "Big Little Lies." Alongside Oscar winner Nicole Kidman and multiple Oscar nominee Reese Witherspoon. Providing another talking point at the blurring of the line between TV and movies.

Particularly the binge-watchers amongst us might argue that Marriage Story is a two hour movie you can stream on Netflix.

While Big Little Lies is a fourteen hour movie you can stream on Netflix.

At around 17:30 on 13/2/20 (UK date) there is more to come.

Edited at around 20:25 on 13/2/20 (UK date) to copy & paste;

Ferrari Vs Ford: Outside of the US this was released under the less jingoistic title: Le Mans '66.

It tells the story of a feud between the American Ford motor company and the Italian Ferrari motor company.

Ford is famous as the company that brought motoring to the masses. Being the first to employ production line techniques Ford produced the first car everyone could own. Ferrari are famous for producing the cars everyone dreams of owning.

In 1963 Ford attempting to boost its prestige by buying Ferreri. Ferrari refused the offer, very publicly snubbing the son of Henry Ford in the process.

So Henry Ford II decides to take that prestige from Ferrari anyway. By building a car that could defeat Ferrari on what they considered to be their home turf. The legendary Le Mans 24 hour endurance race.

In retirement my mothers now watch a lot of movies at the cinema. They're part of almost buyers club which provides heavily discounted tickets to retired people during the day time. That obviously contributes to the discussion of how to combat falling cinema attendances in the face of the likes of Netflix.

I was visiting them in Salisbury, UK just before this movie came out. So we were chatting about whether it was worth going to see. In turn that became a discussion about how difficult it is to make movies about sport.

People who are not interested in the sport to begin with are just not going to be interested in the movie.

In 2010 Sandra Bullock won Best Actress for; "The Blind Side." About a talented, young American Football player. I can assure that no-one outside of America gave a damn about this movie.

People who are interested in the sport will probably just want to watch the sport instead.

Although I've recently lost my way with it I'm quite a big motorsport fan. I know all about the Ford GT40 from the movie and as I look up from this computer screen I see a print of Michael Schumacher's Ferrari F310B.

Yet even I thought this movie sounded like hard work.

It must be said that even amongst motorsport fans the Le Mans 24 hour endurance race is considered particularly dull. Not even the racecar drivers stay awake for the whole thing.

In order to make a movie about sport bearable, let alone enjoyable, the story-telling has to absolutely excel. The writing, direction and the performances of the actors all have to be totally top class to convey the human stories of the participants. Rather than just the monotony of the sport.

One thing that Ferrari Vs Ford had in favour is that it stars Matt Damon. He also starred in probably one of the best made sporting movies of all time. "Invictus" from 2009. This managed to convey the immense journey the South African Rugby Union team went on to unite their nation just after the end of Apartheid.

Making Americans care about the 1995 Rugby Union World Cup is certainly one hell of an achievement.

Once you've started talking about the movie Invictus it's quite easy to start talking about The Invictus Games.

It's founder, Prince Henry of Sussex is now apparently going to break Hollywood. Despite his paramour, Meghan Markle only ever being a success in that land of really cheap productions, Toronto, Canada.

I think though the people behind Ferrari Vs Ford should feel proud. Their peers and collegues looked at the difficult task they'd taken on and were impressed by the results. The movie won both of the Oscars it was nominated for;

Best Sound Editing for Donald Sylvester and Best Film Editing for Andrew Buckland and Michael McCusker.

Best Film Editing of course being the Oscar Britain really wanted to win for 1917.

There is of course a worry. That the movie, in part, recieved its attention because people in Hollywood knew about that conversation with my mothers.

Which has got to be really worrying if you're counting on Britain being able to dazzle the World with it's cunning secret plan.

At around 20:35 on 13/2/20 (UK date) I'll have to leave the last little bit until tomorrow.

Edited again at around 12:20 on 14/2/20 (UK date) to copy & paste;

The Irishman: As directed by Martin Scorsese.

Believe it or not I've only actually seen three Martin Scorsese movies. "Goodfellas" from 1990. "The Departed" from 2006. "The Wolf Of Wall Street" from 2013.

So I've never seen "Taxi Driver" from 1976. Nor any part of the "Godfather" Trilogy. I've got a feeling they might cut rather close to the bone with me.

However I know that a lot of people have seen all of Martin Scorsese's movies and consider them amongst the greatest movies ever made. In accepting his Best Director Oscar Bong Joon-ho thanked Martin Scorsese as someone he'd studied in film school. Essentially the reason he got into movies.

Like a lot of filmmakers Martin Scorsese has a group of regular collaborators.

This is really one of the main functions of all the discussions that take place during the awards season. They're a way of getting the measure of potential new collaborators. So it's not really a question of coming up with the right or the wrong answer. So much as coming up with the same answer as the rest of the clique.

Amongst actors Martin Scorsese has three really highly-rated regular collaborators; Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci.

On some movies Martin Scorsese, Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci have all worked together. On other movies Martin Scorsese, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci have all worked together. What has never happened is that Martin Scorsese, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci have all worked together on the same movie.

So there was a lot of excitement for The Irishman amongst Scorsese fans. As the movie that would see the four all work together for the first time. With Joe Pesci being brought out of retirement to do so.

It serves almost as a career retrospective for Martin Scorsese. Bringing together his favourite collaborators for one of his classic gangster/mafia movies.

The Irishman, like Marriage Story, is also produced by Netflix. Meaning that it had a limited cinema release before being available to stream at home just a month later.

Further highlighting the blurring of the line between TV and movies The Irishman is a seriously long film. Coming in at over three hours. Creating speculation that people streaming it at home would treat it as a TV mini-series rather than a movie. Streaming it in three, one hour episodes.

Ever the traditionalist Martin Scorsese urged people to see the movie in the immersive experience of a cinema. I think nothing fills him with more dread than the prospect of people watching his epic on their phones.

One reason why the movie had to be made by Netflix is its sheer cost. It makes extensive use of this new digital de-aging technology.

I think this is a form of motion capture animation. So the faces of the actors you see in the movie are not really their faces. They are computer renderings of their faces. Made to look much youger.

This is one of the hot new technologies in Hollywood at the moment. It has been used in a couple of films this year; Samuel L. Jackson's small role in; "Captain Marvel." Along with Ang Lee's "Gemini Man." I think it's also similar to the computer rendering to give human actors feline fur in; "Cats."

Although this is one of those highly technical aspects of filmmaking that I can't even really pretend to understand.

The Irishman tells the life-story of Frank Sheeran. An Irish-American World War Two veteran who went on to work for the Italian-American mafia.

That alone makes him an interesting man. Despite both being heavily Catholic Irish-American and Italian-American immigrants have traditionally really not got on with each other.

This is a topic that Martin Scorsese keeps returning to in his work. Such as casting Leonardo DiCaprio as a member of the Boston, Irish-American mafia in The Departed.

Showing his power Scorsese's interest has fuelled a wider interest within the industry. Such as 2015's "Brooklyn." A love affair between an Irish-American woman and an Italian-American man.

As with Marriage Story I don't think you would have to work too hard to find a Brexit metaphor in all this.

Despite the situation amongst American immigrants Ireland, as a majority Catholic nation, has traditionally found itself close to other majority Catholic EU nations. Particularly Spain. Hence Britain's recent, urgent efforts to open up a Madeline McCann style dialogue with Spain.

The specific work that Sheeran does for the Bufalino crime family is that of a contract killer, a hitman. He paint's houses, with blood. Sadly since 2014 just killing people has become a worringly large part of my job description.

The movie really centres around Sheeran's claim that it was he who murdered Trade Union boss Jimmy Hoffa. On the orders of the Italian-American mafia. One of the greatest unsolved conspiracy theories in modern US history.

That rather topically links politics with organised crime and organised murder. There does seem to be a tendency for houses to get painted when the Democrats are campaigning for things at the moment. Particularly houses of worship.

In light of the Trump Impeachment scandal The Irishman has become an incredibly topical and relevant movie.

In 1964 Jimmy Hoffa was convicted of Jury Tampering by US Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy's famous; "Get Hoffa Squad." His sentenced was commuted by President Nixon in 1971. According to the movie it was his attempts to rise back to the top of the Trade Union movement that saw him cross the mafia one last time.

Robert F. Kennedy was appointed Attorney General by his brother, that Democrat hero President John F. Kennedy.

In a further act of spectacular nepotism JFK then tasked Bobby Kennedy with carrying out back-channel diplomacy to resolve the Cuban Missile Crisis. Something far beyond his role as Attorney General. Sheeran claims that he and the mafia helped organise the Bay of Pigs Invasion.

President Trump tasking Rudy Gulliani to investigate Ukrainian inteference in the 2016 Presidental Election seems positively tame, vanilla and ordinary in comparison.

The Irishman, like Joker, was one of the huge favourites going into the Oscars. Having recieved 9 nominations.

With the help of Joker this turned Martin Scorsese into the big hate figure for the diversity protesters. Yet another old, white man being rewarded by the Oscars while much more talented female and non-white filmmakers were being ignored.

It is very easy to make the argument that it was this backlash which meant The Irishman did not win any Oscars at all.

As the protesters fail to realise that Martin Scorsese has been battling to get The Irishman made for pretty much as long a Lulu Wang's been alive.

At around 12:25 on 14/2/20 (UK date) there is still one little bit more to come.

Edited again at around 18:00 on 14/2/20 (UK date) to copy & paste;

Once Upon A Time In Hollywood: This is directed by Quentin Tarantino.

I should start by pointing out that for all his previous movies Quentin Tarantino worked with this producer called Harvey Weinstein. This is the first movie Quentin Tarantino has done without Harvey Weinstein.

I think it's fair to say that the Weinstein scandal embarrassed us all. Every year much of my Oscar coverage celebrated his legendary lobbying campaigns. To get the movies he produced nominated for and winning Oscars.

Although I should point out that I never worked as closely with Harvey Weinstein as Quentin Tarantino did.

The 2018 Oscars actually clashed with the 2018 Winter Olympics held in the Republic of Korea (RoK/South). I don't think anyone in Hollywood minded at all. That was the one year they all just wanted to be left alone.

As the title suggests Once Upon A Time In Hollywood is a very Hollywood movie. All about Hollywood and the movie industry.

Set in the year 1969 it centres around the actor "Rick Dalton" (Leonardo DiCaprio) who is suddenly really unpopular within the industry. So he has to decide whether to take work in Italy in the so-called; "Spaghetti Westerns."

It is a story about his relationship with his agent Marvin Schwartz (Al Pacino). It is about his relationship with his stunt-double and sometimes driver Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt). It is also about his relationship with his new neighbours.

The real-life actress "Sharon Tate" - here played by Margot Robbie - and the real-life director "Roman Polanski" - here played by Rafal Zawierucha. Just two of the real-life Hollywood figures who are portrayed in the movie.

Roman Polanski is of course a figure just as controversial as Harvey Weinstein. For really the exact same reasons.

In 1977 Roman Polanski was convicted of the rape of a 13 year old girl. Fearing a 50 year prison sentence he fled to France where, as a French citizen he has avoided extradition ever since. There have been a further four accusations of rape against Roman Polanski involving girls under 18 years of age. The youngest being just 10.

Yet people still insist on working with him

Just today the entire board of directors of the Cesar's - France's equivalent to the Oscars - have been forced to resign. Over their decision to nominate Roman Polanski's latest movie; "An Officer And A Spy" for 12 awards.

Being all about Hollywood the movie has been extremely popular amongst all the parties and gatherings of award season. I suspect all the conversations about the, say, "Marvin Schwartz" character haven't all been about the Marvin Schwartz character in the movie.

For his performance Brad Pitt finally won his first acting Oscar Best Supporting Actor. After 33 years of trying.

I suspect there are a fair few people in Hollywood who can lay claim to having been Leonardo DiCaprio's stunt-double.

In the movie the Cliff Booth character gets into an argument with a group of Hippies. The real-life 'family' of Charles Manson.

Later the Manson family are preparing to murder Sharon Tate at her home. When they are confronted by Dalton and Booth. Recognising Booth they attempt to kill them instead.

In 1969 the real-life Sharon Tate was really murdered in the home she shared with her husband Roman Polanski. By the real-life Charles Manson and his followers. One of the most notorious crimes in American history.

I think it's well acknowledged now that Charles Manson was seriously mentally ill. Particularly Schizophrenia and Paranoid Delusional Disorder. Brought about by heavy drug use. Mainly LSD.

However I think he can serve as an example of any angry white man. Of the type so focused on in Joker.

In conducting the murders - Sharon Tate was not his only victim - Manson hoped that they would be blamed on Black Supremacists. The likes of Malcolm X and the Black Panthers. This would trigger a race war.

Not because Manson was particularly a White Supremacist. He just wanted to watch the World burn.

So suddenly we're back to Democrat campaign strategy, #OscarsSoWhite and houses getting painted.

18:10 on 14/2/20 (UK date).

The Oscars 2020. Pt.2

A direct continuation of Part 1; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-oscars-2020.html

Joker: This was the clear frontrunner at this year's Oscars recieving 11 nominations. However it fell rather flat. Winning only two;

Best Actor for Joaquin Phoenix and Best Original Score for Hildur Guonadottir.

Amid all the talk of diversity it is worth pointing that Hildur Guanadottir is both Icelandic and female. In fact is the first solo female composer to win Best Original Score.

Joker struck me as incredibly brave movie to make. Which might seem an odd thing to say about a movie which is part of the vast D.C Comics universe and backed by the massive Warner Brother studios.

However some of you may remember another, earlier movie in the Batman franchise. 2012's "The Dark Knight Rises."

I certainly remember the July 20th 2012 (20/7/12) screening of that movie in Aurora, Colorado.

During the movie a gunman walked into the theatre and shot dead 12 people and wounded 50 others. In planning his attack the gunman had dyed his hair orange in a reference to the Joker character.

I think a lot of people involved in the D.C Comics universe would have liked to pretend that incident had never happened. Quietly resting the brand until everyone had forgotten about it.

In this movie though they decided to take responsibility and challenge it head on.

It sees a man whose dreams have failed. Further failed by the system he descends into madness and violence. Emerging as the crazed gunman, the Joker of the Batman franchise.

Particularly in pre-production and production this movie is actually a detailed investigation. Into the process by which forgotten white men get driven to such rage they carry out these appalling acts of violence.

Some, such in Colorado, are honest and do it just because they're consumed by hate. Others try and legitimise their actions by dressing it up in some psuedo-political cause. Such as White Nationalism or this recent Involuntary Celibate (INCEL) movement.

That process is also relevant to the fight against Islamist terrorism.

Let assure you that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) are really not Muslims. They are just raged filled, often, western men. I would describe them as; "Nihilists" but honestly Nihilism is a far more developed philosphy than anything they follow.

Progressive Liberals have really railed against Joker. Decrying it as a celebration of this white man's rage and calling for it to be banned. In doing so they've revealed their true attitude towards this violence.

Particularly since 2014 and the rise of Black Lives Matter (BLM) there have been a number of these sort of attacks. Normally around the time US Democrats are campaigning for something.

Such as the June 2016 attack at the Pulse Nightclub. The February 2018 Parkland High School massacre. The October 2018 Tree of Life Synagogue shooting.

The most globally famous was of course the March 2019 Christchurch Mosque attacks. I think though that was more than dealt with by New Zealander director Taika Waititi in Jojo Rabbit. What with the black Hitler and his Agent Mueller.

Whenever one these attacks occurs the reaction of Progessive Liberals is always the same. They are not outraged, they're not disgusted. They're positively pleased. Almost overjoyed with excitement.

That's because they see these things not as a problem but as an opportunity. On opportunity to rally more people to their cause. The great, ever present danger that only they can protect people from.

Other people. People like me and those behind Joker don't see these attacks as a fantastic opportunity to further our cause. We seem them as tragedies. Problems to be solved and eradicated.

In order to solve a problem you must first understand it.

A prime example being Progessive Liberal demands that these angry white men be labelled as terrorists. When people who know about terrorism understand that affording them that level of cache and legitimacy is the last thing you want to be doing.

In fact I think it was in response to the Aurora shooting that a new rule was introduced. To deny the people who carry out these attacks the legitimacy of a name. Let alone a cause.

Throughout this cultural season the team behind Joker's handling of Progressive Liberals has been a joy to watch.

Mainly they've been antagonising them further. By comparing the movie to Martin Scorsese's Taxi Driver (1976) and King of Comedy (1982). A 77 year old white man Martin Scorsese has become this year's hate figure amongst the diversity mob.

Lulu Wang in particular attacked Scorsese over how easy it was for him to get Netflix to make; "The Irishman."

At around the same time she was announcing she was turning down Netflix to make her debut; "The Farewell" with A24. Apparently completely oblivious to the challenges Scorsese faced making his debut all the way back in 1967.

Despite the movie's wider lack of success the Best Actor Oscar is just the latest in a long list of awards Joaquin Pheonix has won for the role. He's used each acceptance speech to give voice to a different one of these pseudo-political causes these hate-filled individuals latch onto.

So at Britain's BAFTA awards on Super Bowl Sunday (2/2/20) it was racial inequality. At the Oscars it was veganism and animal rights.

Although it's the end of the season I really want him to win just one more award. So I can watch him give an impassioned speech in support of White Power.

The Aurora gunman is currently still languishing in prison.

I like to think of him getting all excited about all the pre-Oscar buzz surrounding Joker.

Only to find one word staring back at him.

At around 18:40 on 11/2/20 (UK date) there are more movies to come. Tomorrow though.

Edited at around 16:30 on 12/2/20 (UK date) to add above and copy & paste;

1917: At it's heart the Oscars is just the end of year party for a professional association. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS).

I think part of the reason behind the Oscars long-standing success is that it never forgets that. Taking the opportunity to celebrate people who have truly furthered the profession over the past year. Even if that makes little sense to people outside of the profession.

1917 is one such movie.

At the 1998 Oscars everyone was excited by Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan." The were particularly impressed by its opening sequence. A 20 minute, seemingly continuous shot of visceral battle sequence. This was something that had never been done before.

At the 2016 Oscars everyone was excited by Alejandro González Iñárritu's "The Revenant." This featured a similar, seemingly continuous shot of a battle sequence. Something which had taken Spielberg's innovation in Saving Private Ryan and advanced it to a whole new level.

Sam Mendes' 1917 again advances the technique to what must be its natural conclusion. It is a two hour visceral war movie that appears to be one continious shot.

Some would say that Alejandro González Iñárritu already made that advance in 2014's "Birdman." However in Birdman the action occurs really within a single, indoor location - a theatre. Amid a small cast of characters. 1917 takes place amongst multiple, vast, indoor and outdoor locations. Amid a cast of thousands.

In order to do that the production team behind 1917 had to completely rethink the way that movies are made.

Normally a director will shoot the same scene a couple of different ways. Then decide which version to use during the editing process. As you can see from DVD extras they often shoot scenes that end up not being used at all.

In making 1917 it's director Sam Mendes had to plan every scene months in advance of actual shooting. This had to be done in the minutie detail. Down to not even each second but to each tenth of a second. To ensure it can all be seemlessly stitched together in the final edit.

Away from the technical accomplishment 1917 is a war movie. Specifically the First World War.

With the global fight against Islamist terror it sometimes feels as though were are currently in the grips of the Third World War. 

Particularly in Iraq and Syria this fight against Islamist terror has been done almost exclusively by Muslims. Western nations have simply been lending them some of their more expensive toys. Such as fighter aircraft.

As a result people in those western nations have really been shielded from the visceral horror of what has been taking place these past five years. In a way they were not during the First and Second World Wars when their cities were being bombed and their sons were being slaughtered in large numbers.

One of the events that did break through globally though was the May 22nd 2017 (22/5/17) bombing of a pop concert at the Manchester Evening News Arena (MENA) in Manchester, UK. Although, for the life of me, I can't seem to remember whose concert it was.

I do not wish to detract from the MENA bombing. It was horrific. However what is truly exhausting is that it wasn't even the most horrific thing I saw that day.

The visceral nature of 1917 goes some way towards conveying the horror of war to audiences who should count themselves grateful that they've never had to see it for real.

If there was one advantage to this recent war. I certainly adds resonance to the way I write about Remembrance Day.

A tradition started by Britain in direct response to the First World War. Intended to force people to reflect on the utter horror of war.

The plot of 1917 is that the German forces have suddenly retreated. Prompting British forces to plan an advance. However it is all a German trap. It is up to two soldiers to hand deliver the message to stop British forces advancing into the trap.

The movie literally follows those two soldiers across the battlefield as they race to deliver the vital message. Apparently in one continious shot.

However it is not one continious shot. That too is a trick. It's a number of short shots, stitched together to make them appear continious.

1917 is largely shot in and around Salisbury, UK. An area synonymous with the Chemical Weapons on the Skripals et al.

So it shows the scene of this supposed Chemical Weapons attack. In a movie, everything about which screams;

"It's A Trick!"

"It's A Trick!"

Reflecting it's technical advancement of the profession 1917 won 3 of the awards it was nominated for;

Best Cinematography for Roger Deakins. Best Visual Effects for Guillaume Rocheron, Greg Butler and Dominic Tuohy. Best Sound Mixing for Mark Taylor and Stuart Wilson.

Mainly though Britain's big hope this year was laregly snubbed. Often in favour of Parasite.

At around 16:45 on 12/2/20 (UK date) there is still so much more to come.

Edited again at around 18:15 on 12/2/20 (UK date) to copy & paste;

Judy: This is a biopic of Judy Garland.

Judy Garland is regarded as both a Hollywood legend and a gay icon. Particularly due to her role of "Dorothy" in the 1939 movie; "The Wizard of Oz."

To this day; "A Friend of Dorothy" is still a commonly used euphemism to describe a homosexual. Particularly a homosexual man.

However, rather like the Eurovision Song Contest, The Wizard of Oz is so much more than a gay movie. It is really a spectacular example of how Hollywood has a long history of telling the stories of marginalised groups. Often in a coded and subversive way.

So yes, you've got the central allegory for someone trying to come to terms with their homosexuality. Realising that you just don't fit into this world and the long quest for the thing that is missing in your life.

However there is also a sequence where Dorothy and her friends walk through a field of poppy-like flowers. Those flowers make them drowsy and they have to sleep for a while. A pretty subversive reference to Opium Poppies and Opioid use.

When the movie was made America was still a very racist place. With the lynching of black people being a common occurence. At that time a popular, dergogratory slang term for a black person was; "Spook."

The is a sequence in The Wizard of Oz when Dorothy and her companions find themselves in Spooky Forest. An unseen force suddenly lifts one of them, I think Tin Man, and holds him level with the tree branches. As if he was being lynched. A coded protest against racial violence being sneaked into the mainstream.

Amid the current hysteria over diversity it seems important to remind people of Hollywood's extremely liberal history.

In attacking the Oscars, particularly the #OscarsSoWhite crowd, frequently point to another 1939 movie "Gone With The Wind." Still considered one of the greatest movies ever made it is set in America's slave-owning south at the time of the US Civil War -1861 to 1865.

The American slave-owning south prior to the US Civil War was an incredibly racist place. It was a large part of what the war was about. So many of the attitudes on display in Gone With The Wind are quite racist.

It is most frequently attacked for the character "Mammy" played by Hattie McDaniel. Something which is viewed as an extremely negative stereotype of an uneducated black woman.

However everyone seems to forget that the former slave Hattie McDaniel won the Best Supporting Actress for the role that year.

Hollywood putting a talented, successful black woman centre stage. Celebrating her ability to transform into a character which is a clear contrast from the person she actually is. All the way back in 1940.

Which certainly doesn't sound as racist as people are claiming Hollywood is in 2020.

The movie Judy deals with a very specific period in Judy Garland's life. Her final years where she was living in London, UK performing her "Talk of the Town" live stageshow.

By this point Judy Garland is a tragic wreck of a human being. Almost totally destroyed by alcohol and drug abuse. Left bankrupt by a series of abusive relationships at the hands of abusive men.

The tragedy of Judy Garland's life was, without doubt, the result of the way she was treated by the Hollywood studio system. The way that women are treated by Hollywood is still a very relevant topic in the #MeToo post-Weinstein era.

Judy Garland first found fame as a child actor. I don't know how true it is but there is certainly a famous story that MGM deliberately malnourished her in adolescence. In order to prevent her going to through puberty and becoming too much of a woman to play child roles.

That is obviously very relevant to Progressive Liberals current obsession with Transgender issues and Gender Fluidity. This often results in adolescents being pumped full of hormone blocking drugs to prevent them going through puberty. Doing great damage to them in the process.

The 26 year old popstar Ariana Grande is another interesting talking point in this area. Any Doctor or Social Worker will look at her childlike body and instantly see evidence of malnourishment in adoselence. Either the result of an eating disorder or parental abuse/neglect.

Which is why Ariana Grande has always been a bit of a pressure point for me. Something the TV show; "The Good Place" noted in their 2016 season. Although I have to say I'm kind of done taking shots at Ariana Grande.

One of Judy Garland's lesser known roles was that of; "Irene Hoffmann-Wallner" in the 1961 movie; "Judgment at Nuremberg." Something worth remembering if you hobbies include quiz shows and shouting at the TV.

Judgement at Nuremberg deals with the International Military Tribunals held in Nuremberg. Dealing with the Crimes Against Humanity of the Nazi regime. Specifically it deals with the third set of trials known as; "The Judges' Trial."

We once again find ourselves having to set up an International Military Tribunal to deal with Crimes Against Humanity. This time carried out by ISIL and their associated groups.

People seem to need to be reminded that non-combatants who provide material or moral support to Crimes Against Humanity have, themselves, committed Crimes Against Humanity. The Nuremberg Judges' Trial should provide that reminder.

The Nuremberg International Military Tribunal led to the creation of the; "Nuremberg Code of Medical Ethics." Specifically to deal with the horrifying medical experiments the Nazis conducted on their captives. The second trial was known as; "The Doctors' Trial."

The Nuremberg Code has been absorbed into the Rome Statute of 1998. In Article 7(1)(k) - cruel and inhumane treatment.

Britain is of course prevented from participating in even the discussion surrounding and International Military Tribunal to deal with ISIL's crimes. Due to its failure prosecute British healthcare workers who have conducted unlawful medical experiments.

Which is unfortunate. Given the British government's attempts today to rush through new Anti-Terror Legislation is clearly a topic they are struggling with. And require assistance with from the more talented.

Renee Zellweger won Best Actress for her portrayl of Judy Garland in the movie.

It is of course extraordinarily difficult to successfully portray a well known public figure. It is much more difficult when that person is also an actress. Forcing you to not only act but act as they would act.

A sort of acting cubed as it were.


Part Three to Follow.

18:25 on 12/2/20 (UK date)