The Golden Globe 2013 nominee list is out. As usual, it’s heavily weighted towards movies released late in the year. While the best picture contender lists don’t appear as interesting as the 2012 nominee lists, it’s probably best to reserve judgment until seeing them. Even those like “Captain Phillips” and “Gravity” that sound as appealing to me as “Zero Dark Thirty” did last year. (“Zero Dark Thirty” was a turkey IMHO.) Also fear that Philomena is this year’s version of the well-meaning, reasonably well produced, and utterly charmless movie such as “Silver Linings Playbook” from last year and “The Descendents” from 2011. (Check out the excellent 2002 The Magdalene Sisters for another treatment of this issue.)
There are several notable absences from the 2013 GG nominations. Before going there, must mention a stinker and a couple of bombs.
The Big Wedding is so bad it has to be seen to be believed. (If you can’t get enough of Robert DeNiro doing comedy, go for The Family instead of “The Big Wedding.” It’s not good but not as bad.) Even more of a waste of good acting talent than last year’s Hope Springs, aka Coldwater Creek and MFCC infomercial.
Then there’s The Lone Ranger (not as bad as another recent Disney production, “John Carter,” but it’s not fun, entertaining, nor interesting.) and Elysium (sci-fi generally bores me, but earnest sci-fi is boring and irritating).
Not too bad compared to my 2012 list of movie stinkers – either I was more selective this year or the not so good movies were better. On to the GG omissions.
In the big budget category, there’s nothing terribly wrong with The Great Gatsby. I’m not a particular fan of Baz Luhrmann’s visual style nor The Great Gatsby, but didn’t dislike anything in it which I can’t say about Les Misérables from last year.
Forest Whitaker is way too good in Lee Daniels’ The Butler to be overlooked. He alone saves the movie from being close to dreadful which puts it several notches up from “Zero Dark Thirty” (Have I mentioned how much I detested “Zero Dark Thirty?”)
42 is solid and competent, traditional style movie making on all levels. All the roles are well-cast (oddly a rarity in movies) and Harrison Ford chomps down hard on his part. It won’t be half as good on a small screen which is probably the only way now to see it.
The disturbing movie of the year has to be Prisoners. By disturbing I mean it stays with one after leaving the theater. Like Safe House was for me last year. Both have serious story telling flaws but are compelling nonetheless. This may be Jake Gyllenhaal’s best performance to date. To say more would risk spoiling the experience of seeing it.
No nod for the Blue Jasmine nor Woody Allen as the director. This is sophisticated and mature movie-making. The Golden Globes only partially compensated for this oversight by nominating Cate Blanchett and Sally Hawkins for their performances.
One that they did get right is the nomination of Rush for best picture and Daniel Brühl in the supporting actor category. Oddly overlooking Ron Howard in the director category and Peter Morgan for the screenplay. Chris Hemsworth in the lead role is also very good. Maybe not an award winning performance, but is Tom Hanks repeating what he’s done many times before either?. (Too soon to tell if Hemsworth has serious acting chops or merely a significantly pleasing persona that will keep him employed for some time.) It is really a first rate, big picture movie.
