The Amazing Spider-Man

Although it wasn't amazing, The Amazing Spider-Man was pretty damn good.  When I heard rumors about 4 years ago that they were making a fourth Spider-Man, but with different actors and a different director, I was very worried.  Spider-Man is by far my favorite superhero, and the only superhero movie I'll watch (with the occasional Greens just because of their cast though), and I grew to love Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, and obviously James Franco.  So, naturally, I would be worried when told those actors were taken out of the equation.  Fast forward a few years.  I'm actually kind of excited to find out that Andrew Garfield (The Social Network) would be playing Peter Parker.  I figured if Batman and Superman can have multiple actors playing the same protagonist, then Spider-Man can too, and it did help that Garfield is smokin'!  Of course Emma Stone (Superbad; Crazy, Stupid, Love; The Help; and pretty much every other movie) had to be in it as Gwen Stacy because apparently her and those bug eyes are the hottest thing right now.  She made a good Gwen Stacy; I think this was one of her more believable characters.  I only hate her because she's dating Andrew, but it made the chemistry in their scenes that much better.  I'm not worried though, because I'm sure once this slew of Spidey movies is done filming they'll break up like everyone else does.  My favorite scene with them is when Parker grabs her ass with his web and spins her toward him so they can have a hot make out scene.  Mmm, what I wouldn't give to have a hot superhero lure me to him with his web!  Anyway on to the review....

The Amazing Spider-Man directed by Marc Webb (500 Days of Summer, great movie) actually follows the comic book a little more closely than the first three Spider-Man films.  Parker spends a good part of the movie trying to figure out the disappearance of his parents, which his parents are never mentioned in the first three.  It also goes about showing how he ended up with Aunt May (Sally Fields, Brothers & Sisters Forrest Gump);  and Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen, The Departed; The West Wing) in the first place. At first I thought Fields and Sheen were an unlikely match, and I was a little thrown off about how much younger Fields looks than Sheen, but I guess they're closer in age than I realized.  In this version, the audience got to see more of Uncle Ben and Peter's relationship, making it sadder than the first film when he gets shot.  We also see Peter grieve more.  Garfield's Parker goes more overboard with the revenge than Maguire's Parker.  A good part of the film shows Spidey trying to get revenge by trapping several men that look like Uncle Ben's killer without actually finding him unlike the first film.

 This film also sticks to the comic book by having the character of Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans, The Five-Year Engagement; Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1), although they add a villain The Lizard, again not recognizing Doc Ock as the first villain.  

Its hard to say which Peter Parker is better because Maguire and Garfield put their own "spin" (pun intended) on the spider in spandex.  Tobey is more of the smart, nerdy Parker who's love for photography is very prominent in all 3 of his films.  Garfield, however is more of the smart yet awkward Parker, who hardly ever has his camera in his hands, but his love for skateboarding and Gwen Stacy are pretty prominent in this film.  The film also shows Garfield making his own webbing device, much like in the comics, while Maguire's Parker just gained that power after being bitten. (Speaking of being bitten, the cheesiest line in the movie was when Stacy responds to Parker's "I've been bitten" with a "Me too".)   Despite being different Parkers, the differences worked for each actor and still did the character justice.

I highly recommend this film.  I mean, there's the obvious $35 million it raked in, which proves right there it's a great movie, but I'm also telling you it's a great movie.  But you don't have to take my word on it, see for yourself.  Or take my word on it, otherwise, why would you be reading this blog?

Jeff, Who Lives at Home

I went into this movie thinking I was going to be constantly laughing, and although there were several laughs, Jeff, Who Lives at Home had a really great story line to which I feel I can relate.  Jeff (Jason Segel; The Muppets, How I Met Your Mother) lives in his mother's (Susan Sarandon; Mr. Woodcock, Thelma & Louise) basement and begins his journey, physically and metaphorically, to The Home Depot to pick up wood glue for his mother.  After a person calls the wrong number, looking for a Kevin, he believes its his destiny to find this Kevin.  After running into a Kevin (Evan Ross; 90210, According to Greta; little known fact-he's also the son of Diana Ross!) an unfortunate event leads him to run into his older brother Pat (Ed Helms; The Office, The Hangovers).  They continue the rest of the day tracking down Pat's wife, Linda (Judy Greer; The Descendants, Love and Other Drugs) who may or may not be committing adultery.

Jeff, Who Lives at Home is directed by Jay and Mark Duplass (Cyrus, Baghead) who do a lot of award winning independent films.  I can relate to the character of Jeff because he is a strong believer in signs and finding out what is his destiny.  He follows what he believes are signs to lead him closer to finding answers.  He is misunderstood from his cynic brother who doesn't really believe in signs and is among those people that think the universe is random.  It was those signs, however, that lead him to his brother twice and helped solve the mystery of his sister in law.  Those signs also lead him to the major event that happened in a surprising ending.  I'm not trying to be vague, but I don't want to give anything away. 

I believe the lesson of this story is that everything happens for a reason, and that is one of my favorite lessons.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Of course I have to compare both versions of the movie to the book.  Surprisingly, the American version is more like the book than the Swedish version.  I thought it would be the other way around.  Personally, I think all the books in the Millennium series are boring.  I'm finding it difficult to get through the third novel.  Its not really a concept I like or relate to, and I don't really like the films either.  As an art piece they were good, but the storyline was boring.  So I'll just discuss the two films in this entry.

Now here's where the first difference begin.  Playing Mikael Blomkvist in the Swedish version was Michael Nyqvist.  Now excuse me for being rude, but either they don't have attractive people in Sweden (which based on the actors in the first and second film seems to be true) or he's considered attractive in Sweden.  For being such a slut, I thought Blomkvist had to be good looking.  Then you have Daniel Craig playing him in the American version.  I don't see it, but apparently women here love him and find him extremely good looking.  So there's the first huge difference.  Who's the better Kalle Blomkvist:  creepy old guy or just old guy?

The opening credits for the American version was very artsy, and it gave me the impression that they were trying too hard.  Luckily, it stopped at that.  In the first Swedish movie, they didn't make Blomkvist seem as much as a slut as he really is.  They completely took out the affair with Erika Berger (although they included it in The Girl who Plays with Fire) and Cecilia Wagner.  In the American version, they not only show their affair, but Lisbeth Salander also explains it while discussing what she found out about him.  They also omit the relationship he has with Cecilia. 

I am kind of curious as to why the Swedish version decided to omit the fact that Blomkvist has a daughter.  They decide to have Lisbeth figure out the Biblical references and send it to him, blowing her cover.  In the book and the American film, she isn't still hacking into his computer and reading his work.  Making him able to suddenly drop by her apartment unannounced once he is told who she is.  That was actually my favorite scene in the book.  I enjoyed reading that first conversation when they met, and I was upset the Swedish version took it out.

The American version included the part when Lisbeth finds her guardian Holmer Palgren after his stroke, but they also continue to show her visiting him at the hospital when she's supposed to think he's dead until the second book.  The Swedish version doesn't include Palmgreen, but has her visiting her mother in the hospital in said.  American version doesn't mention her mother.  Both movies leave out the funeral.
It was interesting that both movies decided to write out Anita Wagner.  They still spoke about her but she was dead in both films.  I thought she played a pretty important role in the novel.
I didn't like how both films went in to the second novel (The Girl who Played with Fire)even if it was for a brief time.  The Swedish film showed 13 year old Lisbeth lighting a man on fire, though the audience doesn't know who either characters are.  That didn't bother me as much as the American film having Lisbeth tell Blomkvist that she lit her father on fire.  It goes against her character, who is very private, and it also takes away from the big secret discovered in the second book.  Unless the American's don't plan on making the rest of the Millennium films, I don't understand why they had her tell him that story.
There were plenty of other minor differences between the two films and the novel, but one last big one, that I don't quite understand, is the how Harald Wagner is perceived.  In the novel and the Swedish film, Harald is a nasty, old man.  His attitude made him a possible suspect of the murder of Harriet.  I don't why they decided to make him a completely different type of person in the American version.  Harald was very nice to Blomkvist and even let him look through his photo albums, which is how he discovered the picture of Henrik.  If I ever meet the screenwriters, I'd like to ask them why they went that route.  There's a lot of writers of adapted screenplays for whom I have a lot of questions.

All in all, the films were okay.  Not sure which ones I like better.  So far, I think the second Swedish film was more similar to the second novel.  The books suck though, just my opinion.

The Tree of Life

I think some films should come with cliff notes. This is true for Terrence Malick's (The New World, The Thin Red Line) film The Tree of Life. Since I'm too dense to understand this film for its true meaning, this will be a short entry. Now I haven't seen any of his other films (although my love for the Disney movie Pocahontas makes me want to see The New World) so I don't know if this is something different for him, but for lack of a better term, The Tree of Life is artsy. I remember seeing a trailer for it months ago, and even though I wasn't sure what it was about, I knew I really wanted to see it because it had so much artistic elements to it that films are lacking today. The toymaker in Hugo use to be a director, but before that he was an artist and a magician so he decided to bring art and magic into films, and I thought that was so wonderful. The Tree of Life had such amazing cinematography that I kept forgetting it was probably mostly CG, even though the dinosaurs look so much more realistic than the Jurassic Park ones. I get the ones in JP were supposed to be robots, but still. Maybe if they remade it today, it would look better. But let's not get any ideas, the last thing we need is a remake. What happened to being original? Malick has that originality, at least in this film, that other films lack. Even though I didn't totally get the story, it was amazing watching these colors in everyday nature unfold before my eyes.

The Tree of Life is nominated for three Oscars. Best Film, Best Achievement in Cinematography, and Best Director. I honesty believe that it deserves Best Cinematography, and I've seen about half of the nominees. However, it's a tough decision on Best Director or Best Film. I think too many people didn't understand it enough to appreciate it to make it become Best Film. Also, I heard even some people walked out. Looking around the theater today, I saw that the majority of the audience (only a couple handful of people) were viewing the film alone. I think it's better appreciated alone because then you're not tempted to either explain it or have it explained to you. It's like a painting where everyone has their own interpretation of it, or at least that's what I think. I'm glad I was encouraged to see it in the theater because it's definitely more enjoyable on the big screen.

The Tree of Life stars Brad Pitt, Sean Penn aka Dustin Hoffman because I confuse the two a lot, and Jessica Chastain (who for some reason got nominated for The Help but not Tree of Life). So that's my comment on it, short and sweet.

The Oscars are tomorrow, and unfortunately I didn't see as many nominees as I wanted, but I saw some good ones. It's hard to decide who will get Best Picture, probably The Help, but hopefully not, and I guess that's why I'm not on the Academy. Good luck tomorrow nominees. May the odds be ever in your favor.

Hugo

I went and saw Hugo in 3D partly because at this point there weren't many other options, but I'm glad I did.  It was absolutely exquisite in 3D.  I felt like "part of their world".  I'll be sad when this fad ends again.

Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield; Nanny McPhee Returns, Wolfman) is an orphan living within the clocks of a 1930s Parisian train station.  He learns how to fix clocks from his late father (Jude Law) who was a clockmaker.  As long as he keeps winding the clocks, a job his uncle (Ray Winstone; 13, Indian Jones and the Crystal Skull) had before he abandoned him, no one will notice he's there. So he spends his days winding up the clocks, hiding from the station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen; Borat) so as not to get sent to the orphanage, and stealing parts from the toymaker (Ben Kingsley; Shutter Island, The Love Guru) to help fix the automaton his dad found in a museum attic.  With the help of the toymakers Goddaughter, Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz; 500 Days of Summer, Kick-Ass) they get the automaton working and start on an adventure to figure out why the automaton drew a picture signed by Georges Melies, the toymaker.

Hugo has the most Oscar nominations this year with 11, only two less than last year's Best Picture, The King's Speech.  Hmm, same decade, different countries, but same continent.  Interesting.  Anyway, Hugo leads this year with nominations for Best Picture, Best Director (one of my favorites Martin Scorsese), Best Editing, Best Music (Original Score), Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Visual Effects, and Best Writing (Adapted Screenplay, based on the Novel "The Invention of Hugo Cabret" by Brian Selznick).

Ok let's quickly compare this to the King's Speech before I give my opinion.  The King's Speech won 4 out of its 13 nominations.  Best Director, Best Picture, Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role (Colin Firth), and Best Writing (Original Screenplay) which goes to show that just because you're nominated for a lot doesn't mean you'll win a lot, but you may win the best ones (otherwise known as the only ones that count).  Rewind one more year.  Best Picture, The Hurt Locker, won 6 out of its 9 nominations.  Won for Best Director, Best Film Editing, Best Sound Mixing and Sound Editing, Best Picture and Best Writing (Original Screenplay).  

Now for my predictions.   Hugo will most likely win Best Picture and Best Director, well because its Scorsese and he's like a legend.  Unfortunately he has only ever won one Oscar out of his many nominations.  That was for The Departed.  Do I think Hugo should win Best Picture?  Let's just say I'm hoping for The Descendants.  Although, it is a children's movie so if it won it will be a first.  Best Director?  Yes.  It'll probably win Best Writing as well.  As for the other categories... I don't really pay too much attention to editing because it was my least favorite subject in college so I'm not one to discuss that category.  I don't really remember the music so there's that, plus I'm still holding out for The Artist to win.  I do think it should win a lot of the more arty categories.  Cinematography, Best Art Direction, and Best Visual Effects.  Costumes weren't that impressive because the characters all wore the same thing everyday, and it was hard for me to tell what year it was.  Sound Editing/Mixing I also don't pay too much attention to so I'm not really sure.  This could be Best Film, who knows.  Its another tough decision like last year.  We'll find out soon enough.  Be the judge yourself and go see it, in 3D.  If not, it comes out on DVD two days after the Oscars.

Moneyball

Baseball is probably my favorite sport, so naturally I love baseball movies.  I blame the trailers for being the reason I didn't want to see Moneyball at first.  For some reason I thought it was about fantasy football.  Yeah.  I don't know. Once I heard it was a baseball film, I was excited to watch it.

Moneyball is the story of Billy Beane (Brad Pitt), former baseball player and current General Manager of the Oakland A's, and his plan to finally win the World Series.  With the help of his AGM, Peter Brand (Jonah Hill; Superbad, Get Him to the Greek), Beane uses statistical data to put value on players and make a team after losing three of his best players to higher paying teams.  Although his team is filled with underrated baseball players and starts off with a rough season, they go on to win 20 consecutive games only to lose to the Twins during the Elimination round before the World Series.  Beane is tempted to leave the team for a higher paying job with the Boston Red Sox but declines.  Two years later the Red Sox go on to win the World Series due to the same statistical method Beane used, breaking the Curse of the Bambino.

Moneyball was nominated for a total of 6 Oscars; Best Picture, Best Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role (Brad Pitt), Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role (Jonah Hill), and Best Writing (Adapted Screenplay).  I don't really care about the other categories, but I do hope Jonah Hill wins for Best Supporting Actor.  This is his first serious role, and he really pulled it off.  Good for him!  This is his first Oscar nomination, and with good reason too.  He proved to other filmmakers that he's not just the token fat, funny guy or a Seth Rogen Jr. (since he's lost weight now too).  He can be serious too.  This was a pretty good film, and we all know that Brad Pitt can act, but viewers saw that Jonah Hill can too.

The Descendants

The Descendants, starring George Clooney, is a sad movie about a man whose wife is in a coma after getting into a boating accident.  Him and his two daughters (Shailene Woodley; The Secret Life of the American Teenager and Amara Miller; first film) set off on an adventure to find the man his wife had an affair with, which he finds out about from his daughter Alexandra (Woodley). While this is happening, with his many cousins, he is trying to figure out what to do with land that had been passed down to his family through generations.  They have seven years to make a decision before the trust containing the land disappears.  I didn't really understand the reason for the family losing the trust, so unfortunately I can not get into more detail.  I fell in love with this film right away seeing as it takes place in Hawaii, and I have an obsession with Hawaii even though I've never been.  Although, I had a hard time taking Matthew Lillard (Scream; She's All That) seriously, the film pretty much had me in tears by the end.

The Descendants is nominated for five awards.  They are Best Picture, Best Director (Alexander Payne; Sideways, About Schmidt), Best Film Editing, Best Performance by a Lead Actor, and Best Writing (Adapted Screenplay; its based on the novel by Kaui Hart Hemmings).

I think this film was really good and has a chance of winning most, if not all, of these awards.  The acting was great.  I loved the relationship between Matt King (Clooney) and his daughters.  He was this man that had no idea how to raise his two daughters plus his wife, whom he loved very much, was cheating on him.  I really felt bad for him, especially when his father in law kept blaming the accident on him.  The characters were very well developed and believable.  As for the character of Sid (Nick Krause, not in anything worth noting), he was probably my favorite character because he reminded me of friends I had in high school.  I do wish Woodley had gotten a nomination for Best Supporting Actress because she did a great job for someone so young.  I've never seen an episode of her show, but I'm pretty sure that character is a completely different person.  I think she pulled it off well.  She helped make that relationship between Alexandra and Matt so great.  I wish I had that same kind of relationship with my father.  I liked this film a lot, and if it doesn't win Best Picture, I hope it at least wins Best Director.

Midnight in Paris

Midnight in Paris is a story about a young man who is forced to see that life different from your own isn't necessarily better.  Gil (Owen Wilson) is a script writer who is struggling to write his first novel.  For inspiration he travels along with his fiancee's (Rachel McAdams) parents to Paris.  He is in love with 1920s Paris in the rain, referring to it as the Golden Age.  One night, while walking around Paris at midnight, he is pulled into a cab and brought to his favorite decade.  He hangs out with fellow writers from that era, such as Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald (Tom Hiddleston; Thor, War Horse and Alison Pill; Kim Pine in Scott Pilgrim vs The World), Ernest Hemingway(Corey Stoll; Push, Salt) and Gertrude Stein (Kathy Bates).  He often escapes to this fantasy land causing him to drift apart from his fiancee.  He falls for Picasso's mistress Adriana (Marion Cotillard; Inception, Nine) and is swept away to her idea of a golden age, 1890s Paris.  She soon decides she wants to stay and that's when Gil realizes that everyone's idea of a golden age is different.  He may be in love with the 1920s, but people from that era may wish to live in a different era as well.  He also soon reevaluates some of his present day relationships.
Midnight in Paris is nominated for Best Picture, Best Director, Art Direction, Writing (Original Screenplay).
Midnight in Paris is director Woody Allen's sixth nomination for Best Director and 15th nomination for Best Writing.  He's won both awards together once before in 1978 for Annie Hall.  He won Best Writing once again in 87 with Hannah and Her Sisters, but hasn't won an Oscar since then.  The writing and dialog has the same flow as all his other films, so to me its nothing really special.  The main story, however, was a different concept.  Any book lovers dream, whether you write or just read, would be to meet any great other of another time.  Seeing these authors, I know for me at least, portrayed in the film was exciting.  One of the things that bothered me in the film, other than the very long establishing shots of Paris, was the character of Gil.  Sometimes I felt as if Wilson was just told to act like a young Woody Allen.  Some of the things he said or they way he said them reminded me of characters Allen had played in his other films.  It wasn't very different from his other films, so I don't know if he has a good chance of winning.  This is his first Best Picture nomination, but I don't think its Best Picture material.  It was good, don't get me wrong, but I wouldn't go out and buy it to watch everyday.  Then again, so far out of the Best Picture nominations I've seen, I haven't felt so excited about any of them.  I guess we'll see in a few weeks.

The Iron Lady

The Iron Lady, nominated for Best Actress in a Leading Role (Meryl Streep; Julie and Julia, Doubt) and Best Makeup.  The Iron Lady tells the story of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and how she broke through the barrier in a male-dominated world to become Britain's first female prime minister.  The movie starts out with a present day Thatcher, showing her struggle to get over her deceased husband.  The film uses flashbacks to tell the powerful story of Margaret Thatcher.

Streep has been nominated for 106 Oscars, but has only one two.  She won Best Actress for 82s Sophie's Choice and Best Supporting Actress in 79s Kramer vs. Kramer.  It's disappointing that Streep hasn't won an Oscar in about 30 decades even though she's been in some pretty good films.  She's an excellent actress which may be overlooked seeing as she is up against some other good actresses.  However, none of the other nominees have won an award, and they certainly haven't been nominated as many times.  Streep's portrayal of Margaret Thatcher was excellent.  It gave me a great insight in what she was and is like.  She's a powerful woman playing another powerful woman in a role that was fitting for her.

As for the Makeup, one of the first comments I made was how they did a great job making her look older.  I didn't even recognize her in the first scene.  I'm always fascinated with special effects makeup in movies, and even though this one was just a matter of making Meryl look like an 85 year old woman, I still think it was a great job done by the makeup artists.

This movie to me was sad because her holding on to her late husbands stuff reminds me of someone I know who has recently lost someone, so it really helped me feel bad for her and empathize with her.  Definitely a must see, especially if you're a history buff.

The Artist

I had the pleasure of seeing the Oscar nominated film, The Artist, this past weekend.  The Artist was something very different than the usual films we see today, but that's what made it enjoyable.  Set in Hollywood of the late 20s, the Artist is a silent, black and white film about two actors who's lives were drastically changed upon the introduction of "talkies" (films with sound) into Hollywood.  It takes place around the span of a few years.  I was a couple minutes late for the film for reasons beyond my control, so I'm not sure exactly what year the film began.  I walked in as a studio was holding auditions for dancers for their next film.  Newbie Peppy Miller (Berenice Bejo; been in mostly Spanish movies) gets a minor role, but slowly starts rising to the top by starring in multiple talkies.  Meanwhile, silent film veteran actor George Valentin (Jean Dujardin; French films) can't find work and slowly hits rock bottom.

The Artist was nominated for ten Academy Awards;  Best Picture, Actor in a Leading Role (Jean Dujardin), Actress in a Supporting Role (Berenice Bejo), Cinematography, Art Direction, Costume Design, Best Director, Film Editing, Music (Original Score), and Writing (Original Screenplay).

It's easy what makes this film stand out from its competitors.  It takes you back to a time where unemployment was at its highest, but Hollywood was still finding ways to bring people to the theater.  I've watched a lot of films that have taken place in the past, and this was probably the first time I actually felt transported to a different time.  Everything from the music and costumes to the exotic looking actors (with the exception of John Goodman and a few others I recognized) made me feel like I was actually watching a silent film from the 20s.   I can't wait to see the other nominations for Best Picture so I can start choosing my favorite.  I hope they're all as entertaining.

I think that acting in a silent film is harder than acting in a talking film.  Because you can't use your voice to express feeling and emotion, actors must rely on their body movements and facial expressions to send a message to the audience and tell their story.  Bejo and Dujardin did a great job of being very dramatic and animated that not only were they believable, but the audience could understand them without hearing them.  You have to be pretty talented to be able to pull it off.  As I stated earlier, being actors in foreign films, I didn't recognize them and that helped me believe that I was watching a film made in the 20s.  They both also had that natural beautiful look that is rare in actors today, more often found in actors from that era.  So either one has a chance of winning the Oscar, although I still have other movies to view before I can really compare.

Along those same lines, great acting is normally due to great directing.  The Artist was directed by Michel Hazanavicius who has done only foreign films previously.  With actors and a director who mostly do foreign films, it makes sense that this film is similar to foreign films.  Michel has done a great job of directing his actors to have extreme emotions in their face.  I don't think I'd ever be able to direct actors in a silent film, so for that I believe this is another nomination well deserved.

I think The Artist has a great chance of winning the music category.  I personally loved the score, and without it the film probably wouldn't have been as great.  Musical scores are very important in a movie because the right tempo helps you decide what you should be feeling at that moment during the film.  The music for The Artist did just that, it got me really excited, sad, scared, happy, etc for different scenes.

I loved the fashion of the 1920s.  It was a rebellious time for women, skirts and hair were getting shorter, and heels were getting higher.  I thought the costumes were great and gave me a great feel of what people wore during that era. 

Art Direction and Best Writing are two other awards I think it has a chance of winning.  Although I don't think it's Best Picture material, I think its still worth paying the money to see.

And the Nominees are...

It's that time of year again. ...The Oscars!  And I have 33 days to watch and review the movies I haven't seen. Like last year, I've only starred the ones I've seen.

Looks like I've got a lot to watch!

Best Picture:
Hugo*
Midnight in Paris*
Moneyball*
Tree of Life*
The Artist*
The Descendants*
War Horse
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
The Help *

Actor in a Leading Role:  
Demián Bichir (A Better Life) 
George Clooney (The Descendants)*
Jean Dujardin (The Artist)*
Gary Oldman (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) 
Brad Pitt (Moneyball)*

Actress in a Leading Role:
Glenn Close (Albert Nobbs) 
Viola Davis (The Help)* 
Rooney Mara (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) I won't see this until I read the books 
Meryl Streep (The Iron Lady)*
Michelle Williams (My Week With Marilyn)

Actor In a Supporting Role:  
Kenneth Branagh (My Week With Marilyn) 
Jonah Hill (Moneyball)*
Nick Nolte (Warrior) 
Christopher Plummer (Beginners) 
Max von Sydow (Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close)

Actress In a Supporting Role:  
Bérénice Bejo (The Artist)*
Jessica Chastain (The Help)* 
Melissa McCarthy (Bridesmaids) I really didn't want to see this movie so now I'm torn 
Janet McTeer (Albert Nobbs) 
Octavia Spencer (The Help)*

Animated Feature Film:  
 A Cat in Paris 
Chico & Rita
Kung Fu Panda 2
Puss in Boots*
 Rango

Cinematography:  
The Artist *
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Hugo*
The Tree of Life*
War Horse

Art Direction:
The Artist*
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 Again, I won't be watching this until I finish the books
Hugo*
Midnight in Paris*
War Horse

Costume Design:  
Anonymous
The Artist*
Hugo*
Jane Eyre
W.E.

Directing:  
The Artist (Michel Hazanavicius)*
The Descendants (Alexander Payne)*
Hugo (Martin Scorsese)*
Midnight in Paris (Woody Allen)*
The Tree of Life (Terrence Malick)*

Documentary Feature:  
Hell and Back Again
If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front
Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory
Pina
Undefeated

Documentary Short:  
The Barber of Birmingham: Foot Soldier of the Civil Rights Movement 
God is the Bigger Elvis
Incident in New Baghdad
Saving Face
The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom

Film Editing:  
The Artist (Anne-Sophie Bion and Michel Hazanavicius)*
The Descendants (Kevin Tent)*
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall) 
Hugo (Thelma Schoonmaker) *
Moneyball (Christopher Tellefsen)*

Foreign Language Film: 
Belgium, "Bullhead"
Canada, "Monsieur Lazhar" 
Iran, "A Separation"
Israel, "Footnote"
Poland, "In Darkness"

Makeup:  
Albert Nobbs
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
The Iron Lady*

Music (Original Score):  
The Adventures of Tintin (John Williams) 
The Artist (Ludovic Bource)*
Hugo (Howard Shore)*
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Alberto Iglesias)
War Horse (John Williams)

Music (Original Song):
"Man or Muppet" from THE MUPPETS (Music and Lyric by Bret McKenzie) 
Real in Rio” from RIO (Music by Sergio Mendes and Carlinhos Brown
Lyric by Siedah Garrett)

Short Film (Animated): 
Dimanche/Sunday
The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore
La Luna
A Morning Stroll
Wild Life

Short Film (Live Action):
Pentecost
Raju
The Shore
Time Freak
Tuba Atlantic

Sound Editing:  
Drive (Lon Bender and Victor Ray Ennis)
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Ren Klyce) 
Hugo (Philip Stockton and Eugene Gearty)*
Transformers: Dark of the Moon (Ethan Van der Ryn and Erik Aadahl) * 
War Horse (Richard Hymns and Gary Rydstrom)

Sound Mixing:  
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (David Parker, Michael Semanick, Ren Klyce and Bo Persson) 
Hugo (Tom Fleischman and John Midgley)*
Moneyball (Deb Adair, Ron Bochar, Dave Giammarco and Ed Novick)*
Transformers: Dark of the Moon (Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers, Jeffrey J. Haboush and Peter J. Devlin)* 
War Horse (Gary Rydstrom, Andy Nelson, Tom Johnson and Stuart Wilson)

Visual Effects:
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
Hugo*
Real Steel
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Transformers: Dark of the Moon*

Writing (Adapted Screenplay): 
The Descendants (Screenplay by Alexander Payne and Nat Faxon & Jim Rash)*
Hugo (Screenplay by John Logan)*
The Ides of March (Screenplay by George Clooney & Grant Heslov and Beau Willimon) 
Moneyball (Screenplay by Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin.  Story by Stan Chervin)*
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Screenplay by Bridget O'Connor & Peter Straughan)

Writing (Original Screenplay):
The Artist (Written by Michel Hazanavicius)*
Bridesmaids (Written by Annie Mumolo & Kristen Wiig) <---- REALLY???!!   Why? 
Margin Call (Written by J.C. Chandor) 
Midnight in Paris (Written by Woody Allen)*
A Separation (Written by Asghar Farhadi)