The Unfettered Critic, March 2014 – by Paula Block Erdmann & Terry Erdmann

In our Unfettered column last October, we told you we were looking forward to five movies scheduled to open before the end of 2013. We hadn’t seen them; they weren’t in theatres yet. We chose them because of the buzz they generated, and because their trailers, which we watched on the web, seemed tantalizing.

Now that we’ve actually seen the films, here’s our thoughts on whether they were worthy of our speculation (with added speculation on how they’ll do on the Oscar front March 2nd).

Gravity—Visually, this film is as breathtaking as anything portrayed onscreen in recent years, particularly the first fifteen minutes. Watching Sandra Bullock and George Clooney struggle to survive in outer space with little air and less hope is enough to keep you on the edge of your seat. The amazing effects weren’t technically possible when production started; they had to be invented along the way. Which is why Gravity deserves its ten Oscar nominations, including best picture, directing, cinematography, production design, visual effects and acting (Bullock). But, sadly, the script was weak, and we left the theater feeling disappointed. Gravity certainly will win several technical awards, along with a Best Director statuette going to Alfonso Cuarón for mastering the complexities of filming. But the story ran out of air.

The Fifth Estate—Although much anticipated by the crowd that loved The Social Network, this real-life dramatic thriller about WikiLeaks mastermind Julian Assange was a box office disaster, and received no award recognition from the Academy. It has all the elements of a great motion picture, including a star-studded cast led by Benedict Cumberbatch, who garnered the film’s only critical praise. But the movie just didn’t work. The fault again lies in the script. As one reviewer jibed: “In the absence of a story, all you’ve got to look at is the casual mistreatment of laptops.”

August: Osage County—It’s even better than we’d hoped, thanks in large part to the incendiary sparring between top-notch actors Meryl Streep and Julia Roberts, and the screenplay drawn from the Pulitzer Prize-winning play. Yet the tone of this dysfunctional family tale proved too acidic for the average moviegoer. Streep and Roberts deserve their Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress nominations, but the competition in both categories is tough this year. Don’t be surprised if they’re edged out by competing nominees from the more popular American Hustle.

Saving Mr. Banks—We loved it. The Academy didn’t. Not much more we can say, other than it didn’t help that the trailers sold this as a chipper duel between two strong creative forces when the actual plot was much darker (and richer). Emma Thompson (as Mary Poppins author P.L. Travers) proved brilliant and should have been nominated.

The Monuments Men—Based on a true story, a group of art experts expose themselves to the dangers of war while trying to rescue great works of art before Hitler’s cronies can destroy them. It’s an old-fashioned WWII picture, like The Dirty Dozen, Kelly’s Heroes and The Big Red One, but the comparison hurts more than it helps. It’s in that style—but not as good. A little funny, a little sad, a little exciting—it’s WWII Light. Enjoyable, but like a meal that doesn’t quite satisfy, one is left with the feeling that maybe it needed a bit more…ketchup. The Monuments Men release date was postponed until after the new year, so it didn’t qualify for the upcoming Oscars. And as well-liked as director-actor-writer George Clooney is, it probably won’t be remembered when next year’s Oscar nominations are announced.

Or so we speculate.