This Sunday, March 10, marks the 96th Oscar Awards ceremony. Best Picture, the Academy’s most prestigious prize—and the only one voted on by all 10,500 members—will be presented at the end of the night. We watched all of the nominated films for the award; here is the exhaustive list of our thoughts and commentaries on the films.
“American Fiction”
CORINNA: This movie was not what I thought it was going to be. I assumed that it would be a well-justified criticism of the depiction of Black people in literature and film, and it was, but it also explored the concept of how impossible it is to limit the Black experience to one singular depiction. It was very thought-provoking and interesting, and explored other concepts like family, identity, and finding your place.
NATE: A compelling, thought-provoking movie about the boxes White people insist Black people’s experiences must fit into. The writing was what worked most for me, what really made the film worth the watch: all the snarky commentary, the ambiguous ending. That said, there was a lot of good about this movie. I enjoyed it.
“Anatomy of a Fall”
CORINNA: This film was without a doubt one of the best nominees this year. I absolutely loved the film's plot, and the inventiveness of the visual depictions of the crime were absolutely wonderful. I am a sucker for a good legal drama, and I think that this not only provided the satisfaction of that, but also provided solid relationships between characters that were fascinating. Everything is vague and non-descript which lets the audience make their own interpretations and decisions about the characters and the crime.
NATE: A moving film. Actress Sandra Hüller (who is incredible) is in almost every shot, and, along with Triet and Harari’s screenplay, gives the film constant forward motion while creating a deepening gray area. The genius of Anatomy of a Fall is that we’re never convinced of anyone’s innocence. Nobody’s good here, but nobody’s particularly bad; the movie’s subtle, gradual implications of the main characters feels deeply human.
“Barbie”
CORINNA: This was a good movie. It made me cry because what it says is relatable and hearing your feelings articulated in art is emotional. But, it didn’t make any groundbreaking statements, or touch on anything that hasn’t already been said numerous times before. Although that is not necessarily a bad thing, I think that there was a lot of room for improvement. It was funny, entertaining, and I absolutely loved the usage of practical effects and sets.
NATE: I love Greta Gerwig and everything she has ever made. Making Barbie actually good was a feat in and of itself, and Gerwig's handprints are everywhere. It’s very basic, corporate feminism—feminism for the masses (and, let’s not forget, for-profit)—but the movie is aware of that, and the fact that Mattel allowed Gerwig to keep jokes about their company was surprisingly introspective. Gerwig, of course, is the film’s strength; she’s any film’s strength.
“The Holdovers”
CORINNA: I loved everything about this movie, and I mean absolutely everything. The cast was absolutely incredible, but Da’Vine Joy Randolph and Dominic Sessa’s performances stood out to me. The characters within this film have such awful and tragic backstories, yet the film manages to maintain its humor. The faux 1970s appearance of the film added to its charm and nostalgia, and was just lovely to look at.
NATE: “The Holdovers” has a lot of heart. Director Alexander Payne takes full nostalgic advantage of the film’s 70s setting, so that it feels like a thing of the past—a relic rooted in the present. Giammatti, Sessa, and Randolph all give convincing, heartbreaking performances. I think they’re the movie’s biggest strength—it’s hard to imagine it without the trio’s incredible chemistry.
“Killers of the Flower Moon”
CORINNA: This film was created from entirely the wrong perspective. The film is focused around Ernest Burkhart, and although his perspective gives us a historical and interesting look into what took place, the film should be centered around Mollie Kyle and the Osage community. The story being told from the perspective of the perpetrators of the Osage murders instead of the victims and survivors felt wrong. Lily Gladstone was absolutely incredible, and she had better win Best Actress.
NATE: A powerful story, but one that feels like an ironically unaware metacommentary: as Jo Koy pointed out in his otherwise horrific monologue, “white people stole 100% of everything.” The fact that director Scorsese delivers the last line really drives that point home: the story of the Osage murders has been fetishized and claimed by white audiences, who have inevitably given themselves final say over how the story is told. Lily Gladstone is the film’s strength—her regality was captivating.
“Maestro”
CORINNA: I think that the only thing “Maestro” accomplished was making me dislike Leonard Bernstein (or at least the film’s depiction of him). I didn’t find the central relationship of the film particularly interesting, nor was it explored deep enough to be compelling. This film was visually beautiful, the cinematography was lovely, but other than that it didn’t hold much appeal for me.
NATE: Everything about “Maestro” worked for me. It’s a film about an artist that is, itself, art—a rare thing today. What I liked most was the unconventionality of it: it changes aspect ratios and shifts from monotone to color and lingers for six minutes on Bradley Cooper conducting the London Symphony Orchestra. Its biggest strength is its sheer beauty.
“Oppenheimer”
CORINNA: This film was entirely too long and tried to cover way too much information. Had the film been focused on a specific aspect of Oppenheimer’s life, it may have been more appealing to me. Although I think it would have improved by being more concise, I will say that it was impressive how it managed to stay organized even with the multiple story lines that it contained.
NATE: For me, the most impressive feat of “Oppenheimer" is that, even though its three-hour runtime is populated almost exclusively with dialogue and relative inaction, it made just short of a billion dollars worldwide. Christopher Nolan made a mostly dialogic film interesting to mass audiences. I could talk about it for hours, but for me, its success was the film’s biggest strength.
“Past Lives”
CORINNA: This film was definitely the most overlooked nominee. Its plot may not be as grand or lou