This blog post is about the 2020 Academy Awards Best Picture Nominees
and my Think, Laugh, Cry Method for reviewing them. Warning: Major Spoilers
How we feel about a film is often very subjective. The TLC Method was created to make it easier to discuss and compare movies. I believe that the marks of a successful, award worthy film is one that makes you think, laugh and cry, hence its name: The TLC Method.
This is the third year I’ve used The TLC Method to review the Best Picture Nominees and attempted to predict the winner, but if you are not familiar with how it works, let me explain! The TLC Method also known as the Think, Laugh, Cry Method is an easy-to-apply approach in which you ask yourself if a film made you think, laugh and/or cry. In my opinion, todays best films are the ones that tell unique and entertaining stories and tell them well. So, if a film can do all three then it has higher probability of being nominated for an award.
How it works:
When you’ve finished watching a film you simply ask yourself if it made you think, made you laugh and/or made you cry and to what degree. When I’m torn about one of those three, I may give a film a half laugh or a half cry. You get the idea. So, if a film made you think, laugh and cry then it is a strong film.
Many who use this method will inevitably ask some questions…
What if I don’t ever cry at movies?
What exactly do you mean by think?
I guess I chuckled, does that count as a laugh?
To those unsure, I would say use your best judgement. If you never cry, then perhaps the clue is if it made you feel sadness. If you are confused about thinking, you might be thinking too much. And if it was only a chuckle maybe give it a 1/2 laugh instead. See the bottom of this post for my ranking of the nominees based on this system.
Movies that don’t make you feel all three emotions aren’t automatically bad films or unworthy of awards. I created this method in the hopes that it would be easier to compare the movies I was watching, especially when films like Parasite and Joker are so unlike anything else being nominated. It’s not a perfect system, but over the last two years it’s been accurate in predicting the Best Picture winner.
Two years ago, only two movies (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri and The Shape of Water) received a think, laugh and a cry rating and while the two movies were a close tie for me personally, The Shape of Water was victorious. Last year, two films (Green Book and Bohemian Rhapsody) also received a think, laugh, cry rating and my personal favorite of the year, Green Book, took home the gold statue. This year only one film received a think, laugh, cry rating.
2020 Best Picture Nominees
(In the order I watched them)
1917 (Think, Cry)
Ford v Ferrari (1/2 Cry, 1/2 Laugh)
The Irishman (None)
Jojo Rabbit (Think, Laugh, Cry)
Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (1/2 Think, 1/2 Laugh)
Little Women (Think, 1/2 Laugh, Cry)
Joker (Think, 1/2 Cry)
Marriage Story (Think, 1/2 Laugh, Cry)
Parasite (Think, 1/2 Laugh)
1917 (Think, Cry)
TLC Method: You can not and will not think about anything else but the tragedy and cruelty of war while watching this film. I’ve never been so consumed. I cried twice during this film; once when Lance Corporal Blake played by Dean-Charles Chapman died and at the end when Lance Corporal Schofield played by George MacKay had to tell the older brother of Blake that his younger brother had died. I did not laugh while watching this film, I do not believe it was the goal of the film to try to make me laugh.
Review: The main feature everyone will be discussing in regards to this film, is the way it was shot. It immerses you in the moment with the perception of one long exhausting and incredible take. The choreography and vision it took to plan this film is absolutely astounding. You move with these characters in real time through the trenches and for me it literally affected my body. We saw this in the theater and at one point I had to step outside because I was over heating. In the minute I left the room I realized I felt physically exhausted. My visceral reaction to this film is a huge reason that this is personally one of my favorite films of the year. 1917 feels true and sincere, it is not over the top or overly dramatic. It does not sensationalize or exaggeration what war looks like, instead it focuses on the small role two soldiers play during the first World War.
Sam Mendes was both the director of 1917 and one of its writers; hands down I believe he should win Best Director. I have see all of the other films whom have directors nominated and none of the other films demanded a more defined directorial challenge. He is the clear winner in my book. On top of that, the performances from Chapman and MacKay were engaging and of the caliber of actors with a lot more experience. I did not even realize until the movie was over that Chapman played the character Tommen Baratheon in HBO’s Game of Thrones. (Both of his deaths will be memorable for me) I had not seen MacKay in anything prior, but I will certainly be looking out for him in future films.
If there were any film to break the TLC Method this year it would be this one. While it does not make you laugh, in my opinion it has a very high likeliness of winner Best Picture. I really enjoyed this film, but it does also fall in line with some of the most popular Oscar bait troupes: true story, foreign location, and the subject of war. If you have any interest in reading about other Oscar troupes, I suggest checking this article out.
Lastly, it’s one of the only war films I’ve ever seen that does not use a major battle or fight scene as the crux of its storyline. The main driving point of the plot is to simply pass information from one person to the next and yet it succeeds in capturing your attention every single second. Of course, it is a war film, so we do see the beginning of a battle, gunfire, and death, but that isn’t the main focus. A lot of films rely solely on violence and explosions to distract you from their lack of storyline. This is a work of art.
Ford v Ferrari (1/2 Cry, 1/2 Laugh)
TLC Method: I teared up when Molly (Caitriona Balfe) came by the garage when Ken (Christian Bale) was by himself (and not in France). They shared a beautiful unspoken bond and it touched my heart. I also teared up slightly when Matt Damon’s character Carroll couldn't find the words when talking to Peter about his father's death. I can’t give this a full cry though, because the fast paced editing really didn’t leave time for me to feel emotions. I laughed when Ken told Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas) off for telling Peter to stop touching the Mustang. I laughed a lot when Ken and Carroll fought on the lawn outside Ken's home and Molly watched them in a lawn chair.
I give this movie a 1/2 cry, 1/2 laugh and a full FUN. This was not a thinking film, this was a fun film. It was a joy to watch. So while it ranks low on the TLC Method, it was still entertaining. Perhaps in the future I will include a fourth category to the TLC Method.
Review: This film was filled with high energy, bold characters, and an engaging plot. I am by no means a car person (I don't even own a car anymore), but it didn't matter. The editing was fast paced and the story clear, you don't need to be a car enthusiast to get it. Christian Bale as Ken Miles was the kind of rough around the edges protagonist that audiences can relate to and enjoy.
So while it does have two major actors (Bale and Damon) and it is based on a true story, I am not sure this is strong enough to win anything. There is no denying it is a good time, but fun is not often enough to make it Best Picture worthy. In the past, I haven’t thought about different values or weights to each of the three categories (think, laugh, cry). This film has made me reconsider. This is one of very few films that did not receive a think rating and perhaps that is in part the reason I feel it will not win any awards. Perhaps, the think rating should be valued higher than laugh or cry? What do you think?
The Irishman (NONE)
The TLC Method: This is the first film, since I starting using the TLC Method, to receive neither a think, laugh, or cry. To be fair, I do not believe it was trying to make me laugh or cry.
Review: If you enjoyed this film, I’m sure you had your reasons. Maybe you are a huge Scorsese fan or maybe you love mob movies - so this was right up your alley. Either way, what I’m about to say is not meant as an insult to your intelligence, you can enjoy whatever you like, it is simply my opinion.
This film was 3 hours and 29 minutes long and I still can’t believe I sat through the entire thing. It completely baffles me that this was nominated. My impression of this movie is that DeNiro and Scorsese have reached a point in their careers where people don’t say no to them. They have the notoriety and money to make movies with full creative freedom and they choose to make this. Netflix is so desperate for a Best Picture winner, that they just dumped money into this and looked the other way. Nevertheless, how is it possible that anyone who participated in this film’s creation did not stop at some point and say why does this film need to be 3 hours and 29 minutes long!?!!
If The Irishman was under 2 hours this review might be very different. In certain scenes, I don’t mind the acting from all three of the major characters and certain plot lines could have been more impactful (think: the father/daughter relationship and Frank’s conflicting relationships with Hoffa and Bufalino). Instead, the movie distracts you with long monologues and scenes that play no major role in the plot. The story is a snooze. The pace of the editing alone matches the rambling of an elderly man. It tries to be witty with text on the screen describing various people’s deaths and cut away shots to violence - but it doesn’t work. It’s like it was trying to be an Adam McKay movie (Big Short, Vice) but because the editing pace was so slow it feels clunky and awkward instead. (Both Big Short and Vice were under 2 hrs 15 minutes).
Have you heard of the phrase “jumping the shark? It’s full definition is here. According to Wikipedia it, “describes a moment when something that was once popular but has grown less so, makes an attempt at publicity which only serves to highlight its irrelevance.” Well, during my frustration after watching this, I thought more and more about the scene when they were discussing how fish had gotten on the car’s back seat. It was towards the end and I just kept thinking, whats the point!? Then I remembered the phrase “jumping the shark”. I knew it didn’t exactly apply to this scenario so I came up with a new phrase: fish building. It refers to the point in a movie which stinks so badly that you finally realize it’s been building up to nothing.
The ending was predictable and inevitable since Jimmy Hoffa and the mystery of his death are common knowledge. It is my opinion, that this movie is a bunch of veteran white male actors flexing their acting muscles on screen for three and a half hours that I will never get back. It was just painful to get through and a waste of my time.
Jojo Rabbit (Think, Laugh, Cry)
TLC Method: I thought about the ramifications of Nazi ideologies on German Nazi children. I thought about war and its impact on young people; how impressionable they are. At first, I was going to give this film a 1/2 think. However, this is the kind of film that because its so funny it makes you think long after it’s over. I laughed constantly as this film pointed out not just the ridiculous nature of Nazi ideology (Jews have horns and sleep upside down like bats), but also the interpretation of a child’s imagination. I cried when Jojo realized his mom had been hung, he hugs her feet and my heart was crushed.
Review: Call it dark comedy, call it a period piece. Whatever genre it is, it was incredibly well done. I give a lot of credit to this film. First, for casting and relying on the performances of such young actors. Roman Griffin Davis does not have a lot of credits to his name but he was perfect in the role of Jojo. While Thomasin McKenzie who played Elsa, was both strong and vulnerable. My personal favorite was Yorki, Jojo’s best friend (Archie Yates) - he as adorable and frank. They carried the story with the help of some very funny supporting characters. Shout out to Rebel Wilson, Sam Rockwell and Alfie Allen, they were hysterical as the rejected and insane Nazi camp counselors. What small, but very memorable performances.
Next, I give huge credit to the Director, Taika Waititi, who also played imaginary Hitler. He told this story in a risky way that was fantastical and over the top, but also reflective. It is my opinion that laughter is one of the most valuable tools a film has to make a point. It is part of the reason that laugh is part of the TLC method. Laughter can have a very memorable impact and when you have a topic as hard as war and genocide and racism, laughter is certainly not the first tool you use to describe it. Waititi does a wonderful job of forcing us to think of World War II from the perspective of a child, which is often simple and silly. Keep an eye out for more of his films, he is moving in very interesting directions.
Perhaps the largest surprise for me, was that this film made me cry. It’s so overtly silly and dry, I was wary to believe that it could do both. Well when we re-entered the courtyard where supporters of the resistance were hung my fiancé said out loud, “I bet the mom is hanging there”. And sure enough Scarlett Johansson’s beautiful shoes were hanging. I don’t believe that many films made today make us think, laugh, and cry. So I think it is a true complement to this film that it was able to do all three and do them in an incredibly memorable and unique way. This is only film this year to have a think, laugh, cry rating. It’s also one of the only films made this year that I want to watch more than once. I believe it will take home the awards for Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Picture.
Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (1/2 Think, 1/2 Laugh)
TLC Method: I guess I thought about the time period and how an aging actor struggles for work, but I also think a 1/2 think is being generous. I chuckled at Cliff’s (Brad Pitt) antics and his relationship with his dog, Brandy. Also, since this is a Tarantino film, I guffawed at the over-the-top violence at the end.
Review: I want to start by saying that I’m a huge Tarantino fan. Reservoir Dogs is my favorite film. I have to be honest though, overall, this was a weak Tarantino film. It was way too long, running at 2 hours and 41 minutes and a lot of details were shared that didn’t seem to really play into the plot. Which can normally be expected in one of his films, but this was way overdone. It almost felt too separated from the reality of how the Manson Murders went down. If you lifted most of Sharron Tates (Margot Robbie) scenes out of the movie, it would not change the plot of the main characters: Cliff and Rick. I understand why Sharron needed to be included - its part of the reveal and surprise of the ending - but I don’t understand why we spent so much time with her. What was the point?
I really loved Brad Pitt’s character, I don’t mind that he is getting a lot of praise for this role. But can someone please explain to me why he is not considered the main character? His movements and decisions are what drives the plot. How is this movie about Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio)? Just like Tate, if you lifted out Dalton’s scenes, it wouldn’t change the stories main thread. Think about it… while some of his scenes were interesting, very few of his individual scenes had anything to do with the lead up to the murders.
Tarantino used a lot of his usual troupes; revisionist history, revenge fantasy, and a lot of famous faces, which depending on your perspective, can be looked at as a good or a bad thing. The ending was exactly what I expected and it truly saved the movie for me. It was unpredictable and very violent. I enjoyed the acting from everyone in this film, I simply think it was way too long. Brad Pitt will probably win for supporting actor, but I don’t think it will win any other awards.
Little Women (Think, 1/2 Laugh, Cry)
TLC Method: I thought about family and siblings, I thought about the fear of losing yourself in the love for someone else. I thought about Jo’s struggle to be herself. I chuckled at the sisters interactions and when they dressed as men. I cried when Beth died and when Jo turned Laurie down.
Review: Before I get into it I should disclose the following: I am a 29 year-old white female who considers herself fairly strong and independent. You take that coupled with the fact that I knew the story going in and I think I was favored to like this one. Beautifully acted and wonderfully edited. I thought it was a distinct adaptation of a classic story and Greta Gerwig, the film’s director, deserves to be acknowledged for it. It has s serious chance of winning Best Adapted Screenplay, but not so much Best Picture. This is a well-known tale and for the most part the major plot points were the same, just told in a different order. I knew how this would go and I think the film wanted to give away certain plot points on purpose. I found this surprising, but not bad. I was still able to enjoy the film and live in those moments even without the surprises. For a comparison of this film and its predecessors click here.
Timothée Chalamet is really one of the most talented young actors out there. There is something so believable and sincere in his portrayal of Laurie. Florence Pugh and Emma Watson are strong as Amy and Meg, while Saoirse Ronan may actually be the character Jo brought to life from the original pages of Little Women. She delivers each line in such a deliberate and infectious way, she is Jo March. Being that this is her third Best Actress nomination since 2016, I think it’s clear that she’s found her type of role: strong aspirational young women.
My future husband, Scott, wanted to guest-review this film because of my “clear” bias. As a first-time observer of this story Scott felt that the shift of time back-and-forth especially for the first hour of the film was hard to follow, especially with all the characters being new to him. The plot seemed a little aimless at the beginning but once the major points started to be hit it was enjoyable for him. It had a slow start, but overall he thought that the film deserves only a half think and a full cry.
Joker (Think, 1/2 Cry)
TLC Method: I thought a great deal about poverty, mental illness, government-funded health programs, and the act of killing while watching this film. I did not cry or even tear up, but I did feel extremely uncomfortable and depressed, which I think warrants half a cry. Feel free to disagree, I’m still torn.
Review: This is another film that was surrounded by a lot of hype. As a fan of Batman and Health Ledger's performance as the Joker in the Dark Knight, this film certainly peaked my interest. As a sort of Joker origin story, I was not surprised to see a lot of white male rage (Check out SNL and Melissa Villaseñor's Oscar Snubs Video) but I was surprised by the tone and performance from Joaquin Phoenix. He absolutely blew me away as the Joker and hands down should win the award for Best Actor. Director, Todd Phillips took this story to a dark and realistic place which was gritty and uncomfortable. I felt it depicted the comic book world of Gotham in a way that was both exaggerated and reflective of our society today.
All of that said, from a writing perspective the story was repetitive and predictable. Perhaps in part, this is because we all know the Joker is a crazy murderer. So we sort of knew where it was going, but how many examples did they need to show us to explain why the Joker became the Joker. He’s got an addiction to medications, he has mental health issues, daddy issues, mommy issues, got fired from his job, has a physical disability... I could go on. It really started to feel like they were over-explaining. However, my largest point of frustration initially was when Arthur dances down the stairs. The song that plays is called Rock & Roll Part 2 by Gary Glitter (Soundtrack here). You’ve heard the song before, or at least ones like it. It sounds like the pump up music that plays before the big game. My initial reaction was, wow this is out of place and drastically outside of the tone of the rest of the film. I could completely see how this appears to glorify violence and make Arthur out to be a sort of hero. I admit I hated that moment. But then I spoke with a few friends and their perspectives really forced me to reconsider if my reaction was a bad thing. While I still think it can easily be interpreted as glorifying violence, I concede to the idea that Arthur was feeling a sort of release and adrenaline. That song certainly evokes the feeling of adrenaline in me (seeing that my instinct was to compare it to sports).
Though I doubt I’ll ever watch it again (it was very depressing), overall I liked it and I’m glad its on this list of films. I enjoyed the nod to Bruce Wayne's parents death at the end. Almost to say that it was the Joker's fault Batman was an orphan. I enjoyed the score (props to composer: Hildur Guðnadóttir) and the use of dance and/or meditation to visually articulate how Arthur processing killing someone. A lot of strong parts to this story, also a lot of weak ones. Phoenix should win for Best Actor, but thats it.
Marriage Story (Think, 1/2 Laugh, Cry)
TLC Method: I thought about my family and divorce. I thought about communication and the importance of it in a relationship. And I thought about my self-worth and the worth you feel as a couple. I chuckled at Nicole’s (Scarlett Johansson) mother and sister while they were preparing to serve Charlie (Adam Driver) the divorce papers. I smiled in the beginning when they described all the reasons they love one another. I ugly cried when Charlie broke down during their fight and told Nicole he wished she would die. I felt his pain, it felt really real.
Review: So, I am in the process of planning my wedding. I get married this year. A few people jokingly suggested we skip watching this film. Honestly, I was a little worried it would be painful to watch with my future husband, but much to my surprise it was painful for a different reason. I found myself thinking only of my parents who got divorced when I was 7. I think this film does a great job of making you feel for both Nicole and Charlie. They are simply two people falling out of love and trying to keep it together for their child. I got a big hug from Scott when this one was over.
Divorce is always a painful situation, but this film surely highlighted the worst parts of dealing with the court systems and attorneys. Johansson and Driver were on the top of their game for this movie. Driver’s performance is the only one that gives Joaquin Phoenix a run for his money, in my opinion. I haven’t seen Harriet, Bombshell or Judy, but I really like Scarlett’s work in this film. I do not think either of them will be rewarded, but I wouldn’t be upset if they were.
I really loved the subtle parts of this film. It was the correct length, I felt its editing was perfect. Coming full circle, the therapy love letters were beautiful book ends to this film. It was hard to watch at certain points, like the uncomfortable scene with the case worker observing Charlie and Henry. Charlie cuts his arm accidentally and for the next 5 minutes he is just a train wreck. The cinematography was breathtaking and if 1917 wasn’t up for that category I’d want this one to win. Credit is due to Robbie Ryan, the director of photography, for creating the visual tension and space between this couple (see image above).
I may never see this film again because of how hard it was to watch (ugly ugly cried), but I say that as a compliment. It did what it was trying to do. A+ in my book.
Parasite (Think, 1/2 Laugh)
TLC Method: This movie certainly makes you think. I contemplated what it means to be a parasite. Who or what is the parasite? I also gave this a 1/2 laugh, not sure if I have a sick sense of humor, but the extreme right turn this movie takes half way through made me laugh out loud.
Review: This film pushes past Korea and can be thought of as a commentary on all societies. Wealth and poverty affects us all and I think this film does well because we can all relate to that. The word "Parasite" is defined by google as "an organism that lives in or on an organism of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense." I believe Bong Joon Ho, the film's director and writer, created a film that is an exaggeration, but not an unfair reflection of society. Yes, the Kim family is self-absorbed and awful, but so is the Park family. I think it is interesting to ask ourselves; who are the parasites? Is it the wealthy or the poor? Are they equally parasitic? What I like the most is that no person in this film is all good or all bad - each has both negative and positive characteristics.
This film is nominated for Best Foreign Film and Best Picture. Because of all the hype and attention I would not be surprised if it won both categories, but in my opinion it was not better than 1917 and Jojo Rabbit. It is certainly a unique film with unexpected twists and turns, but I did not feel that strongly connected to the characters - not once did I feel the urge to tear up even when death and sadness overwhelmed them. Full disclosure, I do not speak or read Korean and its entirely possible that my needing to read throughout the film affected my ability to connect with the characters. Not a fact, just speculation.
All of that being said, I'd like to see more stories like this being told. It pushed the envelope and that deserves to be recognized. The best quote from the film is the one below because it so perfectly depicts the thoughts a parasite would have.
Ki-taek (laying on the gymnasium floor with his children): “You know what kind of plan never fails? No plan. No plan at all. You know why? Because life cannot be planned. Look around you. Did you think these people made a plan to sleep in the sports hall with you? But here we are now, sleeping together on the floor. So, there's no need for a plan. You can't go wrong with no plans. We don't need to make a plan for anything. It doesn't matter what will happen next. Even if the country gets destroyed or sold out, nobody cares. Got it?” (Quote copied from IMDB)
2020 Best Picture Nominees
(ranking)
1. Jojo Rabbit (Think, Laugh, Cry)
2. Marriage Story (Think, 1/2 Laugh, Cry)
3. Little Women (Think, 1/2 Laugh, Cry)
4. 1917 (Think, Cry)
5. Parasite (Think, 1/2 Laugh)
6. Joker (Think, 1/2 Cry)
7. Ford v Ferrari (1/2 Cry, 1/2 Laugh)
8. Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (1/2 Think, 1/2 Laugh)
9. The Irishman (None)
The Oscars are this Sunday, February 9th at 8pm EST on ABC! They are very early this year, which means that I watched all 9 movies and wrote this blog in less than 30 days. A new record for me! My personal favorites this year (if you didn’t read the whole blog) were Jojo Rabbit and 1917. Strangely each were about one of the World Wars, but could not have been more different films. I mention this because the goal of The TLC method is not to show us our favorites. For example, outside of The TLC Method I personally would rank Parasite higher than Little Women and Joker lower than Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood. I simply try to watch each film and be honest about whether it makes me think, laugh or cry. If it does all three, it is my belief that it is more likely to win. Either way, I get to watch a lot of movies and talk about them with all of you! Hope you enjoyed reading my reviews and thinking about The TLC Method! Did you agree with my reviews? Do you think The TLC Method is flawed? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Comment below (no sign-in necessary)!