fbnf film blog

Equilibrium

2010-07-23T16:52:09Z

YEAR: 2002

WRITER: Kurt Wimmer

DIRECTOR: Kurt Wimmer

BUDGET: $20 million (estimated)

GROSS: $1,203,974

some films i talk about on Filmed But Not Forgotten are films i come across randomly. others i know about through research or i check out because of the director or someone involved in the film. then others, like Equilibrium, are films that get recommended to me.

this film came out in 2002 and it has been recommended to me at various times by completely different people over the course of those eight years. i remember a friend of mine even had the poster up in their den back in '02 and at the time i had actually never even heard of it (which i am sure was/is the case for lots of people out there given the measly box office returns it generated upon its release).

so the other day i was dvd shopping as i love to do and i saw the blu-ray edition of the film on sale for about $15. i decided to get it (i also picked up Reservoir Dogs the 15th anniversary edition on blu-ray) and this week i threw it in my blu-ray player and checked it out.

Equilibrium is set in the future after world war III. society has realized that mankind won't be able to survive a world war IV. so the fascist regime as moved to eliminate what makes us human: feelings/emotions.literature, music and art are all being eliminated and society is on a drug called prozium which eliminates emotions. christian bale is cleric john preston. a top ranking government agent responsible for destroying those who resist the rules. but when he misses a dose himself, he begins to see things differently.

i knew from the dvd menu alone, and then once the film started, that the film had a strong visual style. however, we all know that visuals alone can't carry a film. and i was a little worried that the film was going to feel corny and melodramatic. a fascist future, a drone-like society, a resistance. if you watch any of these types of movies you know that those three things are almost must-haves for any dystopian future film.

and its obvious why. they allow for grand ideas and themes to be presented and for a positive look at the human spirit and how human nature can survive and win out against our evil and self-destructive nature (that has brought us to the point we are when these films begin). i get it. however, if you are giving us a grand presentation that we have seen many times before, you better do it well. and Equilibrium does.

there is also the beautiful cinematography and visually engaging fight sequences that all work together to create a world and a style that is more then just a pretty facade. and they did it all on a $20 million dollar budget which is incredible.

about half way through the film i started to get a little worried that it was heading down a very typical path and i wasn't sure it had given me enough to go there with it. but i stayed with it and it worked. sure, its a little predictable. but there are a couple nice little twists and turns which keep you on your toes and then there is just the really solid script that brings depth and emotion to characters and a story that could have been stale.

P.S. Equilibrium was kurt wimmer's directorial debut and he followed it up four years later with the also nice looking set in the future, but not at all as good (actually had it as #3 on my list of worst films of 2006) film Ultraviolet. but he has worked mostly as a writer on such films as The Thomas Crown Affaire (1999), The Recruit and Law Abiding Citizen. he also wrote the screenplay for the upcoming angelina jolie film Salt.

Zombie Girl: The Movie

2010-07-17T13:22:53Z

YEAR: 2009

DIRECTOR: Justin Johnson & Aaron Marshall & Erik Mauck

BUDGET: ?

GROSS: ?

emily hagins loves movies. when she was about five she would sit and watch The Muppets Movie over and over again. then as she got older she would go see movies with her mom - everything from big hollywood blockbusters (they probably saw Lord Of The Rings about 20 times) to crazy cult classics.

now she has written a feature-length script for a zombie movie that she is going to direct. Zombie Girl: The Movie is a documentary that follows emily on that journey from the beginning of her project right through to the premier....... oh yeah. did i forget to mention that emily is 12 years old?!

what was funny to me about the film was how the making of the film and the behind-the-scenes content wasn't specific to how young the director was. anyone who has ever participated in and/or worked on a low/no-budget film will relate to this film. for example...

begging for extras, actors forgetting to bring the clothes that match what they were wearing in the last scene, lots of duct tape, recording over previously filmed footage because the tape wasn't cued up properly, having a great take but not realizing till you watch it later that the sound is really bad, having your mother holding the boom mic and getting on your case cause things are running really late, did i mention duct tape?

i have been involved with the production of a few very, very independent films and, except for the fact that my mom wasn't involved, i can completely relate to pretty much every other thing that emily went through in making her film. but you don't have to have ever made a movie to enjoy this documentary.

i think emily wrote the script for her film "Pathogen" when she was 10 or 11 and by the time it premiers she is 13. how many 10-13 year olds do you know who have that kind of persistence and drive to finish a project on the scale of a full-length movie? it isn't always easy, but there is no doubt watching her that this is what emily wants to do.

she really does have a vision for the movie. actors might have ideas and her mom might have ideas, but as she says in various ways at different times during the documentary - she is the director and her decision is final.

you can tell that she is a little movie geek and it's great. she makes references to various films and even looks to be thinking about the film making process of the documentary itself - sometimes, during an interview, asking the director where she should be looking.

in another scene, her and her mother are being interviewed together. her mother talks about how proud she is of emily and emily talks about how important her mom is and how much she valued everything she did for her. then, she looks at the camera and, with a smile, says something to the effect of, "now this is where you are going to cut to the parts of us arguing right." its funny cause i was thinking the exact same thing.

i checked out her website (cheesynuggets) and found that since the documentary was made she has made one more movie and is currently working on her third. so, who knows where she will go in the future.

now, i can't tell you if emily's movie was any good, since they don't show you much - if any - of the final product in the film. but, i can tell you that the documentary about her making the movie, Zombie Girl: The Movie definitely is.

Observe And Report

2010-07-10T18:19:35Z

YEAR: 2009

WRITER & DIRECTOR: Jody Hill

BUDGET: $18 million (estimated)

GROSS: $23,930,794

films get lost in the shuffle for a variety of reasons. sometimes there just isn't any publicity so no one even knows it exists. sometimes the initial critical reviews are negative (right or wrong) and then there are films like Observe And Report.

this one had a some star power with seth rogan in the lead role and there was at least some publicity for it, as i remember seeing trailers for it many times on tv and in the theatre. now, i will say that critical response was pretty much 50/50, but i don't think that is why this film got lost. unfortunately, i think the reason it got lost was the film itself. stick with me here.....

Observe And Report is a dark comedy about a bi-polar mall security guard trying to bring down a flasher who is terrorizing the mall area. he is also in love with anna ferris who works in the mall, lives at home with his drunk mother and is very territorial when the real cops (ray liotta) are brought in to investigate.

when the general public thinks of seth rogan they think Knocked Up and Superbad. so when they see a trailer with him playing a character in a dark comedy that is 180 degrees from his general perception they might not know what to make of it. also, there is that trailer...

this is not an easy film to make a trailer for. it made me think of a film like Worlds Greatest Dad - another dark comedy that is a little difficult to make a please-everyone trailer for. both films aren't simple set-up/punch line, or visual gag comedies that make for easy trailering. and finally, there might have been a little mall cop movie overload...

i have to admit that when i first saw the trailer for Observe And Report my first reaction was, "really? another mall cop movie?" as some of you may remember, earlier in 2009 there was released a film called Paul Blart: Mall Cop which did surprisingly big numbers. it was another Armageddon/Deep Impact and Dante's Peak/Volcano situation...

however, if i had given Observe And Report a chance, i would have seen that, not only was it not at all the same kind of mall cop comedy, but it was also really good (another thing that sets it apart from Paul Blart).

so, now it is your turn to give it a shot and catch one of the better dark comedies to come along in the last few years. and one of seth rogan's best performances as well.

Magic & Bird: A Courtship Of Rivals

2010-06-11T12:42:10Z

YEAR: 2010

DIRECTOR: Ezra Edelman

did you know that basketball was not a very popular sport back in the late 70s going into the 80s? the tv ratings weren't great and even the championship games were broadcast on a tape delay. do you know who saved basketball? if you said michael jordan, not only would you be wrong, but you would make bryant gumble very angry. no kids, the two guys who saved basketball were larry bird and magic johnson. learn all about that - and so much more - by watching the great hbo documentary Magic & Bird: A Courtship Of Rivals.

it began in 1979 with the ncaa college basketball championship game where magic took round one by leading his michigan state team to victory over bird and indiana state. the next year they both entered the nba as rookies and the rivalry continued throughout the decade..

okay, so i'm sure some of you are thinking, "i'm sure its a good film, but i am really not a big basketball fan so it doesn't interest me." but then i say to you, "you don't have to be a basketball fan to enjoy/appreciate this film." then you say... okay that's enough of that, but the point is correct.

sure, a basketball fan, someone that remembers watching the bird/magic rivalry play out during the 80s will find the film very interesting, but even if the only basketball you know is tossing a crumpled up piece of paper into your waste basket at work so you don't have to get out of your chair, Magic & Bird: A Courtship Of Rivals is worth seeing.

the film goes beyond the basketball court and shows us who these guys really were and are. it tracks their friendship (which took a very long time to happen) and it tracks them individually over the years. and it does it in their own words. while the comments from all the sports writers and other players are great, it is the words from the two men at the center of it all that are the heart and soul of this film.

we get inside their heads and find out what they were really thinking at the time and how they really felt about everything that was going on around them at the time. Then, watching their relationship develop over the years and seeing the respect the two had, and still have, for each other is great.

you don't have to be a basketball fan to be moved when magic talks about how much it meant to him that bird was one of the first people to call him after he was diagnosed with hiv. listening to the two of them take us through their careers and relationship on and off the court reveals such human drama and emotion.

the fact that these two greats came along at the same time (just when basketball needed them) with such opposite personalities, and ended up on the two most storied teams in nba history, fighting each other for championships multiple times is really just almost impossible to believe.

basketball fans and those that remember watching the sport during the 80s have to see this documentary. but, if you aren't one of those people, but you walk into the room and your friend/spouse/lover/roommate/random dude/grandparent/sibling/etc... are watching it, then just sit down and check it out. you might be surprised.

Ex Drummer

2010-05-16T13:19:07Z

YEAR: 2007

WRITER: Koen Mortier (screenplay), Herman Brusselmans (novel)

DIRECTOR: Koen Mortier

BUDGET: ?

GROSS: ?

dries is a famous writer. one day three losers ring his buzzer and ask him to be the drummer in their band. sounds like that could be the start of a funny, family-friendly rock and roll movie right? well, IT ISN'T! it is the start of the flemish film, Ex Drummer.

dries decides to accept their offer because he sees a great story/book in it. he sees the ability to manipulate and have fun with them as a way of generating his next work. now, while that starts to give you a sense of the dark tone of the film, a simple synopsis will not suffice or really give you any indication what you are in for when you decide to sit down and press play.

it doesn't take long to realize this isn't gonna be a "normal" film. after an opening monologue from dries we listen to him telling us about each of the three men that came to his home as we watch them in reverse moving away from his buzzer backwards along the path they took to get to his place as the credits for the film appear on various landmarks, people and items along the way.

the film straddles the line between reality and experimental cinema and it does it very well. you would think that a movie in which one of the characters lives upside down in his apartment (walks on the ceiling, while people in his place walk on the floor), and characters that die give a bloody post-death monologue/statement to the camera would have a hard time keeping itself at all grounded to any kind of reality. but, alas not. i will also tell you that you probably aren't going to like any of the characters and i don't think director koen mortier cares.

i didn't notice it the first time i watched the film, but in rewatching the opening, i noticed that the credit after the title is "an eyemotional film experience." and this pretty much sums it up. Ex Drummer is an experience.

while i do think calling it an experience is very appropriate, mortier does a great job of not letting the "experimental/experience" nature of the film and the film making to completely overpower the story. this isn't always easy to do. either the movie becomes completely form over substance or the film makers don't have the confidence in their "form" or "substance" to follow through completely and it feels half-baked on both counts. and say what you will about Ex Drummer, but there is no way one of those things you say will be "half-baked."

some things you could say though, would be: bloody, dark, violent, intelligent, gruesome, loud, sexual, disturbing and unrepentant. and just in case you skimmed the list and weren't paying attention, let me again mention bloody and violent. and this isn't hollywood violence where 30 guys get gunned down and another 20 get beat up and we sit there smiling digging into our bag of popcorn.

this is bloody, intimate and disturbing violence that confronts you in style and form. now, not all the violence in the film is that way and, if i think back over the whole movie, there really isn't a lot of it. but, the films climax - obviously the last thing i saw and so it is most on my mind - is really what i am referring to.

koen mortier is a director that had a vision for this film. a vision that is, to use an over used film critic term, uncompromising. it might be too much for some, but everyone who watches it is definitely in for an "experience." and in my opinion - a very good one.

Stevie

2010-04-30T14:53:39Z

YEAR: 2002

DIRECTOR: Steve James

BUDGET: ?

GROSS: $97,044

in 1982 steve james became an "advocate big brother" to stevie fielding. in 1995, he went back to see what had happened to stevie and his family since he had left. what began as an idea for a simple film profile, became a four and a half year chronicle - as unanticipated events transpired that lead the film down a path steve probably never expected. it also served to pull him into the film more than he had probably intended as well.

one type of documentary film making involves the film makers not being a part of the film. they are to document the subject, but stay as removed as possible. Stevie is not one of those films. steve james is almost as much a part of the movie as his subject, stevie, is.

one of the reasons steve james went back to make this movie in the first place was because of the guilt he felt for having left. sure, he had to move on with his life and such, but part of him always felt like he had let stevie down when he left and didn't stay in contact like he had planned. so, you get the sense from the beginning that this project is important to james on a very personal - and of course partly selfish level. and i don't think he would deny that. but, the personal nature of the project also makes it so interesting.

and his direct involvement with the subject, stevie, is taken to a whole other level when stevie is accused and arrested for a very serious crime. james wants to help, but he is also disturbed by what stevie has been accused of doing. there are a lot of voice overs throughout the film as james tells us about what he is thinking and feeling and you can feel/hear him fighting an internal battle with when to help and when to let things play out as they are. and looking back, i wonder if he feels he did the right thing?

besides the steve and stevie relationship and the story that follows stevie's arrest, the film is also a really interesting look at how some kids just never get the help they need and deserve.

stevie had a really hard life growing up and it really seemed like no one knew how to help him or cared enough to try. the one foster family that he had and loved left him cause they had to - and after that things continued to go downhill. one of the most powerful moments in the movie is when james takes stevie to visit those initial foster parents all these years later and you can see how much they meant to him. they are really wonderful people and stevie really is a different person when he is with them. who knows what could have been....

the films look at stevie's past and all the crap that he has been through, does not come across, or at least it didn't to me, as making excuses for what he did. it would have been easy, on one side, to just blame his childhood or, on the other side, to completely villainize him. but, it didn't feel like the film did either. although, i think many people will have different opinions on that depending on where they are personally coming from as they overlay their own experiences and beliefs onto the movie.

The Salton Sea

2010-04-08T21:36:45Z

YEAR: 2002

WRITER: Tony Gayton

DIRECTOR: D.J. Caruso

BUDGET: $18 Million (estimated)

GROSS: $765,554

if i was putting a list together of directors who have wasted their potential, D.J. Caruso would be on that list. however, if the only films of his you have seen were Taking Lives, Two For The Money, Disturbia and Eagle Eye you would probably be thinking where is the "potential" in the first place? what is he wasting?

sure, Eagle Eye was ok, but Taking Lives wasn't very good and Disturbia was a film that i liked till the final act where it all fell apart and took the film down with it. so, where is the potential you ask? it is at The Salton Sea.

the film looks great and has an interesting story that plays within the drug/crime/revenge genre but makes its own way through it. even the few twists aren't that predictable. The Salton Sea was caruso's first film and it feels like it - and i mean that in a good way. like he is making the film he really wants to make. like he had a real vision for how he was going to film and tell the story and he was able to get on celluloid what he had in his head.

the question i have is, are the films he has made since The Salton Sea the ones he has wanted to make or have the studios been more involved and hence has there two cents ended up stifling what the films could have been. not to say they all would have been good regardless.

but, i think Eagle Eye had a pretty interesting premise. and, ya it was an alright film, but not great. then, with a film like Disturbia which was quite good for the first 3/4 of the movie and then just gets ruined with the last 1/4 i want to believe it was outside influences that forced it to happen in an attempt to appeal to more audiences and play better at screenings, etc...

now, i could be all wrong and maybe what we are seeing now from mister caruso is all we are gonna get from now on and The Salton Sea was an anomaly. but, im not ready to say that just yet...

and, given that most people have probably seen his more popular films and not The Salton Sea it could have the reverse effect. watching this one it will be like seeing a director break out from his place as a solid go to hollywood director who toes the company line to a film-maker to watch with vision and style.... maybe, in the end its just all about perception?

Greenberg

2010-04-02T21:49:53Z

Year: 2010

Writer: Noah Baumbach (story: Noah Baumbach & Jennifer Jason Leigh

Director: Noah Baumbach

Budget: ?

Gross: $1,200,139 (as of March 28th 2010)

what we have here with Greenberg, is the first great film of 2010 (or at least the first great one that i have seen). but, we also have a film that is going to be very easy for people to discount and dislike. welcome to big cojones film making folks.

for those of you who haven't read my past film discussions on the site and are unaware of what i mean by "big cojones" film making, it goes as follows: i use the term to reference a film/film maker who takes a chance by doing something unexpected or daring or unconventional from what is expected and generally assumed with the craft of film making. and with Greenberg, director noah baumbach has done just that with the roger greenberg character played by ben stiller...

people who don't like the film will tell you that ben stillers character is unlikeable, and with no redemptive quality or moments they couldn't root for him. and you know what? that is true. but, so what?!!

and baumbach doesn't care about that either. he has a character that is who he is and where he is in his life and he isn't going to change him or write in some redemptive side story in order to get an audiences sympathy or make it easier to watch. the knowledge that you have a script that is strong enough to do that with and to trust that we, the audience, aren't all drones who will disengage when things aren't presented to us the way we are used to... that is big cojones film making. and i loved it!!

... on a side note: as i write this i am reminded of the ending change on the film Fatal Attraction. ***spoiler alert*** at the end of Fatal Attraction michael douglas' character's wife, played by anne archer shoots and kills glenn close's character in their bathtub as she is coming at douglas with a knife. it is a big climax in the film and one that allows for the audience to get the revenge on close that they have been seeking. or at least that is how the producers explained it to justify the change. so what was the original ending you ask? well, let me tell you...

in the original ending close commits suicide and frames douglas to make it look like he killed her. the cops go to see douglas and take him away and the film ends as he is being driven off with a distraught archer watching. now that's a great ending!

i have to say that, while i like Fatal Attraction, i have always found the ending a little disappointing, obvious and typical. and when i learnt about the original ending i was so disappointed they changed it. glenn close fought hard to keep it in, but lost. and actually, all the people involved in the film loved the original ending. so, why did they change it?

because they had a few screenings of the movie and they felt that they were losing those audiences with the ending. they felt that the energy dropped with the last 15 minutes and they concluded that the audience wanted to see revenge and the ending wasn't providing satisfaction. so they wrote and filmed the "happy ending" (my words not theirs) of sorts.

sure changing the ending was the safe and easy move, but that doesn't make it the right one. as michael caine tells nicolas cage in The Weather Man, "Do you know that the harder thing to do and the right thing to do are usually the same thing? Nothing that has meaning is easy." to bad the makers of Fatal Attraction didn't have the big cojones. now back to Greenberg....

this is the third film from mr. baumbach that i have seen and i have loved all of them (Kicking And Screaming & The Squid And The Whale are the other two) and what stands out for me with his films are the scripts. and more specifically, how well he is able to write and appreciate the truth of people and situations. the script is so insightful and witty and honest.

he has this ability to get right to the heart of things in such a non-cliche way. there are so many lines that stand out. from ben stiller pointing out the superfluousness of clapping while you laugh given that the laughing "already demonstrates appreciation." or rhys ifran's character telling stiller that "it's huge to finally embrace the life you never planned." if that line doesn't stay with you for days after you leave the theatre than its cause you had probably left the theatre to go to the bathroom when he said it.

also, while i agreed, at the beginning of this discussion, with those who would say that ben stiller's character is unlikeable, i think that is not giving the character and the performance enough credit. it is a total film critic expression to call stiller's performance nuanced, but that really is what it is.

while you are kinda on pins and needles throughout most of the film just waiting for stiller to explode and go, well, all ben stiller with the character. he doesn't. yes, there are moments, but that is not only what the character is about. now, would i want to be his friend? no... do i think he is all bad? no...

it would be so easy to break out simple characters and create cliche moments and dialogue to say what the movie is trying to say. but, that's not what this film does. does that make it less accessible? maybe. but, for those that do access it, it will be so very worth your while.

11:14

2010-03-14T14:27:11Z

Year: 2003

Writer & Director: Greg Marcks

Budget: $6 million (estimated)

Gross: ?

This film brings together 5 different stories that all revolve around each other and culminate with a couple car accidents that take place at 11:14pm one evening. the film is one story told from 5 different perspectives. kind of like Vantage Point, but really good.

also, unlike Vantage Point, 11:14 doesn't start each story from the exact same time. some begin 20 minutes before the 11:14 moment and others begin only a couple minutes prior and take us past the title time by 10-20 minutes.

one of the things that really impressed me about the film was the attention to detail. when you have interweaving perspectives and time is so crucial there is a lot of room to mess up. but, marcks looks to have taken quite a bit of time to figure all the details out and it was well worth it. as the film progressed i really felt like i knew where everyone was at all times and that the timeline worked and made sense.

also, marcks didn't get caught up with loads of unnecessary exposition. by that i mean he trusted the audience and his script to take us along for the ride and provide us with all the information by the end.

in telling a story this was there are obviously going to be moments throughout that require more explanation: who is that person? why was she there? why did he do that? etc.... however, each question that comes up in one perspective always gets answered in another one along the way and the script is confident enough to leave unanswered questions till it is time for them to be answered and not create false moments in order to provide quick answers.

this also made it fun for me to piece together the events of the evening as i gathered more information and started seeing moments from one perspective that i had seen previously from another and had forgotten about or not realized how important they were till i had more pieces of the puzzle.

i don't think this film ever got a theatrical releae in north america, but it did play at multiple fests like cannes and toronto to name just a few. so, unless you were lucky enough to be at one of those festival screenings, go pick this one up on dvd and see one that many people have missed and forgotten.

2010 Oscar Predictions

2010-03-05T23:30:52Z

WILL WIN are in bold

SHOULD WIN (where i have an opinion) is underlined

Did Win are BIG

MY SCORE: 17/24

well, the oscars have come and gone and i had an average go with my predictions this year. it wasn't my most impressive performance, but it wasn't awful either. where i messed up this year was with the shorts (animation, live action, documentary). normally i get at least one of those right and this time nothing. and then, missing both screenplay winners is just awful. but, i went 17/19 for the rest of the awards and a perfect on the top 6 categories which isn't bad.... so, how did you all do?

Best motion picture of the year

Avatar
The Blind Side
District 9
An Education
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Precious
A Serious Man
Up
Up In the Air

Performance by an actress in a leading role

Sandra Bullock (The Blind Side)
Helen Mirren (The Last Station)
Carey Mulligan (An Education)
Gabourey Sidibe (Precious)
Meryl Streep (Julie and Julia)

Performance by an actor in a leading role

Jeff Bridges (Crazy Heart)
George Clooney (Up In the Air)
Colin Firth (A Single Man)
Morgan Freeman (Invictus)
Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker)

Performance by an actor in a supporting role

Matt Damon (Invictus)
Woody Harrellson (The Messenger)
Christopher Plummer (The Last Station)
Stanley Tucci (The Lovely Bones)
Christoph Waltz (Inglourious Basterds)

Performance by an actress in a supporting role

Penelope Cruz (Nine)
Vera Farmiga (Up In the Air)
Maggie Gyllenhaal (Crazy Heart)
Anna Kendrick (Up In the Air)
Mo'Nique (Precious)

Best animated feature film of the year

Coraline
Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Princess and the Frog
The Secret of Kells
Up

Best Documentary Short Subject

China's Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province
The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner
The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant”
Music by Prudence
Rabbit à la Berlin

Best Short Film (Animated)

French Roast
Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty
The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)
Logorama
A Matter of Loaf and Death

Best Short Film (Live Action)

The Door
Instead of Abracadabra
Kavi
Miracle Fish
The New Tenants

Achievement in art direction

Avatar
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Nine
Sherlock Holmes
The Young Victoria

Achievement in cinematography

Avatar, Mauro Fiore
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Bruno Delbonnel
The Hurt Locker, Barry Ackroyd
Inglourious Basterds, Robert Richardson
The White Ribbon, Christian Berger

Achievement in costume design

Bright Star, Janet Patterson
Coco before Chanel, Catherine Leterrier
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, Monique Prudhomme
Nine, Colleen Atwood
The Young Victoria, Sandy Powell

Achievement in directing

James Cameron (Avatar)
Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker)
Quentin Tarantino (Inglourious Basterds)
Lee Daniels (Precious)
Jason Reitman (Up In the Air)

Best documentary feature

Burma VJ
The Cove
Food, Inc.
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers
Which Way Home

ACHIEVEMENT IN MAKEUP

Il Divo, Aldo Signoretti and Vittorio Sodano
Star Trek, Barney Burman, Mindy Hall and Joel Harlow
The Young Victoria, Jon Henry Gordon and Jenny Shircore

Achievement in film editing

Avatar, Stephen Rivkin, John Refoua and James Cameron
District 9, Julian Clarke
The Hurt Locker, Bob Murawski and Chris Innis
Inglourious Basterds, Sally Menke
Precious, Joe Klotz

Best foreign language film of the year

Ajami
El Secreto De Sus Ojos
The Milk of Sorrow
A Prophet
The White Ribbon

Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original score)

Avatar, James Horner
Fantastic Mr. Fox, Alexandre Desplat
The Hurt Locker, Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders
Sherlock Holmes, Hans Zimmer
Up, Michael Giacchino

Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original song)

"Almost There" from The Princess and the Frog Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
"Down in New Orleans" from The Princess and the Frog Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
"Loin de Paname" from Paris 36 Music by Reinhardt Wagner Lyric by Frank Thomas
"Take It All" from Nine Music and Lyric by Maury Yeston
"The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)" from Crazy Heart Music and Lyric by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett

Achievement in sound editing

Avatar, Christopher Boyes and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle
The Hurt Locker, Paul N.J. Ottosson
Inglourious Basterds, Wylie Stateman
Star Trek, Mark Stoeckinger and Alan Rankin
Up, Michael Silvers and Tom Myers

Achievement in sound mixing

Avatar, Christopher Boyes, Gary Summers, Andy Nelson and Tony Johnson
The Hurt Locker, Paul N.J. Ottosson and Ray Beckett
Inglourious Basterds, Michael Minkler, Tony Lamberti and Mark Ulano
Star Trek, Anna Behlmer, Andy Nelson and Peter J. Devlin
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers and Geoffrey Patterson

Achievement in visual effects

Avatar, Joe Letteri, Stephen Rosenbaum, Richard Baneham and Andrew R. Jones
District 9, Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros and Matt Aitken
Star Trek, Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh and Burt Dalton

Adapted screenplay

Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell (District 9)
Nick Hornby (An Education)
Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche (In the Loop)
Geoffrey Fletcher (Precious)
Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner (Up In the Air)

Original screenplay

Mark Boal (The Hurt Locker)
Quentin Tarantino (Inglourious Basterds)
Alessandro Camon and Oren Moverman (The Messenger)
Joel and Ethan Coen (A Serious Man)
Screenplay by Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson, Tom McCarthy (Up)