2015 "Cinema & Stadium" Film Year-in-Review

2015 "Cinema & Stadium" Film Year-in-Review

I'm pleased to present my third Film Year-in-Review blog post, celebrating the best (and a few of the worst) films released during the calendar year that I saw.  This year is a particularly special one, at least for me and I hope for many others:  I believe that 2015 was likely the best year in film in the modern era - at least by my tastes.  My main reasons:

• My three favorite franchises - Star Wars, Jurassic Park, James Bond - each released their newest film, and each was very good.
• Pixar, the most consistently great movie studio of the century, released what is probably their best film yet, Inside Out.
• Although a number of smaller critically-acclaimed films bypassed my area (as usual), I saw a stellar group including historical dramas Selma, The Big Short, and Spotlight.

Add to that an astounding overall rate of quality in a variety of genres but especially my favored action/adventure - with few duds - and it was a great year all around in film.  Now I'd like to review (or re-review) those films that I saw, using a familiar array of categories.  First you'll find my top 10 films of the year, followed by a few miscellaneous awards (under/overrated films, etc.), and brief summaries of the 2015-released films that I saw on Netflix and didn't write full reviews for.  I've linked all film titles to my full reviews, when available, if you're interested.

Also check out my Oscar-type awards here, including the usual acting categories, and best director, screenplay, and visual effects.


Top 10 of 2015:

10.  Spectre (directed by Sam Mendes; starring Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz, et. al.)

Here is the first of the Big Three movies I had been anticipating in 2015.  Admittedly, my familiarity and fondness for the Bond franchise and its traditions puts it here above some other films that may otherwise be as good or better.  Still, Spectre is among the stronger 007 films.  It brought Bond back to the old formula, which previous Craig entries had modified significantly.  But it also brought the overarching story from those three films together in a very nice conclusion.  Add to that some very impressive scenes (especially the train fight), and this would be a perfectly good way for Craig to finish his days as Bond if it works out that way.

9.  Sicario (directed by Denis Villeneuve; starring Emily Blunt, Benicio del Toro, Josh Brolin)

After seeing director Villeneuve's great (but largely snubbed at the Oscars) 2013 film Prisoners, I was excited to hear about his next release, 2015's Sicario.  An even more intriguing and ambitious premise of a treacherous Mexican border mission completed the feeling.  While it ultimately fell a little short of Prisoners, Sicario is still a great film from a director with a unique style and tone.  Both films are incredibly tense, with Sicario focusing on the fate of a female FBI agent strong and determined to make a difference, but naive to the politics of the shadows.  Cinematographer Roger Deakins immerses you in the world, especially a hair-raising convoy into Juarez, as does the very atmospheric soundtrack.  Excellent.

8.  Mad Max: Fury Road (directed by George Miller; starring Charlize Theron, Tom Hardy, et. al.)

Mad Max was not on my list of anticipated movies for 2015.  I hadn't (and still haven't) seen the originals, though with Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron co-starring I was intrigued.  After all the phenomenal reviews, I saw it and was thankful I did.  An instant action movie classic, this reboot/ remake goes full-throttle on excitement and entertainment.  The story is simple but solid - largely consisting of an extended chase across a post apocalyptic desert - and you can almost feel the dirt that coats everyone and everything.  It goes without saying that there are plenty of great action scenes,  especially the funky (and deadly) modified vehicles.  To cap it all off, Max himself plays second fiddle to Theron's tough heroine.

7.  The Big Short (directed by Adam McKay; starring Christian Bale, Steve Carell, Ryan Gosling, Brad Pitt)

I don't tend to buy into the hype of films that take advantage of recent notable people and events.  But when you add an all-star cast including two of my favorites (Christian Bale and Steve Carell) and make it seem like it'll be funny?  Count me in.  Fortunately, The Big Short delivers big time on this set up.  Bale and Carell, very different performers, are both fantastic as co-leads, and Pitt and Gosling lend impressive supporting roles.  They help bring to dramatic life a very, very good script that somehow manages to both explain arcane financial details in an interesting way, and to make many elements of it hilarious.  Part documentary, part drama, part comedy, all awesome.

6.  Tomorrowland (directed by Brad Bird; starring George Clooney, Britt Robertson, Hugh Laurie, et. al.)

Here's one I definitely didn't see coming.  Frankly, I went to see it on the thin basis of liking George Clooney and what seemed a unique premise - despite very mediocre reviews.  Well, the critics were way off on this one.  Tomorrowland is, more than anything else, an optimistic movie, so I can see how some (especially those critics) would be skeptical.  But really, that's what I think movies can do best, and this film succeeds thoroughly with it.  Tomorrowland itself is seen just briefly - rather, the journey to get there is the focus, led by an odd but brilliant trio of Clooney (so dependable), teen Robertson, and the revelation Raffey Cassidy (read my acting awards for more on her).  It's a good old, well-paced adventure, one with an earnest but important message.  Please see this!

5.  Spotlight (directed by Tom McCarthy; starring Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, et. al.)

I feared I might not get to see this in theaters, but at last, long since all the awards hype had built up, it came to my neck of the woods.  Fortunately, Spotlight indeed deserves the Best Picture buzz that it's getting.  Much like two of the year's other best films, Selma and The Big Short, it not only effectively portrays a historical event, it also offers a great human drama to further elevate it.  The ensemble is fantastic, not just co-leads Keaton and Ruffalo, but also McAdams and Schreiber.  The actors, along with a great script and pacing, lends surprising tension to the journalistic process.  And in interviews with the victims of priest abuse, the personal, individual horrors become real in a way that does justice.  This isn't great dramatic filmmaking or important filmmaking - it's both.

4.  Jurassic World (directed by Colin Trevorrow; starring Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, et. al.)

Since Jurassic Park is my favorite movie of all-time, my anticipation of this first new installment in fourteen years was huge.  No, it isn't nearly as good as the original, but it's still an extremely entertaining movie, so much so that its box office explosion is not all that surprising.  Chris Pratt, one of my favorite up-and-comers, is the new franchise lead and somewhat symbolizes the new tone: a little silly, yes, but also solid.  Jurassic World retains a bit of Spielberg's original penchant for hiding the great beasts, but when it goes all out, it goes all out.  The dinosaur melee at the end may have been ridiculous, but to 6-year-old me, it was AWESOME ridiculous as I cheered on T-rex with a pounding heart.  It was all I could ask for from a follow up to my personal favorite.

3.  Selma (directed by Ava DuVernay; starring David Oyelowo, Tom Wilkinson, Carmen Ejogo, et. al.)

The first 2015-released film I saw, Selma was a great omen for how the rest of the year would go in film.  This is a classic, one that should go down as one of the best historical dramas of all time.  Like Lincoln, writer-director DuVernay and company wisely chose to focus on a limited time period in this first major motion picture to feature Martin Luther King, Jr.  It allowed David Oyelowo space to not just grasp the moments of triumph but also to exist as a regular human - and wow, did that result in one of the finest performances I've ever seen.  The script is great (including custom-written speeches due to rights restrictions), and DuVernay paces the proceedings to expertly build tension and urgency.  But it's Oyelowo who ultimately brings out both the drama and the historical impact.

2.  Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens (directed by J.J. Abrams; starring Harrison Ford, Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, et. al.)

If there was one film that could match my anticipation of a new Jurassic film this year, it was a new Star Wars.  If anything, my interest (and concern) over the creative choices taken for The Force Awakens were even greater here.  Fortunately, in the hands of J.J. Abrams, one of today's best creative minds, and his team transitioning to a new trilogy, the Force is as strong as ever.  Harrison Ford digs back thirty years in flawlessly recalling fan-favorite Han Solo.  Even more importantly, the new leads are great and have plenty of promise: Ridley, a revolutionarily good female lead; Boyega, charismatic supporting player with a surprising background; and Driver, the villain who I at first didn't like but is growing on me fast.  And of course there are great lightsaber duels and space dogfights (with better choreography and effects than ever), humor, galactic stakes, cute droids, a John Williams score, and fun.  I've got a bad good feeling about this new trilogy.

1.  Inside Out (directed by Pete Docter and Ronnie del Carmen; starring Amy Poehler, Bill Hader, Mindy Kaling, et. al.)

In a year with plenty of tremendous dramas and highly-anticipated, well-made action films, my favorite is... once again, an animated film.  None of the other films can quite match Pixar's best film yet, not the combination of how good it was and how much I enjoyed it.  Yes, Pixar is the little studio than can.  Like all the studio's best films, Inside Out explores universal human ideas while providing an 1.5 hours' worth entertainment for both young and old.  It knows just where to hit the emotional buttons, but also brings the laughs almost constantly.  It dazzles you with ever-better animation technology while grounding it in solid storytelling.  With Inside Out, the sheer creativity hits a high mark - the main characters are a little girl's emotions, living in her head.  And just to blow our minds even more, the core theme behind it all is perhaps Pixar's most elemental yet:  the weird, wonderful paradox of our feelings and how they help us grow up, make us human.  To top it all off, for me, the voice actors include some of my favorite (and perfectly chosen) comedians including Amy Poehler, Bill Hader, Mindy Kaling, and Lewis Black.  Really, I could have chosen several different films on this list as the #1 movie in an amazing year.  But Inside Out brings the essence of all that cumulative greatness together into one film.


Honorable Mentions:  The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2; Kingsman: The Secret Service; Spy


Miscellaneous Awards:

Most Overrated Film of the Year:  Furious 7 (runner-up:  Bridge of Spies)
As a testament to the strength of 2015 in film, it didn't really matter that Spielberg's was just decent, well below his usual standards.  Yet it has a 91% on Rotten Tomatoes and has a Best Picture nomination.  Sure, it's good, but it took the place of much more deserving films.  That's nothing, though, compared to how overrated Furious 7 (the whole franchise, really) is on both a popular and critical level.  81% on Rotten Tomatoes???  Really?!?  And never mind the U.S. box office receipts ($350 million, including *sigh* about $7 bucks from me); it has made more internationally than The Force Awakens.  I could write an entire blog post about how mind-numbingly insane that is, but suffice it to say, wtf.

Most Underrated Film of the Year:  Tomorrowland (runner-up:  The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2)
I get it a little bit with the last Hunger Games:  many people are (understandably) tired of the YA apocalyptic stuff and the whole splitting one book into two movies.  Thus the last entry has made the least money, by far, and second-lowest Rotten Tomatoes score.  Ironically though, this is the best film of the series.  I already mentioned in my top 10 that Tomorrowland is underrated - to the tune of a meager $93 million at the box office and a criminally-ignorant 49% on Rotten Tomatoes.  Was everyone just that mesmerized by Mad Max the week before?  Give it a try, you won't regret it.

Most Disappointing Film of the Year:  Chappie (runner-up:  Terminator Genisys)
Huge film franchises popped up everywhere you looked in 2015, but the new Terminator was almost immediately forgotten about.  Basically, they just tried too hard with Genisys, with a dizzying new plot and overkill on the explosions - hopefully this won't terminate (sorry) the franchise, though.  Seven years ago, it looked like District 9 director Neill Blomkamp was going to take over the sci-fi movie world.  He followed it up with the decent but underwhelming Elysium and now the disappointing Chappie.  Sometimes potential doesn't work out, though if he can keep the interesting ideas coming maybe he can turn it around.

Most Surprisingly Good Film of the Year:  Kingsman: The Secret Service (runner-up:  Ant-Man)
It worked with Guardians of the Galaxy, so Marvel tried another non-traditional superhero film with Ant-Man - and it worked again.  Paul Rudd is a great choice (comedically, of course, but also the other aspects of the character, too) and it was just a lot of fun.  Keep it up, Marvel.  Kingsman seemed to be a sort of "lets throw lots of cool stuff at the wall and see what happens" approach - but damn if it didn't turn out really well.  Colin Firth is an excellent James Bond/mentor type, and marrying that 007-spy plot with a youngster-in-training idea worked great.  Add in great humor and gonzo action scenes - no surprise, coming from Matthew Vaughn, one of my favorite directors - and you have a really, really fun movie.

Worst Film of the Year:  Insurgent (runner-up:  Furious 7)
So I already ranted about Furious 7 and its perplexing success... but I'll do some more.  Blockbusters rarely produce great acting performances, but Furious 7 has notably bad ones, led by possibly the worst actor of all time, Vin Diesel.  It's cleanly produced, the effects are good, and the Paul Walker tribute is surprisingly sensitive, I'll give it that.  But the plot is beyond incoherent/irrelevant, and the action shifts between stupidly implausible and boringly cliche.  Moving on... the worst film I saw (or at least started to see) was Insurgent, the second film in the Divergent series.  This is where YA fatigue should genuinely have kicked in.  Divergent had good energy, performances and chemistry - Insurgent has none of that, and it exposes the ridiculous premise behind the series more (people are sorted into "camps" based on their strongest personality traits - bravery, intelligence, selflessness, etc.).  Watching on Netflix, I turned this off a little past half way through, so maybe it got better, but the first half gave no encouraging signs of life whatsoever.



Netflix Summary:

The End of the Tour (A-):  A struggling Rolling Stone writer interviews David Foster Wallace, who has just published his masterpiece Infinite Jest, and the pair grapple as they become friends.  Doesn't sound like much, but the leads are excellent and the script is realistic and interesting as it examines a new relationship between two pretty normal people.
Mr. Holmes (A-):  Ian McKellen plays an aging Sherlock, retired and getting to know his maid's son, while in flashbacks we learn about the case that brought him to his end.  McKellen is fantastic as both active and retired Holmes, and the parallel stories expertly combine classic Sherlock mystery with real heart.
Welcome to Me (A-):  A woman with borderline personality disorder wins the lottery... and uses the money to start her own talk show.  Kristen Wiig shows her phenomenal acting range, not just hilarious but also movingly authentic and sensitive with the character - which describes the movie itself, too, a unique and must-see film.
Testament of Youth (B+):  Based on a WWI memoir, Alicia Vikander is a young Englishwoman whose bright potential is utterly transformed by the darkness of the consuming war.  It's too long and at times melodramatic, but the second half improves considerably and ends very powerfully.
While We're Young (B+):  A young couple struggling with both career and family building meets another couple - one that appears to have everything that they want, but isn't what it seems.  Darkly funny, this is potentially pretentious but I think rises above that to show realistic relationships and common struggles both for and against success and integrity.
American Sniper (B+):  An American ready to serve his country ends up becoming one of the deadliest fighters in the Iraq war, though he struggles to come home, mentally and emotionally.  Much of the film is tense and well-made, and Bradley Cooper does a good job, but I felt it leaned a bit jingoistic; the home front is also ineffective.
Ex Machina (B):  An eccentric tech CEO brings one of his employees to a remote base to test the authenticity of his AI creation.  It has that weird scifi vibe that I actually don't like much, but it's well made.  Creative and creepy.
Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (B):  A teen just trying to make it through high school unscathed is forced to hangout with a classmate just diagnosed with cancer, and the two become close.  Despite frequently being nauseatingly quirky and feeling a little too familiar, it manages to be quite clever and moving at times as well.
Focus (B):  Aspiring con Jess tries her game on the wrong guy, veteran con Nicky, but the two work together and gradually become involved in an intricate game.  The twists and turns are far-fetched at times and it's a little formulaic, but it's also quite entertaining; good chemistry between the stars (Will Smith and Margot Robbie).
Vacation (B):  Son Rusty, now a grown man with his own family, takes another trip to Walley World, experiencing a new set of adventures along the way.  Granted, I don't remember the original at all, but this was quite well done.  Ed Helms is a good choice, and the humor is generally clever and effective, avoiding and/or overcoming too much cliche.
Pixels (B-):  An alien invasion strikes Earth, and only Adam Sandler and his friends from youth can take them on when they arrive as classic video games.  I usually dislike Sandler as much as the next guy, but this was fun:  decent humor, inventive, and Peter Dinklage.  Don't listen to the critics on this one.
The Man From UNCLE (B-):  All-star spies from America and the Soviet Union are forced to team up in order to prevent a nuke from falling into the wrong hands.  The actors are charismatic, but the script is poor and unremarkable; you're much better off sticking with its big brother 007.
Jupiter Ascending (C):  A "common" woman discovers that she's actually the heir to a powerful galactic empire, and a rogue alien arrives to save her from being removed from the line.  What little that isn't poorly done in this film is available in many other scifi action films; not completely terrible, but skip it.
Son of a Gun (C):  A young man jailed for a minor crime gets pulled into a major crime ring, and struggles to escape as he aids in daring heists.  It has some inventiveness, but it's overlong and even dull at times, and the story overall is too familiar and cliche.  Skip.
Insurgent (C-):  Tris continues her mission to subvert the ruling order in post-apocalyptic Chicago, which has divided the population by their personalities (the smart ones, the brave ones, etc.).  While the first Divergent movie was quite good despite my skepticism, the first sequel utterly crashed and burned.  I even stopped it before the end, something I rarely do.


Full reviews of other films I saw in 2015 (not previously mentioned in this post):

Trainwreck (A-)
Avengers 2: Age of Ultron (A-)
The Hateful Eight (B+)
Steve Jobs (B+)
The Martian (B+)
Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation (B+)
Get Hard (B)
Sisters (B-)
Blackhat (B-)



I hope you enjoyed this year-in-review.  Even more, I hope that you got to enjoy at least a portion of this amazing year in film in the theater.  If not, then warm up your Netflix/iTunes/whatever, and fast!  This year was a hard act to follow, but hopefully there will be more to enjoy in 2016, too.




"A Total Gem - Inside Out Movie Reviw" https://www.flickr.com/photos/bagogames/19995797742

2015 Cinema & Stadium Film Awards

2015 Cinema & Stadium Film Awards

Last year was an exceptional one for film overall, and so unsurprisingly there were many outstanding performances among the diverse films that I got to see.  To highlight the ones I thought were best, here is my third annual Oscar-style awards post.  Feel free to comment on where you agree or disagree with my selections.  I've pointed out, as well, the "real" Oscar nominees and why I didn't nominate some of them for my awards.  Only films that were released widely in 2015 were eligible.


I hope you enjoy, and please also check out my film year-in-review post here, where I pick my top 10 movies of the year, give out other miscellaneous awards, and more.


Acting Awards

Best Actor:
Michael Fassbender (Steve Jobs)
Harrison Ford (Star Wars: The Force Awakens)
Ian McKellen (Mr. Holmes)
David Oyelowo (Selma)
Jason Segel (The End of the Tour)

Oscar nominees not named here:  Bryan Cranston (Trumbo) - haven't seen the film; Matt Damon (The Martian) - I don't think he merits a nomination above the others; Eddie Redmayne (The Danish Girl) - didn't qualify due to wide release in 2016.

First of all, I want to give very honorable mentions to two different co-leads in top films from 2015:  Christian Bale and Steve Carell in The Big Short, and Michael Keaton and Mark Ruffalo in Spotlight.  Due to sharing the spotlight (pun intended), none of them had quite substantial enough roles for my nomination, but all of them were outstanding and worthy of recognition.

I had my (serious) doubts about the old Star Wars coming back for The Force Awakens, but Harrison Ford completely obliterated them in easily resuming his iconic role.  Ian McKellen was fantastic as Sherlock in Mr. Holmes, both frail old man and genius sleuth in other parts.  Jason Segel blew me away with his acting chops in inhabiting a simultaneously eccentric and normal David Foster Wallace in The End of the Tour.  Michael Fassbender continues to up the ante with his astonishing performances in playing the title role in Steve Jobs.  He easily snaps out Sorkin's smart, rapidfire script in conveying both the technical genius and frequent social failings of his character.

But the best was David Oyelowo as Martin Luther King, Jr., in Selma.  "Overwhelming" would be understating the pressure on Oyelowo in playing the civil rights hero.  Still, I felt like I was watching a living, breathing legend on the screen; his King had that presence at all times, yet he also shows  vulnerability when he (King) allowed himself to.  Selma must be seen, for many reasons but Oyelowo's performance is among the top.  It is one of the very best that I've ever seen.  The Academy's failure to even nominate him is likely the worst Oscar snub of all time.


Best Actress:
Emily Blunt (Sicario)
Daisy Ridley (Star Wars: The Force Awakens)
Charlize Theron (Mad Max: Fury Road)
Alicia Vikander (Testament of Youth)
Kristen Wiig (Welcome to Me)

Oscar nominees not named here:  ummm... all of them - I have not seen any of the films (Carol, Room - neither of which would have qualified for me, anyway, due to wide releases in 2016 - Brooklyn, Joy, and 45 Years)

I want to start, once again, by naming an honorable mention; here, it is to Jennifer Lawrence for her role in The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2.  I made it plain that I didn't think much of her in the first three films, but it finally clicked to terrific effect for the last one.  Alicia Vikander, seen all over the place in film in 2015, did especially well in carrying the WWI memoir-based Testament of Youth, with building heartbreak.  Charlize Theron proved her toughness again as the true hero of the great Mad Max reboot this summer, equaling her male action counterparts.  Emily Blunt provides a piece of humanity to cling to in the chilling Sicario, as she swims against a current of darkness.  Daisy Ridley was a true wonder, a previous unknown within the galactic-sized Star Wars franchise.  Making her predecessor Luke look pathetic in comparison, she not only gave an excellent performance but her character stands as a great model for a generation of strong female leads and heroes.

Among a strong assembly of performances, Kristen Wiig stands out for her work in Welcome to Me.  Known of course for her comedic brilliance, I don't think any other actress could have pulled off her borderline personality disorder-affected character as well.  She's frequently hilarious, though always deadly serious in her respect to the character and her condition.  I didn't predict the Academy to recognize her, but it's their loss; do yourself a big favor and check out this funny, poignant, and excellent film led by Wiig's performance.


Best Supporting Actor:
Colin Firth (Kingsman: The Secret Service)
Ryan Gosling (The Big Short)
Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies)
Liev Shreiber (Spotlight)
Benicio del Toro (Sicario)

Oscar nominees not named here:  Christian Bale (The Big Short) and Mark Ruffalo (Spotlight) - I didn't think they fit in this category (but are definitely awards-worthy); Tom Hardy (The Revenant) - didn't qualify due to wide release in 2016; and Sylvester Stallone (Creed) - haven't seen the film.


Ryan Gosling's part in The Big Short is minimal, but he really digs into it with an almost sick gusto, stepping up to his co-stars' level.  On the opposite end is Colin Firth in Kingsman, who gets close to a lead role but was so effective as a deadly yet gentlemanly agent that he deserves mention as well.  Liev Schreiber's character in Spotlight plays a pivotal role in the plot - but he extends the part well beyond just a device to a give it true depth.  Benicio del Toro is literally scary good in Sicario; early on he is superbly restrained yet highly menacing.  Never losing control, he joins the ranks of Anton Chigurh as film villains go.

All those roles make way for the best of the year, Mark Rylance in Spielberg's Bridge of Spies.  He shines most effectively in the opening sequence - which not coincidentally is by far the best in the whole film.  Both his character and his performance play tricks on the audience:  he is a frail old man whose spying does far more damage than Red Army divisions; and his almost unbelievable quiet is made up for by unbelievably expressive body language.  A great performance.


Best Supporting Actress:
Rose Byrne (Spy)
Raffey Cassidy (Tomorrowland)
Jennifer Jason Leigh (The Hateful Eight)
Rachel McAdams (Spotlight)
Kate Winslet (Steve Jobs)

Oscar nominees not mentioned here:  Rooney Mara (Carol), Alicia Vikander (The Danish Girl) - didn't qualify due to wide release in 2016.

Rose Byrne continues her development as a scene-stealing comic actress in Melissa McCarthy's Spy, with an effortless, clever take on a femme fatale.  Rachel McAdams may be overshadowed in some ways by her male co-stars, but she also shows the most heart in a genuine, poignant performance.  Kate Winslet's character gets the thankless job of trying to keep up with the grind, exhausting Steve Jobs, but audiences thank her for her steadying and much-needed empathy.  Jennifer Jason Leigh plays the Joker of Westerns in The Hateful Eight, with nearly as much glee and skill as Heath Ledger.  In a film filled with dangerous men with hair-trigger paranoia, her character is chillingly - madly - calm.

This may be my oddest acting award selection in three years.  But to me, young Raffey Cassidy's performance in Tomorrowland is the strongest in the category.  And not because she had no competition; I was transfixed by her work.  Younger actors have a tendency to over do it, whatever the role, but Cassidy harnessed an incredible energy and magic into a restrained, professional performance.  The film is one of my favorites of the year, and she is its heart and soul.  Bravo.



Other Awards

Best Director:
J.J. Abrams (Star Wars: The Force Awakens)
Pete Docter, Ronnie del Carmen (Inside Out)
Ava DuVernay (Selma)
Tom McCarthy (Spotlight)
Adam McKay (The Big Short)

2016 Oscar nominees not named here:  

My honorable mention for this category goes to Denis Villeneuve for Sicario; though not quite as good as Prisoners, he is clearly one of today's best filmmakers with a distinct style both artistic and entertaining.  And now I'm going to cheat here, and say that I have no winner in this category - they all did such fantastic yet diverse work that I can't choose just one - or two.

J.J. Abrams brought the biggest film franchise of all time - and if you couldn't tell by all the box office records The Force Awakens has obliterated, yes, he was very successful.  The pressure was beyond any other anticipated blockbuster, yet he navigated the famed galaxy far away by keeping just the right amount of the old feel and adding in a great new core of characters.  Ava DuVernay rallied a bravura solo performance (Oyelowo) together with a broader tension-building plot - and great care and patience for historical detail with relevance to contemporary society - for the outstanding Selma.  Tom McCarthy and Adam McKay, in Spotlight and The Big Short, respectively, fostered stellar ensemble casts in stories seemingly too boring and/or technical for great drama but resulted in great entertainment and impact.  And Docter and del Carmen directed the animated efforts of Inside Out, the greatest film by of a gold-standard studio (Pixar), harnessing the creative but insane idea of emotions as characters in a classic story full of heart.


Best Screenplay:
Donald Margulies (The End of the Tour)*
   *based on Although Of Course You End Up Becoming Yourself by David Lipsky
Tom McCarthy, Josh Singer (Spotlight)
Adam McKay, Charles Randolph (The Big Short)*
   *based on The Big Short by Michael Lewis
Aaron Sorkin (Steve Jobs)*
   *based on Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson
Paul Webb (Selma)

Best Visual Effects:
Ant-Man
Avengers 2: Age of Ultron
Jurassic World
Mad Max: Fury Road
Star Wars: The Force Awakens





"Academy Award trophy" by Source (WP:NFCC#4). Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Academy_Award_trophy.jpg#/media/File:Academy_Award_trophy.jpg

Spotlight

Score:  ****1/2 out of ***** (A)

Directed by Tom McCarthy
Starring Mark Ruffalo, Michael Keaton, Rachel McAdams, et. al.
Running time:  129 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  Spotlight is a historical drama based on the 2001 Boston Globe investigation into the Catholic Church's priest abuse cover up.  Featuring a non-showy but fantastic cast and a remarkable script, the drama is very interesting and entertaining.  But it also reports the real story itself both vividly and powerfully, making for an unforgettable film.  A must-see.


In 2001, the Boston Globe goes through a major transition, hiring editor Marty Baron (Schreriber), an outsider among a staff of mostly Boston natives.  One of Baron's first actions is to get to know the Globe's crack investigative team, known as Spotlight.  Led by Walter Robinson (Keaton), the team of four spends months doing in-depth research on individual reports.  Initially skeptical of the returns on this slow, expensive process, Baron nevertheless gives them a chance by putting them on the case of a possible cover-up by Cardinal Law of a local priest's pedophilia.  Spotlight is doubtful of the case; as city natives, they know how central the Catholic Church is to the city.  Not only will this make the investigation sensitive, it also gives them few good sources to work with.

Still, Robinson and his team of Michael (Ruffalo), Sacha (McAdams), and Matt (James) dig in and begin to find out things that startle them.  Working with an ostracized victims' rights activist and a harried but determined victims' lawyer, among others, Spotlight finds that the initial abuse case was hardly isolated.  Even more disturbingly, a pattern of behavior in hiding the cases emerges.  Despite  intimidation from some of the most powerful figures in the city, and intervening events (9/11), the team brings the case to its shocking, but essential, conclusion.

Spotlight features a rather odd assembly of actors for its ensemble, but one that works brilliantly together.  Spotlight, the group, is a true team and therefore there is no one main character.  So I'll start with Michael Keaton as Robinson, the coordinator.  The script, and Keaton himself, could have tried to make this the star of the show, wise and heroic.  He is both of those things, but not in a Hollywood way.  As is true for all the Spotlight members, Robinson is a nose-to-the-grindstone everyman whose journalistic experience, and specifically to Boston, flows naturally from Keaton's performance.  As a decision-maker, Robinson can't afford to be quite as idealistic or passionate as the others, forcing some truly agonizing decisions on him and recalling painful past mistakes.  An excellent job, if not a showy one.  Mark Ruffalo's Michael is next up, as he is the most fervently involved.  His dogged persistence as a journalist, undeterred by failure, is realistically done - comes across as the practiced professional - especially early in the film.  Ruffalo gets the most of the film's few bursts of emotion, and they are both genuine and feel earned.  Excellent work here, too.  McAdams' Sacha is next, not featured quite as much as Keaton or Ruffalo but still crucial.  She is often even more understated than her two co-stars, although she makes for an excellent audience surrogate in her interviews of the priests' victims.  The heart of Spotlight in many ways, McAdams does a really impressive job.  I've seen Keaton do this before (Birdman), but I had not seen such bravura performances from Ruffalo or McAdams before.  Now I know they are capable, too.  Brian d'Arcy James is the fourth member of the team, but he's the odd man out; not much to say here, he's fine but irrelevant.

It's worth pointing out a few of the non-Spotlight actors as well.  John Slattery and especially Liev Schreiber as the Globe editor are both great "others" at the paper.  Schreiber's Baron has to deal with everyone else's skepticism of him (minor or major) as a non-Bostonian (and Jew).  Yet he portrays great confidence and competence, and quietly moves forward against all opposition.  Stanley Tucci is great as a bedraggled victims' lawyer, his keen intelligence and constant state of annoyance/ exasperation on display.  And finally (though there are more good ones), Neal Huff as Saviano, a victims' advocate, steals a few scenes and is among the first to inject the moral urgency of the story.

A "biographical drama" about the Globe's investigation of the priest abuse cover-up in 2001, Spotlight succeeds brilliantly in both providing an immersive story and conveying the horror of the realities of the case.  A ton of credit should be given to the writers:  despite the fact that we know the outcome (although familiarity with the details may vary), and the not very Hollywood-like stakes, the film is riveting, dramatic throughout, and even suspenseful occasionally.  The pace is great, and even when a certain inevitability starts in, alternate foci (past journalistic mistakes, etc.) slide in naturally to compensate.  It can be difficult for a script to know just how much to tell about its characters - how deep to go - and Spotlight gets that just right.  Its characters are fully realized humans, but we aren't distracted from the main story ever.  Although Spotlight works on the steady, grounded work of its journalists, there are moments of excitement in the everyday, too.  As a librarian, I was especially happy to find some good scenes of searching the archives and even using microfilm (don't worry, there's not too much of that but it really is fun!).

Alongside the great dramatic structure and proceedings, Spotlight also engages the real subject matter head on in powerful ways.  It starts with interviews of victims, now adult, and the authentic weight of their retelling is chilling, shocking, and likely to bring you to tears.  It's not done sensationally, but it drove home, for me, the reality of the effects, both short- and long-term, better than anything else I've read or seen.  Scenes dealing with the lawyers and the Church itself are not as powerful, of course, but no less effective.  Yes, there are some true villains, but many of the responsible were just part of a huge web, their lying eventually becoming a habit whose true meaning became lost to them.  So by the end, culminating in a perfect last shot, you get a sense of the scope of that historic Globe report.  I should also mention its clear message about the importance of good journalism itself, under threat by today's demand for instant gratification which is symbolized here by everything from the Globe's circulation pressures to a big AOL billboard, among others.

***

Spotlight finishes off the year 2015 in spectacular fashion, a film absolutely worthy of its awards nominations (and wins).  It shares a lot in common with other fantastic 2015 films*, Selma and The Big Short, though of course they are quite different in other ways.  Essentially, these films took major historical developments (from the recent past, at that) and ingeniously combined both vivid, effective portraits of those real events with the most engaging drama and characters that you can find in Hollywood.  Frankly I'm often skeptical about historical films - especially of recent events - because they can rely too much on "but it's a true story!" and overdramatize events.  However, these three films not only avoided those pitfalls, they embraced the opportunities of using real life to make their films that much better.  What a way to end the year, possibly the best year in the modern era for film.  Stay tuned to my blog next week for my traditional year-end posts:  top 10 films, Oscar-type awards, and more.  And certainly, if you have the chance make sure you see Spotlight.

*I define a film's release year as the date of its wide release in the U.S.  Thus Selma is a 2015 film (January 9) as is Spotlight (November 25) - though "wide release" still sometimes means only in cities since Spotlight just got to my (rural) area last week.





"Spotlight (film) poster" by Source. Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spotlight_(film)_poster.jpg#/media/File:Spotlight_(film)_poster.jpg

The Hateful Eight

Score:  **** out of ***** (B+)

Directed by Quentin Tarantino
Starring Kurt Russell, Samuel L. Jackson, Jennifer Jason Leigh, et. al.
Running time:  167 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  The Hateful Eight is Tarantino's latest, and also one of his longest and slowest films yet.  Fear not - you still get everything you expect from Tarantino, from the great dialogue to the inventiveness to the suspense.  And led by Russell, Jackson, Goggins and Leigh, the cast and characters are among his best ever.  Still, it is long, so you may want to Netflix this and watch it in pieces.  If you can get through it, you'll have more to think about than the ever-present gore.


Shortly after the Civil War, a stagecoach carrying a bounty hunter (Russell) and his prize (Leigh) charges through the harsh winter Wyoming landscape.  Trying to outrun an approaching blizzard, they come upon a man on foot, another bounty hunter (Jackson) hauling trophies - dead ones - of his own.  Ruth allows Warren to hitch a ride on the stagecoach, but before long they oddly come across another man on foot in the brutal conditions.  Claiming he is the new sheriff of the next town over, Ruth and Warren grudgingly let him on, too.  Ruth the bounty hunter grows more nervous all the time, now traveling with a prisoner, another bounty hunter, and a man who may be a sheriff (or just after the prize money).  Before reaching town, they are forced to stop at a small lodge, Minnie's Haberdashery, where four other men already stay - but Minnie's nowhere to be found.

Forced together by the storm, it's a cramped and tense environment.  Ruth not only has to keep a close eye on his prisoner but also keep the other on the seven strangers he doesn't know or trust.  Surprises and circumstances lead to confrontations, and each of the eight just hopes to be the last man standing - and out of Minnie's little lodge.

As usual, Tarantino has assembled a fine cast for The Hateful Eight and they bring life to the character-driven film.  Kurt Russell is the main character, bounty hunter John Ruth, whose transporting of his prisoner is the basis of the plot.  Gruff, rough, and independent, Ruth is still earnest and likable.  Russell does a very good job grounding Ruth as the central player around whom the others revolve, yet not resorting to turning him into a hero.  If one thing is true in this film it's that appearances are deceiving, though Ruth is more straightforward than the others, and thus more sympathetic.  Samuel L. Jackson is next up as former Union soldier turned bounty hunter Warren.  Warren is an amiable character, though he's also (understandably) skeptical of his companions.  Tarantino creates a rich and complex backstory for his frequent muse, though I won't spoil it.  Suffice it to say the character suits Jackson perfectly, and he doesn't let us down with his combo of smooth, cool control and righteous, withering outbursts.  Walton Goggins, an actor I know from Justified, plays Mannix, the apparent new sheriff hitching a ride.  A former Confederate, he is the opposite of Warren in many ways yet also possesses the same cool head and savvy.  Mannix reminds me a lot of Goggins' character on Justified (besides just being a Southerner) - I'm equally impressed with the smooth charm he can display yet always underlying it is a dangerous menace.  Rounding out the main characters is Jennifer Jason Leigh's Domergue, Ruth's prisoner.  She doesn't get many lines, and early on seems almost a mute savage, a simultaneously crafty and thick one at that.  She often sinks into the background - probably intentionally - as the boys do the talking (and make the mistakes).  Fully immersed in the revolting character, Jason Leigh does a great job and when she gets the spotlight she makes the most of it.

The other cast members do well in their various supporting roles.  Perhaps the best of them is Bruce Dern as a former Confederate general.  He has quite a confrontation with Jackson's Warren which is spectacular, but otherwise conveys the subtle complexity of an extremely bigoted old man worn down by both age and experience.  Tim Roth is one of the more fun and upbeat characters to watch as, coincidentally, the man who is to hang Domergue.  Playing the diplomat in confrontations, he still always seems to be scheming just behind the smile.  The others do fine as well, and there is one major role toward the end that I'll keep a surprise.

A slow-build Western, Tarantino's latest film is less action-packed and more thoughtful than his recent films - for both better and worse.  Adding to the slower nature of the film is its considerable running time of two hours, forty-five minutes.  Filling all this time, besides a few extended shots of the landscape, is the rich roster of characters I've just described.  Tarantino is definitely strong when it comes to dialogue and trademark tense scenes - here, the former is certainly apparent though surprisingly the latter does not really show up.  There is absolutely tension, but it is more spread out rather than concentrated in a few scenes (other than one, but since it's the climax I don't count it as part of Tarantino's usual style).  The overall tensions and the relationships that rise and fall among the characters are the main focus here and it's a credit to Tarantino and the actors that's enough to sustain the film, at least most of the way.  Warren and Mannix's relationship in particular is crackling to start, and the way that it subtly evolves as the two move beyond the initial black-Southerner conflict is fascinating.  In fact, the resolution of that relationship is the resolution of the film, a surprising one that nonetheless is both believable and poignant.

***

The Hateful Eight is not my favorite Tarantino film, but it's a favorable sign that as I think back on it, I gravitate to the strengths rather than the weaknesses.  The film is too long - quite simply, that is the main reason that this is not in the "A" range.  I don't think I'd want to go back and watch it again soon because of that.  There's just too much filler, even if none of it is entirely wasteful or pointless.  Yet in some ways, it is the very length of the film and the (sometimes frustrating) pace that sets the tone of the film, and it's a good one.  I scored Django higher than this, but I'm much in doubt that it's actually a better film.  Easier to sit through and enjoy the shorter, more action-packed proceedings, sure.  But Hateful Eight's characters certainly make a much larger impression, and leave you more to chew on afterward.  I guess in conclusion, this is a very worthy addition to Tarantino's filmography and while it retains his distinct style and strengths, it does so in ways that are enjoyed and appreciated much differently.  As always, there is plenty of gore here - not the whole way through - so you know whether you should avoid it (or at least be ready to cover your eyes).  If you can get through that, then I highly recommend this either in the theater or via Netflix.




"The Hateful Eight" by Source (WP:NFCC#4). Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Hateful_Eight.jpg#/media/File:The_Hateful_Eight.jpg

Sisters

Score:  ***1/2 out of ***** (B-)

Directed by Jason Moore
Starring Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, Ike Barinholtz
Running time:  118 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  Sisters is the latest comedy from the fan-favorite duo Tina Fey and Amy Poehler.  Throwing one last party in the old family home, the two adopt a raunchier comedy style than usual.  While the two stars are fun to watch as always (and helped by a few of the usual good cameos), the new blend of comedy just doesn't work as well as you'd hope.  An overworked story also pushes the film too long, so feel free to wait for this one on Netflix.


Adult sisters Kate (Fey) and Maura (Poehler) appear to have been separated at birth:  the latter is a successful, recently divorced nurse, while the former is an unemployed single mother of an estranged teenage daughter.  For Maura, life seems just fine until she gets a call from her parents who tell her that they will be selling the family house to move into a smaller place.  Rattled by this news, Maura informs Kate and thinks they should use the opportunity to reconnect and revisit their past.  Once there, Kate and Maura become nostalgic and decide to throw one last party at the house.  They invite all their old friends as well as a new guy who caught Maura's eye - and specifically forbid an old rival of Kate's (Rudolph).

It takes a little while for the party to get going, but get going it does.  As they say goodbye to their old home in one last bash, the sisters also grapple with their adult identities.  Can Kate become more responsible, a better parent for her daughter?  Can Maura finally loosen up and embrace a passion?  One of those might sound more appropriate to a party than the other, but all that and more comes together in one wild night.

Sisters is populated by an impressive comedic cast.  Tina Fey and Amy Poehler star as the titular sisters, probably the biggest comedy duo working today.  Both SNL alums, they also both helmed hilarious comedies on NBC (30 Rock and Parks and Recreation) but have yet to find big success in the movies.  The good friends have great comedic chemistry, and it's not difficult at all to buy them as sisters.  I was surprised by how far Fey takes her bad girl character - it is rated R, after all - while Poehler's sister is calmer (much less exuberant than Parks' Leslie).  Despite more comfort on the small screen, they both easily hold the audience's attention for a film's longer running time.  Maya Rudolph (another SNL alum) plays rival Brinda, with only hints of her previous zanier characters but just as great as always.  Ike Barinholtz, a comedy vet himself, is pretty bland as the romantic interest.  There are plenty of small roles at the party, the funniest (to me) being those by Bobby Moynihan (current SNL) who accidentally gets a rather large dose of drugs, and Rachel Dratch (former SNL) who channels Debbie Downer in waxing poetic on the aging process.

Sisters is a fairly conventional party comedy whose most notable feature is, of course, its high-powered pair of leads.  Perhaps because of its convenionality, the film achieves neither too high of highs nor low of lows from the comedy.  There are certain comedic elements that many may come to expect from a Fey-Poehler production - clever wackiness, sharp asides that spare no one particularly themselves, a generally positive tone, etc.  These are all here, particularly in the first part of the film, but they mold it into the frame of the party subgenre, too.  The result is... OK, by their standards.  Once it comes to the party wildness, there are some good exchanges between characters (particularly some of the SNL cameo roles) but the stunts often feel forced and don't work that well.  Even early on, where Fey and Poehler are at their strength mostly just talking with each other, the "need" to make it raunchier or highlight Kate's nastiness saps the level of creativity - and humor.  The story, as I've said before, being an obligatory yet often quite crucial element, starts with a jolting abruptness and has a few too many branches growing off it.  There's nothing bad about it, but also not much interesting, either.

***

Sisters ranks as a decent comedy, though by the standards (mine, anyway) for Fey and Poehler it ranks as a disappointment.  The strength of their comic acting and chemistry is good enough to make it watchable, by all means, the supporting cast adds some nice touches throughout, and there are some funny moments.  I can also certainly see that this might appeal more to other people/demographics (this occurred to me more than a few times while watching it).  The premise has potential, and ultimately Fey and Poehler tried to go broader with their humor here.  Apparently not sufficiently helped by others while they worked outside of their comfort zone, though, their own brand of humor also was less effective.  And at two hours, it's also simply too long.  Removing some elements of the story entirely and tightening some of the sets would have helped other areas of the movie tremendously, too.  I hope Fey and Poehler continue to work together, but they can and have done much better.  Netflix this if you're a fan of theirs, but not really worth a trip to the theater.




"Sisters movie poster" by Source. Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sisters_movie_poster.jpg#/media/File:Sisters_movie_poster.jpg

The Big Short

Score:  ****1/2 out of ***** (A)

Directed by Adam McKay
Starring Christian Bale, Steve Carell, Brad Pitt and Ryan Gosling
Running time:  130 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  The Big Short is a dramedy with documentary elements (your own description may differ!) based on the nonfiction book about the 2008 financial crisis.  The script does a fantastic job developing the drama while explaining the complex stuff, and the superb cast led by Christian Bale and Steve Carell bring it all to life exceptionally well.  Plus, it's even funny!  A must see.


In 2005, the American housing market was making a lot of money for a lot of people.  The good times kept rolling, and everyone thought they would keep going that way.  Almost everyone.  Some things are too good to be true, and eccentric hedge fund manager Michael Burry (Bale) takes a closer look at the numbers.  Sure enough, he finds a large degree of risk due to increasingly poor loans, and decides, against conventional wisdom, to bet against the market with a new concept called credit default swaps.  Elsewhere, investor Vennett (Gosling; also the film's narrator) catches wind of this unusual move and comes to the same conclusion - in fact, his theory goes even further.  More actors get wind of this as well, including trader Mark Baum (Carell) and his team, and the amateur duo of Charlie and Jamie, working out of a garage.

Baum, deeply cynical of the system yet entrenched within it, digs deeper and begins to discover the true level of fraud and negligence from everyone, including the government.  The early excitement of finding a massive opportunity for profit which just a handful saw, including Burry, Vennett, and Baum, turns to varying levels of numbness, guilt, and anger as the consequences begin to play out.

The Big Short is ably led by an impressive cast both in the big star leads and the supporting players.  Christian Bale's Burry is the first character introduced, and the co-lead.  One of my favorite contemporary actors, Bale fulfills expectations in playing the brilliant yet socially inept investor.  He shows a single-minded determination to solve the housing question, which he does impressively, yet he is also believably helpless in dealing with people both above and below him who are incredulous at his bet against popular opinion.  Steve Carell as Mark Baum is the other co-lead, and gives an equally great performance.  Due to personal tragedy, Baum is angrily determined (and unafraid to be an asshole) to "call the bullshit" he finds in the corporate world, and wins by profiting handsomely.  The indifference to others' feelings recalls Carell's boss on The Office, but he is no buffoon - he is deadly serious and smart.  And despite that trait, he somehow also serves as the on-screen moral surrogate as even his expectations of corporate misbehavior are upended.  Grating yet in command, Carell is superb.

Gosling and Pitt each have smaller roles.  Gosling's Vennett is mostly highlighted, beyond the narration, in humorously and vividly explaining the situation to Baum and his team.  Slick, arrogant and not nearly as regretful as the others, we get just the right dose of Vennett and Gosling does a great job with him.  Pitt plays a former banker who has turned against not only banking but most of society; yet still decides to help out his young friends Charlie and Jamie.  I've seen this kind of calm crazy from Pitt before (not sure where), and he also exudes the competence and even a little of the cool that you expect from him.  Also wisely kept to a minimum, Pitt is a positive presence as well.  There are several  cameos, but I want to give a shout-out to the impressive supporting cast, which provides everything from humor (Hamish Linklater's partner to Baum) to depth (Marisa Tomei as Baum's wife).

The Big Short is difficult to define, and sometimes to watch (for the subject matter), but it is equally easy to see for the surprising entertainment value and overall quality it presents.  The film is based on Michael Lewis's (Blindside, Moneyball, etc.) 2010 book and has an interesting hybrid drama-documentary feel to it.  This is partially because, in addition to having the actors I just described in roles like any other film, Gosling's narrator also speaks directly to the audience and there is definitely an effort to try to explain it all (including a few well done asides).  Both aspects work exceptionally well.  I thought I mostly understood the background to the 2008 financial crisis before seeing this, but I still learned a lot from the film, the housing market aspect itself in particular.  Remarkably, the script also creates a genuinely riveting drama around this with real people (adapted to one degree or another, I'm sure).  To rephrase my acting section a bit: the film has the unique individual who starts to unravel it (Bale); the central character (Carell) whose career and even personal life is in tune with yet deeply challenged by the crisis; and the side story of the "little guys" (Jamie, Charlie) naively trying to swim with the sharks.  The editing and pacing as these strands are weaved together is remarkable and makes the two-plus hours fly by.  Finally, I also have to mention the strong comedy involved here.  Despite being about a recent and very painful event, The Big Short is funny in all the right ways.  Not only does it leaven the pain, but it also often effectively complements the natural anger and outrage that the story produces.

***

The Big Short is an excellent film, and not just as art or entertainment; you'll probably learn something about the financial crisis here, too, no matter how familiar you are with it.  I was pulled to this film because of Christian Bale and Steve Carell, as well as to what seemed to be a humorous spin on a complex, important recent event.  It had all of that and used it to the maximum, in addition to featuring the impressive narrative that I explained previously.  Admittedly, the film starts to gloss over some details later in the film - particularly in how the CDOs came to truly infect the banks and bring about the sensational, shocking news headlines.  But there had already been enough technical details explained, and the focus on the initial, housing market component was wise.  I truly can't think of any significant flaws with this film.  The film's ability to simultaneously explain the complex situation as it arose and develop its characters, and by the end to convey the scope of the real, overall damage and pain that was done along with the dramatic resolution, is quite impressive.  A must-watch film (try to see it in the theaters, but Netflix will work, too).






"The Big Short teaser poster" by Source (WP:NFCC#4). Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Big_Short_teaser_poster.jpg#/media/File:The_Big_Short_teaser_poster.jpg