A guide to the best picture nominees from the Oscars

By Claire Silva

“Top Gun: Maverick” 4/5

In 1986, Tony Scott blew everyone away with the iconic “Top Gun,” starring Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer. Nearly 40 years later, Cruise and Kilmer returned to dominate “Top Gun: Maverick,” which catches up with Cruise’s character Maverick, who is now a test pilot for the Navy after being an aviator for 30 years and ends up training the flight school’s most skilled graduates.

The beauty of “Top Gun: Maverick” lies between the similarities and differences with its derivative. The 2022 version obviously has a more immersive action experience — there is rarely a dull moment when flying. The film would be a masterpiece on its own, but when its relation to the original “Top Gun” is considered, the movie becomes magical. Maverick’s heartfelt moments with Iceman (Kilmer) perfectly draw attention to their past without labeling the recent movie as just a sequel. Watching “Top Gun: Maverick” just felt good — that’s the easiest way to put it.

“Women Talking” 4.5/5

Evidently, “Women Talking” is not an incredibly complicated premise or even title. However, its simplicity is its beauty. The women of a rural, religious colony meet to discuss the sexual abuse they endured for years. The survivors must decide whether to stay and fight or leave before the men of the colony return.

In “Women Talking,” each individual’s process of healing and clarification is delicately conveyed through conversation and connection to each other. The dedication to healing is what makes the movie so noteworthy. Yet, it may be the reason some have trouble connecting with this film. It’s been called “flat,” “dull” and “whiny,” according to Google Reviews. In “Women Talking,” the suffering is assumed and the reaction is described, a component that tends to be the critics’ least favorite part.

So, if you want to see an action movie consisting of abuse and trauma then skip “Women Talking.” But if you want to be guided through the minds of incredibly wise, yet repressed women, give it a try.

“Everything Everywhere All at Once” 4.5/5

Never before have everything bagels and taxes played such large roles in an Oscar-nominated film. They do, however, play a large role in many people’s everyday lives, including protagonist Evelyn Wang’s (Michelle Yeoh). Wang is a Chinese immigrant and mother who is summoned into the multiverse to save everything, everywhere from the evil Jobu Tupaki. “Everything Everywhere All at Once” is absurd and humorous, while somehow remaining philosophical.

Wang battles seemingly every person she’s encountered while amidst her journey through dimensions, which opens her eyes to the decisions she’s made. The film uses the multidimensional factor to convey the message of the importance of appreciation of who you are and who you love. The film generally accomplishes this — some scenes, especially in the latter half, are chill-evoking and may drag tears from a viewer’s eyes. Unfortunately, some of the heartfelt scenes get lost in the absurdity. If creators Daniel Kwan and Daniel Schenairt had thoroughly integrated more meaningful moments into ridiculousness or focused on the existing meaningful moments, the film may have landed better. That said, it would be nothing without its humor. Even those who are hesitant to embark on a journey as unfamiliar as this should at least sit down and have a little fun.

“The Banshees of Inisherin” 4/5 of the upper class is entertaining, but unfortunately not funny enough to get one through the nearly 2 and a half hour-long film. “Triangle of Sadness” is a fun way to spend an evening, as long as you bring a barf bag.

The value of kindness is oftentimes not conveyed through the friendship of two middle-aged Irish men. Pádraic Súilleabhá (Colin Farrell) is devastated when his best friend, Colm Doherty (Brendan Gleeson), decides to abandon their friendship one day due to Súilleabhá’s “dullness.” The film is a dialectic of the emotional repression that occurs when a friend gets bored with another friend.

There is nothing especially miraculous about this movie’s premise, which explains its four (fingers) out of five rating. The plot isn’t particularly thrilling or philosophical. Yet, for some reason, it’s still engaging for most. Despite its sorrowful story, most scenes carry a sliver of humor. Both Farrell’s acting and eyebrows are also notable while the beauty of Ireland keeps viewers’ eyes stuck to the screen. And, the film’s lack of an inventive plot doesn’t mean it’s uneventful. Entertainment is not scarce as the plot becomes more and more surprising. “The Banshees of Inisherin” won’t be the most mind-tripping or actionpacked movie you’ll watch this awards season, but it very possibly could be your favorite.

“The Fabelmans” 5/5

Making a movie about making movies is a bold choice. Luckily, Steven Spielberg has the ability and right to do so. “The Fabelmans” is a coming-of-age story inspired by Spielberg’s childhood that follows Sammy Fabelman, who uses filmmaking to understand and tell the stories of the people around him.

Critics of “The Fabelmans” claim that Spielberg is coasting on his reputation. Sure, the movie may not have been as successful if it wasn’t followed by the Spielberg name. Yet, the relationship between protagonist Sammy and Spielberg is truly insignificant. And, it does not take away from the movie’s awe. It’s cheesy and full of motivational quotes yearning to be repeated by viewers. But I truly enjoyed every second.

“Elvis” 4/5 guilty of anything. By the movie’s end, one may be convinced that Blanchett was a former conductor reincarcerated into an actor. Yet, “Tár” is not much more than a good performance. The story isn’t thought-provoking and does not make for a spectacular viewing.

“All Quiet on the Western Front” 3/5

“All Quiet on the Western Front” follows Paul Bäumer (Felix Kammerer) as he enlists in World War I for the Germans and discovers the true trenches of war. Bäumer enters the war hopeful to emerge a hero but becomes devastated as he uncovers what it really means to be immersed in war. In general, “All Quiet on the Western Front” is well done. It’s beautifully written and shot. Kammerer delivers a moving performance — his acting phenomenally conveys the crossroads of guilt and determination.

While the film is impressively filmed, it falls short when delivering its message. Because “All Quiet on the Western Front” is based on an anti-war book from the 1920s, its effect has lessened. During the book’s time, media containing war material was rare, resulting in a jarred reaction from the audience. Now, because war is much more understood and accessible, war media doesn’t have the same effect. To be truly meaningful, war movies must do more than be well-made. Unfortunately, “All Quiet on the Western Front” does not do more — besides its cast and cinematography, the film is not particularly special.

“Avatar: The Way of Water” 3.5/5

“Triangle

of Sadness” 3/5

“Triangle of Sadness,” directed by Ruben Östlund, illustrates what happens when a social hierarchy is flipped upside down. The film follows the relationship between influencers Yaya (Charlbi Dean Kriek) and Carl (Harris Dickinson) in a threepart structure. In part one, the audience is introduced to the shallowness that lies beneath the typical celebrity relationship. Parts two and three allow watchers to follow Carl and Yaya onto a luxury cruise filled with socialites and the uber-rich which, expectedly, leads to disaster.

Three very different words can be used to summarize “Triangle of Sadness:” fun, nausea and classism. The first part presents the audience with a glimpse into a world most are excluded from. Most find people who are out-of-touch entertaining. Both the fun and the throwing up begin in the next section. The ridiculousness of two dozen millionaires being trapped in each other’s craze allows for quite a few laughs. The most comical scene is 30 minutes of the guests flailing amidst their seasickness.

Östlund mastered the combination of comedy and social commentary in his movie. The constant diminishing

Austin Butler’s portrayal of Elvis may go down in history as one of the most convincing performances of all time, and for good reason. This biopic illustrates the story of Elvis Presley and follows him through his astronomical career. Whether you’re an Elvis fanatic or someone who enjoys good music, “Elvis” is worth watching. Director Baz Luhrmann excels in creating a film that successfully transforms time. Hair, music and setting usher the audience back to the 50s and 60s. Butler adds to this with his voice and stage presence, which are both perfect replications of Elvis, explaining the connection many viewers have felt with the film.

However, that connection may begin to fade when nearing the end of the twoand-a-half-hour film. “Elvis” is overstuffed with subplots and when a musical number occurs you might feel thankful that an elongated scene of dialog has concluded. Despite its length, “Elvis” is a necessary watch.

“Tár” 3.5/5

“Tár” follows Lydia Tár (Cate Blanchett), a well-known composerconductor as she works to elevate her career using the Berlin Symphony and receives reputation-damaging backlash about her personal life. Tár leans on her family while navigating the difficulties presented as a societal figure.

“Tár’s” strongest appeal is Blanchett’s acting. In addition to conducting an orchestra, she can conduct a screen. She maintains a stern expression that only turns playful with her daughter, Petra (Mila Bogojevic), and her music. She has mastered the look of guilt while actively trying to deny she could ever be

Those who loved the original “Avatar” will love the new one. It jumps back into the life of Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) and Neytiri (Zoë Saldana) and their family in Pandora, following Jake as he fights against the threat of the humans. Watching the children developing similarities to their parents encourages the nostalgic tone present throughout the film. As expected, the technology and visual effects used are spectacular and enhance the watching experience, regardless of the storyline.

Those who only liked the original “Avatar” may be less likely to thoroughly enjoy its sequel. Despite its pockets of reminiscence and visually enthralling techniques, it’s difficult to ignore its length. Its duration, three hours and 12 minutes, taints the worthiness that lies within the plot. It seems like director James Cameron chose to ignore that entertainment and attachment to a storyline are irrelevant if the audience has to constantly pinch themselves to stay awake. Yet, those who are invested in what happens to Jake and Neytiri may be able to forgive its length and remain determined to absorb all “Avatar” material possible.

Make sure to add more movies to your repertoire by watching “Everything Everywhere All at Once” and more from the 2023 Oscars list.