If you asked a movie critic…

You didn’t ask, but I’m going to tell you anyway.

The great Roger Ebert wrote a regular column titled “Movie Answer Man,” in which the venerable Chicago critic answered questions from the readership.

We don’t get as many movie questions to the Coeur d’Alene Press, obviously, so instead, I compose totally fake questions about topics I want to write about in this space. For some reason, the questions are always aggressive, despite coming from my own head. Probably something there to explore with my therapist.

Anyway, on to the questions!

Hey Tyler, I tried to watch “Everything Everywhere All At Once,” and it made me so frustrated. How is this movie considered the frontrunner to win Best Picture at the Oscars? How could you think this movie is good? It should be called “Nothing, Always, Not Worth the Time.” — James Cameron, Rathdrum.

OK, this question resembles several real comments I’ve heard about “Everything Everywhere All At Once,” particularly from people over the age of 40. “It’s too weird.” “I can’t follow what’s happening.” “It just keeps doing the same thing over and over.”

I understand those comments. “Everything Everywhere” is… different. While I personally love the energy and sentimental wackiness of it all, I can see how it wouldn’t be everybody’s idea of a good time.

That’s why I’m still skeptical of its trajectory as a Best Picture winner. Sure, it leads the nominations count, but that didn’t translate to much statue success for last year’s brilliant-but-chilly “The Power of the Dog.”

Oscar voters are a varied bunch, and a good chunk of the membership is comprised of older industry types who want something a little more grounded when it comes to storytelling. I can see a backlash brewing from that faction of the Academy.

Best Picture is determined by a preferential ballot, essentially allowing each voter to rank their nominees from best to worst, 1-10. A popular movie with a good chunk of No. 1 votes will carry the day, and “Everything Everywhere” surely has supporters that will list it at No. 1.

But if a movie doesn’t reach the required threshold of No. 1 votes, the count continues based on the remaining rankings in descending order. It’s all a bit complicated, but what if “Everything Everywhere” doesn’t have the enough No. 1 votes to secure Best Picture after one round of counting, and a huge group of folks who really don’t like it decide to list it at the bottom of their ballot?

It can lead to a movie with stronger general support winning Best Picture, as what has been suggested about last year’s winner, the feel-good family drama, “CODA.” A movie that uniformly scores in the No. 2 and No. 3 slots on far more ballots can then win Best Picture, with the idea being that more members generally like that particular movie overall.

So if not “Everything Everywhere,” what is the next well-liked consensus pick? Judging by its nomination tally, that could very well be “The Banshees of Inishirin.” Or, heck, “Top: Gun Maverick” probably scores fairly high on a large set of ballots, if not landing in the No. 1 spot. There is strong passion for “Elvis,” “All Quiet on the Western Front” and “Tar too,” but each of those come with their own thorny narrative challenges.

Anyway, I don’t have a great answer, but it’s safe to say the Best Picture race is far from over.

“Hey Tyler, I think I remember you defending M. Night Shyamalan at some point. You’re an idiot! That guy made one good movie 25 years ago and keeps giving us one garbage twist ending after another.” — @IdahoMcGFan24 on Twitter. Paid blue checkmark.

Hi IdahoMcGFan, I didn’t notice a question in there. Oh well, let me take this opportunity to say that I DO indeed defend M. Night Shyamalan more than many. I’d argue he’s made three great movies — “The Sixth Sense,” “Unbreakable” and “Signs,” as well as several flawed-but-worthwhile films.

“Split” works well as a thriller, riding a dynamic performance from James McAvoy. I also appreciate the outright trolling Shyamalan does to his audience by subverting massive expectations with “Glass,” which brought his “Unbreakable” characters into the “Split” universe. “The Visit” is about as good as found-footage horror movies get that aren’t named “The Blair Witch Project,” and, yes, despite its extremely silly dialogue, I thought “Old” was a deranged big swing that made me squirm in my seat.

Even “The Village” is way better than you remember, I promise. I won’t defend the twist, but that’s 75 percent of an excellent movie.

Yes, he’s made bad movies — “The Happening,” “Lady in the Water,” “The Last Airbender,” “After Earth.” But he’s had enough good stuff to keep me coming back for more.

Case in point, his latest film, “Knock at the Cabin,” contains more undeniably strong filmmaking choices, and the performances are uniformly strong, especially Dave Bautista as a seemingly-mild-mannered schoolteacher turned home invader who offers a young family an impossible choice. Again, the dialogue can be a bit tin-eared in spots, but there’s plenty of tension to sustain its brief runtime… right up to another divisive ending.

What’s with all these TikTokers doing Wednesday Addams dances and flopping around like that evil robot doll in “Megan?” Is this the state of modern horror? Stuff that fuels TikTok content? — Fred Estaire, Post Falls.

I don’t really use TikTok, and I don’t want to get involved in that conversation, Fred. The “Wednesday” Netflix show isn’t a horror show, so that seems like a weird comparison. As for the breakout horror flick “M3gan” (notice the 3 in the title. It’s important!), I admit I don’t know much about its cultural impact, as I only just watched the movie recently. Curiously, the “M3GAN” dance that became so popular stems from a 15-second moment in the movie.

Nevertheless, “M3GAN” is actually pretty good fun for a PG-13 (and therefore mostly bloodless) horror flick. It has some stealth comedic beats that flow out of character moments rather than the wink-wink cynicism that the TikTok dance culture suggests. The movie isn’t particularly scary, but the robot is creepy enough, and the story maintains a thoughtful focus on its two main characters, played by Allison Williams and young Violet McGraw.

I do worry about the already announced “M3GAN” sequel though, as it will likely lean into the more “viral” elements that made it so popular before it even debuted.

• • •

Tyler Wilson is a member of the International Press Academy and has been writing about movies for Inland Northwest publications since 2000, including a regular column in The Press since 2006. He can be reached at twilson@cdapress.com.