So the nominations for this year's Oscars were announced this week. I must say that I haven't been overly impressed with this year's selections. The films that have received a lot of hype, to me, failed to live up to the expectations. Same as with 2009 where I think The Hurt Locker was hugely overrated (Inglorious Basterds should've won). Of course, as with every year, the Academy makes some glaring omissions. I am going to look at each main category and discuss my feelings on the selections -there are one or two films I've yet to see, but I feel I've seen enough to be able to make comment:
BEST PICTURE
127 Hours
Black Swan
The Fighter
Inception
The Kids Are All Right
The Kings Speech
The Social Network
Toy Story 3
True Grit
Winters Bone
I hate the fact that its ten nominees and not five. Realistically, to be in the running, you have to have a Best Director slot. So that means the race is between Black Swan, The Fighter, The Kings Speech, The Social Network and True Grit. Of these films, Kings Speech is the best. To be honest, I fail to see why The Social Network, Black Swan and The Fighter have received so much acclaim. They are good films, but really they don't stand out at all. I have three favourites from thid bunch, either one I wouldn't mind winning: that being The Kings Speech, Inception and Toy Story 3. I feel they are the strongest contenders from this bunch, and I will make my personal pick known closer to the time.
Biggest snub: Shutter Island
Its disappointing that, in a field of 10, Shutter Island didn't make the cut. Yes it rubbed people up the wrong way, but its technically a strong movie and has some very gripping performances. Should've made the list here.
BEST DIRECTOR
Darren Aronofsky - Black Swan
Ethan & Joel Coen - True Grit
David Fincher - The Social Network
Tom Hooper - The Kings Speech
David O Russel - The Fighter
An overall solid group of directors here, but the race is most certainly between Fincher and Hooper. It could go either way. Personally, I am not a fan of The Social Network, so if I had to chose from this bunch I'd vote for Tom Hooper.
Biggest snub: Christopher Nolan - Inception
A familiar story repeats itself again: Christoper Nolan, as with The Dark Knight, is robbed of a Directing nomination. This is a shocking omission from the Academy as Inception was the best directed film of the year. Nolan can take solace in his nomination in the screenplay category, but this is most certainly a slap in the face from the Academy.
BEST ACTOR
Javier Bardem - Biutiful
Jeff Bridges - True Grit
Jesse Eisenberg - The Social Network
Colin Firth - The Kings Speech
James Franco - 127 Hours
Whilst I felt the absence of really strong films this year, the acting department kept at an extremely high level with some fantastic performances across the board. This category is extremely strong, but for me personally its between Firth and Franco. Both giving complex and extremely layered performances on each side of the spectrum, its difficult to differentiate between the two performances. I will give my personal choice in my final precitions.
Biggest snub: Leonardo di Caprio - Shutter Island
Say what you like about the film, but Di Caprio shines in his performance as the tormented Marshall trapped on the chilling island. His performance in Inception, and this film, have gone fairly unnoticed this season, and its a true pity because he really did a fantastic job this year.
BEST ACTRESS
Annette Benning - The Kids Are All Right
Nicole Kidman - Rabbit Hole
Jennifer Lawrence - Winters Bone
Natalie Portman - Black Swan
Michelle Williams - Blue Valentine
It's Benning vs Portman in this one. Personally, I feel Benning is the better overall actor and gives the better performance of the two. I really hope she pulls this one off because she has had a distinguished career (can we ever forgive the Academy for snubbing her performace in American Beauty??..sigh). But I think Portman will probably win here.
Biggest snub: Julianne Moore - The Kids Are All Right
Benning was the main star of the movie, but Moore also gave a fantastic performance in a movie that was definitely an "actors" movie. Would've liked to see her nominated here.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Christian Bale - The Fighter
John Hawkes - Winters Bone
Jeremy Renner - The Town
Mark Ruffalo - The Kids Are All Right
Geoffrey Rush - The Kings Speech
A pretty solid line up in this category as usual, but Christian Bale will win this for sure. He probably gives the best performance of the bunch, but I felt the real best supporting actor wasn't even nominated (see below):
Biggest snub: Andrew Garfield - The Social Network
I was extremely disappointed not to see Garfield's name mentioned on Oscar morning. He most certainly was best thing about The Social Network, and in mind gave the most honest and real performance of the lot. He would've had my vote if nominated, but alas, the Academy makes another stupid mistake.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams - The Fighter
Helen Bonham Carter - The Kings Speech
Melissa Leo - The Fighter
Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit
Jacki Weaver - Animal Kingdom
I think Amy Adams gives the best performance amongst this group. Her acting definitely stood out amongst the rest of her cast mates, but I got a feeling Melissa Leo will end up winning.
Biggest snub: Marion Cotillard - Inception
Cotillard put in a great performance in Inception, and would've been nice to see her nominated here as well.
Other notable snubs:
Inception for Best Editing (what the hell?? It is EASILY the best edited film of the year!)
Shutter Island for Best Cinematography (the film was well shot and deserving of some recognition)
There are probably others, but I'm too tired to think now.
Overally, 2010 has been a disappointing year, but not because the movies were poor, its because the movies that were hyped and the major contenders really shouldn't be (I'm looking at you Fighter, Network and Black Swan). I will give my personal picks when I make my final predictions, but its Network vs Kings Speech for now. Whose your money on?
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Thursday, January 20, 2011
THE KINGS SPEECH (REVIEW)
STARS: * * * * (4/4)
Did you know that the number one fear in the world is not death, or pain, or heights? No. The number one fear in the world is speaking in front of an audience. In other words: public speaking.
"The Kings Speech", the portrayal of a man literally forced to overcome his inner demons in order to unite a nation to rally together for the outbreak of war, is meticulously layered with emotion and feeling. It is so easy for an audience to feel a disconnection to monarchic and royal characters because, well, they are so disconnected. This film explores the people's need to be shown leadership, and despite the obvious discrepancies, they do look somewhere for that leadership, whilst taking an intimate look inside the lives of the monarchy.
Fortunately for Albert (Colin Firth), or "Bertie" as he is known by his family, he never had to worry about being looked at for leadership. Being the second child of King George V he was out of the spotlight of his older brother David (Guy Pearce), who would become King. David was the confident one, sure in his ways - the more "natural" future monarch. Albert lacks the confidence and desire to be in the spotlight. Not only this, but he suffers from a terrible stammer, which makes it difficult for him to communicate his thoughts properly and clearly. He is often ridiculed by his family and seemingly mocked by the media. The opening scene perfectly captures his plight: he is at the closing of an event at Wembley Stadium, and as part of his royal duties, is required to give the closing speech. He steps up to the mic; daunted, dismayed, almost to the point of tears as he tries to speak. He struggles, hearing the echoes of his disjointed words ringing back and piercing his ears, whilst his supporting wife Elizabeth (Helen Bonham Carter) struggles with emotion watching him struggle. Firth plays his role this with great emotion and sincerity, and there are other wonderful scenes where we feel so much for him, as he is pushed to do something that is just so difficult for him to do (like when his father ridicules him for not being able to speak or his children beg him to tell them a bed-time story).
Albert has tried everything, including one humiliating technique to the next, and has given up hope with any kind of therapist. Until his wife introduces him to Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), a rather unorthodox speech therapist. After some initial resistence, Logue inspires Albert to persist with it, trying to give him some self-belief that he can actually do it. Logue keeps this "patient" a secret from his family and doesn't want any exposure from it, but as the movie progresses, we slowly see Albert adapting to Logue's methods. There are times when he puts on a confident front, only to be vulnerable and weak at mind on the inside.
We all the know the history of what happened here: Albert's father, King George V, passes away and his brother David succeeds the throne as King Edward VII. However, the seeds of displeasure are planted through Edward's infatuation with a divorcee socialite, Miss Simpson. Pressure is on Edward to chose the throne or Miss Simpson. Inevitably, he choses the throne, and abdicates the throne. He is the first monarch to fully abdicate the throne, leaving his younger brother Albert to take over as King. Albert reluctantly becomes King, but as time goes he grows more comfortably into the role, except he now has to deliver his first war-time speech in 1939.
The film's design is very accurate in capturing the essence and dreariness of 1930's England. The use of dreary colours and low lighting is constant throughout the whole film. The costumes are also impressive. But where this film succeeds is in a very subtly layered script, precise direction and honest performances from Firth, Bonham Carter and Rush. They are shown to be human and real, something which is often forgotten bout how royalty is portrayed. Carter delivers a touching performance as Albert's wife as she witnesses her husbands struggles and lack of belief, doing everything in her power to give him the confidence to succeed. Geoffrey Rush plays a slightly odd character, but its in his unpredictable, unorthodox behaviour that he is able to reach the King on that level.
But it is Firth, supported by these two actors, that delivers a truthful, honest and tear-jerking performance as King George VI. We may ask ourselves: "why should we care for a King? Yeah sure, he really has it rough!" But that is exactly why Firth's performance is so amazing in that he brings us to the core and shows the vulnerable, human side of the monarchy, where we as the "common" audience feel a strong connection to his character. He never overplays his performance, and does an amazing job. Expect him to walk away with the Best Actor Oscar this year.
"The Kings Speech" is one of the best made, scripted and probably the best acted movie of the year. There are many memorable scenes in this picture, particularly the beginning and end, but this is truly a film that will live long in the memory.
Did you know that the number one fear in the world is not death, or pain, or heights? No. The number one fear in the world is speaking in front of an audience. In other words: public speaking.
"The Kings Speech", the portrayal of a man literally forced to overcome his inner demons in order to unite a nation to rally together for the outbreak of war, is meticulously layered with emotion and feeling. It is so easy for an audience to feel a disconnection to monarchic and royal characters because, well, they are so disconnected. This film explores the people's need to be shown leadership, and despite the obvious discrepancies, they do look somewhere for that leadership, whilst taking an intimate look inside the lives of the monarchy.
Fortunately for Albert (Colin Firth), or "Bertie" as he is known by his family, he never had to worry about being looked at for leadership. Being the second child of King George V he was out of the spotlight of his older brother David (Guy Pearce), who would become King. David was the confident one, sure in his ways - the more "natural" future monarch. Albert lacks the confidence and desire to be in the spotlight. Not only this, but he suffers from a terrible stammer, which makes it difficult for him to communicate his thoughts properly and clearly. He is often ridiculed by his family and seemingly mocked by the media. The opening scene perfectly captures his plight: he is at the closing of an event at Wembley Stadium, and as part of his royal duties, is required to give the closing speech. He steps up to the mic; daunted, dismayed, almost to the point of tears as he tries to speak. He struggles, hearing the echoes of his disjointed words ringing back and piercing his ears, whilst his supporting wife Elizabeth (Helen Bonham Carter) struggles with emotion watching him struggle. Firth plays his role this with great emotion and sincerity, and there are other wonderful scenes where we feel so much for him, as he is pushed to do something that is just so difficult for him to do (like when his father ridicules him for not being able to speak or his children beg him to tell them a bed-time story).
Albert has tried everything, including one humiliating technique to the next, and has given up hope with any kind of therapist. Until his wife introduces him to Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), a rather unorthodox speech therapist. After some initial resistence, Logue inspires Albert to persist with it, trying to give him some self-belief that he can actually do it. Logue keeps this "patient" a secret from his family and doesn't want any exposure from it, but as the movie progresses, we slowly see Albert adapting to Logue's methods. There are times when he puts on a confident front, only to be vulnerable and weak at mind on the inside.
We all the know the history of what happened here: Albert's father, King George V, passes away and his brother David succeeds the throne as King Edward VII. However, the seeds of displeasure are planted through Edward's infatuation with a divorcee socialite, Miss Simpson. Pressure is on Edward to chose the throne or Miss Simpson. Inevitably, he choses the throne, and abdicates the throne. He is the first monarch to fully abdicate the throne, leaving his younger brother Albert to take over as King. Albert reluctantly becomes King, but as time goes he grows more comfortably into the role, except he now has to deliver his first war-time speech in 1939.
The film's design is very accurate in capturing the essence and dreariness of 1930's England. The use of dreary colours and low lighting is constant throughout the whole film. The costumes are also impressive. But where this film succeeds is in a very subtly layered script, precise direction and honest performances from Firth, Bonham Carter and Rush. They are shown to be human and real, something which is often forgotten bout how royalty is portrayed. Carter delivers a touching performance as Albert's wife as she witnesses her husbands struggles and lack of belief, doing everything in her power to give him the confidence to succeed. Geoffrey Rush plays a slightly odd character, but its in his unpredictable, unorthodox behaviour that he is able to reach the King on that level.
But it is Firth, supported by these two actors, that delivers a truthful, honest and tear-jerking performance as King George VI. We may ask ourselves: "why should we care for a King? Yeah sure, he really has it rough!" But that is exactly why Firth's performance is so amazing in that he brings us to the core and shows the vulnerable, human side of the monarchy, where we as the "common" audience feel a strong connection to his character. He never overplays his performance, and does an amazing job. Expect him to walk away with the Best Actor Oscar this year.
"The Kings Speech" is one of the best made, scripted and probably the best acted movie of the year. There are many memorable scenes in this picture, particularly the beginning and end, but this is truly a film that will live long in the memory.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
MY GOLDEN GLOBE PREDICTIONS
The first big award show of the year. Whilst their were some glaring omissions from the group, the Drama category looks fairly strong....the Comedy/Musical? Hmm, not so much.
So without further or do, I'm going to tell you whose nominated and who I think will win, and my own personal pick:
BEST PICTURE - DRAMA
Black Swan
The Fighter
Inception
The King's Speech
The Social Network
Who will win: The King's Speech
The Social Network is the odds-on favourite, but I think the HFPA is going to shower the love on The King's Speech. Winning the Golden Globe is not a determining factor in winning the Oscar (look at Babel. It won the Globe, but The Departed won the Oscar). I still think The Social Network will sweep the Oscars, but I think this is the awards ceremony that will honour The King's Speech. However, the best film of this bunch I feel is Inception.It is Kings Speech vs Social Network, with Inception being a long shot.
BEST COMEDY/MUSICAL
Alice in Wonderland
Burlesque
The Kids Are All Right
Red
The Tourist
Who will win: The Kids Are All Right
No Toy Story 3? Are any of these films better then Toy Story 3? Answer: No. Unforgiveable omission. That said, the best made, scripted and acted film of the bunch is The Kids Are All Right. It will walk away with the Globe in a category that is, quite frankly, quite poor.
BEST ACTOR - DRAMA
Jesse Eisenberg - The Social Network
Colin Firth - The King's Speech
James Franco - 127 Hours
Ryan Gosling - Blue Valentine
Mark Wahlberg - The Fighter
Who will win: Colin Firth - The King's Speech
James Franco was outstanding in 127 Hours, as was Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network. Expect Colin Firth to continue on his run to the Oscar by getting love here.
BEST ACTRESS - DRAMA
Halle Berry - Frankie and Alice
Nicole Kidman - Rabbit Hole
Jennifer Lawrence - Winters Bone
Natalie Portman - Black Swan
Michelle Williams - Blue Valentine
Who will win: Natalie Portman - Black Swan
This is Portman's category to lose. She's pretty much got this one for a certainty.
BEST ACTOR - COMEDY/MUSICAL
Johnny Depp - Alice In Wonderland
Johnny Depp - The Tourist
Paul Giammati - Barney's Version
Jake Gyllenhaal - Love and Other Drugs
Kevin Spacey - Casino Jack
Who will win: Paul Giammati - Barney's Version
Johnny Depp...seriously? Okay. He's the favourite and will probably win for Alice in Wonderland (unfortunately), but I think he'll split the vote, allowing Paul Giammati to step in. He got the best reviewed performance and, after being snubbed for "Sideways" and "Cinderella Man", he'll get some just reward here.
BEST ACTRESS - COMEDY/MUSICAL
Annette Benning - The Kids Are All Right
Julianne Moore - The Kids Are All Right
Angelina Jole - The Tourist
Anne Hathaway - Love And Other Drugs
Emma Stone - Easy A
Who will win: Annette Benning
The Oscar race is shaping up as "Benning vs Portman", so expect Benning to win here and continue to stake her claim. Moore could surprise, as could Emma Stone, but be safe and go with Benning.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Christian Bale - The Fighter
Michael Douglas - Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Andrew Garfield - The Social Network
Jeremy Renner - The Town
Geoffrey Rush - The King's Speech
Who will win: Christian Bale - The Fighter
Quite a strong category, but expect Christian Bale to win. His biggest contender is Geoffrey Rush, whom the HFPA love. Andrew Garfield could also challenge (if they decide to really love The Social Network), but Christian Bale will win this one.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams - The Fighter
Helen Bonham Carter - The King's Speech
Mila Kunis - Black Swan
Melissa Leo - The Fighter
Jacki Weaver - Animal Kingdom
Who will win: Helen Bonham Carter - The King's Speech
This is the closest acting category as there is no clear favourite. I'm going to go with Bonham Carter cause I got a feeling they're going to go with The King's Speech. Adams may surprise, but if there's going to be a surprise it'll be Leo. It's Leo vs Carter. Both could win, but I'm going Carter.
BEST DIRECTOR
Darren Aronofsky - Black Swan
David Fincher - The Social Network
Tom Hooper - The King's Speech
Christopher Nolan - Inception
David O'Russell - The Fighter
Who will win: David Fincher -The Social Network
Fincher's the big favourite, and the Globes won't completely shut out The Social Network, so he'll win here. Nolan or Hooper could surprise, and I won't be too surprised if they do, but this one's going to Fincher.
BEST SCREENPLAY
127 Hours
Inception
The Kids Are All Right
The King's Speech
The Social Network
Who will win: The King's Speech
Inception should win this category, but it'll be more love to The King's Speech. The Social Network may surprise in this one.
BEST SONG
"Bound to You" - Burlesque
"You Haven't Seen the Last of Me" - Burlesque
"Coming Home - Country Strong
"There's A Place For All of Us" - Chronicles of Narnia
"I see The Light" - Tangled
Who will win: "You Haven't Seen The Last of Me"
Don't really know or care, but they'll probably give it to one of the songs from Burlesque.
BEST SCORE
127 Hours
Alice in Wonderland
Inception
The Kings Speech
The Social Network
Who will win: Inception
Had a great score that I think is probably too strong to ignore here.
BEST ANIMATED FEATURE
Despicable Me
How To Train Your Dragon
The Illusionist
Tangled
Toy Story 3
Who will win: Toy Story 3
Enough said.
BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Biutiful (Spain)
The Concert (France)
The Edge (Russia)
I Am Love (Italy)
In A Better World (Denmark)
Who will win: Biutiful (Spain)
Only European films in this category (no big surprise). With a big name performance in Javier Bardem...Biutiful to win this one.
Okay, so that's my say. Check back tomorrow to see how many I got right/wrong.
So without further or do, I'm going to tell you whose nominated and who I think will win, and my own personal pick:
BEST PICTURE - DRAMA
Black Swan
The Fighter
Inception
The King's Speech
The Social Network
Who will win: The King's Speech
The Social Network is the odds-on favourite, but I think the HFPA is going to shower the love on The King's Speech. Winning the Golden Globe is not a determining factor in winning the Oscar (look at Babel. It won the Globe, but The Departed won the Oscar). I still think The Social Network will sweep the Oscars, but I think this is the awards ceremony that will honour The King's Speech. However, the best film of this bunch I feel is Inception.It is Kings Speech vs Social Network, with Inception being a long shot.
BEST COMEDY/MUSICAL
Alice in Wonderland
Burlesque
The Kids Are All Right
Red
The Tourist
Who will win: The Kids Are All Right
No Toy Story 3? Are any of these films better then Toy Story 3? Answer: No. Unforgiveable omission. That said, the best made, scripted and acted film of the bunch is The Kids Are All Right. It will walk away with the Globe in a category that is, quite frankly, quite poor.
BEST ACTOR - DRAMA
Jesse Eisenberg - The Social Network
Colin Firth - The King's Speech
James Franco - 127 Hours
Ryan Gosling - Blue Valentine
Mark Wahlberg - The Fighter
Who will win: Colin Firth - The King's Speech
James Franco was outstanding in 127 Hours, as was Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network. Expect Colin Firth to continue on his run to the Oscar by getting love here.
BEST ACTRESS - DRAMA
Halle Berry - Frankie and Alice
Nicole Kidman - Rabbit Hole
Jennifer Lawrence - Winters Bone
Natalie Portman - Black Swan
Michelle Williams - Blue Valentine
Who will win: Natalie Portman - Black Swan
This is Portman's category to lose. She's pretty much got this one for a certainty.
BEST ACTOR - COMEDY/MUSICAL
Johnny Depp - Alice In Wonderland
Johnny Depp - The Tourist
Paul Giammati - Barney's Version
Jake Gyllenhaal - Love and Other Drugs
Kevin Spacey - Casino Jack
Who will win: Paul Giammati - Barney's Version
Johnny Depp...seriously? Okay. He's the favourite and will probably win for Alice in Wonderland (unfortunately), but I think he'll split the vote, allowing Paul Giammati to step in. He got the best reviewed performance and, after being snubbed for "Sideways" and "Cinderella Man", he'll get some just reward here.
BEST ACTRESS - COMEDY/MUSICAL
Annette Benning - The Kids Are All Right
Julianne Moore - The Kids Are All Right
Angelina Jole - The Tourist
Anne Hathaway - Love And Other Drugs
Emma Stone - Easy A
Who will win: Annette Benning
The Oscar race is shaping up as "Benning vs Portman", so expect Benning to win here and continue to stake her claim. Moore could surprise, as could Emma Stone, but be safe and go with Benning.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Christian Bale - The Fighter
Michael Douglas - Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Andrew Garfield - The Social Network
Jeremy Renner - The Town
Geoffrey Rush - The King's Speech
Who will win: Christian Bale - The Fighter
Quite a strong category, but expect Christian Bale to win. His biggest contender is Geoffrey Rush, whom the HFPA love. Andrew Garfield could also challenge (if they decide to really love The Social Network), but Christian Bale will win this one.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams - The Fighter
Helen Bonham Carter - The King's Speech
Mila Kunis - Black Swan
Melissa Leo - The Fighter
Jacki Weaver - Animal Kingdom
Who will win: Helen Bonham Carter - The King's Speech
This is the closest acting category as there is no clear favourite. I'm going to go with Bonham Carter cause I got a feeling they're going to go with The King's Speech. Adams may surprise, but if there's going to be a surprise it'll be Leo. It's Leo vs Carter. Both could win, but I'm going Carter.
BEST DIRECTOR
Darren Aronofsky - Black Swan
David Fincher - The Social Network
Tom Hooper - The King's Speech
Christopher Nolan - Inception
David O'Russell - The Fighter
Who will win: David Fincher -The Social Network
Fincher's the big favourite, and the Globes won't completely shut out The Social Network, so he'll win here. Nolan or Hooper could surprise, and I won't be too surprised if they do, but this one's going to Fincher.
BEST SCREENPLAY
127 Hours
Inception
The Kids Are All Right
The King's Speech
The Social Network
Who will win: The King's Speech
Inception should win this category, but it'll be more love to The King's Speech. The Social Network may surprise in this one.
BEST SONG
"Bound to You" - Burlesque
"You Haven't Seen the Last of Me" - Burlesque
"Coming Home - Country Strong
"There's A Place For All of Us" - Chronicles of Narnia
"I see The Light" - Tangled
Who will win: "You Haven't Seen The Last of Me"
Don't really know or care, but they'll probably give it to one of the songs from Burlesque.
BEST SCORE
127 Hours
Alice in Wonderland
Inception
The Kings Speech
The Social Network
Who will win: Inception
Had a great score that I think is probably too strong to ignore here.
BEST ANIMATED FEATURE
Despicable Me
How To Train Your Dragon
The Illusionist
Tangled
Toy Story 3
Who will win: Toy Story 3
Enough said.
BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Biutiful (Spain)
The Concert (France)
The Edge (Russia)
I Am Love (Italy)
In A Better World (Denmark)
Who will win: Biutiful (Spain)
Only European films in this category (no big surprise). With a big name performance in Javier Bardem...Biutiful to win this one.
Okay, so that's my say. Check back tomorrow to see how many I got right/wrong.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
127 HOURS (REVIEW)
STARS: * * * 1/2 (3.5/4)
How often have we taken for granted the simple things in our lives? Our friends, our family, a roof over our heads, water?
Indeed, this is exactly what Aron Ralston (James Franco) had to face when on a fateful day in April 2003, he went exploring and mountaineering in the Grand Canyon. Little did he know, that would be the day that changed his life forever. "127 Hours" tries to recapture the moments, the struggles, the desperation that Ralston had to face. And it succeeds on every level. Director Danny Boyle (of "Trainspotting" and "Slumdog Millionaire") takes us back to the basics of successful storytelling. The premise is simplitistic and has the potential to fail from the get go, but it doesn't. Having a movie that is, essentially, about one character trapped under a rock and unable to move (with very little dialogue) is very risky, but like Robert Zemeckis' "Cast Away", Boyle uses visual imagery and plain human emotion to get his message across.
Indeed, "127 Hours" is very similiar in theme and make-up to "Cast Away" (although 127 Hours is a lot shorter in length and uses more musical score) in that it is essentially about one man being trapped and isolated from the rest of the world. A classic tale of a struggle for survival and return to essential human basics: like water, shelter, food. Boyle uses the camera with some telling shots to create the isolation and seclusion of Ralston. There is one in particular in the beginning where, upon unexpectedly meeting some girls whom he had an adventure with, he falls down from the rocks and his hand is trapped under a boulder. He calls out, hoping for the girls to hear him, a hopeful cry of desperation in his voice. As he looks up the camera pulls away and reveals the enormity and vastness of the Canyon. This brilliant shot sets up the rest of the narrative of the movie: we are immediately told by it that Ralson will not be found, he will not be saved by someone else. The only way he can get out is to do it himself, and so we join him on his tale of survival.
Whilst the film is very well directed and technicaly solid (particularly how they edited and sequenced the shots of Ralston recording his ordeal on his digital camera), it is the performance of James Franco in the title role that makes this film. Just watching the film I can imagine what an emotionally and physically taxing role this must've been for him to undertake. I mean, he is on camera by himself for pretty much the whole film. The entire weight of it is on his shoulders. No easy task by any means, but Franco really puts his heart-and-soul into this one, and we can really feel the desperation and the loss of hope with each passing sequence. It is refreshing to see an actor who has always had potential break out like this, and following an impressive supporting performance in "Milk", Franco announces to the world what a fine actor he really is. Expect him to get some serious Oscar consideration, and all I can say is it is truly well deserved. His performance is the best I've seen so far this year, and indeed this film is one of the best of the year, too.
"127" Hours is based on the book "A Rock And A Hard Place", and is inspired by a true-story. Indeed, it is quite disturbing to hear that this actually happened to someone in real life, but the film succeeds in giving the most accurate and realistic portrayal that could've been made from it. I am sure a lot of people will shudder when they watch this film in certain parts, and for many it may be life-changing. People will take different lessons from this film, but whatever the lesson is, I think its important for us to remember the little things in life...and treasure them every day.
How often have we taken for granted the simple things in our lives? Our friends, our family, a roof over our heads, water?
Indeed, this is exactly what Aron Ralston (James Franco) had to face when on a fateful day in April 2003, he went exploring and mountaineering in the Grand Canyon. Little did he know, that would be the day that changed his life forever. "127 Hours" tries to recapture the moments, the struggles, the desperation that Ralston had to face. And it succeeds on every level. Director Danny Boyle (of "Trainspotting" and "Slumdog Millionaire") takes us back to the basics of successful storytelling. The premise is simplitistic and has the potential to fail from the get go, but it doesn't. Having a movie that is, essentially, about one character trapped under a rock and unable to move (with very little dialogue) is very risky, but like Robert Zemeckis' "Cast Away", Boyle uses visual imagery and plain human emotion to get his message across.
Indeed, "127 Hours" is very similiar in theme and make-up to "Cast Away" (although 127 Hours is a lot shorter in length and uses more musical score) in that it is essentially about one man being trapped and isolated from the rest of the world. A classic tale of a struggle for survival and return to essential human basics: like water, shelter, food. Boyle uses the camera with some telling shots to create the isolation and seclusion of Ralston. There is one in particular in the beginning where, upon unexpectedly meeting some girls whom he had an adventure with, he falls down from the rocks and his hand is trapped under a boulder. He calls out, hoping for the girls to hear him, a hopeful cry of desperation in his voice. As he looks up the camera pulls away and reveals the enormity and vastness of the Canyon. This brilliant shot sets up the rest of the narrative of the movie: we are immediately told by it that Ralson will not be found, he will not be saved by someone else. The only way he can get out is to do it himself, and so we join him on his tale of survival.
Whilst the film is very well directed and technicaly solid (particularly how they edited and sequenced the shots of Ralston recording his ordeal on his digital camera), it is the performance of James Franco in the title role that makes this film. Just watching the film I can imagine what an emotionally and physically taxing role this must've been for him to undertake. I mean, he is on camera by himself for pretty much the whole film. The entire weight of it is on his shoulders. No easy task by any means, but Franco really puts his heart-and-soul into this one, and we can really feel the desperation and the loss of hope with each passing sequence. It is refreshing to see an actor who has always had potential break out like this, and following an impressive supporting performance in "Milk", Franco announces to the world what a fine actor he really is. Expect him to get some serious Oscar consideration, and all I can say is it is truly well deserved. His performance is the best I've seen so far this year, and indeed this film is one of the best of the year, too.
"127" Hours is based on the book "A Rock And A Hard Place", and is inspired by a true-story. Indeed, it is quite disturbing to hear that this actually happened to someone in real life, but the film succeeds in giving the most accurate and realistic portrayal that could've been made from it. I am sure a lot of people will shudder when they watch this film in certain parts, and for many it may be life-changing. People will take different lessons from this film, but whatever the lesson is, I think its important for us to remember the little things in life...and treasure them every day.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
NEW JAMES BOND: OUT IN 2012!
News just in: there will be a new James Bond film that will be released in 2012.
Production was delayed in 2010 because of financial troubles with MGM, but plans have been put in motion for production to begin later this year with the release date set for November 2012. Daniel Craig will return for his third stint as 007 (following his turns in "Casino Royale", 2006, and "Quantum of Solance").
I for one am hoping this is a return to the style of "Casino Royale" as the last instalment ("Quantum of Solance") was a massive disappointment. Its direction and script were all over the place, and to be frank it was a mess of a film. However, Craig did the best he could've done with what he had to work with, and I have no doubt in my mind he will give us another great showing in the next release.
It appears that the film will be directed by Sam Mendes. I am excited about this choice as he is a skillful and masterful director, haven given us such classics as "American Beauty" and "Road to Perdition". Mendes and Craig also worked on "Perdition", so I'm sure Mendes will be able to bring out the best in him again.
Production was delayed in 2010 because of financial troubles with MGM, but plans have been put in motion for production to begin later this year with the release date set for November 2012. Daniel Craig will return for his third stint as 007 (following his turns in "Casino Royale", 2006, and "Quantum of Solance").
I for one am hoping this is a return to the style of "Casino Royale" as the last instalment ("Quantum of Solance") was a massive disappointment. Its direction and script were all over the place, and to be frank it was a mess of a film. However, Craig did the best he could've done with what he had to work with, and I have no doubt in my mind he will give us another great showing in the next release.
It appears that the film will be directed by Sam Mendes. I am excited about this choice as he is a skillful and masterful director, haven given us such classics as "American Beauty" and "Road to Perdition". Mendes and Craig also worked on "Perdition", so I'm sure Mendes will be able to bring out the best in him again.
AMADEUS (REVIEW)
STARS: * * * * (4/4)
If you were to ask me what film encapsulates the divine art of music, writing, acting and design, that has been moulded into a cinematic masterpiece, the answer would be: Amadeus. Indeed, this film has taken the audio magic of the master, Mozart, and combined it with stunning to visuals to create a work of art that is both bold and brilliant.
Amadeus was adapted from a successful play by Peter Shaffer and is a stylized fictional description of the life of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, perhaps the most famed and talented composer in history. The story focuses on the rivalry that existed between Mozart and Antonio Salieri. Whilst a "rivalry" did exist between the two, it is not known to exactly what degree it actually was. However, Shaffer and director Milos Forman give us a portrait of two men driven to the brink of insanity: Mozart by his ambition and overworking, Salieri by his greed and bitter jealousy. This film doesn't attempt to be an autio-biography, but conforms to the classic "myth and legend" plot that has been passed down over the centuries. What is known is this: Salieri WAS a successful, prolific composer, and was well respected during his time. Mozart was a genius, but whilst respected during his time, wasn't given the attention and acclaim that he deserved.
The movie begins after Salieri (F.Murray Abraham), now an old man, tries to commit suicide and is confined to a mental asylum. He is visited by a Priest who, upon hearing the rumor that Salieri confesses to "kill Mozart", promptly arrives at the asylum looking for a confession and redemption. Salieri doesn't give him this. Instead, he takes him on a journey back to the past: when he was a court-composer and Mozart a struggling musician. It starts off when Salieri was a boy in Italy, playing little games, while Mozart was touring Europe "playing for Emperors' and Kings'". Salieri then indulges on his life's mission and offers up a vow to God, begging him to give him the talent to "praise him with music". To some degree, Salieri is granted this: he is taken away from his small town to Vienna, "City of Musicians", and becomes Court Composer to Emperor Joseph (Jeffrey Jones). But its not enough. He desires more then earthly recognition, but rather a divine-like spirit to praise God through immortal music. He then meets Mozart (Tom Hulce), and slowly his deep hatred and jealousy grows to this man. He sees Mozart's talent, so effortless and childlike, and can not undestand why God chose Mozart and not him to be his "instrument".
Forman and his entire team transform themselves into the 18th century environment in which the story takes place. One only has to just sit back and watch the extraordinary design and attention to detail that went into this film: every aspect is meticulously planned and well-thought out. There is a methodness to Forman's direction and (as with "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest") he plants us directly in the environment in which the story and actors are in. We feel as if we are in 18th century Europe. When Mozart conducts his operas, we feel as if we are on the stage, there in the moment, feeling the passion and genius of the man. Forman chose to film in Prague, probably the most "classical" of the European cities. Immediately we are given the backdrop of the times. Technically, the film is a masterpiece with authentic looking costumes, amazing production design, skillful editing and breath taking cinematography. The make up in this movie is also impressive as the artists manage to transform Abraham from the young to the old Salieri with poignant ease.
But where this film succeeds it is incorporation of the original music of Mozart. It's only right to have the entire score devoted to the man. Mozart's music is actually another character in this movie: it takes us into the minds and emotions of Salieri and Mozart, what they're feeling, how they're going to react. Forman and Shaffer spent four months writing the script and listened to hours of music, incorporating music and writing scenes around it, and one can see in the final product of the movie and the actors performances how meticulous and successful they were.
The acting in this film is so convincing you see the characters for who they are. We truly believe we are seeing Mozart and Salieri on stage. The ensemble and supporting cast is great, from Jeffrey Jones to Elizabeth Berridge (Costanze, Mozart's wife), but the on-screen chemistry and distinct rivalry between the two main players, Hulce and Abraham, is what lights up the screen. Both are extraordinary in their roles. Hulce portrays the childlike aspects of Mozart with such grace, yet at the same time encapsulating the genius of the man and the seriousness he put behind his work. Abraham gives us a Salieri that is talented but so flawed that he could never really see it. He loses himself in the jealousy, the rage and the anger he has towards Mozart and the God who he believes "betrayed him". The words spoken from his monologues, so poetic, so lyrical, is delivered with aplomb by Abraham who elevates himself to an acting level that very few actors have reached. These two performances will go down in history as being two of the best ever put on screen. Tom Hulce received a well-earned Academy Award nomination, but it was F.Murray Abraham who deservedly walked away with the Oscar. His performance is definitely one of the most iconic in cinema history. Amadeus walked away with 8 Academy Awards, deserving of them all.
Amadeus is a film that delights in both a visual and auditory way. We fall in love with both the main characters, because they are both human and are flawed. But we also fall in love with the other main character: the music. As Mozart says: "I'm a vulgar man. But I assure you, my music is not." Indeed, the characters may have been flawed and imperfect, but this film (most definitely) is not.
If you were to ask me what film encapsulates the divine art of music, writing, acting and design, that has been moulded into a cinematic masterpiece, the answer would be: Amadeus. Indeed, this film has taken the audio magic of the master, Mozart, and combined it with stunning to visuals to create a work of art that is both bold and brilliant.
Amadeus was adapted from a successful play by Peter Shaffer and is a stylized fictional description of the life of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, perhaps the most famed and talented composer in history. The story focuses on the rivalry that existed between Mozart and Antonio Salieri. Whilst a "rivalry" did exist between the two, it is not known to exactly what degree it actually was. However, Shaffer and director Milos Forman give us a portrait of two men driven to the brink of insanity: Mozart by his ambition and overworking, Salieri by his greed and bitter jealousy. This film doesn't attempt to be an autio-biography, but conforms to the classic "myth and legend" plot that has been passed down over the centuries. What is known is this: Salieri WAS a successful, prolific composer, and was well respected during his time. Mozart was a genius, but whilst respected during his time, wasn't given the attention and acclaim that he deserved.
The movie begins after Salieri (F.Murray Abraham), now an old man, tries to commit suicide and is confined to a mental asylum. He is visited by a Priest who, upon hearing the rumor that Salieri confesses to "kill Mozart", promptly arrives at the asylum looking for a confession and redemption. Salieri doesn't give him this. Instead, he takes him on a journey back to the past: when he was a court-composer and Mozart a struggling musician. It starts off when Salieri was a boy in Italy, playing little games, while Mozart was touring Europe "playing for Emperors' and Kings'". Salieri then indulges on his life's mission and offers up a vow to God, begging him to give him the talent to "praise him with music". To some degree, Salieri is granted this: he is taken away from his small town to Vienna, "City of Musicians", and becomes Court Composer to Emperor Joseph (Jeffrey Jones). But its not enough. He desires more then earthly recognition, but rather a divine-like spirit to praise God through immortal music. He then meets Mozart (Tom Hulce), and slowly his deep hatred and jealousy grows to this man. He sees Mozart's talent, so effortless and childlike, and can not undestand why God chose Mozart and not him to be his "instrument".
Forman and his entire team transform themselves into the 18th century environment in which the story takes place. One only has to just sit back and watch the extraordinary design and attention to detail that went into this film: every aspect is meticulously planned and well-thought out. There is a methodness to Forman's direction and (as with "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest") he plants us directly in the environment in which the story and actors are in. We feel as if we are in 18th century Europe. When Mozart conducts his operas, we feel as if we are on the stage, there in the moment, feeling the passion and genius of the man. Forman chose to film in Prague, probably the most "classical" of the European cities. Immediately we are given the backdrop of the times. Technically, the film is a masterpiece with authentic looking costumes, amazing production design, skillful editing and breath taking cinematography. The make up in this movie is also impressive as the artists manage to transform Abraham from the young to the old Salieri with poignant ease.
But where this film succeeds it is incorporation of the original music of Mozart. It's only right to have the entire score devoted to the man. Mozart's music is actually another character in this movie: it takes us into the minds and emotions of Salieri and Mozart, what they're feeling, how they're going to react. Forman and Shaffer spent four months writing the script and listened to hours of music, incorporating music and writing scenes around it, and one can see in the final product of the movie and the actors performances how meticulous and successful they were.
The acting in this film is so convincing you see the characters for who they are. We truly believe we are seeing Mozart and Salieri on stage. The ensemble and supporting cast is great, from Jeffrey Jones to Elizabeth Berridge (Costanze, Mozart's wife), but the on-screen chemistry and distinct rivalry between the two main players, Hulce and Abraham, is what lights up the screen. Both are extraordinary in their roles. Hulce portrays the childlike aspects of Mozart with such grace, yet at the same time encapsulating the genius of the man and the seriousness he put behind his work. Abraham gives us a Salieri that is talented but so flawed that he could never really see it. He loses himself in the jealousy, the rage and the anger he has towards Mozart and the God who he believes "betrayed him". The words spoken from his monologues, so poetic, so lyrical, is delivered with aplomb by Abraham who elevates himself to an acting level that very few actors have reached. These two performances will go down in history as being two of the best ever put on screen. Tom Hulce received a well-earned Academy Award nomination, but it was F.Murray Abraham who deservedly walked away with the Oscar. His performance is definitely one of the most iconic in cinema history. Amadeus walked away with 8 Academy Awards, deserving of them all.
Amadeus is a film that delights in both a visual and auditory way. We fall in love with both the main characters, because they are both human and are flawed. But we also fall in love with the other main character: the music. As Mozart says: "I'm a vulgar man. But I assure you, my music is not." Indeed, the characters may have been flawed and imperfect, but this film (most definitely) is not.
Monday, January 3, 2011
THE FIGHTER (REVIEW)
STARS: * * 1/2 (2.5/4)
"The Fighter" should've been a great movie. Really. Its supposed to have everything: drama, action, romance.
So what went wrong?
Okay, well, let's start at the beginning:
It is 1993 in the small town of Lowell, Massachussets. We are joined by Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) and Dicky Eklund (Christian Bale) as they wander the neighbourhood, followed by a film crew. Why are they being followed by a film crew? Well, it is a crew from HBO who are tracking the comeback of Dicky Eklund, a young fighter who once knocked out Sugar Ray Leonard in 1978. Dicky is Micky's older brother, and he taught him everything he needed to know about boxing and life. Dicky was Micky's idol. But whatever potential Dicky had quickly evaporated after he fell in with the wrong people and became addicted to cocaine. Micky, however, has chosen a safer path. He is a good boxer. In fact, he is a great boxer who just needs a litte guidance and some luck to get his way. The problem is that he is managed by the wrong people: his mother, Alice (Mellisa Leo) is his manager, and he also gets some help from his father George (Jack McKee), though his advice is often shot down by the rest of his family. He has a travelling band of supporters in his seven sisters who all live at home and seem more interested in Micky making money and boxing then showing any real affection towards their brother.
Micky lands a fight in a bid to start climbing up the boxing hierarchy, but the boxer pulls out the night before, and he is given the option of fighting a replacement boxer. He is told the replacement is unfit and untrained, and ready for the taking. Without thinking much about it, Micky's family urges him to fight (why? oh, well, because they won't get paid if he doesn't). Micky takes the fight, but arrives at the ring and finds the guy outweighs him by 20pounds and is as ripped as any fighter he's ever been up against. Micky does his best, but is taken to the cleaners. He starts to decline, but through the support of his bartender girlfriend, Charlene (Amy Adams), he tries to put his life in perspective. He is offered a wonderful opportunity to train in Las Vegas, away from his family and brother, and make a real run at the whole boxing thing. He wants to do it, but doesn't want to leave Dicky, who is just falling deeper and deeper off the rails. Dicky promises to get Micky money to keep him at home, and after trying a few criminal acts, it all catches up to him in one scene that involves him getting arrested and sent to prison. We really want Micky to actually leave his family and go train with professional trainers because he has potential, he has the desire, but is to afraid to let go of his overbearing family. It is frustrating to watch as we just want Micky to tell them off, but he doesn't.
Where this film falls flat is the connection between Micky and his family, and Micky's inability to actually take control of his own life by his own measures. We just don't feel that his family, particularly his mother and his sisters, have any real concern for Micky other then his fighting. They are just too involved in his affairs. Micky meets Charlene and we start to see him becoming more focused, more determined, but it is his family that is ultimately holding him back. There is one scene, where he is happy in the arms of the women he loves, when the women of his family march to Charlene's house to "demand Micky back". I honestly was so annoyed with this scene and everything about it: the acting by the sisters in this scene (and in the movie as a whole) is rather pathetic and forced, and it was just out of place. Micky is a grown man, a fighter, who should just be left alone to get on with what he has to do.
And that's where this movie doesn't quite make the grade. The characters aren't believable, and the close-knit, concerned family unit that the writers and director were trying to convey, just falls flat because of it.
The acting by the rest of the cast is good: Mellissa Leo's character is really annoying and downright rude and pretentious sometimes, but Leo pulls off a good performance. Amy Adams does a fine job as Charlene and plays quite a different character to what we're used to. Mark Wahlberg's performance gets better as the movie progresses. In the beginning we're not quite sure where he's headed, but it definitely picks up, and in truth we start to really care about him and want him to make the right choices. As with "The Departed", Wahlberg is becoming a better actor with each passing role. Adams and Wahlberg will most likely get some Oscar recognition for their roles.
But it is Christian Bale that truly carries this film on his shoulders. He puts in a great performance as Wahlberg's crackhead criminal brother, and convincingly gives us a man who had so much potential, but has sunk away to complete nothingness. Bale's transformation is truly remarkable where we truly believe he is Dicky Eklund, the fighter who could've had everything but ended up with just memories. Expect Bale to get some deserved Oscar recognition for this performance, and if you consider his repertoire of work in his career (from American Psycho to The Dark Knight), then it truly is overdue.
The direction is solid, but the best shot scenes were the HBO documentary about Dicky - in prison he gets to see who he truly is. The director did a great job forging these two worlds together. The boxing scenes were also good and realistic. But ultimately, we just don't get a grip on the characters, and in the end we want Micky to find success just for himself, Charlene and Dicky. We want the family to have no joy because, quite frankly, they don't deserve it.
Overall, this is not a bad movie. But as I was watching, I just thought it could've been so much better.
"The Fighter" should've been a great movie. Really. Its supposed to have everything: drama, action, romance.
So what went wrong?
Okay, well, let's start at the beginning:
It is 1993 in the small town of Lowell, Massachussets. We are joined by Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) and Dicky Eklund (Christian Bale) as they wander the neighbourhood, followed by a film crew. Why are they being followed by a film crew? Well, it is a crew from HBO who are tracking the comeback of Dicky Eklund, a young fighter who once knocked out Sugar Ray Leonard in 1978. Dicky is Micky's older brother, and he taught him everything he needed to know about boxing and life. Dicky was Micky's idol. But whatever potential Dicky had quickly evaporated after he fell in with the wrong people and became addicted to cocaine. Micky, however, has chosen a safer path. He is a good boxer. In fact, he is a great boxer who just needs a litte guidance and some luck to get his way. The problem is that he is managed by the wrong people: his mother, Alice (Mellisa Leo) is his manager, and he also gets some help from his father George (Jack McKee), though his advice is often shot down by the rest of his family. He has a travelling band of supporters in his seven sisters who all live at home and seem more interested in Micky making money and boxing then showing any real affection towards their brother.
Micky lands a fight in a bid to start climbing up the boxing hierarchy, but the boxer pulls out the night before, and he is given the option of fighting a replacement boxer. He is told the replacement is unfit and untrained, and ready for the taking. Without thinking much about it, Micky's family urges him to fight (why? oh, well, because they won't get paid if he doesn't). Micky takes the fight, but arrives at the ring and finds the guy outweighs him by 20pounds and is as ripped as any fighter he's ever been up against. Micky does his best, but is taken to the cleaners. He starts to decline, but through the support of his bartender girlfriend, Charlene (Amy Adams), he tries to put his life in perspective. He is offered a wonderful opportunity to train in Las Vegas, away from his family and brother, and make a real run at the whole boxing thing. He wants to do it, but doesn't want to leave Dicky, who is just falling deeper and deeper off the rails. Dicky promises to get Micky money to keep him at home, and after trying a few criminal acts, it all catches up to him in one scene that involves him getting arrested and sent to prison. We really want Micky to actually leave his family and go train with professional trainers because he has potential, he has the desire, but is to afraid to let go of his overbearing family. It is frustrating to watch as we just want Micky to tell them off, but he doesn't.
Where this film falls flat is the connection between Micky and his family, and Micky's inability to actually take control of his own life by his own measures. We just don't feel that his family, particularly his mother and his sisters, have any real concern for Micky other then his fighting. They are just too involved in his affairs. Micky meets Charlene and we start to see him becoming more focused, more determined, but it is his family that is ultimately holding him back. There is one scene, where he is happy in the arms of the women he loves, when the women of his family march to Charlene's house to "demand Micky back". I honestly was so annoyed with this scene and everything about it: the acting by the sisters in this scene (and in the movie as a whole) is rather pathetic and forced, and it was just out of place. Micky is a grown man, a fighter, who should just be left alone to get on with what he has to do.
And that's where this movie doesn't quite make the grade. The characters aren't believable, and the close-knit, concerned family unit that the writers and director were trying to convey, just falls flat because of it.
The acting by the rest of the cast is good: Mellissa Leo's character is really annoying and downright rude and pretentious sometimes, but Leo pulls off a good performance. Amy Adams does a fine job as Charlene and plays quite a different character to what we're used to. Mark Wahlberg's performance gets better as the movie progresses. In the beginning we're not quite sure where he's headed, but it definitely picks up, and in truth we start to really care about him and want him to make the right choices. As with "The Departed", Wahlberg is becoming a better actor with each passing role. Adams and Wahlberg will most likely get some Oscar recognition for their roles.
But it is Christian Bale that truly carries this film on his shoulders. He puts in a great performance as Wahlberg's crackhead criminal brother, and convincingly gives us a man who had so much potential, but has sunk away to complete nothingness. Bale's transformation is truly remarkable where we truly believe he is Dicky Eklund, the fighter who could've had everything but ended up with just memories. Expect Bale to get some deserved Oscar recognition for this performance, and if you consider his repertoire of work in his career (from American Psycho to The Dark Knight), then it truly is overdue.
The direction is solid, but the best shot scenes were the HBO documentary about Dicky - in prison he gets to see who he truly is. The director did a great job forging these two worlds together. The boxing scenes were also good and realistic. But ultimately, we just don't get a grip on the characters, and in the end we want Micky to find success just for himself, Charlene and Dicky. We want the family to have no joy because, quite frankly, they don't deserve it.
Overall, this is not a bad movie. But as I was watching, I just thought it could've been so much better.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
SIDEWAYS (REVIEW)
STARS: * * * * (4/4)
"Sideways" is a film about wine.
That's the simplistic answer. But in truth, Sideways is a film in which wine serves as one of its many metaphors. It is in fact about the ageing process in life, how we mature and grow, how we decline, and the decisions we make. This film marks a fantastic achievement by director/writer Alexander Payne (who also did the brilliant "About Schmidt"). Payne also penned the script, which is one of the cleverest scripts ever written, and deservedly won "Best Adapted Screenplay" Oscar for this film. "Sideways" seems simplistic in its approach, but its the subtle brilliance in its script and direction that makes this film great.
It starts off with a brilliant opening of Miles (Paul Giammati) who is awoken by builders that want him to move his car. Miles stumbles to the door, hungover from the night before, and moves his car. Miles is a wine connosier who went to a tasting the night before, but wakes up late for a meeting in Los Angeles. He "hurries" through his morning routine and drives slowly on the freeway in order to do the crossword puzzle: the others cars pass him by, but he just continues at his own slow pace. We can take this to be a metaphor that Miles is just cruising through life, not really going anywhere, whilst the rest of the world is passing him by.
"Sideways" is full of metaphors of this nature, subtle meanings and themes, that it feels sometimes like its too much to keep track of. But never does the director manipulate the viewer, and it all just seems so natural - and thats where this film succeeds. The beauty is in its simplicity and subtlety.
Miles is on his way to pick up Jack (Thomas Hayden Church) to take him away for week before his wedding on Saturday. A sort of "bachelor party", per se. They travel up California wine-country to take in the sights and scenery, and good wines that the region has to offer. Jack is an actor who specialises in smaller gigs and commercials. These guys are both characters that have basically failed to live up to their true expectations: Jack is a low-end commercial actor, and Miles is an unpublished author who teaches English to middle school students.They see this trip as one last chance to get crazy, cut loose, and with middle-age approachign, they seek to recapture some of the youth that seems to have just vanished from their eyes. They meet two women, Stephanie (Sandra Oh) and Mia (Virginia Madsen) who join them on their adventures. Jack has no problem connecting with Stephanie, but Miles, who is a depressed, insecure and lonely person, struggles to reciprocate mutual feelings towards Ma. He still hasn't gotten over his ex-wife, and the depression of rejection is really taking its toll.
I won't give away the plot here as you really have to see this picture yourself to fully understand the range of emotions and meaning, but it really is an equiste picture. The acting in this film is outstanding. Sandrah Oh and Virginia Madsen are great in their roles, but it is really the onscreen chemistry of Giammati and Hayden Church that makes this picture. Their characters' were college roommates (one can already imagine a scenario where Jack's character wants to go out to town in the evening, only to be rejected by Miles who wants to study for Monday's test), but their relationship now seems to have soured a little bit. It's probably just age, but they do their best to take comfort in each other. Hayden Church gives a brilliant comedic portrayal of the outgoing, womanizing Jack, but Giammati gives the best performance in this film. He is so convincing in his role and totally loses himself in this emotion-filled character. We feel his pain: every look in his eye, every expression on his face is portrayed with such precision and nuance. Madsen, Oh and Church all got deserved Oscar nominations, but that just doesn't seem fair when you consider Giammati didn't get any. He gives us a truly original, sometimes annoying, but real character in a career-defining performance. There is one scene in particular, where he is on the porch talking with Virginia Madsen's character about wine, where the acting is just truly breathtaking (by both actors).
"Sideways" is a film that has everything: great acting, directing, interesting editing (particulary when we follow Miles and Jack on their first wine tour), and a wonderful soundtrack. But it is the script and Giammati's performance that makes this film a masterpiece. There is so much visual imagery and meaning in this picture that what we are seeing is basically poetry, a poem about life, where everything has meaning. Its up to us to decipher what it may mean.
"Sideways" is a film about wine.
That's the simplistic answer. But in truth, Sideways is a film in which wine serves as one of its many metaphors. It is in fact about the ageing process in life, how we mature and grow, how we decline, and the decisions we make. This film marks a fantastic achievement by director/writer Alexander Payne (who also did the brilliant "About Schmidt"). Payne also penned the script, which is one of the cleverest scripts ever written, and deservedly won "Best Adapted Screenplay" Oscar for this film. "Sideways" seems simplistic in its approach, but its the subtle brilliance in its script and direction that makes this film great.
It starts off with a brilliant opening of Miles (Paul Giammati) who is awoken by builders that want him to move his car. Miles stumbles to the door, hungover from the night before, and moves his car. Miles is a wine connosier who went to a tasting the night before, but wakes up late for a meeting in Los Angeles. He "hurries" through his morning routine and drives slowly on the freeway in order to do the crossword puzzle: the others cars pass him by, but he just continues at his own slow pace. We can take this to be a metaphor that Miles is just cruising through life, not really going anywhere, whilst the rest of the world is passing him by.
"Sideways" is full of metaphors of this nature, subtle meanings and themes, that it feels sometimes like its too much to keep track of. But never does the director manipulate the viewer, and it all just seems so natural - and thats where this film succeeds. The beauty is in its simplicity and subtlety.
Miles is on his way to pick up Jack (Thomas Hayden Church) to take him away for week before his wedding on Saturday. A sort of "bachelor party", per se. They travel up California wine-country to take in the sights and scenery, and good wines that the region has to offer. Jack is an actor who specialises in smaller gigs and commercials. These guys are both characters that have basically failed to live up to their true expectations: Jack is a low-end commercial actor, and Miles is an unpublished author who teaches English to middle school students.They see this trip as one last chance to get crazy, cut loose, and with middle-age approachign, they seek to recapture some of the youth that seems to have just vanished from their eyes. They meet two women, Stephanie (Sandra Oh) and Mia (Virginia Madsen) who join them on their adventures. Jack has no problem connecting with Stephanie, but Miles, who is a depressed, insecure and lonely person, struggles to reciprocate mutual feelings towards Ma. He still hasn't gotten over his ex-wife, and the depression of rejection is really taking its toll.
I won't give away the plot here as you really have to see this picture yourself to fully understand the range of emotions and meaning, but it really is an equiste picture. The acting in this film is outstanding. Sandrah Oh and Virginia Madsen are great in their roles, but it is really the onscreen chemistry of Giammati and Hayden Church that makes this picture. Their characters' were college roommates (one can already imagine a scenario where Jack's character wants to go out to town in the evening, only to be rejected by Miles who wants to study for Monday's test), but their relationship now seems to have soured a little bit. It's probably just age, but they do their best to take comfort in each other. Hayden Church gives a brilliant comedic portrayal of the outgoing, womanizing Jack, but Giammati gives the best performance in this film. He is so convincing in his role and totally loses himself in this emotion-filled character. We feel his pain: every look in his eye, every expression on his face is portrayed with such precision and nuance. Madsen, Oh and Church all got deserved Oscar nominations, but that just doesn't seem fair when you consider Giammati didn't get any. He gives us a truly original, sometimes annoying, but real character in a career-defining performance. There is one scene in particular, where he is on the porch talking with Virginia Madsen's character about wine, where the acting is just truly breathtaking (by both actors).
"Sideways" is a film that has everything: great acting, directing, interesting editing (particulary when we follow Miles and Jack on their first wine tour), and a wonderful soundtrack. But it is the script and Giammati's performance that makes this film a masterpiece. There is so much visual imagery and meaning in this picture that what we are seeing is basically poetry, a poem about life, where everything has meaning. Its up to us to decipher what it may mean.
40 DAYS AND 40 NIGHTS (REVIEW)
STARS: * 1/2 (1.5/4)
This film, released in 2002, is like all the other teen gross out comedies you'll find (such as "American Pie" or "Road Trip"). However, the characters are out of school, even out of college, and are in jobs. They're working to pay the bills, they're doing their own laundry and living their own lives. So I kind of felt the gross out sex humour a little too forced and immature in this one. We've seen these jokes a million times. Yes, we still have some fun moments and chuckles, but when we're in our mid-20s and the jokes are trying to copy the "teen/gross out" genre, it just doesn't fit.
The idea for this movie is actually quite a clever one: what if an overly sex-minded 25-year-old (approximate age) male takes a vow of abstinence for 40 days? We can imagine some really clever scenarios and situations that could be played out. Unfortunately, we are left with few. What plays out is a conventional romantic-comedy genre where boy meets girl, they fall-in love, they fight, they meet together at the end. Whilst this is the accepted convention for other films, it just doesn't quite work out here. The writers have tried to merge two genres into one, and what results is a film void of any real comedy, weak characters and contrived conversations.
At the beginning, the film starts off with Matt (Josh Hartnett, whose performance was a little too awkward at times), a tall, cute guy who has a normal sexual appetite, who has just broken up with his long term girlfriend Nicole. With the help of his roommate Ryan (Paulo Costanzo, from "Road Trip" fame), he tries to get his mind off her by meeting as many girls as possible. But still, he is haunted by her and can't get her out of his mind. After hearing some inspiring words from his brother John (Adam Tresse), who is training to become a priest, he decides to take a vow of abstinence for Lent. However, abstinence includes EVERYTHING sexual (hint hint). Everyone doubts him, but Matt shows incredible self-control. We think he can do it. Until he meets a girl named Erica (Shannyn Sossamon), and is then tested to the extreme. To make matters worse, his office workers have gotten wind of the bet, and set up an internet betting pool to see how long it will go on. This is probably the most humorous part of the story. It is pretty funny watching the guys betting money and doing their best to get Matt to cave in. The character of Jerry (Griffin Dunnem, who probably gives the funniest performance here) is also great to watch as he tries to emulate Matt in an attempt to win back control of his marriage, but ultimately fails miserably at it.
However, whilst I feel the film ultimately falls flat, what it does succeed in showing (on however gross a level) is how a man's brain is wired. Men have animal instincts, and as Ryan points out, were designed to "spread their seed". So I can imagine that women who watch this may not understand what the big deal is, but men will fully appreciate Matt's plight and champion his cause. The love story between Matt and Erica also has touching moments, however cliched the storyline may be. But what ruins this connection is that we are given an actual beautiful moment between the two, but the ending is ultimately unsatisfying. I won't give it away, but I actually cringed. I think a better ending would've saved this movie.
"40 Days and Nights" has a good concept, some funny moments, but ultimately leaves us emotionally unsatisfied and quite frankly, a little bit disturbed.
This film, released in 2002, is like all the other teen gross out comedies you'll find (such as "American Pie" or "Road Trip"). However, the characters are out of school, even out of college, and are in jobs. They're working to pay the bills, they're doing their own laundry and living their own lives. So I kind of felt the gross out sex humour a little too forced and immature in this one. We've seen these jokes a million times. Yes, we still have some fun moments and chuckles, but when we're in our mid-20s and the jokes are trying to copy the "teen/gross out" genre, it just doesn't fit.
The idea for this movie is actually quite a clever one: what if an overly sex-minded 25-year-old (approximate age) male takes a vow of abstinence for 40 days? We can imagine some really clever scenarios and situations that could be played out. Unfortunately, we are left with few. What plays out is a conventional romantic-comedy genre where boy meets girl, they fall-in love, they fight, they meet together at the end. Whilst this is the accepted convention for other films, it just doesn't quite work out here. The writers have tried to merge two genres into one, and what results is a film void of any real comedy, weak characters and contrived conversations.
At the beginning, the film starts off with Matt (Josh Hartnett, whose performance was a little too awkward at times), a tall, cute guy who has a normal sexual appetite, who has just broken up with his long term girlfriend Nicole. With the help of his roommate Ryan (Paulo Costanzo, from "Road Trip" fame), he tries to get his mind off her by meeting as many girls as possible. But still, he is haunted by her and can't get her out of his mind. After hearing some inspiring words from his brother John (Adam Tresse), who is training to become a priest, he decides to take a vow of abstinence for Lent. However, abstinence includes EVERYTHING sexual (hint hint). Everyone doubts him, but Matt shows incredible self-control. We think he can do it. Until he meets a girl named Erica (Shannyn Sossamon), and is then tested to the extreme. To make matters worse, his office workers have gotten wind of the bet, and set up an internet betting pool to see how long it will go on. This is probably the most humorous part of the story. It is pretty funny watching the guys betting money and doing their best to get Matt to cave in. The character of Jerry (Griffin Dunnem, who probably gives the funniest performance here) is also great to watch as he tries to emulate Matt in an attempt to win back control of his marriage, but ultimately fails miserably at it.
However, whilst I feel the film ultimately falls flat, what it does succeed in showing (on however gross a level) is how a man's brain is wired. Men have animal instincts, and as Ryan points out, were designed to "spread their seed". So I can imagine that women who watch this may not understand what the big deal is, but men will fully appreciate Matt's plight and champion his cause. The love story between Matt and Erica also has touching moments, however cliched the storyline may be. But what ruins this connection is that we are given an actual beautiful moment between the two, but the ending is ultimately unsatisfying. I won't give it away, but I actually cringed. I think a better ending would've saved this movie.
"40 Days and Nights" has a good concept, some funny moments, but ultimately leaves us emotionally unsatisfied and quite frankly, a little bit disturbed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)