Whatever you opinion may be about this film, you have to admit that it does not have the best ensemble. I’m not saying that just because I love The Social Network but because it is the truth. The Social Network, The Fighter and even The Kids Are All Right have a better ensemble than The King’s Speech. But The King’s Speech won (unfairly) and there’s nothing I can do about it. However, I won’t accept the fact that it will sweep at the Oscars. Am in total denial? Fuck yes I am. Why? Because no matter what you tell me, I still think that other films are more deserving than The King’s Speech.
P.S. The Social Network COULD still win Best Picture and Best Director.
Are you surprised that Christopher Nolan didn't get nominated for best director for oscars? D:
Yes, I was. I thought he his nomination was going to be a sure thing, but now I know that the Oscars do not like him. In my mind, Nolan was more deserving of a nomination than David O. Russell. Anyone could’ve made The Fighter, but I only Nolan could’ve done something as great as Inception.
I’m hoping he wins for best original screenplay, but I don’t think that will happen either. His screenplay for Memento was nominated when it came out and that one lost as well. It all seems really unfair to me…
This article right here is scaring the hell out of me. The website from which this article is taking from is a website dedicated to the awards race, to analyzing why some films win the Oscar while others do not, etc. Much like the woman who runs the website, I too thought (still think actually) that The Social Network was going to win most of the major awards come Oscar time. That however is no longer the case. The King’s Speech is as of now the favorite to win everything from best picture to art direction to score.
Many people are questioning exactly where this newfound love towards The King’s Speech came from? Why are the Oscars so in love with it? The answer is very simple: this is a film that at the end makes you feel good. It is a film with likable characters, a hopeful and inspirational message, and presented in splendid fashion. Films such as this one are the ones the Oscars love to award and have awarded throughout many years. That is why Shakespeare In Love won over Saving Private Ryan, why Chicago won over The Hours, and why The Return of the King won over Mystic River. Now in 2011, The King’s Speech might win over The Social Network.
If you’ve followed my blog long enough, you know that I love The Social Network. If it were up to me I would give it every award. What really bothers me about The King’s Speech possible win in every major category is that fact that it doesn’t deserve to win, except for Best Actor. The King’s Speech score is not better than The Social Network's, its direction is not better than David Fincher's, its original screenplay is not better than Inception's, and its cinematography is not better than True Grit's. To award The King’s Speech in every category is not only insulting but it undermines the Oscars.
I know that this talk is premature, but I bring it up because tonight the possible outcome of the Oscars will be decided. If The King’s Speech wins for Outstanding Ensemble, Best Supporting Actor and Best Supporting Actress besides the already locked Best Actor, then make no mistake that it will most likely repeat all of its winnings at the Oscars. Many of the experts are onboard with this, while others are throwing the towel at this unprecedented travesty. Me? I’m still hopeful that The King’s Speech will only win for Best Actor. I will feel so cheated if it won the rest.
But like the woman who runs this website says: “The trick is not minding”
Oh an another thing, I would rather see Toy Story 3 win for Best Picture than The King’s Speech. If they’re not going to give it to The Social Network, they must as well give to a film that actually deserves it.
Creep (Originally by Radiohead) - Scala And Kolacny Brothers
This beautiful cover done by Scala And Kolacny Brothers choir captures all the most haunting aspects of Radiohead’s classic song. This version came to my attention after watching the trailer for the upcoming tale of the creation of facebook, The Social Network. It was a perfect match for this film because in a world where everyone’s social lives are becoming easily accessible with only a couple clicks of the mouse, we are all feeling like creeps in this world that keeps getting smaller every second. Our social identity is becoming the center of our lives. This is the “me” generation. It’s a egocentric world obsessed with everybody’s lives meanwhile endlessly advertising how awesome our own lives are. Our facebook pages, our twitter updates, our tumblr posts, our flickr photographs, our last.fm music charts are becoming who we are. It’s a blueprint for our identities for the entire world to see. Our lives are now on facebook, everything that happens, whether good or bad, is constantly updated onto the online realm. Our reals lives are intertwining with our virtual lives. Life is becoming one big status update.
“You’re just like an angel. Your skin makes me cry. You float like a feather in a beautiful world.”
I think that in the realm of scary films, the ones about exorcism have the most difficulty. Why? Because once you’ve seen a film about exorcism, you’ve seen them all. There isn’t much they can do besides showing you a priest in conflict with his faith, a girl doing odd things with her limbs and speaking in a creepy deep voice, and weird images of demonic stuff. But the main problem with The Rite is not the fact that we’ve seeing everything in it before, it’s just that everything is presented in the most generic and predictable way.
The basic story of The Rite is that Michael, who is almost a priest but not quite, is sent to The Vatican to take a class on exorcism. In here he is introduced to Father Lukas (Anthony Hopkins) and his unorthodox ways of conducting exorcisms. During his stay there, Michael uncovers some secrets of his past while also discovering whether he believes in devil or not.
I really don’t want to spend that much space writing about this film so I’ll get to the point. The Rite is a really average movie. It does have some strong moments all courtesy of Anthony Hopkins who really elevates the material. In fact I don’t understand why he offered to be in this film, but I;m glad he did because otherwise I would’ve walked out. The actor playing Michael is as bland as they come and beyond boring. Then there’s this other actress who is playing a journalist and she sucked too. What was funny about her is that she had this face throughout the whole movie that she wanted to fuck Michael. The visual effects are gimmicky and silly, and I really, really wanted to laugh at so many moments. What else is there? Oh yeah, the direction and editing got in the way of things being scary so that was a huge problem too.
My advice is to not watch The Rite. Once it becomes available on Netflix and you are still really curious about it then go watch it. Or you can do what I did, go to the cinema and sleep in the last 30 minutes of the movie.
A couple of days I started watching RED and I really couldn’t get into it. I wasn’t sober at the time so I had no idea what was going in the film, it all seemed too confusing. But after re-watching it today, sober, I must say that I’m surprised as to how fun, funny and good RED is. I now understand why the film was such a box office hit and why it was nominated for Best Picture Musical/Comedy at the Golden Globes.
In RED, Bruce Willis plays retired C.I.A. agent Frank Moses who has a sort of love flirtation going on over the phone with pension’s representative Sarah Ross played by Mary-Louise Parker. After a hit-squad comes to Frank’s houses and attempts to kill him, he goes after Sarah to protect her life and also contacts his former partners. Along with Joe Matheson (Morgan Freeman), Marvin Boggs (John Malkovich), Victoria (Helen Mirren) and Ivan Simanov (Brian Cox) they attempt to discover why they are being targeted.
First of all, I’m impressed by the level of renowned talent involved in these film and especially how each and everyone of them brings something cool and funny to the table. Helen Mirren, who has always been a GMILF to me, is pretty funny and totally badass with a gun. John Malkovich, who I personally don’t like that much, is utterly hilarious as the crazy and always right Marvin. His scenes are among the funniest and best of the whole. Mary-Louise Parker, who I haven’t seen since I stopped watching Weeds, is to me the funniest character in the film. But of course, the best is easily Bruce Willis who is awesome and badass in almost everything he does. And what most people don’t realize is that he can be really funny as well, especially in here where he is so smitten by Sarah.
I think one of the main reasons why this film works so well is because you can totally tell how everyone is just having a blast. It is really obvious that all the actors involved had so much fun playing their characters and this transcends to us, the audience, and makes enjoy everything more. RED is a film that shouldn’t be taken seriously at any point, which you can tell by the way it was directed and by the music. The film was made specifically to be fun and funny and it achieves that splendidly. Plus, the actions are all so awesome.
I saw Robyn last night in concert and she KILLED IT! I was really surprised by her amazing stage presence and she sounds so much better live. There were a lot of gay dudes in the concert and it was so funny how much they were into her. It was as if all them were having an orgasm/epileptic attack. This song in particular, I didn’t really like it that much when I heard her album but the ways he sang it in the concert just blew me away. It was sooooo good! That was by far one of the best concerts I’ve been to. Highly recommend it.
Harry Brown has been labelled as the British response to Clint Eastwood’s Gan Torino. While that is an accurate comparison, there are of course some very predominant differences between the two. The main one is the lead actors, Clint Eastwood gives a very intimidating and unapologetic vibe to the film whereas Michael Cane establishes a more intimate, serious and threatening mood. Which one is better? It doesn’t matter, but what does matter is the commentary on violence and police negligence that infests our current society.
Michael Cane plays veteran marine officer Harry Brown who lives in one of the most dangerous neighborhoods I’ve ever seen. Gangs violence is not only present throughout the neighborhood but everyone in it is constantly living in fear. Harry has one friend, Leonard Attwell (David Bradley), left who he has a beer and plays chess with. Leonard tells Harry how he is living in fear and how the police don’t do anything. Harry’s view of it is that as long as you turn a blind eye to the violence, then nothing will happen. But once Leonard is beaten and then stabbed to death by a gang of teenage boys, Harry Brown takes matters into his own hands.
For those people who thought Gran Torino lacked violence, then they will certainly be satisfied by Harry Brown. This film is extremely violent and it does a great of showing us exactly why everyone in the neighborhood is afraid. No one is safe there, which is evident from the very beginning of the film where we see a lady strolling her child only to be later shot. The film also does a great job by making us have absolutely no sympathy for the members of the gang, they are highly unlikable characters. This makes Harry Brown consequent action is seem heroic and justifiable. However, the violence of the film is portrayed in such a gruesome and gritty way that it’s even hard to see the bad guys getting killed. Yes, they deserved to die but the film’s handling of their deaths doesn’t bring us much satisfaction, at least not to me personally.
I’m not very familiar with Michael Cane’s work, my introduction to him was as Alfred in Batman Begins. I haven’t seen any of the films he did prior to that one and as a result I was very surprised by how brilliant his performance is in here. I’ve always said that the quieter performances are the most intriguing and complex ones, and this proves to be true with Harry Brown. Michael Cane plays him with a level of calmness, vulnerability and quiet anguish that is really fascinating. I especially like the moments where we get see glimpses of his former self and when Michael Cane wants to be threatening, trust me that he will scare the hell out you. This is why I prefer him over Clint Eastwood, with Michael Cane you never know just how Harry Brown will react.
Harry Brown is pretty powerful film and very much deserving of your viewing. The director Daniel Barber does a great job at creating threatening and eerie looking shots, while Michael Cane gives a brilliant and very relatable performance. There is violence in the film but it is not a cheer-inducing violence, instead it it gritty and highly shocking at times. To me, the British response to Clint Eastwood’s Gan Torino is on a whole other league of its own.
A First Impressions Anecdote of: Exit Through The Gift Shop.
I’ve always said that if there’s one true thing about documentaries is that they are interesting. Whether you end up liking them is a whole different matter. I use to believe that there couldn’t be a documentary I wouldn’t like, especially one that deals with street art. The common misconception about Exit Through The Gift Shop is that it is a film about the famous street artist Banksy. The film is actually about Mister Brainwash a.k.a. Thierry Guetta and his fascination with street art. As a “filmmaker” Thierry started filming and becoming friends street artists in order to make a documentary on street art. After tagging along famous street artists, he still hadn’t managed to meet the street artist which is Banksy. Through sheer luck their paths crossed and they became good friends. Next thing you know, Thierry starts trying out street art and becomes Mister Brainwash.
My main problem with this film is that I did not care at all about Thierry Guetta. I would go so far as to say that I did not find the guy likable/relatable and in my opinion he is a big joke. I totally understand why all the other street artists didn’t necessarily approve of Mister Brainwash. Why? Because he so called art is a joke. This is just a guy who took every work of other artists, combined them, called them his own and put up an exhibition. He did that in a matter of months and because the general public is delusional, everyone thinks he is the new Andy Warhol. It’s pure bullshit in my opinion. And another thing, Mister Brainwash? Is that really your artistic name? “Anne, punch me in the face.”
The only time I actually enjoyed this film was when the focus was directed at the other street artists and Banksy. I actually really enjoyed all the comments Banksy gives towards Mister Brainwash, they are hilarious. But besides that, I could really care less about this documentary. I am now actually really pissed off that this film got an Oscar nomination over Waiting For Superman. I’ll never understand America.
I’m so disappointed that Andrew Garfield wasn’t nominated for Best Supporting Actor. Why is Jeremy Renner even in there? Garfield gave the better performance.
While I’m one of those people who knows for sure that Inception won’t win in any of the major categories, I’m really surprised that he was snubbed from the Best Director category. I don’t understand why Christopher Nolan isn’t getting the love he deserves.
I totally approve of Hailee Steinfeld for Best Supporting Actress in True Grit, but I’m not liking Jeff Bridges for Best Actor. I feel that Ryan Gosling gave the better performance.
Yes for Jackie Weaver’s nomination in the Best Supporting Actress category. She would totally win if it wasn’t for Hailee Steinfeld.
You should’ve seen my face when I heard Dogtooth's nomination for Best Foreign Language Film. It was a very odd moment, but I totally approve. Glad to know this film will be exposed to a wider audience.
I’m so happy Javier Bardem got a Best Actor nomination! He might be the only one who can steal the win from Colin Firth.
Why is Winter’s Bone nominated for Best Picture? What’s so great about that film? Is it because I’m not American? Can someone explain this to me, because to me that movie is as average as you can get. I would’ve rather seen The Town get a nomination instead of Winter’s Bone.
By the way everyone, Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross did get a nomination for Best Original Score. Yeah, I was nervous about that too but I’m glad they weren’t snubbed. That would’ve been a fucking crime.
Besides that, I’m happy with all the nominations. Can’t wait for the show!
While I didn’t hate Tron: Legacy (it is what it is) I am really excited for the 3rd one if they’re going this route. Maybe the fact that Tron: Legacy’s plot didn’t make any sense was done purposely with the intention of explaining everything in the next film. Not a very good move, but I guess it sort of makes sense.
“Acting forces you to look at yourself all the time. You have to move through these ages: You’re a teenager, a daughter, then a mother. You can never get stuck in your own bubble, acting doesn’t allow that.”— Julianne Moore (W Magazine).
On a visit to New York City for a university interview, Nick (Jesse Eisenberg) visits his uncle Roger (Campbell Scott) for some help. Nick has a difficulty with women in the sense that he has absolutely no idea how to speak to them, which is why he is still a virgin. After revealing this to Roger, Roger takes him through the ropes of how to check out ladies, of the ways one can approach them and how to get lucky. This film is one of those kinds of films that are really interesting to watch but you would never waste your time watching it again. I personally didn’t like Roger who is the protagonist of the film, just in case you thought it was Eisenberg. Roger is one of those people who see themselves as being above the rest, because they are knowledgeable in every subject and can see through everyone’s bullshit. It is fascinating to hear him speak, but he is the kind of asshole character I could only watch for less than 2 hours. Any more than that I’ll end up punching a hole through the screen. Besides the unlikable lead, Roger Dodger is an okay film you might not regret watching. I only saw it for Jesse Eisenberg who is pretty good in it. It was a bit odd seeing him looking so young though. He has come a long way.
This film has no plot and as I’ve said before, this sometimes works and sometimes it does not. In Please Give it actually works splendidly. The film’s main focus is on the idea of giving and how this affects us. The character of Kate (Catherine Keener) for example, is the owner of a vintage furniture store whose items are taken from the houses of people who have recently died. She feels extremely guilty from taken possessions from the recently deceased and as a result is desperately trying to give back, whether it is by giving homeless people $20 or volunteering. Catherine Keener is by far one of the best actresses around and her portrayal of Kate is brilliant. Kate is such a conflicting character and the more she tries to give the more miserable she feels. It is really interesting to see how she attempts to cope with her guilt. The other two standouts of the film are Rebecca (Rebecca Hall) and Mary (Amanda Peet) who play two highly different sisters. Rebecca is profusely taking care of her dying grandmother, which makes her miserable and Mary is a selfish woman who doesn’t give a fuck about anyone, which makes her miserable. Please Give is a really great dialogue-driven film with outstanding female performances. The film’s commentary on what it means to give is really insightful and will make you wonder about your own life. Catherine Keener should be in more films.