
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
UPDATE: already deceased Julia Child spotted!!!

Friday, February 27, 2009
Why I Hate EW and Lisa Schwarzbaum Is a Moron
The New JoeBro Movie!!! Yay!!!
Wow. I have lost absolutely all respect for EW. They were hanging on by a thin thread for shittiness to begin with, but this has absolutely sealed the deal that EW is a horrible, sorry excuse for an entertainment magazine.
Also, Lisa "I'm one of the worst critics of all time" Schwarzbaum really needs to be kicked in the face. She gives this horrible turd of a film a B-. B-???!!! Are you kidding me? I think I'd rather gouge my eyes out than have to watch this movie.
Wow. I have lost absolutely all respect for EW. They were hanging on by a thin thread for shittiness to begin with, but this has absolutely sealed the deal that EW is a horrible, sorry excuse for an entertainment magazine.
Also, Lisa "I'm one of the worst critics of all time" Schwarzbaum really needs to be kicked in the face. She gives this horrible turd of a film a B-. B-???!!! Are you kidding me? I think I'd rather gouge my eyes out than have to watch this movie.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Mindy's Oscar Picks: Who Will Win, Who Should Win, and Who Got The Shaft
The 81st annual Academy Awards are upon us, and thus it is necessary for me to do the all to well-known Oscar picks post. If a certain blogger named John, who's name just so happens to be apart of this blog, can find it in his heart to follow suit, maybe we could get some good arguments...I mean discussions going.
First, let me say that I am already a little disappointed with the whole ordeal because I already know who's going to win best picture, and it definitely is NOT the best movie of the year. But hey, it won't be the first time the Academy has completely effed up. See 1980 when Scorcese lost best director for Raging Bull, or 1998 when Gwenyth Paltrow (Shakespeare in Love) beat out Cate Blanchett (Elizabeth) for best actress and Saving Private Ryan lost to Shakespeare in Love for best picture as prime examples.
Anyways, enough complaining and time for the picks. I clearly am not going to cover every single category, namely those categories where I have not seen more than one of the films nominated, or those categories where I just don't care. Oh, and the category of "Who Got the Shaft" is referring to who got snubbed nomination-wise.
Best Supporting Actress:
Who Will Win: Penelope Cruz for Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Who Should Win: Viola Davis for Doubt
Who Got the Shaft: Kate Winslet for The Reader
Ok, so a couple of comments. First, enough with the SJo/Woody Allen garbage. SJo could not act her way out of a paper bag. Secondly, I put Kate Winslet in this category because I honestly think she is in the wrong category for The Reader. The role should undoubtedly be a Best Supporting Actress nomination, as done by every single other award possible. I have no idea what the hell happened here. If she was in this category as Best Supporting, NO QUESTION she would have won, not to mention having a decent chance for Revolutionary Road in Best Actress, but that's a whole other discussion that I will save for later. Oh, and Viola Davis was on screen for a whole big 10 minutes, but her impact on Doubt cannot be underestimated.
Best Supporting Actor:
Who Will Win: HEATH LEDGER
Who Should Win: HEATH LEDGER
Who Got the Shaft: anybody who had the misfortune of being nominated against Heath Ledger.
Is there any question about this, seriously?? I can't believe a certain someone bet me $10 that Ledger would NOT sweep the Globes and Oscars. Please.
Best Music (Song)
Who Will Win: "O Saya" from Slumdog Millionaire
Who Should Win: "O Saya"
Who Got the Shaft: "The Wrestler" from The Wrestler
What the hell??? I can't believe the Academy didn't nominate Springsteen for his song "The Wrestler." I mean, it won the effin' Globe and now not even a nomination! I don't get it.
Cinematography:
Who Will Win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who Should Win: The Dark Knight
Art Direction:
Who Will Win: Revolutionary Road
Who Should Win: Revolutionary Road
Costume Design:
Who Will Win: The Duchess
Who Should Win: Revolutionary Road
Did you see that white dress that Kate Winslet wore in the film?? Nothing says 1950s more than that.
Best Actress:
Who Will Win: Kate Winslet for The Reader
Who Should Win: WHO DO YOU THINK????? MERLY STREEP. PERIOD. Nomination #15, you'd think she'd take a breather to let give someone else a chance.
Who Got the Shaft: Kate Winslet for Revolutionary Road and Cate Blanchett for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
As I was saying above, Kate Winslet got nominated for the right film just in the wrong category, and then got screwed out of a double nomination. But it really is her year, and she's due, being now 0-5 in the Oscar wins. If she had been nominated for Revolutionary Road, definitely would have still been a major contender, if not the favorite. And before I forget, I want to give a shout out to Melissa Leo for Frozen River. If she does somehow magically manage to win (which would be the biggest surprise since Marisa Tomei won Best Supporting Actress for My Cousin Vinny), I would be OK with that loss for Meryl. Oh, and screw Anne Hathaway. Angelina shouldn't have even really been nominated, but the Oscars wanted a "Brangelina" moment to boost ratings I suppose.
Best Actor:
Who Will Win: Mickey Rourke for The Wrestler
Who Should Win: Mickey Rourke for The Wrestler
Who Got the Shaft: Leonardo DiCaprio for Revolutionary Road
Revolutionary Road, so completely underrated. Anyways, I know Sean Penn is the favorite right now for Milk, and no putting him down, but I think the Academy will do the right thing and give the Oscar to Mickey. Role of a lifetime. That is all I have to say about his performance. I did see Milk, just didn't have time for a review, and though Penn was good, I just gotta stick with Mickey for this one.
Best Director:
Who Will Win: Danny Boyle for Slumdog
Who Should Win: David Fincher for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who Got the Shaft: Sam Mendes for Revolutionary Road
Since everyone seems to be jumping on the Slumdog bandwagon, the obvious pick is for Danny Boyle. Although he does do a good job, Fincher's direction of Benjamin Button really elevates the film from mediocrity to greatness.
Best Picture
Who Will Win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who Should Win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who Got the Shaft: Revolutionary Road
I guess nowadays if you just promote a film hard enough, you'll start to convince people of its greatness as well (see Crash). If Revolutionary Road had been nominated, I definitely think it should win, but since it is not, I have to go with Benjamin Button as the film that should win, though of course we all know the overrated cliché Slumdog will be the winner.
And that should do it. I now patiently await John's picks.
If Meryl Streep should happen to win on Sunday night, you may want to call the fire department in advance, since I'll be lighting cars on fire in the street in CELEBRATION, à la "classy" Ohio State fans.
First, let me say that I am already a little disappointed with the whole ordeal because I already know who's going to win best picture, and it definitely is NOT the best movie of the year. But hey, it won't be the first time the Academy has completely effed up. See 1980 when Scorcese lost best director for Raging Bull, or 1998 when Gwenyth Paltrow (Shakespeare in Love) beat out Cate Blanchett (Elizabeth) for best actress and Saving Private Ryan lost to Shakespeare in Love for best picture as prime examples.
Anyways, enough complaining and time for the picks. I clearly am not going to cover every single category, namely those categories where I have not seen more than one of the films nominated, or those categories where I just don't care. Oh, and the category of "Who Got the Shaft" is referring to who got snubbed nomination-wise.
Best Supporting Actress:
Who Will Win: Penelope Cruz for Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Who Should Win: Viola Davis for Doubt
Who Got the Shaft: Kate Winslet for The Reader
Ok, so a couple of comments. First, enough with the SJo/Woody Allen garbage. SJo could not act her way out of a paper bag. Secondly, I put Kate Winslet in this category because I honestly think she is in the wrong category for The Reader. The role should undoubtedly be a Best Supporting Actress nomination, as done by every single other award possible. I have no idea what the hell happened here. If she was in this category as Best Supporting, NO QUESTION she would have won, not to mention having a decent chance for Revolutionary Road in Best Actress, but that's a whole other discussion that I will save for later. Oh, and Viola Davis was on screen for a whole big 10 minutes, but her impact on Doubt cannot be underestimated.
Best Supporting Actor:
Who Will Win: HEATH LEDGER
Who Should Win: HEATH LEDGER
Who Got the Shaft: anybody who had the misfortune of being nominated against Heath Ledger.
Is there any question about this, seriously?? I can't believe a certain someone bet me $10 that Ledger would NOT sweep the Globes and Oscars. Please.
Best Music (Song)
Who Will Win: "O Saya" from Slumdog Millionaire
Who Should Win: "O Saya"
Who Got the Shaft: "The Wrestler" from The Wrestler
What the hell??? I can't believe the Academy didn't nominate Springsteen for his song "The Wrestler." I mean, it won the effin' Globe and now not even a nomination! I don't get it.
Cinematography:
Who Will Win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who Should Win: The Dark Knight
Art Direction:
Who Will Win: Revolutionary Road
Who Should Win: Revolutionary Road
Costume Design:
Who Will Win: The Duchess
Who Should Win: Revolutionary Road
Did you see that white dress that Kate Winslet wore in the film?? Nothing says 1950s more than that.
Best Actress:
Who Will Win: Kate Winslet for The Reader
Who Should Win: WHO DO YOU THINK????? MERLY STREEP. PERIOD. Nomination #15, you'd think she'd take a breather to let give someone else a chance.

As I was saying above, Kate Winslet got nominated for the right film just in the wrong category, and then got screwed out of a double nomination. But it really is her year, and she's due, being now 0-5 in the Oscar wins. If she had been nominated for Revolutionary Road, definitely would have still been a major contender, if not the favorite. And before I forget, I want to give a shout out to Melissa Leo for Frozen River. If she does somehow magically manage to win (which would be the biggest surprise since Marisa Tomei won Best Supporting Actress for My Cousin Vinny), I would be OK with that loss for Meryl. Oh, and screw Anne Hathaway. Angelina shouldn't have even really been nominated, but the Oscars wanted a "Brangelina" moment to boost ratings I suppose.
Best Actor:
Who Will Win: Mickey Rourke for The Wrestler
Who Should Win: Mickey Rourke for The Wrestler
Who Got the Shaft: Leonardo DiCaprio for Revolutionary Road
Revolutionary Road, so completely underrated. Anyways, I know Sean Penn is the favorite right now for Milk, and no putting him down, but I think the Academy will do the right thing and give the Oscar to Mickey. Role of a lifetime. That is all I have to say about his performance. I did see Milk, just didn't have time for a review, and though Penn was good, I just gotta stick with Mickey for this one.
Best Director:
Who Will Win: Danny Boyle for Slumdog
Who Should Win: David Fincher for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who Got the Shaft: Sam Mendes for Revolutionary Road
Since everyone seems to be jumping on the Slumdog bandwagon, the obvious pick is for Danny Boyle. Although he does do a good job, Fincher's direction of Benjamin Button really elevates the film from mediocrity to greatness.
Best Picture
Who Will Win: Slumdog Millionaire
Who Should Win: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Who Got the Shaft: Revolutionary Road
I guess nowadays if you just promote a film hard enough, you'll start to convince people of its greatness as well (see Crash). If Revolutionary Road had been nominated, I definitely think it should win, but since it is not, I have to go with Benjamin Button as the film that should win, though of course we all know the overrated cliché Slumdog will be the winner.
And that should do it. I now patiently await John's picks.
If Meryl Streep should happen to win on Sunday night, you may want to call the fire department in advance, since I'll be lighting cars on fire in the street in CELEBRATION, à la "classy" Ohio State fans.

I'm Just NOT That Into This Movie.
What can I say about He's Just Not That Into You? One word: HORRIBLE. I really don't have much else to say. Sorry, no in depth analysis or critical scene by scene analysis. This movie was so unbelievably crappy that I really don't want to put in the time, nor the effort to verbally destroy this huge piece of shit of a movie. I believe the conversation that the studio execs had while deciding to make this film went a little something like this:
"Hey, I know this movie is crap, but let's just pay a bunch of big movie stars to be in it"
"Yeah, that's a great idea. That'll make people want to pay to see it"
"Yeah, and let's release it on Valentine's Day weekend so that couples HAVE to see this sorry excuse for a film"
"Great idea!"
"I mean even if we have a horrible script, bad directing and a shitty soundtrack, so what? We can just get a bunch of A-listers to join the cast and it will be ALL worth it."
"Yay money!!!!!"
Yeah let me put more emphasis on that last point about the music for this film. So cliché that I wanted to gag myself. Keane's Somewhere Only We Know ENDLESSLY looping during a heartfelt confession scene, I thought I was going to vomit all over the person in front of me. And if you've seen the soundtrack on iTunes, you should take note of the last track as it is sung by none other than Scarlet Johansson. To use one of her lines from the film: "Oh. My. God." voiced like a complete and total moron, as SJo so aptly does in one of the first scenes. If you've never heard SJo sing before, I highly recommend you taking a-listen to this: SJo sings. WOW. She really needs to stick to acting, though she's a pretty overrated in my opinion. And why is Woody Allen so crazy about her?? Maybe we should ask his adopted daughter...I mean wife.
"Hey, I know this movie is crap, but let's just pay a bunch of big movie stars to be in it"
"Yeah, that's a great idea. That'll make people want to pay to see it"
"Yeah, and let's release it on Valentine's Day weekend so that couples HAVE to see this sorry excuse for a film"
"Great idea!"
"I mean even if we have a horrible script, bad directing and a shitty soundtrack, so what? We can just get a bunch of A-listers to join the cast and it will be ALL worth it."
"Yay money!!!!!"

Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Angelina Jolie's Oscar To Do List
CRY. Cry a lot. Oh and scream and yell some too. And don't forget your straight jacket scene. If your name is Angelina Jolie, this is exactly what you need to do to garner an Oscar nomination. See Exhibit A:

Jolie's Oscar To Do List:
1. Scream a lot ✓
2. Cry a lot ✓
3. Straight jacket ✓
4. Get nominated ✓
"Ok, it's just one film, and she was playing a character in a mental institution," you may say. And I see your point. But point, counter-point with Exhibit B:
Jolie's Oscar To Do List:
1. Scream a lot ✓
2. Cry a lot ✓
3. Straight jacket
4. Get nominated ✓
Alright, so no straight jacket this time. But, I've saved my trump card for last. I give you ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Exhibit C AND Exhibit D:
Crying, and lots of it...

JACKPOT!
Jolie's Oscar To Do List:
1. Scream a lot ✓
2. Cry a lot ✓✓✓✓
3. Straight jacket ✓
4. Get nominated ✓
I threw some extra check marks in there for the crying item, as I felt it was appropriate. I hope my demonstration has persuaded you, if not I hope it provided a few laughs.
It's been awhile since I've seen Changeling, so I'm not going to write a review of it since I don't think it'd really be fair or accurate enough. All I will say about the film is that I thought it was good, though not one of Eastwood's best. And as much as I'm bashing on Jolie in this post, it's not really because her performance was bad in the film, but rather that I am making an observation of a pattern I have noticed in her roles/acting style. Because that's what we do here at The Cheap Seats. We make fun of people like Angelina Jolie. And let's not forget Maggie Gyllenhaal. It's not that I hate Maggie or really Angelina for that matter, but I was just making an observation.

Jolie's Oscar To Do List:
1. Scream a lot ✓
2. Cry a lot ✓
3. Straight jacket ✓
4. Get nominated ✓
"Ok, it's just one film, and she was playing a character in a mental institution," you may say. And I see your point. But point, counter-point with Exhibit B:

Jolie's Oscar To Do List:
1. Scream a lot ✓
2. Cry a lot ✓
3. Straight jacket
4. Get nominated ✓
Alright, so no straight jacket this time. But, I've saved my trump card for last. I give you ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Exhibit C AND Exhibit D:

Crying, and lots of it...

JACKPOT!
Jolie's Oscar To Do List:
1. Scream a lot ✓
2. Cry a lot ✓✓✓✓
3. Straight jacket ✓
4. Get nominated ✓
I threw some extra check marks in there for the crying item, as I felt it was appropriate. I hope my demonstration has persuaded you, if not I hope it provided a few laughs.
It's been awhile since I've seen Changeling, so I'm not going to write a review of it since I don't think it'd really be fair or accurate enough. All I will say about the film is that I thought it was good, though not one of Eastwood's best. And as much as I'm bashing on Jolie in this post, it's not really because her performance was bad in the film, but rather that I am making an observation of a pattern I have noticed in her roles/acting style. Because that's what we do here at The Cheap Seats. We make fun of people like Angelina Jolie. And let's not forget Maggie Gyllenhaal. It's not that I hate Maggie or really Angelina for that matter, but I was just making an observation.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Liam Neeson's Stock Just Went Up 100 points: Taken Review
The moral of this movie is to never go into a theater with high expectations. After seeing the preview for this action film, I did not expect much. Surprisingly, this worked to the movie's advantage. The movie is an homage to the old school action flicks, like Arnold Schwarzeneggar's Commando, where one guy takes down like an entire effin' army single-handedly. Not only does the movie succeed in being faithful to the old style, it exceeds it. Every part to make a successful homage is there: it's cheesy as hell, laughable at many parts, and the cliché lines from Neeson are quite entertaining. At one part in the film he tells an old friend who now works for the French government: "I'll tear down the Eiffel Tower if I have to." Awesome. You do that Liam, you do that. From Oskar Schindler to rampaging one-man shit show?? Impressive.
The plot is pretty basic. We start out meeting Neeson's character, a recently retired spy or CIA agent guy, who is trying to improve the relationship with his 17 year-old daughter. The daughter now lives with her mother and her super wealthy step-father. Poor Neeson, can only afford a cheap-ass karaoke machine for her birthday, while her step-father gets her a pony. Tear... Anyways, we learn that Neeson is a bad-ass mofo, since he takes down some random guy with a knife trying to hurt a pop star. Hilarious scene. But the movie starts moving when his daughter goes with her slutty friend to Paris for a Eurotrip. Just like the plot from Commando, the daughter gets kidnapped by some bad guys, and dad must come to the rescue. So Neeson goes to Paris on a one-man mission of kicking ass and taking names. I won't say anymore about what happens, except to mention that what follows is an hour long journey that involves guy getting hit by truck, sex slaves, pimping, some Albanians, Arab Sheiks, and shooting an old friend's wife in the arm. What more do I need to say to motivate you to see this movie??? Just check out this little mini-comic that gives you a brief glimpse of the awesomeness you're missing:
If Meryl Streep was about 15 years younger, and a dude, she would totally be all over this film. I give Taken 4 Meryls. I would've gone for 5, except for the fact that there is a happy ending, and we all know I hate happy endings.
The plot is pretty basic. We start out meeting Neeson's character, a recently retired spy or CIA agent guy, who is trying to improve the relationship with his 17 year-old daughter. The daughter now lives with her mother and her super wealthy step-father. Poor Neeson, can only afford a cheap-ass karaoke machine for her birthday, while her step-father gets her a pony. Tear... Anyways, we learn that Neeson is a bad-ass mofo, since he takes down some random guy with a knife trying to hurt a pop star. Hilarious scene. But the movie starts moving when his daughter goes with her slutty friend to Paris for a Eurotrip. Just like the plot from Commando, the daughter gets kidnapped by some bad guys, and dad must come to the rescue. So Neeson goes to Paris on a one-man mission of kicking ass and taking names. I won't say anymore about what happens, except to mention that what follows is an hour long journey that involves guy getting hit by truck, sex slaves, pimping, some Albanians, Arab Sheiks, and shooting an old friend's wife in the arm. What more do I need to say to motivate you to see this movie??? Just check out this little mini-comic that gives you a brief glimpse of the awesomeness you're missing:


Thursday, January 29, 2009
Slumdog Millionaire: a stylishly shot collection of clichés
After writing my review of Slumdog Millionaire, I felt that there was still something that could be added to better get my point across. Dennis Lim is a much more eloquent writer than I am, and I found that his article on Slumdog hit the nerve of what I was attempting to articulate in my own review.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
How to win an Oscar by ruining your face and being mentally unstable: The Wrestler Review
There are some roles that are just made for an actor. Mickey Rourke's turn as Randy "the Ram", a washed up wrestler from the 80's, is one of those roles. Rourke himself was a big star in the 80's, falling into obscurity after becoming a professional boxer and a few mildly psychotic episodes on the set of various films. Now, he's a major Oscar contender. Rourke is Randy "The Ram." Without Rourke, the film wouldn't have had nearly the same amount of power or effectiveness. He has lived the life of Randy the Ram. I mean, just look at his face, before and after his turn as a professional boxer in the 90's:
The Wrestler follows the daily life of Randy "The Ram," as he performs at second rate wrestling shows in school gymnasiums, gets locked out his trailer, and works at a local grocery store. His relationship with his daughter is pretty horrible, and though he tries to mend it, things go awry when he gets distracted by a little bit of coke and some skank with a fetish for firemen. His only friend/love interest is the stripper single mom, Marisa Tomei. Who also does a fine job in the film. Anyways, Randy learns that he has a heart condition after a very violent and visually disturbing wrestling match with some guy that involves barbed wire, a staple gun, and a ladder, and thus decides to give up wrestling and attempt to live a normal life. Will his new life last? Or will he return to the ring, putting his life at risk? You will just have to watch the movie to find out. And I certainly recommend you watch this movie. Rourke really has the best performance of the year.
Suffice it to say, I really enjoyed this film due to 4 major things: it was depressing, it really gave a nice sense of realism, Rourke was awesome, and it was fantastically directed by Aronofsky. Aronofsky really knows how to shoot messed up, horribly depressing movies (see Requiem for a Dream). If Rourke doesn't pick up the Oscar for best actor, then something is seriously wrong with the Academy. I give The Wrestler 4 Meryls.

Suffice it to say, I really enjoyed this film due to 4 major things: it was depressing, it really gave a nice sense of realism, Rourke was awesome, and it was fantastically directed by Aronofsky. Aronofsky really knows how to shoot messed up, horribly depressing movies (see Requiem for a Dream). If Rourke doesn't pick up the Oscar for best actor, then something is seriously wrong with the Academy. I give The Wrestler 4 Meryls.

Maggie Gyllenhaal's face?
After seeing The Dark Knight, I had a lingering annoyance in the fact that Maggie Gyllenhaal's face reminded me of something. After dwelling on the issue for a couple of days, which included numerous discussions with John, we came up with a few possibilities:
Close, but I think we can do better....
Getting warmer....

And we have a winner!!! Melted pumpkin face. I'm glad this dispute has been settled once and for all.



And we have a winner!!! Melted pumpkin face. I'm glad this dispute has been settled once and for all.
Why most movie-goers are idiots:
As the Oscars approach, I've been reading many complaints about how the Academy does not take into account a movie's box office performance as much as it should when picking nominees. I'll use the link above to illustrate a point: movies that do well at the box office are not necessarily good movies. In fact, they are often horrible movies, as the top grossing movie
of the past two weeks has been. You may ask, "well Mindy, have you even seen the Mall Cop film?". And I would reply, "I saw the trailer, and it was sufficiently shitty enough for me to get a good enough idea that this movie is a grade A piece of crap." Do you really think I'm about to drop $10 on a film like this?? I rather pay that money to re-watch Slumdog Millionaire, which I only gave 3 Meryls.
I guess who ever green-lighted this awesome idea of a movie was banking on the fact that no other half-decent movie would be debuting during the same. If you are short on ideas about what to do on your Friday night, and tough economic times are making the movies a more popular option, I suggest going down to your local bar and getting drunk on Old Style canned beer, which sure enough would be cheaper than what you'd pay to see this movie.

I guess who ever green-lighted this awesome idea of a movie was banking on the fact that no other half-decent movie would be debuting during the same. If you are short on ideas about what to do on your Friday night, and tough economic times are making the movies a more popular option, I suggest going down to your local bar and getting drunk on Old Style canned beer, which sure enough would be cheaper than what you'd pay to see this movie.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Most OVERRATED Movie of the year: Slumdog Millionaire
First, let me start with an article I read on Time's website about how Indians hate Slumdog Millionaire. Such a reaction I find to be completely understandable, since the movie is patronizing and a re-telling of the most prototypical Hollywood movie plot. Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back. The fact that the movie is centered around Indian characters does not make this movie some profound new concept. The film is typical feel-good gooey Hollywood B.S. disguised as a world enlightened depiction of the struggles of people in a third world country.
Basic synopsis - the film starts off in the present where the main character is a contestant on the Indian version of Who Wants To Be a Millionaire. He is doing remarkably well, since he had grown up in the slums of Mumbai and has had no formal education. Thus, he is tortured in an attempt to get him to admit that he has cheated, and in a series of flashbacks, we the viewer learn of his life's experiences that have provided him with the answers to the questions. In the flashbacks, we learn that he and his brother witnessed their mother brutally killed, and are then picked up by con-men and forced to become beggars to earn them money. Along the way they meet a young girl about their age who has also lost her family. Predictably enough, the main character, Jamal, and the young girl, Latika, become very close, while Jamal's brother becomes a thug of sorts. Yada yada yada, let's skip a few years and the boys and girl are separated. When they find her again, she is pulling some kind of tricks or something. Jamal's brother then loses his damn mind, tries to hook up with Latika, and Jamal runs off, not finding his brother and Latika afterwards. Now back to the present. He finds his brother again, and subsequently Latika, who is now the girlfriend of some shady gangster that Jamal's brother works for. I'm not going to give away any more of the ending, but I'm sure that if you thought about it hard enough, you could probably come up with it on your own, right down to the final question that Jamal is asked to win the million dollars. Boy meets girl, loses girl, gets girl back. Stereotypical Hollywood formula. Basically a plot out of some shitty romance novel, that just happens to be set in India. Ohhhh mixing it up a bit I see. How fitting it would be if Jamal and Latika got married, etc, moved to the suburbs and then find out for themselves why Kate and Leo lose their damn minds in the far superior Revolutionary Road???
Most people enjoy this movie, and I think it is mainly because it has such a nice happy ending. In my opinion, it has a nice little, completely PREDICTABLE ending. I'm so sick of this cheesy garbage coming out of Hollywood that is supposed to make you feel good. I've seen this movie before, but with different actors. I guess I'm also supposed to like it because of the horrible conditions it shows of the slums and poverty in Mumbai. I know there is horrible poverty in Mumbai, I don't need to be reminded about it in an extravagant, pretentious Hollywood film, which by the way was directed by the British Danny Boyle.
Don't get me wrong, the movie was not horrible. I am not saying that it is. But best movie of the year?? I completely disagree. It will most likely end up being the Crash of 2008. Not the best movie of the year, but the promoters push it hard enough, and suddenly it's at the top of everyone, including the Academy's lists. It will most likely win Best Picture, and then a year or so later, everyone will come to their senses and admit that it really wasn't the best picture of the year, just the most commercial out of the nominees.
The one compliment I can give the film is that it is shot very well, and the cinematography is fantastic. Soundtrack is also good, with the sampling of MIA mixed in. And I guess if I was having a really bad day, and needed some cheering up??? Maybe I would decide to watch this instead of Revolutionary Road or Sophie's Choice. Which brings me to my final point: would Meryl Streep ever do a movie like this??? Well, she's not Indian, but besides that?? Most definitely NO. IT'S TOO DAMN HAPPY!!!!!!!!! I give it 3 Meryls.

Basic synopsis - the film starts off in the present where the main character is a contestant on the Indian version of Who Wants To Be a Millionaire. He is doing remarkably well, since he had grown up in the slums of Mumbai and has had no formal education. Thus, he is tortured in an attempt to get him to admit that he has cheated, and in a series of flashbacks, we the viewer learn of his life's experiences that have provided him with the answers to the questions. In the flashbacks, we learn that he and his brother witnessed their mother brutally killed, and are then picked up by con-men and forced to become beggars to earn them money. Along the way they meet a young girl about their age who has also lost her family. Predictably enough, the main character, Jamal, and the young girl, Latika, become very close, while Jamal's brother becomes a thug of sorts. Yada yada yada, let's skip a few years and the boys and girl are separated. When they find her again, she is pulling some kind of tricks or something. Jamal's brother then loses his damn mind, tries to hook up with Latika, and Jamal runs off, not finding his brother and Latika afterwards. Now back to the present. He finds his brother again, and subsequently Latika, who is now the girlfriend of some shady gangster that Jamal's brother works for. I'm not going to give away any more of the ending, but I'm sure that if you thought about it hard enough, you could probably come up with it on your own, right down to the final question that Jamal is asked to win the million dollars. Boy meets girl, loses girl, gets girl back. Stereotypical Hollywood formula. Basically a plot out of some shitty romance novel, that just happens to be set in India. Ohhhh mixing it up a bit I see. How fitting it would be if Jamal and Latika got married, etc, moved to the suburbs and then find out for themselves why Kate and Leo lose their damn minds in the far superior Revolutionary Road???

Don't get me wrong, the movie was not horrible. I am not saying that it is. But best movie of the year?? I completely disagree. It will most likely end up being the Crash of 2008. Not the best movie of the year, but the promoters push it hard enough, and suddenly it's at the top of everyone, including the Academy's lists. It will most likely win Best Picture, and then a year or so later, everyone will come to their senses and admit that it really wasn't the best picture of the year, just the most commercial out of the nominees.
The one compliment I can give the film is that it is shot very well, and the cinematography is fantastic. Soundtrack is also good, with the sampling of MIA mixed in. And I guess if I was having a really bad day, and needed some cheering up??? Maybe I would decide to watch this instead of Revolutionary Road or Sophie's Choice. Which brings me to my final point: would Meryl Streep ever do a movie like this??? Well, she's not Indian, but besides that?? Most definitely NO. IT'S TOO DAMN HAPPY!!!!!!!!! I give it 3 Meryls.

Most UNDERRATED Movie of the Year: Revolutionary Road
Apparently some of us just did not like this movie. Well, I think that maybe some of us just did not get this movie. I won't lie, I like depressing films; Slumdog Millionaire really annoyed the hell out of me with its perfect happy little ending. I also like films that provide a commentary on American life (see Mendes' American Beauty), without making it super obvious or condescending. On these two points, Revolutionary Road delivers. And it doesn't hurt that your two leads are two of the best actors around right now.
Basically, the film is a story of what would've happened if poor Jack hadn't
frozen to death after the Titanic sunk and everyone lived happily ever after...except the maybe the quiet married life maybe isn't so happy after all. The fact that the two of them, Leo and Kate, are both very attractive people, underscores the fact that everyone should think that their lives are very happy and fulfilling. What's not to like? They have a nice home, in a nice suburb, live comfortably with two kids, yada yada yada. The American dream, right? But the point is, being told what the American dream is by the mainstream: nuclear family, nice house, suburbs, white picket fences, is not really the American dream.
Overall I my interpretation of the film is that it is a critique on American values. We value having children, preferably a boy and a girl, getting a good job, though it may not be a job you especially enjoy, and settling down in the suburbs. But is this what we need? Trying to make a better life for your children and conforming to the standards of American family life doesn't always amount to your own happiness. Parents/grandparents always talk about the sacrifices they had to make, but those sacrifices don't necessarily have to be obvious, dramatic ones. Simply giving up your dreams, and settling for what society tells you is appropriate is sacrifice in itself. Kate and Leo's characters may be be pretty and perfect looking to the outsider, but in truth they are dead inside. Going through the motions, each makes their own attempt to feel more alive: Kate tries to get back to acting in a local play, which fails miserably, and Leo has an affair with a secretary. Both attempts leave them feeling worse off than before. The Wheelers' idea to escape to Paris is an unrealistic one, but can you blame them for wanting to try and live their life how they had always envisioned it? Most of their acquaintances find their idea preposterous, though they scoff at it in a meager attempt at hiding their own dissatisfactions.
It is a difficult concept for a movie. But I think this film had the right director and actors, Leo and Kate are both fantastic, to make it in to one of the year's best films. I give it 4 1/2 Meryls.

Oh and hilarious, yet sad at the same time: in one last attempt at feeling anything even remotely significant, Winslet gets down and dirty Titanic style with their neighbor (and good friend) in his car. How awkward do you think it was for her husband, Sam Mendes, to film that scene? And this movie getting snubbed by the Oscars for best picture????? RIDICULOUS.
Basically, the film is a story of what would've happened if poor Jack hadn't

Overall I my interpretation of the film is that it is a critique on American values. We value having children, preferably a boy and a girl, getting a good job, though it may not be a job you especially enjoy, and settling down in the suburbs. But is this what we need? Trying to make a better life for your children and conforming to the standards of American family life doesn't always amount to your own happiness. Parents/grandparents always talk about the sacrifices they had to make, but those sacrifices don't necessarily have to be obvious, dramatic ones. Simply giving up your dreams, and settling for what society tells you is appropriate is sacrifice in itself. Kate and Leo's characters may be be pretty and perfect looking to the outsider, but in truth they are dead inside. Going through the motions, each makes their own attempt to feel more alive: Kate tries to get back to acting in a local play, which fails miserably, and Leo has an affair with a secretary. Both attempts leave them feeling worse off than before. The Wheelers' idea to escape to Paris is an unrealistic one, but can you blame them for wanting to try and live their life how they had always envisioned it? Most of their acquaintances find their idea preposterous, though they scoff at it in a meager attempt at hiding their own dissatisfactions.
It is a difficult concept for a movie. But I think this film had the right director and actors, Leo and Kate are both fantastic, to make it in to one of the year's best films. I give it 4 1/2 Meryls.

Oh and hilarious, yet sad at the same time: in one last attempt at feeling anything even remotely significant, Winslet gets down and dirty Titanic style with their neighbor (and good friend) in his car. How awkward do you think it was for her husband, Sam Mendes, to film that scene? And this movie getting snubbed by the Oscars for best picture????? RIDICULOUS.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Holy Shit, I Thought Julia Child Had Died!

But wait! That's not Julia Child, that's just Meryl Streep. Cannot wait to hear the accent in this upcoming film Julia and Julia! Amy Adams is also set to star in the film, which is expected to be released next winter, in time for the Oscar season. I'm expecting another full round of nominations/possible awards for Meryl in this role. Suck it Helen Mirren! Don't know why I really picked Helen Mirren...anyways you get my point.
Finally, the DOUBT Review.
Yes I have been very behind in movie reviews. Sorry. I have shit to do. BUT after Meryl won the SAG yesterday, I feel inclined to start catching up.
Regarding the film Doubt, I feel like I have to give two separate reviews, one for the movie itself, and the other for the acting performances. To start, the acting performances were superior to the movie as a whole. I have not seen the stage version of Doubt, but I can see how the transition from stage to screen could have taken away from the substance of the story. Some of the angles and scenes just seemed off, and
if it wasn't for the outstanding performances, this movie could have been pretty mediocre. I think that Shanley (the director) being overlooked for an Oscar nod is fully justifiable. However, not only was Meryl fantastic (of course), Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Viola Davis, and Amy Adams were all great. Not only was each individual performance outstanding, the interactions between them had a lot of chemistry and depth.
The movie's plot centers around the workings of a Catholic parochial school in the 1960s, post Vatican II. Hoffman is the parish's priest, and appears to be fairly progressive. Streep plays Sister Aloysius, the Mother Superior of the school, who finds Hoffman's character extremely troubling, as his progressiveness, as well as other personal habits irritate her. Thus, she asks Amy Adams to keep an eye on him. One day, the school's only black student is sent to meet with Hoffman, and when he returns, he seems out of sorts, and Adams claims to smell alcohol on his breath. She reports this to Meryl, who then believes that Hoffman has taken inappropriate liberties with the boy. After Meryl hears Adam's story, the acting that ensues is the best, as Hoffman and Streep face off in a tour de force battle, Catholic style. Though Meryl strenuously accuses Hoffman of impropriety, he claims to have done nothing wrong, and since he is a priest in the extremely patriarchal Catholic Church, he is seemingly beyond reproach, especially from a subordinate nun. No where else is this more evident than in the scene where they first meet in Meryl's office. Though it is her office, it is Hoffman who sits behind the desk, in the authoritative role. A very tense, uncomfortable scene, but it says a lot about the atmosphere of the time. Eventually, Meryl is able to force Hoffman to resign his post at the parish with a little bluff, though he never admits outright that he did anything to the boy.
Can I just say the opening scene that introduces Streep's Sister Aloysius is freaking awesome?? No one else can purvey the full sense of this bitter old nun, smacking around small children during mass, than Meryl Streep. Going to a Catholic high school myself, I can tell you, nuns like that REALLY do exist. I really don't think anyone could have pulled this role off as well as Meryl Streep.
What I liked best about this movie (besides the acting of course), was the fact that it never does reveal whether Hoffman's Father Flynn is actually guilty of what he is accused of or not. It is left up to the viewer to form their own opinion, and they are left to their own doubts. In addition, I also enjoyed the fact how my sympathies changed during the course of the movie, based on the opinions I was forming, at first sympathizing with Hoffman, but by the end of the film with Streep's character.
Doubt the film 3 1/2 Meryls:
Doubt the acting 5 Meryls:
Regarding the film Doubt, I feel like I have to give two separate reviews, one for the movie itself, and the other for the acting performances. To start, the acting performances were superior to the movie as a whole. I have not seen the stage version of Doubt, but I can see how the transition from stage to screen could have taken away from the substance of the story. Some of the angles and scenes just seemed off, and

The movie's plot centers around the workings of a Catholic parochial school in the 1960s, post Vatican II. Hoffman is the parish's priest, and appears to be fairly progressive. Streep plays Sister Aloysius, the Mother Superior of the school, who finds Hoffman's character extremely troubling, as his progressiveness, as well as other personal habits irritate her. Thus, she asks Amy Adams to keep an eye on him. One day, the school's only black student is sent to meet with Hoffman, and when he returns, he seems out of sorts, and Adams claims to smell alcohol on his breath. She reports this to Meryl, who then believes that Hoffman has taken inappropriate liberties with the boy. After Meryl hears Adam's story, the acting that ensues is the best, as Hoffman and Streep face off in a tour de force battle, Catholic style. Though Meryl strenuously accuses Hoffman of impropriety, he claims to have done nothing wrong, and since he is a priest in the extremely patriarchal Catholic Church, he is seemingly beyond reproach, especially from a subordinate nun. No where else is this more evident than in the scene where they first meet in Meryl's office. Though it is her office, it is Hoffman who sits behind the desk, in the authoritative role. A very tense, uncomfortable scene, but it says a lot about the atmosphere of the time. Eventually, Meryl is able to force Hoffman to resign his post at the parish with a little bluff, though he never admits outright that he did anything to the boy.
Can I just say the opening scene that introduces Streep's Sister Aloysius is freaking awesome?? No one else can purvey the full sense of this bitter old nun, smacking around small children during mass, than Meryl Streep. Going to a Catholic high school myself, I can tell you, nuns like that REALLY do exist. I really don't think anyone could have pulled this role off as well as Meryl Streep.
What I liked best about this movie (besides the acting of course), was the fact that it never does reveal whether Hoffman's Father Flynn is actually guilty of what he is accused of or not. It is left up to the viewer to form their own opinion, and they are left to their own doubts. In addition, I also enjoyed the fact how my sympathies changed during the course of the movie, based on the opinions I was forming, at first sympathizing with Hoffman, but by the end of the film with Streep's character.
Doubt the film 3 1/2 Meryls:


Sunday, January 25, 2009
CONGRATULATIONS MERYL!!!!!!!

Surprise, surprise. Guess who won the SAG award for best actress in a leading role?? MERYL STREEEEEEP!!!! Sorry Anne Hathaway, just not your year. And I know that Meryl is attempting to be modest, but let's admit it, she is the GREATEST living actress. Her acceptance speech was fantastic.
Here's the youtube link for her acceptance speech, though it is also the Meryl Clip of the Month.
Meryl's SAG Award Acceptance Speech
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)