All posts tagged oscar

The Oscar Race Begins….THE 84th ACADEMY AWARD NOMINATIONS Are In!

84_tunein

Jennifer Lawrence announced the nominations less than an hour ago. No need to babble on; here they are: Read more…

‘YOUNG ADULT’ Movie Clips!

Young-Adult-poster

Hi Guys, To celebrate today’s release of the incredible ‘Young Adult’ here are some clips for you to enjoy! Read more…

STEVE MARTIN Gives Some Oscar Hosting Advice to EDDIE MURPHY!

steve-martin-has-some-oscar-advice-for-eddie-murp-720-1316618227-3

I just thought this was hilarious: Read more…

EDDIE MURHPY To Host The Oscars!

eddie

It has recently been confirmed that Eddie Murphy will be the host for next year’s Oscar ceremony. Read more…

‘BARNEY’S VERSION’ Movie Review: Paul Giamatti’s best.

2010_barneys_version_001-1024x682

Article by David.

‘Barney’s Version’ is a decent film that is elevated to near classic status by actor Paul Giamatti: he remains everyone’s favorite character actor: from indie cult hit ‘American Splendor’ to the classic, and one of my all time favourite films: ‘Sideways’. Here he gives his best performance as the titular Barney Panofsky, and the film chronicles his sleaze-bag and politically incorrect life – and what a life it is! Read more…

‘INSIDE JOB’ Movie Review: Needlessly mean spirited; but largely insightful and entertaining.

dzparadise.com Inside Job 2010 (dvdrip single link)


Article by David.

‘Inside Job’ is a feature length and somewhat controversial documentary film about the 2008 economic crisis. It attempts to expose the “shocking truth” behind it.

Through extensive research and interviews; academy award nominated director Charles Ferguson (‘No End In Sight’) explores the rise of Wall Street and the banking industry and reveals the dirty deals between corrupted politicians; regulatory organizations and academics - and showcases how these deals led to what is said to be “The worst financial crisis since the Great depression” - oh, and its narrated by Matt Damon! Because if anyone knows about money its him! (I’m just kidding - Matt Damon is awesome).

Here is a reading from the directors statement:

“I hope that the film, in less than two hours, will enable everyone to understand the fundamental nature and causes of this problem. It is also my hope that, whatever political opinions individual viewers may have, that after seeing this film we can all agree on the importance of restoring honesty and stability to our financial system, and of holding accountable those who destroyed it”.

The film itself is a little bit more difficult to digest than Ferguson would lead you to believe; certain moments are definitely overwhelming in terms of how much sheer information is being dumped onto you; but that is not say it is impossible to understand whats going on in ‘Inside Job’; unless you yourself are in the financial industry.

The film begins with using Iceland’s current situation as a microcosm to basically summarize the effects the financial collapse has had on the world economy. From there it goes into a very entertaining title sequences that presents us “The Cast” of the film: taking all these bullshit artists we are about to hear from and displaying them for the actors they are. Very funny; if not slightly mean spirited and biased. These bullsh*tters… and I should clarify I say: “bullsh*tters” in the sense that they are talking to us; not that they are specifically liars:  but whatever: the point is that we don’t know the truth so it may as well be B/S…well: these guys are so varied in breadth and a lot of the people interviewed are very high profile as well as unexpected/exciting choices.

Amongst many financial advisors/university professors/ company ceo’s/ Ministers/ etc; we have some of particular interest: And by that I mean: “damn thats an usual person to interview!”:

Jonathon Alpert: One of the biggest psychiatrists in New York; whose clients include some of the huge wall street players - he tells stories about their drug habits and strip club and prostitute habits. His clients are very well known and married with children. Insane.

Kristin Davis: Known as “madam” to countless investment bankers. A pimp of the classiest order:

Then you have the usual slew of ‘significant authorities’ on a subject matter: the ones I found of particular interest are:

Christine Lagarde: The french minister of Finance/economic affairs/ industry and employment. First woman to become the economic minister of a G8 nation.

Lee Hsien Loong: The current prime minister of Singapore.

Andrew Lo: the director of MIT’s laboratory for financial engineering.

Andri Magnason: An Icelandic film-maker.

Martin Wolf: the associate editor and chief economics commentator at the Financial Times.

Glenn Hubbard: A scoundrel. Chief economic advisor of the Bush administration. Also the current dean of Columbia university business school.

Harvey MIller: The most prominent Bankruptcy lawyer in the United States.

Frederic Mishkin: American economist and professor at Columbia University. This guy is crazy corrupt.

Paul Vocker: American Economist who served as chairman of the Federal Reserve under Carter and Reagan.

And so on and so on…

The film features many, many interviewees from all sides of the financial disaster; from famous economists; to Professors; to government people - The majority of the film is just people sitting in chairs talking whilst animated graphics fill the screen. It is decidedly uncinematic -  the entire film just feels like a big long lecture - sometimes it is hard to follow - other times the actions of the people onscreen enrage you - and in my case (someone who knows next to nothing about financial engineering) it was incredibly interesting and engaging.

But it is not a film that exists just to show off how smart and important it is: It attempts to tell the full story of the crisis; and to not allow the many criminals to get away with what they have done - you see the industry is filled with corruption and greed; the progressive deregulations of the financial sector since the 1980’s led to an increase in “innovations” - which are thinly disguised power-plays for money/control. Ultimately all of these bankers are not the ones affected by such moves and innovations; it is the family with a mortgage - the family with debt: basically the poorer sections of society.

In many cases the bankers came out RICHER after the crisis than before. And because of corruption-filled relationships with academics (who then go and teach these bad practices to the next generation) - who have relationships with the government (many academics advise not only the banks but also the government - earning 100’s of thousands more dollars than teaching would ever earn them. Everybody is in bed with each other - and through the excessive amounts of bullsh*t; whether it be through a team of lawyers or face to face with a judge; everyone just comes out unscathed. No-one gets sent to prison despite the trillions of dollars they are responsible for losing.

The financial system is such a complicated topic and the film tracks it from right after the great depression - through to the Reagan Presidency - through to the Clinton reign - through to the Bush reign - and into Obama and the present. Dealing with topics such as: traditional American finance options; The  start of deregulation; The Wall Street culture; financial scandals; economic inequality issues; tax cuts; philosophy, the idealogical belief in Wall Street, Wall streeters running the government; the banks and insurance companies; housing markets, Lehman Brothers, crash, CRASH, What the The Dark Tower actually is; SHUFFLE; Prostitution; gambling, corruption and drugs, overseas situations, perspectives and graphs, graphs, figures, formulas, employment, unemployment….the film is just vast and extremely complicated in what it covers.

Now before I blabber on about how complicated the movie is - I would like to note another issue I had with the film: and it is just a problem that affects any documentary film: BIAS:

The film ‘Inside Job’ is not afraid of what it is: which is an extremely leftist piece of propaganda. Odd’s are your opinion of the people portrayed in the movie will be negative if you are actively seeking the picture out - and it is edited together to capitalize on this. It is all so subjectively handled. Ferguson and the rest of the film-makers don’t just lay out the facts; they interject their own voice, or Matt Damon’s narration; we are constantly getting a skewed look at events: Interviewees are rudely cut off and there are multiple sequences where suspicious editing is used. The whole situation ends up feeling very “Michael Moore” particularly in certain sections -especially those done for comedy; like a sequence where a bunch of bankers have to state their case in-front of a series of judges. The data in this movie feels skewed.

But like Michael Moore’s film-making it is undeniably effective and entertaining. It is just important to remember that if you are going start fighting for the cause of the movie; then do some research of your own before you start calling for tighter Gun laws…er…I mean Banking…wait… What do they want me to do about Wall Street again? Uh never mind…

But yeah I can’t help but think a lot of the “moviemaking” was done on purpose to make the film somewhat entertaining: Matt Damon is the narrator and does an okay job; it is just everything that he says is incredibly cheesy and hyperbolic (I know he didn’t write it) it is the ‘shouting for change’ type of rhetoric. Melodramatic sort of thing.

The big thing that felt “movie-like” is that Ferguson openly treats his interviewees like absolute SH*T. He yells at them, interrupts them, flat our abuses them, tells them they are wrong, it is crazy how in-your-face he is; for example many of the interviews are shut down because he yells at his subject - this makes for some uncomfortable viewing: a large part of ‘Inside Job’ is needlessly mean spirited; and while it may turn some off - I found it largely entertaining - I just thought this was a section of the movie that some could view as a negative so it was worth discussing.

This leads to what I think the film’s actual problem is: it is just massively complicated: In 109 minutes ALOT of ground is covered: For me: someone who was not knowledgeable about American Finance - I became lost in many places. It is difficult to mentally juggle hundreds of cast members, hundreds of facts and figures and graphs and topics -especially when you are there watching it in a cinema.It is hard enough to remember 3 peoples names - let alone one hundred..But hey; It wasn’t like I could just pause and rewind the film; if you miss or don’t understand something you can’t just go back.  this is perhaps an unfair criticism as maybe I am just too stupid for the movie; and that someone with a major background in economics might find it base - I guess its a question of audience?

Is ‘Inside Job’ a movie only for the financial crowd? I believe that the answer is a firm “no” - its a movie that is meant to educate and enlighten. And it does a fairly good job of that - I just can’t help but feel that this movie would have worked much better as a television mini-series or something like that - where it had the luxury of time.

I guess ‘Inside Job’ is a movie that would work much better on television; where it can be digested easier; but that is not to say it isn’t worth a watch at the cinema. It definitely is; my only note of warning is you should only go and see the movie if you are really interested in the subject matter; it is not a film that will be enjoyed by everyone - so don’t drag along people just for the sake of it. For the non-caring this movie will be torture.

But if you are interested; then go check it out; it’ll probably be worth your time and money. There are only so few times you wish that a documentary film was longer and more in-depth; and I guess that’s the greatest compliment I can give ‘Inside Job’.

7 out of 10.

Movie trailer:

‘THE KING’S SPEECH’ Movie Review: The must see film of 2010.

kings speech poster

Written by David.

The King’s Speech is hands down the very best film of 2010.

The film opens In 1925 and we are introduced to The Duke of York: Prince Albert (played by Colin Firth), for all his life he has suffered from an incredibly debilitating speech impediment: that of an incredible stammer and stutter which results in ridicule from the rest of the royal family and the general public of the United Kingdom.

After the death of his father King George the 5th (played by Michael Gambon) and the oncoming removal of his ‘less than worthy’ brother King Edward the 7th (Guy Pearce) from the throne - Prince Albert, known by his friends and family as “Bertie” is suddenly thrust in-line to become the King. The problem is that World War 2 is about to happen, and Bertie will have to lead the country into that - with his disability this would prove difficult.

So his wife, the future Queen Mother Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) arranges for Bertie to see an unusual and bizarre Australian Speech therapist Lionel Logue (played by Geoffrey Rush). Over several years the two form a great bond and friendship as they attempt to beat Bertie’s speech impediment, and give the King the ability to inspire and lead the general public into war.

The film originated as a stage play written by David Seidler; and whilst being touted around to be performed on stage- it landed in the lap of Geoffrey Rush, who championed it to be made into a film by director Tom Hooper (‘The Damned United’ and the renowned mini-series ‘John Adams’). The Uk film council provided the film’s budget and the film was made. After winning a ton of awards at festivals it was picked up for distribution almost everywhere- and for good cause - it deserves every damn one.

The King’s Speech is the most human and profound movie of 2010. I am afraid that my review will be nothing but over the top hyperbolic statements, so I will try to keep that In check by saying very little. Whilst the movie is very historical, it places it’s human elements far far above the simple re-enactments of history. It’s very funny, sad and yet incredibly inspirational and moving. It would be a wonderful companion movie to Danny Boyle’s 127 Hours because like that film, it is about the triumph of the human spirit - but whereas that film is about the triumph of an individual - The Kings Speech is about how those who are our friends and family have the ability to change and impact us - and if not for them we would not be who we are.

One of the most important of those friends is Lionel Logue; the eccentric speech therapist(Geoffrey Rush). He is warm, funny and very fleshed out as a character, never seeming unrealistic or over-the-top even with his apparent madness. A failed actor cum speech therapist who comes to be the best friend of Bertie through their time together.

Their friendship together; and how it is developed (with the reveal of his character’s backstory and whatnot) is beautiful and memorable - they go through the ups and downs and you truly buy the gamut of their relationship. Helena Bonham Carter is also great, she has so many great moments in the film - same with Michael Gambon and Guy Pearce; the fact that the movie can fully realize so many of the background characters without short changing any of the principles or the historical aspects is nothing short of astounding.

It’s a perfect screenplay; that not only juggles so many things so expertly it is also flawlessly executed, with gorgeous cinematography (many unusual angles where chosen; as well as it being very pretty to look at) and just a mature even-handed take on the material. The director Tom Hooper has done a spectacular job- he has treated the material like a stage play; allowing for the story and characters to shine through and illustrate the themes of the movie, rather than showing off with visuals. It is not a flashy film; it is a very restrained and mature piece of work that mostly lets the performances carry the film.

And look, the performances are the real stars of the film; and I was so blown away by the lead performer that I am going to give his name a whole paragraph of its own:

Colin Firth.

If this man does not win an academy award for best actor for playing the Duke of York; I will eat a shoe. The man is just remarkable, completing dispelling any vision of Mark Darcy and Reindeer sweaters and whatnot. The thing that struck me most about his performance was how in control of it he was. When you have a character that is called to stammer and stutter; two terrible things can happen:

  1. The actor can focus too much on the actual speech impediment and forget to be in the moment and actually perform, and/or
  2. It can become comical, almost a parody - which; ever since Tropic Thunder is now called: “Going Full Retard”.

Colin Firth’s performance is so wonderful in this film- that not only does he appear to be completely in-the-moment, and not only does he have incredible chemistry with Geoffrey Rush - he actually ceases to be Colin Firth and becomes the most complex and relatable and human character in the cinema of 2010. A heartbreaking and inspiring performance - that will surely net him the Oscar as-well as go down as a career high.

Firth’s performance in this movie is the stuff that cinema lives for - and it is the chief reason why the film is so beautiful and profound. The subtleties and nuances there are amazing- it’s even the small things like the welling up of the eyes and the creaks and cracking of the voices - there is a scene early on that will melt the hearts of even the hardest people: it is of Bertie telling a bedtime story to his young girls (one of whom we know will become Queen Elizabeth) and it’s so deeply heartbreaking and sad and moving- and that scene is only the beginning of what he does in the movie!

I just can’t say enough about how deeply affecting and incredible his performance is - again I apologize for the hyperbole.

A perfect script. A perfect performance (and other great ones too). A perfect execution. Even the score by Alexandre Desplat is just beautiful. I don’t what else you could ask of this movie?

To clean up the 2010 Academy Awards?

One would hope so.

10 out of 10.

Article by David.

David’s review of INCEPTION

inception-imax-poster

“It all begins with an idea”

So explains Leonardo DiCaprio’s character Dom Cobb during a key scene.

There are movies that come out every ten years or so that have the power to change everything…ideas that can inspire people all around the world. Cinema is a powerful tool and its because of the ideas…and considering the wasteland that has been the cinema of 2010 lets thank our lucky stars that this one idea was Christopher Nolan’s.

The idea is so good, so original and brilliant that Inception is a perfect movie, an absolute masterpiece of a film that is almost incomparable to anything in quite a few years. It’s a monster of scale, of ideas, of character… its the perfect film, it works on every level..imagine Inception to be an endless mine, you can chip away, and chip away but you just won’t reach the bottom. This is the real deal; films like Inception are the reason we go to the cinema in the first place.

Inception follows the story of Dom Cobb (DiCaprio) the greatest extractor in the dream business. The job is to enter the dreams of people; specifically the subconscious; and steal secrets and ideas for others. Things complicate when the question of whether it is possible to enter a dream and implant an idea, so that when the person awakens he achieves inspiration, and thus changes tactic. Is it possible to create the inception of an idea, when inspiration itself is an unknowable concept?

Thats all you should know about Inception I guess. This idea instigates a heavy going investigation into the workings of the human mind, and as complex as the mind could be the film still feels in-depth and engaging. Rest assured there is much, much more to the flick, but to spoil the surprises here would be criminal.

The funny thing is that Inception is a complete original idea. There are no underpinnings of studio interference or an attempt to franchise. Its not even in 3D.

Watching the movie is an experience in itself. I got chills during it. Like last years Inglorious Basterds it is evidently the work of an auteur, not a committee. It is uncompromising in its vision. Christopher Nolan’s entire filmography has led to this picture. It’s a summation of everything he stands for, everything he believes.

An interpretation of the film that I love is that it is about the power of cinema. Cobb and his team represent film-makers, with Cobb the director – the rest of the cast fit the archetypes of a film crew. The excellent Ellen Page is an architect, which could be construed as the screenwriter; the person who creates the world for the director; Tom Hardy is in the thespian role and so forth. From ‘producers’ to even ‘the audience’; every character has a role. And as for dreams themselves, they represent cinema, you see ‘dreams’ have the ability to generate ideas and create something of meaning and importance for individuals.

The cast is uniformly excellent, DiCaprio gives arguably his greatest performance; carrying the picture. How an actor accomplishes a film like this is beyond me, if shooting the picture out of order is not enough, maintaing that incredibly complex and layered performance is another. His performance is oscar worthy.

At the end of the line Inception remains a ensemble piece, every performance works wonders to gel the entire project together, from Joseph Gordon Levitt to Ken Watanabe to the excellent, excellent, Marion Cottilard – it’s such a collection of talent that only a script and film-maker this fucking good could have gotten them. Cillian Murphy, who I’ve always felt has been an incredibly underated performer brings the goods also.

The images that Nolan has achieved with his long time collaborator; cinematographer Wally Phister, are gorgeous and lush, often striking and breath taking. The decision to back away from 3D was an excellent one. The film is already incredible to look at, I only fear the unnecessary addition of the third dimension would sully the proceedings.

Technically the picture is flawless, Nolan has overcome his action weaknesses and has presented some of the most excellent and revolutionary sequences since The Matrix. There is no reliance on CGI really, everything that could have been done practically has been and more. There is a sequence involving Joseph Gordon Levitt in a hotel that is ridiculously amazing. Just like the whole ‘Bullet Time’ thing was back in the day. I do not have any conception of how the sequence was achieved. On top of this the sequence is part of a longer 25 minute sequence during the third act that is seriously unparalleled in terms of scale and brilliance.

Nolan manages to seamlessly blend an emotional bearing into the film through DiCaprio and Cottilard’s characters; that manages to overshadow the action to a degree – see even the action scenes are for reasons relating to character and idea. This is the true genius of the film – that every single development is not only striking in it’s genius and originality, but completely organic.

It’s a very powerful and moving film to say the least. My friend commented that “A smart film-maker plays to the dumbest and smartest person in the room” and this is perfectly indicative of what Nolan has done, wow them with the smarts and emotionality or wow them with the incredible action – or in a perfect film (which I believe this is) both!

I cannot stress enough how amazing it is that this entire picture, its scope and all originated from a single man. Christopher Nolan may very well be the next Stanley Kubrick, and Inception sure feels like a movie from that era.

With all the endless remakes, franchises, and crap that has populated cinema for so long, Inception comes as a huge sigh of relief. Rewind or imagine the 1960s – 1970s, people would flock to the cinema to make The Godfather, Star Wars, or 2001: A Space Oddessy number one box office films.

Since then, when studios realize the box office potential of a Star Wars for example; a cheap knock off comes out. And when that knock off makes money, an even lesser knock off comes, and so on and on, up to the point where Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen can be one of the top grossing movies of the year it was released.

There has been a real decline in cinema I feel, in previous times it almost felt as if true auteurs were gone from the multiplexes, Oscar calibre films like No Country For Old Men and The Hurt Locker don’t get mainstream releases until they win awards. However, seeing Inception do as well as it has done, and be enjoyed by so many; might just herald a new age. We don’t want crappy post 3D converted films or endless unoriginal properties. We want auteur cinema, we go to the movies to experience something new, something different.

“It all begins with an idea”

I suppose one key thing you can take from Inception is the idea that cinema, like dreaming; creates inception in people. It has the power to inspire.

To me Inception was a masterpiece; all about how cinema can inspire the individual. Nolan inspired me and I hope that he will inspire you too.

Go and see this movie, if only so you can tell your kids you watched Inception in the cinema. Better yet if you have kids take them to it, it is a small step to making sure the films and art of the next generation don’t decline in quality; after all “it all begins with an idea” right? Go and give them and your friends one.

10 out of 10