• Following Us

  • Categories

  • Check out the Archives









  • Awards & Nominations

How Learnt to Stop Worrying and Love the Oscars…

This is a bit of a belated reaction to the Oscar nominations announced last Tuesday. Going in, I was pretty much agreed with the general consensus – in fact, the only prediction I really bothered to make was that Christopher Nolan would be snubbed in the Best Director categoryagain. A lot of people were surprised that he was omitted, but I really wasn’t – the Academy has made some cosmetic changes, but there’s still that sense of elitism which excludes the director of “common” blockbusters. Anyway, perhaps it’s because I predicted it, but I’m actually fairly okay with the list of nominees this year. When the one snub is the snub you see coming, there’s really not too much to complain about.

Leo won't be strutting to the Oscars this year...

Continue reading

When Does a Movie Star Become an Actor?

I think that most people would agree that there is a distinction between a “movie star” and “an actor”. I think that the great Nicholas Meyer offered a definition that fits quite well:

What’s the difference between an actor and a movie star? An actor is someone who pretends to be somebody else. A movie star is somebody who pretends that somebody else is them. Actors will change their face, will change their hair, will change their voice, will disappear into the role. A movie star doesn’t disappear.

That might sound quite harsh towards a “movie star”, but I think that you could argue that a movie star (if applied correctly) can add a certain amount of artistic weight to a film:

A movie star is someone whose past work enriches your experience of, and deepens your pleasure in, his or her present work. In other words, a movie star is someone whose baggage you want to carry.

I don’t mean that the terms are mutually exclusive insofar as they apply to a specific individual (indeed I can think of several performers who are both actors and movie stars), nor that it’s a fixed position (I can think of many individuals who have started out as what might be considered an “actor” before becoming a “movie star” in their own right). In fact, while it’s easy to think of any number of performers who have repositioned themselves as movie stars after beginning as actors, it’s somewhat rarer to see it happen the other way around. Is the road from actor to movie star a one-way trip?

Is it a rocky road to being taken seriously as an actor?

Continue reading

Should There Be a Distinction Between The Best Picture and the Best Director Oscar?

Ignoring the fact that, in practice, the Best Director Oscar simply exists to be a “runner-up” award in a really tight Best Picture race (like with Crash and Brokeback Mountain), with there being a huge overlap between the winners in both categories, I have been thinking a bit recently about whether there should be a more practical distinction between the two. Perhaps we should divorce the two awards, and decouple them in public consciousness. Of course, this is a purely academic argument (as the Academy voters will continue to associate them), but is the link between the two yet another indication of Hollywood’s director-centric culture?

Is it two for one?

 

Continue reading

Why The Social Network isn’t an “Outside” Choice for Best Picture…

I enjoyed The Social Network. Hell, I loved The Social Network. I think it’s easily one of the best films of the year. It has – deservedly in my humble opinion – generated a huge amount of buzz about the Best Picture Oscar. However, the more interesting facets of discussion measure the film against the other favourites, like The King’s Speech or Black Swan. A number of these arguments suggest that The Social Network deserves the Oscar because it is “more socially relevant”, even painting the Oscar voters at a crossroads – forced to choose between a modern film (The Social Network) and a classy but stuffy period piece (The King’s Speech). However, I find this argument rather disingenuous. While the Oscar voters in that situation would undoubtedly be choosing between two solid films, I think it clearly misrepresents the appeal of David Fincher’s deconstruction of the American Dream.

Will Academy voters be getting a friend request?

Continue reading

Super-Snobbery…

I was very interested to read a piece comparing Christopher Nolan to Stanley Kubrick in The Guardian over the weekend. Ignoring the fact that I don’t think it’s fair to attempt to seriously describe anyone as the “new” anything (it’s really only handy as a shortcut, to form a quick association, rather than forming the basis of a whole argument) and, if I had to, I’d say Nolan was “the new Hitchcock”, one piece stood out at me, when comparing Kubrick’s work to Nolan’s under “thematic daring”:

In the end, what are Nolan’s films actually about? Two of them are superhero flicks, two are cop movies and one is about a magician. Nolan isn’t exactly going to the wall for the big ideas. (Interestingly, by far the most radical film he’s made was that very first one, Following – a very creepy existential story about a stalker.) Kubrick made films about paedophilia, military justice, atomic obliteration, urban violence and the Vietnam war … Nolan is – at present, anyhow – a confirmed establishment figure; nothing he’s done has caused the smallest ripple of disquiet. This may change, but with another Batman film in the works I can’t see it happening just yet.

What immediately struck me about that paragraph was how ridiculously condescending it was to the genres that Nolan worked with – as if to say he’s “only” made two movies about a guy who dresses in formfitting rubber, two cop thrillers and one film about some blokes who do magic. How ridiculously patronising can you get?

If Batman hears one more person say "The Dark Knight isn't bad for a comic book movie..."

Continue reading

Do We Live in the Age of the Forty-Something Leading Lady?

Jennifer Aniston’s romantic comedy The Bounty Hunter may not have quite set the US box office alight last weekend (coming third behind Alice in Wonderland and some film even I’ve never heard of), but she’s still one of Hollywood’s biggest name leading ladies currently on film – and I don’t see that changing. And she’s 41 years old. Sandra Bullock, that darling of the nineties romantic comedy, spent last year reaffirming her golden touch, with the surprising-even-by-the-standards-of-the-genre romantic comedy The Proposal and an Oscar-winning role in The Blind Side. There was also a Razzie-winning role in All About Steve, but she even managed to use that to demonstrate that she is still one of the queens of Hollywood. And she’s 45 years old. Are the attitudes towards women – particularly leading women – changing in Hollywood?

Is Aniston on a winning Streep?

Continue reading

Academy Award Winning Movie Trailer

I know this has been going around for ages, but I figured I’d just post it. It’s from Britanick, two young comedians with a lot of skill and hopefully some good stuff in their future. Well worth a look.

See it here.

“Niave yet optimistic statement.”

The Photo of the Oscars 2010

Kudos to The Film Cricket for pointing it out over at Screenwriter, but this has to be the photo of this year’s Oscars cermony.

Who says James Cameron doesn’t have a sense of humour? Either that or he really wants to put his ex-wife in the Hurt Locker.

The Hip, Cool Oscars…

I’m getting old.

That’s the only way to really explain it. The more I think about, the more irritated I get. There really isn’t too much commentary to be made on the awards handed out at the ceremony, it was the bland and safe option for just about every major category. I was more interested to see what elements of last year’s radical overhaul they kept and which ones they disposed of. Basically, my problem with the Oscars can be summed up with two questions: Who invited Taylor Lautner? And why is Kristen Stewart giving out an award?

Neil Patrick Harris gets a pass... because he's awesome!

Continue reading

It’s the Hurt Locker!

I’ll probably have a more well thought out reaction tomorrow, but woot! My brother owes me €10!

He looks kinda like an Oscar statuette!

Other than that though, didn’t this seem like the most predictable Oscars ever, with the acting categories all sewn up even before nominations were announced? Still, great to see Mo’Nique and Christoph Waltz win. I particularly liked Mo’Nique’s confirmation it could be “about the performance and not the politics” – though I’m cynical enough to see her season-long disengagement as a calculated political move, it still made me smile.