322. Snow White and the Huntsman

322. (23 Dec) Snow White and the Huntsman (2012, Rupert Sanders) 41



A too ambitious retelling of the familiar tale, Snow White and the Huntsman is at least some fun when playing into its fantasy elements, like a brief scene where the duo fend off a troll. Otherwise, iconic elements like the poisoned apple become mere blips to make room for countless throwaway sequences. Kristen Stewart and Chris Hemsworth have no discernible chemistry, leaving all of the heavy lifting for a very over-the-top Charlize Theron. Dour though it may be, the costumes and visual effects offer at least some intrigue. But no one should be asking for a sequel.

154. The Life and Death of Peter Sellers

154. (15 Aug) The Life and Death of Peter Sellers (2005, Stephen Hopkins) 53



Odd directorial choices abound in The Life and Death of Peter Sellers with some unnecessary breaking of the fourth wall and editing that rarely feels less than choppy. It's only a thoroughly absorbing performance from Geoffrey Rush that holds this together. He's continuously better than the too ambitious script. The film just can't delve into his personal life without coming across as disingenuous. For instance, scenes with his children all feel like this should be titled Daddie Dearest.

124. Prometheus

124. (08 Jun) Prometheus (2012, Ridley Scott)* 38

Certainly the most disappointing science fiction prequel since The Phantom Menace, this is infinitely more inept than that film. Failing to establish any characters to the point where it becomes downright comical when we're meant to feel for them as they perish one by one, it's impossible to get caught up in a moment of Prometheus. Reliant on special effects, this lamely undercooked spin on creationism is neither thought-provoking nor entertaining. The criminal underuse of Charlize Theron is perhaps most crushing of all.

PROMETHEUS

PROMETHEUS
Written by Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof
Directed by Ridley Scott
Starring Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender and Charlize Theron

David: Sometimes to create, one must first destroy.

The ship which Ridley Scott’s latest foray into outer space is named for, PROMETHEUS, is itself named after a Greek god. In case you’re unfamiliar, this particular God is not only credited with the creation of man, from clay no less, but also with providing mankind with fire and the possibility of progress. The trouble is he had to steal the fire in the first place and so his deed would need to be punished. Aside from eternal torment and torture, Prometheus would also be forever known as a symbol for overreaching and the often unfortunate consequences of doing so. There is only one person doing any overreaching on this ship though and that’s the director. Not to mention, it would seem to me that naming an exploratory space ship thus would just be more of a subconscious effort to sabotage your chances for success than anything else.

PROMETHEUS opens with stunning shots of landscapes and waterfalls and culminates in a bizarre spectacle that announces the possibility of a truly unique and breathtaking film experience. It then moves rather quickly into all too familiar territory. Type on the screen dictates the time and place of the mission, while people are asleep in pods on the ship, and an android watches carefully over them with some potentially questionable motivation. There were months of speculation but now there is no denying that this is an alien movie, somehow connected to Scott’s seminal 1979 film, ALIEN. It isn’t made clear just how at first but it certainly follows exactly the same pattern as his original film, as well as James Cameron’s sequel, ALIENS. After everyone wakes up, they pal around in the cafeteria; the ship’s authorities have money on their minds at all times; disposable crew members are picked off in small increments; heck, there are even things that pop out of stomachs and girls in tiny, objectifying briefs. The technology allows the film to look fresh and updated but the familiarity left me wondering if I was watching a remake and also why no one told me ahead of time.

So, once you realize PROMETHEUS is an ALIEN movie, the question becomes is it actually a good ALIEN movie? It is, to some extent, if you consider the word “alien” to mean beings from outer space and not the specific ones from the original film. Go in expecting them and you will be disappointed. That said, I can’t guarantee you won’t be disappointed if you go in not expecting them either. We wait to see what all the fuss is about for a good hour, and marvel at its beauty, because PROMETHEUS is nothing if not beautiful, but by the time the action comes, we have been waiting for it for so long that it almost feels forced. And I know that genre pics like this warrant all secrecy but the fact is that the spoiler moments in this film almost spoiled it completely for me. There are moments that are just too hard to believe or too sadistic to be taken seriously. Some of these moments are too hard to truly recover from even. Scott may know aliens but he doesn’t seem to know much about creating credible human beings here.

PROMETHEUS is co-written by LOST alumni, Damon Lindelof (along with relative newcomer Jon Spaihts). Like in the popular television series, Lindelof again attempts to tackle ideas about where we came from and where we’re going. And once again, he provides vague musings about our nature that truly only beg more questions. Hence the reason any characters left at the end of the film are only left with one question on their minds; why is this happening? Naturally, they must find out and so PROMETHEUS seems destined to continue its quest, which, while noble in intention, is really nothing more than a setup for a sequel. With that, PROMETHEUS the film reveals its true mission is not so dissimilar to that of the ship. Profit at any expense is always more important than understanding humanity.

Young Adult

Young Adult, 2011
Directed by Jason Reitman

Young Adult tells a story about that girl we all hated in high school. That really mean one, but somehow she's still popular. Okay, I've never really met anyone like her, but we've all seen Mean Girls, and various other American High School movies. This is the story of that girl, all grown up, except she hasn't really grown up at all. Mavis Gary is stuck in the past. She writes young adult fiction, she wears Uggs and sweat pants, and only tries to look good when she's going out at night. After receiving an email from her high school ex-boyfriend Buddy, that he and his wife are now parents, Mavis decides to return to Mercury, Minnesota (her hometown & where Buddy lives) and to try and get him back.

Initially, watching the trailer, I thought this movie would be awesomely hilarious, and that Charlize Theron would give a super awesome performance, and it would be unique. I was partly right about this thinking. This film was way less funny than I imagined it was going to be, but I don't consider this a bad thing.

Mavis Gary is a complex person. She's stuck in the past, filled with bitterness and regret. She longs to be back in high school where she was still hooking up with all the guys, picking on all the girls, and just loving life and being popular. Mavis seemed to learn the hard way that the way you live in high school just doesn't cut it in the real world. Eventually you need to grow up and become a real person. And that's something Mavis never seemed to learn. She's still the mean girl, who flirts with other people's husbands, is rude to people she doesn't know, and drinks whenever she can.

Charlize Theron really knocks it out of the park in this movie. She's everything we all hate in those mean girls, and we feel so little sympathy for her. She's mean, she's vain, and she's slightly crazy. Really, she's still that mean girl, still a teenager, and not ready to grow up. Charlize hits all the right notes with Mavis.

Many people have compared Bridemaids' Annie (Kristen Wiig) to Young Adult's Mavis (Charlize Theron). They are similar characters in various ways. They're both filled with bitterness, lash out at others, and are just extremely immature and mean. But Mavis is definitely the winner in this character contest. Mavis is over the top and mean, whereas Annie is just bitter and spiteful. Mavis pushes the boundaries everywhere she can whereas Annie only seems to toe the line in comparison.

Now, I can't forget Patton Oswalt. Oswalt plays Matt, a boy Mavis had a locker next to in high school. He got beat up in the woods by jocks because they thought he was gay. They smashed his leg with a crowbar, and he's never walked the same since. Matt is the exact opposite of everything Mavis is. Matt is in a crappy situation but he doesn't complain, and he accepts what he's been dealt in life. Mavis is in a pretty good place, being beautiful and having made it out of Mercury, yet she constantly complains about everything around her.  Patton Oswalt plays Matt with such a sympathy, yet with a hint of humor. He's a nice guy, and Patton Oswalt plays him quite well.

While I really enjoyed the performances, I felt the story could've had way more to offer. The end and the solution came all too quickly, and didn't offer very much. We'd constantly see Mavis pulling out bits of her hair, talking about depression, etc, and nothing seemed to come of these possible outcomes. The ending was quite dissatisfying. Additionally, I'd have loved to seen more of Mavis with old high school friends, instead of just with Matt, or with Buddy. It'd have been interesting to see how her old clique had grown up, maturing, unlike Mavis.

However, it was still quite an enjoyable film, and it's a big shame Charlize didn't get nearly as much attention for her role as Mavis than she deserved. I'd have loved to see an Oscar nomination for this quirky part, but alas.

7/10

SNOW WHITE & THE HUNSTMAN

SNOW WHITE & THE HUNSTMAN
Written by Evan Daugherty, John Lee Hancock and Hossein Amini
Directed by Rupert Sanders
Starring Kristen Stewart, Chris Hemsworth and Charlize Theron


Ravenna: I feel that you and I are bound.

The Grimm fairy tale best known as “Snow White” dates back to the beginning of the 19th century. It is a cautionary tale of sorts to young women everywhere that beauty is only skin deep and that true beauty, the kind that either commands respect and admiration or say the attention of a handsome prince, is to only be found on the inside. On many levels, it not only warns the reader but rather sets up the expectation that one day our prince will come and make all of our woes disappear. It is a timeless tale but it contains elements that don’t necessarily translate to today’s contemporary princess. Of course, minor issues like these would never deter Hollywood from trying to bleed it dry. And while you can put Snow White in pants, she still needs to be kissed by a prince at some point.

The trick then becomes how to modernize Snow White for today’s audience while not losing the story’s key factors. SNOW WHITE & THE HUNSTMAN tries to do so by keeping the fable set during the period (which is done masterfully) but by making it into an epic battle between the two fairest women in the land, Snow White (Kristen Stewart) and her evil stepmother and Queen, Ravenna (Charlize Theron). Their beauty is supposedly unmatched - and I say unmatched because you can never convince me that Stewart could ever look better than Theron, even on Stewart’s best day and Theron’s worst - but Snow White’s is internal and Ravenna’s is merely on the surface. Yes, they ride horses and wear armor and wield swords but beauty is each their greatest weapon. First time director, Rupert Sanders, strives to give the fairy tale a realistic edge visually but he fails to make these women into real people. Perhaps it is his lack of filmmaking experience or perhaps it is a lack of understanding when it comes to women.

SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN spends most of its time with its title characters (Chris Hemsworth plays the hunstman) as they journey aimlessly through the land to reunite Snow White with her former subjects in exile. They barely speak (which in Stewart’s case is always best) but yet this is their love story. The film is only ever truly interesting when Theron is on screen. She is the only true evil queen (sorry, Julia!) and her obsession with beauty fuels her every move. She fears becoming old and being replaced by youth, a very real plight for many women today, especially actresses, and one that gives her character an edge I never saw in her before. This goes nowhere though and we are only left waiting for Stewart’s inner beauty to shine through and lead the people to victory. Stewart, with all her youthful vigor, never allows us to see what’s inside, leaving us with exactly the same beauty she is supposed to be fighting against. Sadly, this makes the movie itself only pretty on the outside too.

YOUNG ADULT

YOUNG ADULT
Written by Diablo Cody
Directed by Jason Reitman
Starring Charlize Theron, Patton Oswalt and Patrick Wilson

Buddy Slade: Mavis, I’m a married man.
Mavis Gary: I know. We can beat this thing together.

Mavis Gary (the always stunning, Charlize Theron) wakes up, it would seem, most days face down in her pillow, still wearing her makeup and heels from the previous night of debauchery. When she comes to, she immediately reaches for the nearest 2L bottle of Diet Coke she can find to give her the jolt she needs to get on with her day. After high school, she promptly exited her hick town, Mercury, in favor or the mini-apple, Minneapolis, to pursue a once thriving career in ghost writing young adult fiction. At 37 years old, Mavis is hardly young like the characters she writes about and knows best but after spending five minutes with her in Jason Reitman’s latest film, YOUNG ADULT, you’ll see that calling her adult is sometimes an even bigger stretch.

If you pointed out what a mess she was, I seriously doubt Mavis would know what you were talking about. Actually, given the amount of attitude she usually carries in her demeanor, I’m thinking she would probably punch you in the face for the suggestion. As constructed by Diablo Cody, who last collaborated with Reitman on the contemporary classic, JUNO, Mavis is quite simply unlikable and Theron is perfectly cast in the part. She is strikingly beautiful and therefore has always had an easy time getting what she wants but despite her soft features, she is about as callous as they come. Theron is unapologetic as Mavis, determined in her resolve no matter how misguided it is and no matter whom she takes down along the way. Yet she still reveals enough of that once young adult inside of her to give the audience some insight into how she came to be this person.

Compared to past Reitman films, like UP IN THE AIR and THANK YOU FOR SMOKING, YOUNG ADULT is by far his prickliest pear. It’s humour is decidedly darker in tone and it isn’t easy to forgive his heroine her actions, regardless what damage inspired them. Mavis returns home under the guise of a real estate transaction to essentially “save” her college boyfriend (Patrick Wilson) from his supposed death trap of a marriage despite his first child just being born. (In fact, the baby is the catalyst for her decision.) In doing so, the high school prom queen befriends the hapless high school loser (an endearing and impressive, Patton Oswalt) and the two form an unlikely friendship that holds a mirror up to both of their issues. Their chemistry is so unexpected and natural that it gives YOUNG ADULT exactly what it needs to mature into the film it was always meant to be - a modern exploration of how growing up can be a lifelong process.

453. Young Adult

453. (01 Nov) Young Adult (2011, Jason Reitman)* 59

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 2003

2003

So the much anticipated ranking is:

5. Samantha Morton in In America

This is a wasted opportunity.2003 offered some really weak Best Actress nominees and Morton was one of them. There were some points where I was minimally impressed but for most of the time I felt really nothing. Too bad, as this could have been something very interesting and moving and yet it became a little dreary and lifeless.

4. Naomi Watts in 21 Grams

I'm very confused. How should I feel? What should I be thinking? For me, Naomi Watts' performance in 21 Grams is a failure. It's not epic fail, it's more of a missed opportunity even though it's extremely hard to say anything about this performance and the movie. All so shady and confusing and again, not in a good way.

3. Keisha Castle-Hughes in Whale Rider

Keisha Castle-Hughes, stands out in the awful field of 2003. Although this is not one of the greatest performances, she still turned in a beautiful work, full of substance. The great parts make up for the weaknesses and overall it's a really great job by an extremely young talent.

2. Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give

I ask myself: is this that much from Diane Keaton? Well, probably not. Still, she's extremely funny and entertaining as Erica Barry, she has a wonderful chemistry with Jack Nicholson and she enlightens the screen with her wonderful, radiant personality that I love so much. I might be biased but who cares? I liked her.

1. Charlize Theron in Monster

SURPIRSE! :) This performance is universally praised and for a reason. Charlize Theron gives an unfogettable, astonishing, breathtaking, mindblowing, heart-breaking, angry, bitter, desperate, devastated, devastating, in short brilliant performance as Aileen Wuornos. This might look like another deglam role but it's more than that in my opinion. Charlize really rocks as Aileen, showing the dark sides of human life. Brilliant.

So I can proudly announce

the winner is...

Charlize Theron

in

Monster

As easily as it gets.

Congratulations to Malcolm! Excellent predictions! Prize: you can pick the year I'm going to do after the next one (available for me: 1933, 1943, 1953, 1956, 1961, 1962, 1967, 1968, 1971 1976, 1982, 1985, 1988, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008)

Final thoughts: An awful year. There you go, I said it. I guess that's pretty much what I expected. Charlize was the easiest winner so far. There was so much gap between the first and the second that it almost hurts. Diane and Keisha are pretty solid. However, the other two ladies were not that satisfying (ot put it delicately). Actually, this was the first year when two nominees were fighting for the #4 spot. :) I gave the edge to Naomi because she grew on me a bit.


Omissions: 

• Uma Thurman in Kill Bill Vol. 1. 
• Jamie Lee Curtis in Freaky Friday

The ranking of the reviewed years:

1. 1944
2. 1969
3. 1974
4. 1989
5. 2001
6. 1959
7. 2006
8. 1978
9. 2010
10. 1996
11. 1964
12. 1939
13. 1977
14. 1997
15. 2009
16. 1980
17. 1941
18. 1972
19. 1963
20. 1966
21. 1973
22. 1983
23. 1986
24. 1937
25. 1990
26. 1954
27. 1958
28. 1948
29. 2002
30. 1957
31. 2003
32. 1940
33. 1998
34. 1975

About the next year: Oh, I can't wait to do the next year. It offers not one, but two (or even three?) iconic performances. I really want to make my thoughts clear on that year. It's a historic year. This clue says why:

• VIVA ITALIA! :)

What do you think?

Charlize Theron in Monster

Charlize Theron received her first Best Actress nomination and the Oscar for playing Aileen Wuornos, a serial-killer prostitute in the movie Monster. In my humble opinion, Charlize Theron's win was pretty much locked. She won tons of awards possible for this performance of hers (though not as much as, say, Helen Mirren for The Queen). Entertainment Weekly actually predicted the win for her eleven months before she won. That's really something and I think Theron won by over 70% of the votes. I just don't buy that Naomi Watts was a serious rival for Charlize.

Monster is a pretty great movie, I think. Patty Jenkins wrote a very interesting screenplay and her directing was free of clichés. I really think that this movie could have been nominated for Best Picture. I guess it was too small compared to LOTR and such. I also believe that Christina Ricci also should have been nominated. Although she's not nearly as great as Theron, she's still pretty good, way better than the actual winner of the year.

There are the so-called deglam roles. A beautiful, sexy actress becomes ugly, even disgusting, play a character of a poor social background, gets nominated for the Oscar and then wins in most of the cases. If wee look at Monster this way then it's really just a deglam role with tons of make-up for Charlize. However, if we look more closely, we get to discover what a truly amazing, mindblowing performance this is. In fact, I've never seen anyone who criticised Charlize's performance (or I just didn't look). For some reason (God knows why), there are some who think Naomi Watts should have won for her overacting but nobody is critical of Charlize. Why? The answer is easy.

As I said, Charlize Theron is amazing in this movie. You don't have to be an expert to see that. You just feel her performance in your guts. There are performances when you forget to be amazed as you are so blown away by it and you're so absorbed that you cannot control your emotions. For instance, Elizabeth Taylor in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf or Jane Fonda in They Shoot Horses, Don't They? In these cases, the actress goes so deep inside the character's mind and identifies with her so well that there's no margin between the performer and the part. They became thos women. Same goes for Charlize Theron. You just don't see the beautiful, sexy Charlize Theron on the screen. You see an ugly, bitter and crazy Aileen Wuornos on the screen. The transformation of Theron was so astonishing that it could have won the Oscar alone.

However, I still haven't even mentioned the darkness that Charlize added to Aileen. To watch the changes in the character is just a terrific experience. First, she seems to be a hardened hooker who wants only beer. And along comes Selby, a young girl seemingly attracted to her and slowly Aileen falls in love with her. I guess Selby is the only one who keeps Aileen sane and Charlize showed that wonderfully. The desperation of Lee in the scenes where she's looking for a decent job is just unbearable. The struggle that we can see is so wrenching. There's a short scene when she's on the street basically begging. It's an astonishing, unforgettable moment. There's so much humiliation there and it's just heart-breaking.

Again, the way Charlize showed Aileen's lvoe for Selby is just amazing. The scene at the skating rink is just unbelievable. I mean the chemistry between the two ladies is just so brilliant that I became really speechless. Selby, in my opinion, was a selfish person who actually used Aileen and forced her into prostitution. Aileen was just desperate not to lose the only great thing about her life. That's Selby. Theron and Ricci work exceptionally together. They really make this a very realistic relationship.

The most devasting scenes in this movie are the ones where Aileen kills her guys. There's only one man who can avoid his fate and it's such a terrifying and intense moment. We see Aileen feeling sorry for her and in the end she just gives her a handjob. However, later she's not this forgiving and she kills an innocent man who really just wants to help her. That's probably one of the best acted scenes in history. Charlize is unbelievable. We just see her become hysterical that she can see a man who has a great life. A life she could never have. It's a brutal, unforgettable, terrifying scene and I'm really not overenthusiastic. The way she screams "I'm sorry!" is so... oh, I can't describe it, watch her. :)

Of course, Aileen cannot avoid her own fate. She has to face with the consqeuences with her acts. That extended telephone scene with Christina Ricci is just amazing again. All the emotion that she put there is just astonishing. Really. Not to mention her breakdown in the courtroom. Fantastic.

This performance is universally praised and for a reason. Charlize Theron gives an unfogettable, astonishing, breathtaking, mindblowing, heart-breaking, angry, bitter, desperate, devastated, devastating, in short brilliant performance as Aileen Wuornos. This might look like another deglam role but it's more than that in my opinion. Charlize really rocks as Aileen, showing the dark sides of human life. Brilliant.

What do you think?

The Next Year

2003

So the nominees were:

• Keisha Castle-Hughes in Whale Rider
• Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give
• Samantha Morton in In America
• Charlize Theron in Monster
• Naomi Watts in 21 Grams

I surrender. Let's see this year. :)

What do you think? Who's your pick? What are your predictions?