The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, 2008
Directed by David Fincher
Nominated for 13 Oscars, Won 3
Lost BP To: Slumdog Millionaire

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is loosely based on the short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald. It tells the story of Benjamin, who was born as old man, and who ages in reverse. That is, to say, he gets younger instead of getting older. In this film version, directed by David Fincher, Benjamin was born the day the Great War ended. His mother died in child birth, and his father was horrified by the sight of him. He was born with cataracts, wrinkled skin, and arthirits. His father contemplated throwing him in the river but leaves him on the doorstep of a home (whether random or not, we're not sure). A young black woman named Queenie, who helps run a seniors home, takes him in and cares for him. Thinking he doesn't have long left anyway, Queenie keeps him. And he begins to get younger.

This story is told by the way of a young woman, reading Benjamin's diary to her dying mother, who is in the hospital during, what we think is, the beginnings of Hurricane Katrina. The old woman's name is Daisy. The love of Benjamin's life. Benjamin meets Daisy when he's very young (or still very old), and she's around 6 or 7. Her grandmother lives in the seniors home, and they are kindred spirits and become pals- in the way little girls and old men do.

The movie is Benjamin's entire life. Him getting younger, leaving home, living on a tugboat in Russia, having an affair with a married woman, working the tugboat in WWII, being attacked by submarine there, falling in love with Daisy, being apart from Daisy, being with Daisy, and getting younger.

The idea for this film had been floating around for a long time. The rights to the story was bought back in the 70s, Jack Nicholson originally slated to star. Other buyers of the rights included Steven Spielburg (in the 90's, with a Tom Cruise slated as Benjamin) but went on to direct Jurassic Park and Schindlers List. Kathleen Kennedy and Frank Marshall were sold the rights. Several different directors and stars were slated. Ron Howard (starring John Travolta), Spike Jonze, Gary Ross, and finally David Fincher, with several, several screenplays having been written. But finally, Brad Pitt was cast as Benjamin, Cate Blanchett was Daisy, and filming began in November 2006.

The film clocks in at 2 hours, and 46 minutes. The film spans Benjamin's entire life, from birth to death. The first time I watched this movie with my family, we complained it was so long, and so boring, and who cares. But then, as I've had before, I had the urging to rewatch it. So I did, and it's become a favourite film (just missing my top 10- taking the 11th spot). Many others have shared in my initial complaints that it was long and dull, and some have even compared it to Forrest Gump, being the story of a man born with defects that he eventually overcomes. He falls in love with a young girl while their both young, are companions, and aren't together for a long time (she rejects him), and eventually come together for a short time, shorter than they would've liked, lived on a boat, went to war, and had mother's who gave them quotes about not knowing what to expect of life. Eric Roth, penned the screenplays for both films and many have compared them, though they are incredibly different, even if they sound similar.

This is one of those movies that makes me feel an enormous range of feelings. Seeing Benjamin travel the world, making the most of his life, falling in love, and then, not being able to stay with Daisy makes me feel a lot of things. Its the movie that makes me feel the most.

Brad Pitt is, in my opinion, fantastic as Benjamin. He plays the subtleties just right, and acts the old man and the young man just right, making distinctions between both, all while having this wiseness beyond his years (ironically or not). Cate Blanchett is also lovely, playing both the teenage/young adult Daisy, the ballerina, and the dying woman we see in the beginning, who is unrecognizable. Other fun apprearances include Tilda Swinton, as Benjamin's first grown up love, in Murmansk, Russia and Taraji P. Henson as Queenie.

While this movie was nominated for 13 Oscars, the leading movie of the year, it only won 3. And the ones it won were truly, truly deserved. The Visual Effects, for the things like the "old man" baby, and the old Brad Pitt. In an interview with VFX Supervisor, Eric Barbra, he explains how the first 52 minutes of the film, is a 3D head. They made 3 head casts of Brad Pitt, aged 80s, 70s and 60s, then scanned into a computer, 3D. Brad would perform the facial expressions of a scene, as it was being digitzed, filmed from 4 different angles, and were matched to a scene/moment. Body actors were used on set, and essentially, Brad every facial movement and emotion was mixed with the digitized headcast (whichever age), and then photoshopped on top of the body actor. After the first 52 minutes, Brad does a full body performance, with makeup now deaging him, until he becomes a child and then a baby, when child actors are used. In the end, this gives me so much more appreciation for Brad's work on this film. Every facial expression was thought out, recorded without doing the action, only watching the body actors performance. It's incredibly complex, and the capturing of the facial expressions was the first of it's kind. (for more info on this all, see interview and the official Benjamin Button VFX Website). And how Brad Pitt doesn't have an Oscar yet is beyond me. Especially after this and Tree of Life.

In the end, I have a lot of respect for this movie, for how well it was performed, the technical and visual aspects, as well as the directing. And while it deserved the 3 Awards it won (VFX, Makeup, Art Direction), it deserved that and more. This should've been Alexandre Desplat's year for winning Original Score, in which his themes for Benjamin and Daisy was played forward, and then backwards (a technique used frequently in the film). He was truly, truly robbed. It's one of my favourite film scores ever.

However, I love this movie, understand why not everyone does, but I love it anyway. Forgive me for this long, technical review.

8.5/10

029. Redwoods

029. (23 Jan) Redwoods (2009, David Lewis) 53



There's some amazing sexual tension early on in Redwoods. It dissipates as the film progressively turns into a romance novel. A devoted partner and father finding love with a charming stranger isn't much conceptually, but Lewis at least creates plausible characters and relationships. That his main character is an accountant with abs is a bit of a stretch, but it's something that comes with the territory in this genre. The bitter, tragic twist in the end rings a little false considering the sentimental first hour.

004. Killer Hair

004. (01 Jan) Killer Hair (2009, Jerry Ciccoritti) 15



Who knew a murder mystery could be quite this dull? Lame attempts at humor, an immense amount of plot, and twists that are totally unsatisfying, Killer Hair promises to be fun between its title, premise, and wackiness, but it never follows through. At least Victor Webster is easy on the eyes.

A Town Called Panic (2009)

Overall Score: 8.50/10

I have to be honest, A Town Called Panic frustrates me deeply. It is almost entirely Univarn critic proof. My usual go to items on character development, lack of narrative flow, or blatant misnomers pale in comparison to the film's sheer "WTF" factor. A factor so pushed to the extreme of its capabilities, one might imagine this film ought to be watched through multiple levels of consciousness if only in the name of determining which level most amplifies this film's more unique qualities. Because let's be honest, there's absolutely no way you could complain about the movie's weak characters and still keep a straight face when suddenly the image of cow kamikazes works itself into the forefront of your brain.

So I find it hard to know what to say about the film. I think it's pretty much a movie that can only be reviewed on the enjoyment factor. That's how it sells, and presents itself. There's no "now my main character will twist his head in a slightly downward and away direction in the hope of gaining audience sympathy even though he has less dimensions than the marketing's cardboard cutout of him" scenes which press the dramatic issue that's just not there. Nope, A Town Called Panic starts off with a small slice of zany, and just continues piling until the credits roll.

Which leaves the question - how much of the film did I actually enjoy? A pretty good percentage. I won't say I found everything to be quite as glorious, and certain sequences left me wondering more about what will happen next and less about what's going on in the moment. But that is the film's greatest strength. Even during its moments which are low on entertainment, there's a constant feeling that what will happen next can only be even better. This is important for a reason all too often forgotten by Hollywood blockbusters - it keeps you smiling, guessing, and wanting more throughout the film. There's no better feeling than walking away from a movie knowing that at no point did you think "this is a waste of time."

Now I'm not going to deny that A Town Called Panic appeals to a very specific base of filmgoers. Those who expect nothing less than a montage of 'realistic' over the top action sequences loosely tied together by what someone calls a plot, are probably not going to be quick to hop on the Panic bandwagon. Same might be said for those who see the world in only "chick flicks" and "everything else." So if you're going to seek out and indulge in this experience, consider yourself warned. But I should say, I'd recommend indulging in this anyway.

The Secret in Their Eyes (2009)

OVERALL SCORE: 9.50/10

Regret can be debilitating even among the strongest men. It's worse when all the regrets of your life spawn from a single series of interconnected events twenty-five years ago. Retired legal counselor and federal agent, Benjamin Esposito (Ricardo Darin) finds himself at a crossroads in his life. With little to do, and less in mind, he decides to write a novel about the events that surrounded the rape and murder of Lilana Coloto (Carla Quevedo).

What transpires is a tale of passion, unrequited love, and justice in a world of political upheaval. In love with his young boss, the now Judge Irene Hastings (Soledad Villamil), Benjamin is a man fascinated by passion. Too reserved to ever express his feelings, he idealizes Ricardo Morales (Pablo Rago), Lilana's widower who spends every day at the train station hoping to one day find her killer.

In essence, that's what separates Secret in Their Eyes from so many of our modern-day generic crime thrillers. It's not a film with a series of twists and turns, desperately trying to get you to guess and second-guess who the killer could possibly be. The killer is revealed very early on into the tale. Instead, the movie is about what happens afterward. How those events so affect these characters that it breaks them down to their very raw emotional beings. What happens when these characters are finally forced to address the very things they've been repressing for years.

Once those shells have been stripped away, we finally get to see these characters for who they truly are. Often sad and lonely people trying to get through life with as little regret as possible. Sure, they work well-paying jobs, maybe they have a marriage or a loved one, but none of these things complete them. The things they truly want in life have either been taken away or not come along when they were in a position to grab them. As such, much of Secret in Their Eyes is about missed opportunities. Lives currently filled with reflection over action.

That's one of the many aspects I absolutely love about this film. Many will tell you it's a thriller, tense and ominous, and it is, but Secret in Their Eyes is so much more. Writer-Director Juan Jose Campanella majestically wraps a tale of complex, emotional characters around a captivating thriller with enough twists and turns to constantly keep you wanting more. As much a mood film as it is an emotion, Secret in Their Eyes constantly draws the viewer in with a perfect balance of intensity and reality.

One would be hard pressed to pin-point a single genre for the wide-spread narrative. The movie flirts with a wide variety of topics, with each character embodying a different form. Through their eyes we encounter politics, justice, love, loss, and addiction. We see how failing to gain closure on some of the biggest events of life can leave gaping holes that must be closed. And through it all Campanella finds hope in even the most solemn of life's moments.

Unrelenting, Campanella navigates the tale with a keen understanding for direction. His timing is as impeccable as his characters are fallible. Sentimentality is the name of the game, and everyone plays. Every scene is an expository moment, making even the most meandering scenes captivating.

At times the film may waver under the weight of its melodrama, but the characters and Campanella carry it through. There's no need for action to keep your attention, only tension and well designed characters. Simple enough to make you love them, complex enough to request you get to know them. All in all, The Secret in Their Eyes is one of the best films I've seen in years, and a surefire classic.

Film Credits:
Directed By: Juan Jose Campanella
Written By: Juan Jose Campanella & Eduardo Sacheri
Novel By: Eduardo Sacheri 

Police, Adjective (2009)

POLICE, ADJECTIVE

WRITTEN AND DIRECTED BY: CORNELIU PORUMBOIU

OVERALL SCORE: 7.75/10

Torn between his duty to arrest a teenage hashish user in his local district and the inevitable consequences it'll have on the teen's life, young police detective Cristi (Dragos Bucur) tries to hunt down the teen's dealer before he is forced to make the arrest.

-----------------------------------------

Police, Adjective, the 2009 Romanian entry for Best Foreign Language Film, is a captivating tale about the battle between duty and conscious. Director and writer Corneliu Porumboiu beautifully captures a few days in the life of Cristi with a methodical precision, slow pacing, and wonderful use of single camera angles. 

Porumboiu's lack of constant cuts, and quick movements, adds an element of realism to the world he creates. The audience is presented with the feeling of being another member in the room, or on the street, with Cristi, as opposed to an omnipresent being. As Cristi becomes aware of things, the audience in turn becomes aware. Though what is most striking about Police, Adjective isn't its ability to shock and wow, as so many cop films try to do, but rather its dedication to the mundane events of police work.

Don't get me wrong, PA is not two hours of paperwork filing. What I mean is that while Cristi is doing a stakeout, we are there with him for event. Any suspicious vehicles he sees we see, any third party member coming and going we both investigate. When Cristi trails someone we're there through every street, turn, and staircase. If Cristi is interrupted by a dog walking by, so are we.

Cristi is handled wonderfully by Dragos Bucur, who manages to capture that sense of struggle without constantly flaunting it. Bucur and Porumboiu allow Cristi's struggles to reveal themselves in the way he treats others, especially his coworkers and wife. The moments of brief frustration and remorse. The way Cristi tries to get his mind off of work with conversations on music and grammar. Cristi's acts of self justification, and the audience's desire to sympathize with him.

The ultimate 'climax,' if one dares call it that, puts Cristi's beliefs to the test in a wonderfully intelligent way, devoid of any over the top action. Like the rest of the film, this climax is slow, taking its time to get to the point with a strict realism. For those who admire this type of story telling, Police Adjective is a perfect example of how effective it can be when used correctly. For those who don't, Police, Adjective will most likely be an exercise in patience and interest.

Slow, methodical, and dedicated to realism, Police, Adjective is an engrossing tale about the mundane actions and human choices that confront the Police every day. Porumboiu delivers a simple and straight forward tale that lacks the twists and turns of conventional narrative, maintaining interest through realistic characters and events.

Note: This film was watched and reviewed by birthday request of Brian's Film Review Blog. If you're celebrating a birthday and want to request a review let me know at twitter.com/univarn or lifeinequinox@gmail.com

The Red Riding Trilogy

In the Year of Our Lord - 1974:

Directed by: Julian Jarrold
Trilogy Written by: David Peace (novel) & Tony Grisoni

Grounded by a solid performance from Andrew Garfield, and a great supporting cast of Sean Bean, Eddie Marsan, and Rebecca Hall, 1974 is a beautifully shot introductory element to the trilogy. Setting the series in tone, and in narrative, it creates the starting point from which the other two films must follow.

The film's shining quality is how it blends plot, action, and character breakdown seamlessly. Capturing deep emotional struggles beneath, as each character tries to present their own uncaring to what's going on around them.

While it will provide some answers to the questions it presents, 1974 leaves you hooked, and begging for more. My one real complaint would lie in the middle in which the plot begins to drag before heading into a powerhouse of a finale. A finale which, quite honestly, saves the film several times over.

In the Year of Our Lord - 1980:
Directed By: James Marsh

In the context of the entire trilogy 1980 suffers from 3 problems. The first being that it is in many respects a stand alone story which provides some context which is later developed in the final installment. Secondly it lacks the beautiful imagery, and style, of the first and final installment. Lastly, there's just not enough depth there to make it gripping.

There's no hiding my enjoyment for watching Paddy Considine act, and here he brings some of his best acting to the forefront. As well you have lesser known British actors such as Sean Harris, Tony Pitts, Maxine Peake, and Warren Clarke stepping up to meet that level, giving 1980 one of the best all around performances of the trilogy.

1980 also benefits from having a rather quick paced plot with plenty going on. Lots of dealing with uncovering corruption, murder, and providing a bit of rounding out to some of the character's we've seen, but not known until now.

In the Year of Our Lord -1983:
Directed By: Anand Tucker

Perhaps the most visually surreal entry, 1983 does a brilliant job of tying together the loose ends left by 1974 and 1980. Linking the three films together in a story of redemption, and uncovering. Headlined by two strong performances by David Morrissey who spends the first two installments as a back ground character, and Mark Addy as a solicitor trying to prove the innocence of those accused of the lead in crimes.

Perhaps the most striking thing about 1983 is how those characters who merely served as background for the first two installments really come to light here. How much impact they really had on the plot development of the previous two films, and the crimes surrounding them. If nothing, I greatly enjoy how it all tied together, even if it isn't a perfect knot.

The only real issue I had with the plot lied in the heavy use of flashbacks. They were in many cases necessary, but not well blended, and towards the end it became hard to keep track of what time frame I was looking at. Luckily the placement of certain characters makes it a bit easier on the viewer.

--------------------------

As a whole you won't find many television movies as provocative, or indeed captivating, as this Red Riding trilogy. The acting is splendid throughout, and, while it never achieves an element of perfection, it certainly makes for a gripping weekend event.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 2009

We finally got to the end of our reviewed first year, 2009. Actually, many say that this was a truly weak, and of course giving five stars to four performances means that I was deeply satisfied with this year's nominees and had any of the members of my top 3 won, I also would have been satisfied. These ladies prove that you can give a stellar performance no matter what. Stone-cold sober I find these women fascinating (Whom did I quote?:D). Gosh this decision was so painful as I feel really sorry for #2 (especially her) and #3, but in time one of them might become my pick. This is just how I feel at the moment. But I won't let the suspense go on, let's just jump to the ranking:

5. Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side
Although Bullock suffers from an awful screenplay, a predictable movie and a terrible cast, she was still able to give a decent, but not brilliant performance, which was definitelyworthy of winning the Oscar, but was able to save a movie from being a total disaster with the help of Bullock's charm.

4. Helen Mirren in The Last Station
Although I was a bit too generous in my rating, I am still very shocked how much people dislike Dame Helen in The Last Station. As Sofya Tolstoya, she was able to give a terrific performance which is unfortunately not for everyone (and this might be its biggest flaw), but still amazed me.

3. Gabourey Sidibe in Precious
This is a devastating, moving and heartbreaking piece of art, which could become the part of the history of movies. Despite Sidibe's inexperience, her performance truly speaks for itself and one just cannot get across Sidibe's brilliance, which I hope to see very often in the future.
2. Carey Mulligan in An Education
Mulligan solves everything with grace and amazing naturality, I can't say enough times how amazing she really is. To sum up, this is a terrific, beautiful and even poetic performance by a rising beauty and star, who's sure to become a marvellous and acclaimed actress. Fantastic, riveting work.

1. Meryl Streep in Julie and Julia
Had the movie been only about Julia (and hadn't it been for that dreadful It's Complicated which ruined her chances) Meryl would have easily won her third. She did not, but again she gifted us with a performance which is truly-truly unforgettable and top-class. I felt lucky that I saw her and could experience her brilliance.

So I announce that my winner for this year is...

Meryl Streep in Julie and Julia

Bon appétit! Viva Meryl!.

So what do you think about my reviews? Should I go on doing this or am I completely awful? Do you agree with my ranking or do you say Bullock deserved to win? You can also suggest years I should do next, and I tell if it's possible (I have a plan too) .

Meryl Streep in Julie and Julia

Academy Award Queen Meryl Streep received her record-breaking 16th nomination for playing Julia Child (and lost it to Sandra Bullock, God Almighty!), the legendary American chef, who basically taught America how to cook like the French do. She's tall with a funny voice, she's full of joy and independance, and is a person who enjoys life as much as she can along with her husband with whom she has the most beautiful relationship. Actually this character is so marvellous in every possible way and Streep uses every opportunity to shine.

Julie and Julia is a very entertaining and enjoyable comedy about realtionships, food, love and joy. I've seen it several times, but enjoyed as much as I did for the first time. Stanley Tucci gives a nomination-worthy performance as Paul Child, the supportive husband. His scenes with Meryl are probably this movie's greatest moments. Amy Adams and Chris Messina are decent in their no too inetersting storyline, however, if there's Meryl Streep in a movie, then you can easily realize that it's all about her.

Meryl Streep is masterful in every possible way: she nails the technical part of this performance so well, that in my opinion it's also convincing for the sceptical people. She has the voice and the accent. In fact she's so good with these accents, that it's no wonder Geraldine Page asked the question ironically if Meryl could speak normally.

It's the technical part you admire first in a Meryl Streep performance, still in this movie for me it wasn't about her faces, but mainly about her joyeous spirit. She captured Julia's soul so thrillingly, actually the real life person and Meryl become one and you can't decide what's real. Only with her first scenes she simply made my heart melt like butter, she's so... cute. Actually I don't have many other words for her first scene than cute. If I said Sandra Bullock had charm, than Meryl has gigaübercharm. And her laugh is so indescribably sweet and funny.

Meryl also nails the very few dramatic scenes and handles them with great ease. That crying scene was extremely dangerous, she easily could have ruined that scene, but she knew exactly well when to hold herself back. Some say that scene is bad and useless and in a way I agree (it did not really happen in real life, that was fiction), however I think Meryl solved this little problem quite well.

And of course, the humor department. It's so delicious, subtle and lovely, which is I guess mostly due to Meryl and Tucci. I especially loved her scenes with Jane Lynch, which were simply hilarious (especially the one in front of the mirror). But I must also mention Meryl's brilliant line readings, the way she say "surprised" is so funny. I actually did not mind that Meryl's performance emphasised the comedy and humor of this beautiful character.

And another question came to my mind? Who else could've played this role other than Meryl Streep? Julia Child is a character Meryl was born to do. I read somewhere that Sigourney Weaver would have been better, I doubt it, just because Sigourney is also tall, she's completely different from Julia.

Nevertheless, had the movie been only about Julia (and hadn't it been for that dreadful It's Complicated which ruined her chances) Meryl would have easily won her third. She did not, but again she gifted us with a performance which is (again) definitely not for everyone. But I felt lucky that I saw her and could experience her brilliance. Thank you!



Carey Mulligan's next and after her comes the Conclusion and my ultimate, final pick for 2009 Best Actress. I'm excited and enjoy this thing very much.

Carey Mulligan in An Education

Rising talent and future Academy Award winner Carey Mulligan received her first nomination for playing Jenny, a very clever English schoolgirl, who plans to go to Oxford, but eventually falls in love with a much older, but charming man, who turns out to be different from what she thought. Jenny is an well-written character with not as many opportunities as one would think, however Carey Mulligan was able to charm audiences and critics, who often called her the next Audrey Hepburn. After all this is a star-is-born performance with all of its advantages and disadvantages.

An Education is a fairy enjoyable, but also a tiny bit clichéd movie about the 60s and although it seems as if the Organization of Teachers ordered it, you can get something out of it and is worth watching mostly because of the excellent performances of the cast. And here I must underline the performances of Rosamund Pike and Alfred Molina who truly stand out even in the shadow of our rising star. The screenplay is also well-written and of good quality, even though it's a bit conventional.

I really don't get the comparison with Audrey Hepburn as this performance is quite different from what Hepburn did in her movies and also they don't really look like each other. The only common thing between them is probably the subtlety and grace with which they handle their characters. Mulligan created a breathing, truly living character, which cannot be compared to anything we've ever seen. A great actor is known for being unique, and Mulligan has a lot of potential and possibilities to become a leading star.

The first time I saw An Education, I wasn't that impressed by Mulligan as I found nothing challenging or hard about her role. But time has proven me wrong and I was simply mesmerized this time. She handles this character with the dignity of a queen, simply like a great and experienced actress. The way she catches the insecurities of this young girl, the embarassed little giggling, the joy she feels when she gets introduced to this new world. It's actually a fascinating character study, done very wisely and confidently. Actually, it takes some time to completely warm up to it, however, it's still an amazing feat.

Even in the first scenes, we see a hard-working, blooming young girl having a plain and boring life in the 60s. And her transformation could be compared to flowering. Mulligan slowly, but (again) confidently shows all the dimensions of this exciting character which seems one dimensional at first sight. However it is really-really three dimensional, real person.

And again she immediatly wins our simpathy. I was so moved and shocked when I saw the scene when she knows the whole truth. It's probably as close to cathartic as a performance can be. Mulligan's star power can be seen so easily, you really think that this girl was born to do this role. Not to mention the humor she also puts into this performance: Jenny is an ironic girl, but Mulligan never exaggerates this, she perfectly finds the balanced.

Contrary to Gabby Sidibe, here I did not feel that this is her first serious role. Mulligan solves everything with grace and amazing naturality, I can't say enough times how amazing she really is. As I'm going towards the end of this review, I can get the comparison with Audrey Hepburn and I even go further and don't send me to hell immediately: Mulligan's going to be an even better actress as she relies her acting chops way more than her charm.

So, to sum up, this is a terrific, beautiful and even poetic performance by a rising beauty. Who's sure to become a marvellous and acclaimed actress. Fantastic.


Now, we have got to the end. The final conclusion is due tomorrow. I hope you're excited and I'm eager to see your predictions of my ranking. I'm not very sure about it either. :)

Gabourey Sidibe in Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire

Fresh face Gabourey Sidibe was nominated for Best Actress for her role as the illiterate, but smart abused girl in Precious, and was the dark horse for the Best Actress prize, which she lost to Sandra Bullock. However her Best Picture nominated movie won two awards for Best Supporting Actress (Mo'Nique) and Best Adapted Screenplay. Although she lost, she now has terrific opportunities to show her talent again and to prove that she was not one-role-wonder.

Precious is a quite overdirected movie with some terrific moments and some really shining actors. The screenplay doesn't scream Oscar to me actually as I find it a bit unbalanced and clichéd. However, it's the terrific acting performances of Gabby Sidibe and Mo'Nique that makes it being worth watching. In my opinion (and I'm not alone on this one), Mo'Nique gives one of the greatest supporting performances ever, winning a much deserved Oscar which nobody would have believed, say, three years ago. But Gabby Sidibe was even more surprising as we did not know anything about this girl, who might become a true star or disappear in a couple of years.

You can see perfectly well that this is the first role Gabby has ever played. She has much to learn about the technical part, however she's masterful with the emotional part. From the moment we see Precious, we feel sympathy for her (instantly) and it's simply heartbreaking to see her fight and difficulities. As Precious she's so realistic that it's no wonder people think that she's actually just like Precious. There's nothing wrong with the credibility, we can always feel and see the pain of this character, but Sidibe also fills her with hope.

Narration is not the best thing you can do in a movie, still Sidibe handles them with such naturality and ease that you are simply amazed and (or at least me) speechless. And her case is not very easy as she has to be impressive with the tour-de-force performance of Mo'Nique, who's truly brilliant. But instead of outacting each other and stealing the spotlight, they co-opearte so well, that in their scenes they both stand out.

Gabourey Sidibe is also brilliant in the very few funny scenes and she knows perfrectly well how and when to use her humor, when to hold herself back and when to show what. However, this brilliance could seem a bit sterile (like I felt when I first saw her), but once you warm up to her, she instantly gets your guts and does not let you.

And her big scene where she reveals a terrible secret of ehrs to the class is simply just mindblowing and it's very hard even for the most stone-hearted person not to cry or at least sob. We get so many emotions right in our faces, it's simply exploding and you just can't to anything and you don't understand your own feeling. This emotional avalanche is probably the highlight of the performance and is probably one of the most heartbreaking scenes I've ever seen.

It's no wonder she's often compared to Whoopi Goldberg's legendary performance as Celie in The Color Purple. The characters are very similar and they both have this naturality and realism which is rarely seen on the silver screen. I hope though that Sidibe will not end up being a talk show host, and I think she definitely has the potential to win an Oscar (if she gets another right part). No matter what, I'm rooting for her career.

OK, to sum up, this is a devastating, moving and heartbreaking piece of art, which could become the part of the history of movies. It truly speaks for itself and one just cannot get across Sidibe's brilliance. The rating is easy and definitely not surprising.


Meryl's next.

Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side

Sandra Bullock received her first nomination and won the Little Golden Guy for playing Leigh Anne Touhy, a conservative, rich and controlling Southern woman adopting a homless black boy, who turns out to be a real sport talent. And naturally Leigh Anne offers everything she can until the very-very surprising and shocking ending (kidding).

The Blind Side is a rather dumb movie and when I realised that it was nominated for Best Picture I was incredibly shocked and furious. I could understand Sandra's nomination but the movie itself was way behind it's competition. I guess Bullock's popularity led the movie to the nomination. The screenplay is so sentimental and unrealistic, that it makes it truly hard to believe that this is actually a true story. I don't want to be cynical, but this is a true American (male) cinderella story, the rich men's Precious. The acting is also so-so at best, except for the always reliable Sandra Bullock (and maybe Kathy Bates in her brief role).

Now, if you think that I'm gonna say as many bad things about Sandra Bullock as I can, then you can easily be wrong. I would not say that she's talented, but has a natural charm and in my opinion was born to become a rom-com queen. For example, she almost does miracles with these movies, see The Proposal, While You Were Sleeping or Miss Congeniality. These are entertaining, relaxing flicks, which are perfect on a Sunday evening on TV or on a hot summer day in a cold movie theatre. However, this defintitely DOESN'T equal an Oscar. At least not with me.

Yet, most of the problems of this performance are due to the previously mentioned terrible screenplay. Nobody could be able to give life to those cheesy and corny lines, nobody could have been brilliant with such bad actors (except for Kathy Bates of course) and the lame directing. So we can say actually that Sandra saves this movie for being a disaster, but she doesn't give enough to make this movie great. I have the same feeling when I watch her that I felt while watching Loretta Young in The Farmer's Daughter. Some great moments, but the whole thing is more of mediocore.

The directing does not help her either. In her first scene, we see her yelling with her exaggerated Southern accent (it gets a bit softer as the movie goes on) and you immediately resist this performance. It begins as annoying and if you don't watch it at least twice (I know it's a torture), you will hardly find anything to like in her. But since I'm crazy and a real Oscar nerd, I have seen this movie three times and at a third viewing, I found some very good things about this performance.

First of all, there's Bullock's natural charm, which always works (at least with me), and after a while she injects some humor and irony into this humorless character. Bullock knows perfectly well what to do, when and how. We can say, that she's a craftsperson. She doesn't give a true depth to her character, but she makes them at least human and entertaining. And I was entertained by her quite often.

There are some scenes though which she can't deal with, for example the one when she's looking for Michael, she was not credible enough for me. I could not feel her desperation or something else (but again this is also the screenplay's fault). Although these mistakes are not very severe, the ruin the overall picture a bit. Nevertheless, Bullock's comedy skills help her a great deal.

But then a question comes up: does being charming and entertaining equal an Oscar win? And the answer is a very quick no. However, had she only been nominated, I would have been OK with it, I just can't understand this Oscar, even though it's much better than the other so-called "star-crowning" wins. I had some problems how I should rate her, because sometimes she's a very strong four, but sometimes she's only a weak two. I guess I'll be generous and use mathematics to rate Ms. Bullock.


So I'm waiting for the comments where you can share your thoughts and pick who should be the next reviewed lady.

Helen Mirren in The Last Station

Academy Award winner Helen Mirren received her fourth nomination for playing Countess Sofya Tolstoy, the stubborn and desperate wife of Lev Tolstoy, the author of the world-famous novels Anna Karenina and naturally War and Peace.

The Last Station is a rather interesting movie about the elder days of Sofya and Lev and of course their conflicts. Tolstoy wants to give the copyrights of his books to the Russian people, while Sofya wants her children to have them and she also want to get rid of Chertkhov (warning it's NOT Chekhov who died in 1904). I truly enjoyed this very underrated movie (I don't know why), which is not a masterpiece but it's of good quality and way better than The Blind Side or the overrated District 9. The actors give solid performances and Christopher Plummer deserved the nomination, even though he does not have the most baity role.

However, Helen Mirren (one of my absolute favorite actresses) has a very Oscary role, full of showy scenes. Still, he had as much chance of winning as she had of losing for The Queen. Most people see this nomination as some kind of a filler, which is mostly due to the fact in my opinion that her movie is largely unseen. I can only agree with the opinion that not many Academy members saw this movie. Needless to say, she can only be better than Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side.

Mirren gives two kinds of performances: subtle ones (like The Queen or Gosford Park) or a bit over-the-top ones (like the miniseries Elizabeth I) and in The Last Station we can see an example of the latter. We first see Sofya getting up in the morning, going to her husband's room and lies next to him. We can instantly see this woman's pride and noblety, but Mirren also shows her desperation. Sofya cannot put up with rejection or contradiction, in a way she a bit like Sandra Bullock's character in The Blind Side. A woman who can control, however the fact that she's an aristocrat is the most important for her after her love for her husband.

We can instantly understand through Mirren's great acting, that the only truly important things for her are her husband and children and she never lets them down. She finds someone whom she can trust (the young man played by James McAvoy).

But again, this is a mostly loud performance with great outbreaks, which do not really annoy me, actually I even like them. Her breakdown during the dinner is excellent: Mirren knows when to do what and how. The screentime does not help her, however she uses every opportunity to show her brilliance. She's like Mary Tyler Moore in Ordinary People: when she's there she completely commands the screen, so you don't actually feel her small screentime.

I admit though that this performance can amaze only a small bunch of people (this does not mean that those who don't love it are totally stupid) as it's really the kind of acting that doesn't amaze everyone, probably the huge fans of Mirren and the lovers of Russian culture. I'm both, so it was easy for me, but I can completely understand those who don't like it.

So to sum up, this is a terrific performance which is unfortunately not for everyone (and this might be its biggest flaw), but still amazed me. I know I am alone with this opinon, but I loved this performance so badly because I did not expect it at all. The most pleasant surprise.

Another experiment

As I'm moving along with the Best Supporting Actor reviews, I'm trying something else to see who it is to do this thing that everyone else those, but I haven't started it.

So now, it's my pleasure to announce that I'm going to do my very first Best Actress Profiles and let's get stylish my first year is going to be this year.

So Best Actress profile #1 and the year is 2009.


The nominees were:
• Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side
• Helen Mirren in The Last Station
• Carey Mulligan in An Education
• Gabourey Sidibe in Precious
• Meryl Streep in Julie and Julia

My first reviewed lady will be Helen Mirren, but after her you tell me in your comments who should be next.

So who will be my pick? Who do YOU want to win?