Recent Posts
In a move that takes the Academy Awards back to its early days, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has announced that, starting with the 2010 Oscar ceremony, 10 films will be included in the nomination for Best Picture. Since 1944, only five have been included in the nomination category.
Academy president Sid Ganis said, "The final outcome, of course, will be the same - one Best Picture winner - but the race to the finish line will feature 10, not just five, great movies from 2009."
It is unknown why the Academy suddenly changed their policies after half a century of going one way, but there are many different theories running around the interwebs. Surprisingly, most people who actually still watch the Oscars are against it, which some what baffles me. One of the biggest complaints I always hear from movie nerds such as myself is that their favorite film didn't win the big Oscar, let alone even get nominated. Now, most people's big complaint about this is that there aren't enough good movies that are released to even warrant the expansion.
I guess I am in the minority of thinking that this is not such a bad idea. Sure, the Academy Awards will still be just as political as ever, but at least more films will get the chance (even if a slim one) to take home the most coveted film award in America. And as for the argument that there aren't enough films made to make this change, no one can know the future. Despite most people's claims that cinema has died for the most part, I still like to believe there are a lot of great films that have yet to be made. For me, it's worth having to wade through all the Soul Planes to get to the American Beautys or Heats. So I think this is great idea.
What are your thoughts, guys? Is there anyone out there who still watches the Oscars every year that thinks this is a good idea? If not, why?
Legendary television personality Ed McMahon died in the early hours this morning, according to the Associated Press. Though he had been previously diagnosed with systemic bone cancer and other ailments towards the end of his life, it has so far been unconfirmed what the cause of his death was.
I must say this is pretty sad news, at least for me. I remember as a child my grandparents had hundreds of episodes of The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson recorded, and every time I would go to visit, one would be playing in the background. Of course, I remember him best not only from his showing up at people's front doors with a big check for millions of dollars, but also because of Star Search, which was an obsession of my older sisters for years.
McMahon got his start in the entertainment industry while working alongside of Carson, co-hosting The Tonight Show for nearly 30 years. Though he has had many recent legal and medical troubles, I think it is fair to suggest that he will be remembered by most for his distinctive voice, witty sense of humor, and engaging screen presence.
We truly have lost a legend.
Angels & Demons - 7/10
Ron Howard's adaptation of the first Robert Langdon novel is much, much easier to swallow.
Admittedly, Professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) hasn't had such an easy life these past few years. Only recently, he was involved in a very controversial discovery that cast the Catholic Church into a very harsh shadow. While he may have profited from that in a way, the celebrity status that followed him was more than likely not as enjoyable as one would expect. Just as his life is beginning to move on from those insane events, he is once again thrust into another conspiracy involving the Catholic Church when an Italian policeman working for the Vatican asks for his help in a most troubling crime: four Cardinals have been kidnapped on the eve of the Conclave, and an extremely destructive device has been hidden somewhere inside of Vatican City. The next day-and-a-half will challenge Professor Langdon more than he could have thought possible.
I will admit it right here: I am a fan of Dan Brown. I know that, lately, that is not something to be proud of. It is not uncommon knowledge that Brown seems to skate past history with such bravado that most historians cannot even comprehend his actions. However, from a reader's point of view, Brown has an uncanny ability to create tension and suspense that is unrivaled in most of today's authors. That being said, I was very disappointed with The Da Vinci Code film. I knew that the "history" and "facts" that Brown provided in his novel were skewed to the point of being absurd, but he still managed to make things exciting. Ron Howard's/Akiva Goldsman's interpretation, however, left a lot to be desired...and that is saying something. So my excitement for the next Robert Langdon adventure was a bit waned.
I had no reason to be worried, surprisingly. A lot of credit has to go to the film makers here. They managed to take yet another absurd Dan Brown story and make it more plausible. While The Da Vinci Code tried a bit too hard, Angels & Demons felt spot on! For those of you who have not read the novel of this movie, you may not feel the same way. I, however, was extremely relieved. There ware many parts of the original story that I felt to be ridiculous and far-fetched. Howard/Goldsman seemed to understand their mistakes from the first film (which, to me, was being too faithful to the original text) and did their best to veer away from the parts of the story that seemed too out there.
I was not expecting to be surprised when watching this film. Having read the novel many times (and feeling that it was far superior to "The Da Vinci Code"), I was expecting to be let down. However, nothing could be farther from the truth. Angels & Demons held a lot of surprises, shocks, and some good ol' acting to make even the biggest skeptics go "Oh, wow!' It was better written, acted, and directed than its predecessor, and deserves that accolade!
Whether you are a fan of Dan Brown or the first film of the series, I think it safe to say that you will find your heart beating fast with this newest addition to the series.
Let me preface this entry by saying that I have never been on the Heath Ledger "bandwagon." To be quite honest, other than his work in The Patriot, I never left the theater asking myself "I wonder where his career is going?" Even though he became immensely popular after Brokeback Mountain, I still did not give much thought to Ledger. I wanted to say all this so none of you trolls out there think that I am just another typical "OMG LEDGER IS F***ING AWESOME ROFLCOPTER!!!!" person
[ Click here to read more ]
The previous writer of CineFiend up and left the wonderful site quite a while ago, and Orble has asked me to fill his shoes. I'll do my best to do just that, though it may be a bit hard, seeing as how he had some really fantastic reviews.
As of December 10th, I have taken over CineFiend and hope to keep up the conversations about the awesomeness that are movies! If you're wondering which reviews are mine and which are the other writer's, here's a hint: if it was written before December 8th, I did not write it. I wish I could take credit for those wonderful reviews that he did, but I won't
[ Click here to read more ]
NOTE: I wrote this article last December, so if it seems a bit dated, that's why.
As I was checking IMDb today (one of my many daily routines) I noticed an article about the decline in DVD sales this year. This is what it said
[ Click here to read more ]
Anyone remember the days when the phrase 'independent movie' brought to mind the following thoughts: low budget, crude editing, rushed filming dates, etc. Some times, despite all those obstacles, the movies that came from truly independent filmmakers were exceptional and/or skyrocketed the careers of those involved. Quentin Tarintino, Robert Rodriguez, Sam Raimi, and Doug Liman come to mind. In the past few decades, these were the men who either could not get the financial support (or just support in general) they needed from Hollywood to make their films, or just did not care to. So what did they do? They said 'fuck it' and made their movies anyway. And what did we get? Reservoir Dogs, El Mariachi (Desperado), The Evil Dead, and Swingers. Granted, that is only a small list, but you get the picture. Those four films are considered cult classics by many movie enthusiasts, myself included.
These days, the phrase independent movie means something completely different. 'Indy' filmmaker, to me, means nothing anymore. In fact, there's nothing really independent about independent film making anymore. Some of the most critically acclaimed "independent" films to come out in the past decade have all been financially backed by the major film studios here in the US. Not wanting to loose that key demographic (those 18 to 25-year-olds who think they are free thinkers and hate the "corporation" side of America), the major studios decided to play down their status, or just create a new company entirely that would still be run by them, but just have a different name. Here's a list of a few 'indy' studios that are owned and operated by the major players in Hollywood
[ Click here to read more ]
|
|
|
Add Comments
Read More
Comments (2)
Comment by Taylor
on Heath Ledger Earned It!