|
|
---|
Friday, 18 September 2009
Labels: games, Katharine Hepburn, polls
Monday, 14 September 2009
Voting has closed on the choosing the nominations for the Katharine Hepburn Awards and now it is time to choose the winners. The nominees are not what I expected...but oh well, you have to know. I'll be doing some profiles on each category over the next two weeks. Voting closes on September 28th.
I suppose Alex was right when he called this the weakest category. However four of the five are Oscar nominees...so it's not that bad.
As much as I like admire Anthony Hopkins I don't think he was my favourite son in The Lion in Winter. No John Castle? Surely you jest? Oh well...Dean Stockwell is there. Surprisingly none of the Oscar nominated performances got in...hmmm. And Montgomery Clift? I did not see that coming.
This is a good batch, to be honest. But no Spencer Tracy? What a travesty...and there were so many choices. I guess Kate and Spencer were not the best screen couple. We have two Oscar winning performances. Two that should have been nominated [Cary Grant, and Cary Grant], and one that should have one. This is going to be tough.
A good list...but no love for David Lean's good work for Summertime. Oh well.
It's an interesting bunch of nominees. The biggest snub for me was probably Jane Hudson in Summertime, but I suppose the film is not that popular. Two of Hepburn's Oscar winning roles are here, two other Oscar nominated and one that we'll all pretend won an Oscar.
And the final category...A very good bunch. Let's see what will happen here.
Oh well, people. Enjoy voting. Spread the word...and do your worst.
PS. Contribute also...
Addendum...Voting closure has been pushed back to October 17th. I'm going to be swamped in upcoming weeks.
Labels: games, Katharine Hepburn, polls
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
In my recent poll pitting recent blockbusters films head to head Pirates of the Caribbean came out on top. Edging out Spider Man and Ocean’s Eleven among others. I had thought that Spider Man was going to take the cake, but no, Johnny Depp’s Jack Sparrow prevailed.
What is it that people like about this movie [and I mean just this one and not the franchise]? What was it that made it one of the biggest films of 2003? Why were critics so impressed with it? Why or how did Johnny Depp manage to win a SAG award over pimped contenders like Sean Penn and Jude Law? These are all good questions, let me try to answer them.
Starring the aforementioned Depp with Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley, Pirates of the Caribbean is a Disney comedy film. Well I thought it was a comedy. But now I don’t know. The other day James was doing a list of potential action stars, and I commented that I’d like to see Keira [among others] in an action film. JD responded asking me what about Pirates of the Caribbean. Which got me thinking, is this an action flick? Is it a genre flick? I figure maybe I should back up and give you a plot rundown but if you don’t the plot…well…that’s just bad. Okay, fine. [You’re lucky I’m in a good mood.]
The film takes place during the time of colonisation in the Caribbean. While sailing to Jamaica with her father, the Governor, an adolescent girl happens upon a young boy unconscious boy floating on some wreckage. Elizabeth spies a necklace around his neck which she confiscates as the young boy is lifted unto the ship. Years later after some interesting machinations involving a rakish Captain Jack Sparrow we come to realise how Will ended up that wreckage as a child. Enough plot.

What I hate about people who remember this movie, though, is that the supporting performances are so often criticised. This movie is not supposed to be a game changer in terms of acting [Depp is just good like that], so why complain that Knightley and Bloom bring nothing new to their roles. They’re perfectly effective as the young couple. We’re supposed to feel three things. That Will Turner is too good to be an apprentice, Elizabeth Swann is more than a pampered rich girl, and that the two belong together. I don’t know about you, but I believed all that. And though the script was not bad, the treatment of their romance was not as prolific as the treatment of Jack’s escapades. So of course it pales in comparison. But the movie’s called Pirates of the Caribbean, Lovers in the Caribbean. Geoffrey Rush is also great as the token villain in the film.
The reason that it never occurred to me that this was an action film is probably the setting. A period piece action piece? Surely you jest! The film is beautiful to look at – the art direction, the costumes, the visual effects, the cinematography are all eye catching…and it sounds good too [props to the sound mixing]. Even technically this is a good film. And the special effects are not those that bang on your head like those horrid Transformer films. It's all done with a level of sophistication that belies Jack Sparrow's intention.
If you're one of those rare persons who've never seen this movie, I'm not giving away the plot...and if you are one of those rare persons who have not seen this movie...go out and get it NOW. It's a good film, and it'll keep you occupied for two hours and more. This film makes people happy and for something that's enjoyable and is well acted and produced...that's a rarity. I think that's a large reason for the rabid following that the film has picked up...and imagine all this in a Disney film. Really?
Pirates of the Caribbean was one of the films that I seriously considered including in my top 100 films. It did fall short [it’s in my 200].
So were you bowled over by the Pirates? Did you look and walk away? Do you think this is an action movie?
Don't forget to VOTE
Labels: 2003, Johnny Depp, Keira Knightley, Orlando Bloom, polls, reviews
Monday, 24 August 2009
I had to repost this. Sorry for the technical difficulties.
Labels: games, Katharine Hepburn, miscellaneous, obsessions, polls