Theatre, strong femininity and too much time.

Being sick for a long period of time is interesting. It's like an ocean shore, with waves of worse days and better days. Sometimes it's hard to tell if one is really getting better or not.

However, on Tuesday I was up to leaving the house for awhile. My friend Anthony (some of you know him as "Fish" in SOTB) has been participating in an acting class for the past month and invited some of us to come down to his showcase. Another friend was kind enough to give me a ride down (driving really isn't an option for me yet), so we were able to go downtown to see it.

It was a frightfully cold night, well below zero, and our parking meter decided to be finicky and torture us by making us try the payment about three times before it went through, and completing each step in excruciatingly slow time. It was worth it, though, because we were able to park right next to the theatre and didn't have to walk hardly at all.

The theatre was pretty awesome. It was built in the 1920's and still has the original period architecture. It's a fairly beat up place but the setting was just so cool! I think it would be amazing to act on that stage. Anyhow, we watched the string of monologues (mostly Shakespearean) with enjoyment from our second row seats. Anthony performed from "Julius Caesar" and we agreed he was definitely the best of the group (although the others were quite talented as well).

Other than this adventure, I've been mostly stuck at home. Thankfully I have been feeling well enough to do some SOTB editing, which has been strangely addictive.

I've also been keeping entertained with a variety of X-Men related things, which should come as no surprise. Latest activity? Retelling the first three films using office supplies with my also-sick-and-stuck-at-home sister. It was probably one of those "you had to be there" moments, but boy, sometimes there is nothing like putting your own humorous twist on a popular story.

I've also been writing a fanfic/RPG with some friends that has once again got me thinking about characters and what I value in them. I've been especially thinking about what makes for a strong female character, and how a woman can be strong, yet feminine. I've been considering writing a longer post on this subject, but no promises because I find that often when I promise to write something, that's exactly what doesn't get written... oh well.

X-Men: First Class Trailer -- Thoughts

All right friends. It's here. The first official trailer for the newest X-Men film.

My feelings on this are just all over the board. I went through stages of ranting, denial and acceptance after the release last night, commiserating with fellow fans and explaining my disappointment to the less initiated.

I also read the following analysis's on comicvine, which did help me come to a more grudging acceptance, if only because unanimously all of us fans are agreed on the worst points, yet we can admit some elements of coolness all the same.

http://www.comicvine.com/myvine/sora_thekey/making-sense-x-men-first-class-trailer-breakdown/87-65000/

http://www.comicvine.com/news/x-men-first-class-trailerbreakdown-analysis/142814/

http://www.comicvine.com/news/off-my-mind-x-men-first-classmagneto-turns-evil/142809/

So, without further ado, let's plunge into examining this piece of advertising, shall we?

The first 30 seconds are purely for grounding. "Before he was Professor X... Before he was Magneto..." Which of course makes perfect marketing sense and explains to fans exactly what they should be expecting. It does however make a pretty tight connection with the existing films, which will cause problems further on.

That said, as a James McAvoy fan, I am pretty excited to see what he does in this role. He may not look exactly like what we might expect a young Xavier to look like, but there's no questioning that he's a fantastic actor.

Also, I've been a fan of the young Magneto for ages. Since Magneto regenerated long ago and has spent most of his time in comic books as a pretty buff powerhouse, I always felt that Ian McKellen's casting was a letdown. Not that he isn't a brilliant actor because he is, but he just is too old to really embody everything that Magneto is. So even if the rest of the movie were going to be trash, I would probably still want to see it just for the sake of a properly done young Magneto. Only I really do miss the white hair...

Next we're shown into what is presumably the X-Mansion (although it could also possibly though not probably be an estate belonging to Xavier or Moira in Britain), and a glimpse of the main team in street clothes. This includes:

Magneto

Havok (who? I'll explain in a minute)

Young Mystique

Beast

Moira MacTaggart (Scottish Scientist and Xavier's early love)

Xavier

And what we think is probably our first glimpse at Sean Cassidy (Banshee), an Irish mutant who uses his voice to do awesome things like fly.

JFK on Television also sets this up as the 1960's.

Retro is totally cool. And I love the music they're doing here. As for the line-up... Magneto, Xavier, Moria and Mystique are all the right ages (Moira MacTaggart makes me SO VERY HAPPY). You could make a fairly strong case for Banshee as well.

Beast... well maybe. The First Class of X-Men consisted of Scott Summers, Jean Grey, Bobby Drake, Warren Worthington and Hank McCoy (Beast). For the longest time the filmmakers were actually making it sound like we'd get to see at least Scott and Jean (though probably not Bobby or Warren). In the end we just get Beast... and Scott's younger brother Alex (Havok.)

Yeah, a LOT of fans are wondering why Scott's younger brother is joining the team before Scott, especially when Scott couldn't even have been born in the 1960's if they want to connect with the previous films AT ALL.

???

Moving on.

At 0:50 we get a shot of Xavier opening up what appears to be either a future Cerebro or a vault. One of the students, however, is carrying a dress form which leads me to suggest two other options --

a) it's an early danger room, and the dress form is some sort of test dummy/practice victim to save, etc

or b) it's going to be where they store their cool supersuits and the dress form is for holding them (think of Wolverine's discovery of the suit room after freaking out on Jean in X1)

0:53 we see Emma Frost (in a pretty cool Emmaesque suit) in a weird looking room. Based on the fact that we've also seen Magneto in this room in promo pictures, it seems that it might possibly be something for containing mutants/subduing their powers. A mutant prison, perhaps? Or testing center? I'm wondering if Emma is being held there and is going to get offered a deal to get out and join the Hellfire Club.

...Emma. Oh I'm so picky about Emma. As she's currently written, she's my favorite female mutant. Her confidence, her poise, her intelligence... I just think she's awesome. So while I'm excited she's making an appearance here, I'm also extremely skeptical. Especially because what makes Emma most awesome is her relationship with Scott Summers... who, again, according to the X-movie-verse hasn't even been born yet. Not to mention that Emma herself appears as a teenager in "Wolverine" which takes place fifteen years later. Is someone going to use some sort of anti-aging thing on her?

0:56 -- okay, this is the scene that really makes me go WHAT THE HECK? I didn't actually notice it on my first time through, so I owe a thank you to the cool people at comicvine for pointing it out. WHY are Xavier and Magneto sitting on a bed, and WHY is Angel (this is the FEMALE Angel -- don't ask why they give two mutants the same name) stripping for them? I agree that this is probably some infiltration of the Hellfire Club or something of the sort, but it seems incredibly tasteless and offensive. OY.

We now get some quick flashes of the various mutants in the movie (most of which I've already mentioned). Quick note on Mystique-in-bed. If you didn't know, Mystique is Nightcrawler's mother, and his father is the red teleporting guy who appears later in the trailer. So that's one scenario that seems likely for this particular shot... However since she's also seen kissing Hank later, there's a second explanation as well that I'm much less happy about.

Passing the 1 minute mark, we get to see the Blackbird and the X-Men in action. Bring on the coolness.

1:13 -- quick shot of Hank in his furry blue form!!!!

1:16 -- Magneto doing evil undercover work.

1:18 -- sweet geeky Hank transforming. Why do I get the feeling that I could end up a bit teary-eyed over this in the actual film? Poor Hank.

1:19 -- any shot of Emma Frost makes me automatically want to squeal. And here she's turning into diamond which is that much more awesome. Yes, I know she technically doesn't get that power until later on Genosha, but honestly, it's too cool a power to waste, especially if they don't plan to ever show her acquiring it later. What enrages me about this shot is that Emma does NOT get any sort of cool leather corset, but rather a very skimpy, supportless bra. Which is impracticaland NOT classy. Emma may dress provocatively, but she is extremely classy and would never be so stupid as to wear a bra for combat (as she seems to be here since she's going into her diamond form).

Sebastian Shaw (ringleader of the Hellfire Club) also appears in this shot, and he's looking pretty cool for a slimeball.

1:20 -- interesting little montage. We see a danger room setting, with someone (who I assume is Hank) doing a flip. Cut to Mystique with an expression that says "My kinda man" and then a romantic picnic in this same room with Mystique and Hank. Cute... but... uh... what? (Mystique does get around, though, no matter what universe she's in.)

1:21 -- Havok doing power-y things. I'm interested in exactly what his role is going to be in this film, and especially how he is going to relate to Magneto. See in the real early days of the X-Men, when Havok first joined the team, he was dating a girl who went by the code-name Polaris -- and was later revealed to be Magneto's youngest daughter. Is there any chance at all we'll see Polaris in this film? We HAVE been told that they are keeping some characters a secret, and a daughter of Magneto would certainly be the sort of thing to keep under wraps. It would make for some really interesting characterization on Magneto's part (especially if the badies kidnapped or killed her) and would explain Havok's presence in the film.

1:24 -- Xavier tries out an early (and painful) Cerebro.

1:25 -- Azreal (Nightcrawler's Dad) makes his appearance, apparently in service to the Hellfire Club.

1:38 -- Magneto doing some super-awesome-submarine-lifting awesomeness. (Yes, I know I used awesome twice)

So... am I excited? Yes. Am I disappointed? Yes. Am I curious? Yes. Am I fearful? Yes. Will I see it in theatres? Yes. Will I probably rant some more at some point afterwards?...Yes.

All of that said, I DO think, after much consideration, that there is a chance this film may be the best X-Film we've had since the first two came out.

And if they don't ruin Emma Frost, I may even approve of a sequel.

Help Create a New Superhero

Hey friends (and fellow comic fans),

I wanted to personally ask you to consider voting for my friend Alicia's design (pictured on the left) in the Stan Lee Foundation's contest. Not only is she a very special friend of mine, but she is a huge comic fan and extremely talented artist. It would be so amazing if she could win this! She'd get to meet Stan Lee, recieve an award at the San Diego Comic Con, and other really cool stuff.

All you have to do is go to the link below and vote. You can even use your facebook account to do it! And it would mean so much to me! (If you're really psyched about the design you could even post a link on your facebook page or blog) http://www.talenthouse.com/creativeinvites/preview/a4c385742f7e0d845b8653470352ee09/154

Thanks for taking the time to read this and I really hope you vote!

A Look at the Oscars -- Guest Review by Lirra (part two)

(Read Part One of Lirra's Review here)

When we enter the animated category, I feel like some films got rather gypped. The Academy will pick Toy Story 3. It has a Best Picture nomination (which is becoming just a fad, because it seems unlikely an animated feature will ever win an Oscar, even though last year’s nomination from Pixar was a better film than The Hurt Locker). But, this is kind of too bad for The Illusionist and How to Train Your Dragon. Both are high-quality contenders that, without the presence of Pixar, would be possible winners. But, Pixar is not only almost entirely consistent with high-quality, but is also consistently a screen favorite. Toy Story 3 really was a great film, entertaining, heartfelt, and even moving. But, it almost feels like a predestined win in this case, which is a little unfair to the other contestants. Also, critical and audience favorite Despicable Me was not nominated. And, since my family owns this film, can I give a big, “Thank goodness!”? Talk about overrated. This was a simplistically animated, only middling funny film with clichés aplenty. Everyone seems annoyed that it was snubbed, but I say that’s great. The Illusionist is a better runner-up any day, and Jonsi sings in How to Train Your Dragon. (Freaking Jonsi! Cue some ‘Vas’ now, please?) I rather wonder why the dualing film, Megamind, was snubbed by critics, actually, but it’s not really Oscar material, either. However, as a family film, Megamind rocks and is much better than Despicable Me. Seriously, just go see it. You won’t be sorry. It’s hilarious!

Otherwise, apparently the favorite as of now for Best Picture is actually The King’s Speech. But, since I haven’t seen it (yet), I can’t say how I feel about that. It does look amazing, though, and the reviews are great. It’s also wonderful to see Helena Bonham Carter in a non-Burtony role. She used to be such a great period actress! She was the go-to girl for costume dramas! And… then she went all high school goth on us. I would love to see Tim Burton manage to make a film without his wife and best friend, and do something serious, like his biopic about Ed Wood, and I’m very happy that Carter decided to ditch the white makeup and be an actress instead of a sideshow event. Apparently, she was splendid, and I am excited to see her performance. Also, another costume drama darling, Colin Firth, has his Best Actor nomination from this film. So, I’m excited to see how that plays out.

But, wait, what about Burton’s films? I have to say… curse Alice in Wonderland! I have no idea why anyone liked this film! It was so cliché, so poorly written, so not like Alice that I actually wanted the Hallmark TV version. Great actors like Stephen Fry were totally wasted. Johnny Depp decided to make the Hatter a Scottish, bi-polar drag queen. The pseudo-feminism was so out-of-date it didn’t even have relevancy to defend itself. The March Hare was apparently mentally challenged. The sleepy Doormouse became freaking Reepicheep! In fact, the whole story became the Narnia movies, while Alice became Joan of Arc! It didn’t even feel like a Burton film. It felt like an Asylum Films director pretending to be Burton. And the 3D conversion made everything dark and muddy, so Wonderland really did become Underland (why?). And, let’s add pointless violence to the mix. It was so depressing, ugly, annoying, poorly acted, and poorly written that I was honestly angry after seeing it. I’d rather watch the cartoon, and that one gives me an anxiety attack! I’d rather see Best Art Direction go to a Harry Potter flick than this piece of uninspired rubbish and commercial horror. Also, PG? Really? This film is way too violence and scary for the usual PG audience. Don’t take small children to see this, please. It will only upset them and give them nightmares, and it’s too boring and unpleasant to be entertaining.

A couple films I haven’t seen but which are in the running and look amazing are Buitiful (Best Foreign Film and Best Actor for Javier Bardem), and Exit Through the Gift Shop (Best Documentary –even though it’s unlikely it’s actually a documentary…). The first looks gorgeous and seems to be the Best Foreign Film favorite, though some critics found it too unrelentingly depressing. Bardem won Best Actor for his role as the cold-blooded killer in No Country for Old Men, but is supposed to be equally brilliant in this sympathetic role. He’s extremely versatile and I’d love to see his performance. My sister is convinced he’ll win Best Actor, even. Exit Through the Gift Shop is about Banksy. If you’re into art, you know Banksy as the mysterious, enigmatic graffiti artist (so, he’s the Boba Fet of the art world, basically). The documentary-that-may-not-be-a-documentary is done in Gonzo style, which you probably know as the journalistic, “most accurate and least factual” style of writer/social critic/drug fiend Hunter S. Thompson (popularized by Johnny Depp in the film version of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, and Depp will be reprising the role for Rum Diary, so watch out). It’s supposed to be as entertaining as Man on Wire, another great documentary, and looks very exciting. It’s the favorite for its category as well.

And, last of all, where is Christopher Nolan? Well, to be honest, I never saw Inception. I want to, but I haven’t yet. So, I can’t really give an opinion. Based on his previous work in Memento, The Prestige and The Dark Knight, he’s a very competent director. I think he’s a tad overrated, because none of those films are masterpieces. People are going around saying he’s the greatest director of our time, and that just isn’t true. Best mainstream popcorn director? Yeah, probably he can claim that title every time del Toro isn’t making a popcorn flick, but otherwise I don’t see him as our generation’s Kubrick, Bergman, Lang or what have you. I don’t think he’s as innovative as people say, and, frankly, The Prestige was stupid. Okay, did anyone really miss the twist ending? It was a Twilight Zone episode, but pretentious, like it thought it was Annie Hall or something. And I’m no Woody Allen fan, either! But, Nolan does raise the bar, is visually very interesting, and he’s different. He’s not especially cliché, and his faults are usually that he’s trying too hard to be impressive, not that he’s conforming to Hollywood. So, I like that. And, I love The Dark Knight. It was awesome and was totally snubbed for no good reason when it was released, so there’s that. (Though… the choice to make Christian Bale have that ridiculous voice was just a major misstep.) As for Inception, I have no idea what to expect. People have set the bar pretty high and said it was amazingly mind-bending, has gorgeous art and is very philosophical. The trouble is, the last time people said those things about a tent pole was when The Matrix came out, and that film was, I’m sorry, very mediocre. It was style over substance, full of cheesy one-liners, all flash and no soul, and had obnoxious pretentions to brilliance. So, I’m a little wary. I don’t want to go in expecting great things and then be disappointed. I’ve read too many far-fetched articles claiming Nolan was referencing any number of philosophies, and I just highly doubt that is the case. It really just looks like a live-action Paprika to me, though, I imagine, less insane. When it comes to films that are a little obscure, especially those that deal with dreams, people read in all sorts of their own ideas. But, then, maybe that’s its glory. Maybe its ability to make people see whatever they want in it, like Finnegan’s Wake, is what makes it so good. I guess I’ll see when I get around to watching it. I think I’m a tad biased against it because of the hype, and also because I think that some of my favorite art films just don’t get any attention. From what I’ve seen, the art direction isn’t actually as beautiful, original or mind-bending as, say, The Piano Tuner of Earthquakes, or Jan Svankmajer’s Alice, or Rashomon, or Mulholland Drive, or even del Toro’s better works. When it comes to philosophy, I like “gentler”, smaller works that really ponder what it means to be human, like Wes Anderson’s films, or Into the Wild, No Country for Old Men, Fargo, et cetera. And, when it comes to mind-benders, I wonder if anyone who likes David Lynch’s work is going to find Nolan that difficult to understand. Not to be snobbish, but, yes… I’m being snobbish. Anyway, that being said, I may come in with so many reservations that I might actually be a bigger fan of Inception because of it. Whenever I go to a film expecting great things, and that film is not by the Coens or Tarantino, I usually just end up angry (Valhalla Rising and Alice in Wonderland spring to mind). But, when I have reservations, I’m often pleasantly surprised. So, who knows? I can’t say anything as of yet.

So, that’s basically my opinions about what I know of the Oscars this year. I haven’t seen a lot of the contenders. I hope I’ll get to see all of them later. And, I hope that my little rambles make sense. Again, these are just my opinions. Maybe someone reading this will go, “No way, Black Swan is totally the best picture of the Year!” or “Nothing can beat the original True Grit!” And, that’s fine. These are just my opinions. I have my biases as much as anyone else.

Aronofsky (and films I mentioned in reference to Aronofsky)-

Black Swan: R Requiem for a Dream: R The Red Shoes: R Opening Night: PG-13 Kill Bill (1 and 2): R The Haunting: G (though, seriously, it shouldn’t be) Suspiria: R Dario Argento’s Phantom of the Opera: R

The Coen Brothers and films I referenced while talking about them–

True Grit: PG-13 True Grit (original): G No Country for Old Men: R Fargo: R

David Fincher et cetera:

The Social Network: PG-13 Fight Club: R Se7en: R Zodiac: R

Nolan et cetera–

Inception: PG-13 Memento: R The Prestige: PG-13 The Dark Knight: PG-13 Mulholland Drive: R The Piano Tuner of Earthquakes: Unrated Paprika: R Alice by Jan Svankmajer (Neco z Alenky): Unrated Rashomon: Unrated Annie Hall: PG Into the Wild: R Fargo: R Pulp Fiction: R

Animated flicks–

The Illusionist: PG Toy Story 3: G How to Train Your Dragon: PG The Triplets of Belleville: PG-13 Despicable Me: PG

Assorted nominees or rejected candidates–

Blue Valentine: R Alice in Wonderland: PG (but should be PG-13) Winter’s Bone: R I Am Love: R The King’s Speech: R Rabbit Hole: PG-13 Buitiful: R Exit Through the Gift Shop: R

Others:

Man on Wire: PG-13 Saw franchise: R Valhalla Rising: R Avatar: PG-13 Titanic: PG-13 The Hurt Locker: R Up :PG Inglorious Basterds: R Megamind: PG Narnia films: PG Sweeney Todd: R Final Fantasy: Advent Children (from footnote): PG-13

*I’m aware Avatar didn’t win. But, it shouldn’t have been nominated at all. That script is wretched, and the FX is better in Final Fantasy: Advent Children!

Thank you so much Lirra for taking the time to write this up for us!

I just got a new voting category up -- Original Score. Also, today is the last day you can vote in the Short Film (Animated) category!

And don't forget, I still need nominations for our own short film category! Nominate them here!

Goodbye, Brian Jacques

This post is in honor of Brian Jacques, author of the much beloved "Redwall" series. He passed away this weekend after a heart attack at the age of 71.

Mr. Jacques, you taught me so much about writing, characters, imagination, and pacing. Redwall will forever be a part of my creative consciousness. Rest in Peace

One of my very first posts on this blog was about the effect of the Redwall books upon my own writing. You can read it here: http://elenatintil.blogspot.com/2008/02/mouses-influence.html

Were you a "Redwall" fan? Did Mr. Jacques influence your creativity, writing, or the way you view the world?

A Look at the Oscars -- Guest Review by Lirra (part one)

Special treat for you all today! I've asked my friend Lirra to give us a look at the Oscars from her eyes. Lirra is a major film lover with strong interests in the independent and foreign projects. She always has something interesting to say, and though I may not always agree with her conclusions, I do find them intriguing! After all, film, as art, is subjective and a well-rounded film lover will examine as many points of view as possible to fully understand the medium.

One note -- Lirra and I both wanted to make sure that you all understand that just because she mentions a film or it's production values positively in her review, does NOT mean it is appropriate for all audiences. All ratings will be giving at the end of part two (coming on Wednesday) and we strongly encourage you to do your own research into appropriateness levels before watching any of these films.

Elizabeth asked if I would write up something about the Oscars, in preparation for the most exciting event… other than Sundance, Cannes, Toronto and other major film event motion picture snobs and fanatics get all antsy for. But, honestly, the Oscars, while sometimes (often) clinging to the annoyingly conventional –and let’s not forget they didn’t give Best Picture to Citizen Kane!– are still important. Why? Because that little, naked, gold man can spell major film victory for newbies and arthouse films on the market and change filmmaking trends. Or, just continue to perpetrate the popularity of bad sci-fi flicks about blue cat people in an evolutionarily improbable universe of McGuffins*. Whatever works.

So, that being said, I unfortunately didn’t get to see a lot of films in theatres this year, due to college-poverty. But, I’ll try and fill in my gaps of knowledge with what I’ve gleaned from lurking on film blogs religiously. These are just my opinions, so feel free to disagree with me. Also, these are really just reflections on what’s going on right now in film, and not critical reviews.

First thought, the best picture nominations this year are phenomenal. We’re really light on popcorn fare, and leading the charge are very humanly-based films like The King’s Speech, True Grit, The Social Network, and Winter’s Bone. I have nothing against the big, FX-heavy flick, but when the Oscars aren’t being blown away by style, and are giving note to substance, that’s a good sign for me. Maybe the day of Titanic winning practically everything (for no good reason) is finally closing. We can only hope. But, at least this year isn’t threatening to make me as irrationally angry as last year’s snub to Tarantino in favor of films that are conventional in every sense of the word (and lacking in David Bowie scored scenes with Mélanie Laurent).

There are also some surprises this year. I think one film (nominated for Best Animated Feature) that may surprise a lot of people outside of the animation-geek crowd is The Illusionist. A many viewers really hadn’t heard of this film, and honestly the publicity wasn’t very good. It’s by Sylvain Chomet, the director of Oscar-winning animated feature The Triplets of Belleville, which made him a shoe-in for nomination, in my mind. But, Triplets didn’t quite come in with today’s animation craze and went under the radar for most viewers (which is a mixed bag because the film isn’t exactly the masterpiece some critics think it is). The Illusionist, however, seems much more fluid in style and with a stronger sense of story and purpose than Triplets, so I hope people take note of it. While I think it’s obvious the box-office favorite, Toy Story 3 (also a Best Picture nominee), will win Best Animated Feature, it’s nice to see serious, traditional, Western animation get some recognition. Japan isn’t the only country that can make great cartoons.

Another unusual submission is Winter’s Bone, which I haven’t seen, but which has a whole lot of hype and looks like an incredible film. It’s a gritty family/social drama, and has won or been nominated for quite a number of awards, including four Oscars. This is especially interesting considering that Winter’s Bone is really an alternative film, not a big flick, and without the pop-culture icons and flashy FX that usually wins audiences. It’s a small, quiet picture. And, for those interested in filmmaking, it’s good to know that the director is a woman, Debra Granik. Looks like the gender gap in directorial positions may be finally falling, considering last year’s winner was also female helmed, and she won best director, too. Not bad for being formally known as the maker of a vampire western. A comforting change for those of us girls who want to be behind cameras, not in front of them.

Another interesting nomination is Michelle Williams, not so much for her performance alone (not to downplay it), but because it seems like an apology. For those who have lives and therefore don’t follow film buzz that often, Michelle Williams starred in the domestic drama Blue Valentine, which was supposed to be a Best Picture contender. Where is it now? Well, Blue Valentine got saddled, albeit temporarily, with the infamous NC-17 rating. And so, the Oscars won’t touch it, even though the rating was revoked for being… stupid. Really, it was a single scene, between a husband and a wife. We’re allowed to see people fall into pits of hypodermic needles (Saw franchise), slice open the guts of living people to fish out keys (Saw, again), get trapped in razor wire (again, Saw), bite out chunks of skin out of people’s necks and disembowel people on rocks (Valhalla Rising), cannibalize people (Sweeney Todd), and so forth, and all of this is more natural than human relationships –according to Tinsel Town and the rating demons. So, Michelle Williams gets a Best Actress nomination, but Blue Valentine doesn’t get its Best Picture. I doubt she’ll win, though.

Of the favorite selections this year, the outlook is really diverse. We have two flicks from indie-rooted filmmakers, the Coen Brothers and David Fincher, and a whole handful of indie films. Fincher, as you probably know, directed this year’s critical success, The Social Network, but was originally indie darling for his groundbreaking neo-noir serial killer flick, Se7en, and his adaptation of Chuck Palahniuk’s cult favorite, Fight Club. Both films are stylish, tight, dark and boasting brilliant scripts and performances, so you should really check them out if you haven’t yet. Fincher doesn’t disappoint in his flick this year. The script is streamlined to the point of Hemmingway, with no word wasted. Every performance is raw and achingly believable, with fresh, new talent packing the box office as well as any old hand at the art. The visuals are dark, striking with a sleek, technological color pallet, with stylish cinematography and hip score to match. But, Fincher may have shot himself in the foot with his comments about how it’s really just a movie, not a film, and that his Zodiac flick is superior. This was quickly picked up on by those critics who think the film is conventional. Which, honestly, it is. But, it has a great Old Hollywood feel that pulls it through into something fresh, in my opinion.

The Coens, of course are veritable idols to cinemaphiles. While they’ve had some misses, their distinct style, emphasis on strong storytelling and brilliant writing, and their unconventional approach to complex human dilemmas in entertaining scenarios make them national treasures. But, was True Grit any good in comparison to the original? Now, I grew up on the old True Grit, and it’s been a childhood favorite. However, while the John Wayne version is great, solid, classic fun, this version is an A-list work of art. The performances are incredible, even better than The Social Network, and the film steers away from familiar clichés. It’s a classic western, sure. But it’s like seeing the genre anew. And it looks glorious! No one does the American landscape justice like the Coens! I would suggest this film as a set with No Country for Old Men. In No Country, the western is anti-heroic, a dark, postmodern story of evil in its most pointless, nihilistic sense. True Grit is a story of heroics, classic bravery against evil, in a world where the guns of the past are pointed at outlaws and wild animals, not at innocent people for the sake of a dark vision of chaos. They’re both brilliant films, and you should try to see them together if at all possible.

There were some very surprising snubs this year, as well. Two of the biggest surprises for film fans are the omission of Rabbit Hole, which earned Nicole Kidman a Best Actress Nomination, and the Italian-language film I Am Love, which boast Tilda Swinton channeling Meryl Streep by playing her role entirely in a language she isn’t actually fluent in. Both films were supposed to be runners for the Oscar gold, but were strangely snubbed. I haven’t seen either, but the buzz was terrific enough to make this oversight very puzzling. Tilda didn’t even get a Best Actress nod, which seems unfair, since her role is supposed to be brilliant. And, of course, the Academy seems to be allergic to Nolan for some reason, even though he’s superior to their precious James Cameron in every way. (Cameron…)

One film that is high in the running (as well as the buzz) is Aronofsky’s Black Swan. Now, critics seem pretty divided over Aronofsky. Is he a stylist but a hack director, or is he an unconventional storyteller like early Tim Butron? Now, I’m more of an Aronofsky supporter. I appreciate how he takes difficult, unusual subjects and turns them into entertaining, if dark, films. Requiem for a Dream, for example, is made like a thriller, but is about levels of addiction in society and the disintegration of human relationships for cheap substitutes. If you’ve been following the buzz on Black Swan, you know it was compared to everything from Red Shoes to Dostoyevsky’s The Double. The blend of old-school Hollywood with high-brow concept and arthouse visuals, as well as a tight thriller plot, is immensely entertaining, (although one could argue this mix is better served by Tarantino, and yeah, this is no Kill Bill). Portman does a wonderful job playing the woman-child protagonist, and her fragile beauty transforming into a dark, seductive Black Swan character is truly marvelous. She reminds me of Nell from The Haunting in her childlike exterior and tormented interior, complete with twisted mommy-issues for wonderful, gothic goodness. But, the film does suffer from being… well, derivative? Some of the homage , and I’m all for a good homage (like I said, I’m a big Tarantino fan), feels a bit more like copying. While it’s great that Aronofsky seems to have one foot set in classic horror cinema (lots of The Haunting, Argento, etc…), and a wonderful sign for those of us who think horror cinema is vastly underappreciated, he does lift a bit more than one would like– from all genres. Red Shoes is rather more than nodded to, and some of the scenes are classic Argento in set-up and design. I was waiting for Goblin to burst out in the Suspiria theme at moments. I think Aronofsky’s rather fond of his ‘60s and ‘70s dramas, too, because Black Swan feels pretty Opening Night-esque at parts, as well.

But, aside from the derivative points, the film is actually very entertaining, and it looks gorgeous. I know a lot of dance fans had a cow about how it isn’t, I don’t know, a real ballet, but the thing is: it’s not. It’s a film. And as a film, it does capture all the emotional intensity, artistic passion, and dedication of any determined practitioner of the arts who wants to get ahead in her field. The character interactions are great and twisted in an almost David Lynch fashion (lots of Mulholland Drive spice was added to the mix, I suspect). The visuals, though a very Dario Argento (before he went insane and made that horrible Phantom of the Opera film… with rats), are dark, sleek, and make great use of form and color. The writing is excellent, as well. Do I think it will win? Well, honestly, no. It’s too devoted to its camp/horror roots for the Oscars, too artsy in its approach, too derivative, and too controversial in its gender-issues, sexuality and violence. The Academy will most likely be too skittish to give this one the gold, in my opinion. And, honestly, True Grit and The Social Network are better films.

You can read Part Two here!

Weekly Art Roundup

For a week that actually had a couple days of no art work, I turned out quite a number of finished pieces!

First off is a subdued rendering of Illyana Rasputin - Magik (better known as the younger sister of X-Man Colossus).

(Reference picture here: http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/77/215906-127374-illyana-rasputin.jpg)

Second is my most recent work, a self-portrait based on a picture from two years ago. This is the first "photo realistic" coloring project I've attempted and I'm quite happy with the results.

Third is a drawing of X-Man Psylocke done by my talented friend, Alicia. She gave me permission to color it, and I definitely had fun doing so!

While parts of the forth piece remain problematic, this was a good exercise in action poses. It's a duel in a telepathic landscape by Jean Grey and Emma Frost. The background is a photo from my Virginia adventures that I tweaked around.

(Reference photo here: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3498/4054987257_230ac05332_b.jpg)

Lastly is a more cartoonish style rendering of three X-Men members. Featured below are Pixie (Megan Gwynn), Rogue (Anna Marie Raven) and Jubilee (Jubilation Lee) on a shopping trip to the mall. Thanks to Alicia and Andy for giving me some constructive criticism on the proportions!