Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:15 pm
Rachel Getting Married (2008): Better than expected. One of those films I end up wondering why did I expected so long to see. Demme was good a s a director but some times I felt he was trying too hard to get that "indie-effect" on the film. Hathaway deserved her nod, no questions about it. I kinda feel sad right now her performance gained momentum way too early just to loose it by the end of the season. Had it been released later would had she been the eventual winner? Right now I like more her performance than Winslet's (for the winner role, still think Winslet was the Best Actress that year but for RR). A nod for Rosemary DeWitt should have occurred... and Winger was great too, a nice comeback but her role was (I think elegantly and smartly) underdeveloped. 7,5/10
Slumdog Millionaire (2008): Second view... hadn't seen it since I watched it on big screen. Guess I liked it a bit more, specially cause back then my expectations were too high and I ended up with mixed feelings towards it. Still think the cinematography and the sound award are way too underserved and a proof that everything that gets overpraised ends up with a dubious place in history. 8,5/10
Ken Park (2002): Disturbing, yes... I was disturbed by some scenes but specially because I wasn't sure what the director was trying to do... Clark and Lachman, the directing team were conciously making a film to impress with underage sex and with highly unlike situation like the one involving the extremely christian father. At some points I even remembered Salo for that matter. Interesting acting by the some of the kids but it failed to deliver something to me... 6/10
Inglorious Basterds (2009): Great... finally a good film. The only way this years's Oscar night can get interesting is by shaking the expected scenario. No war between critics's The Hurt Locker nor mass friendly Avatar. They have the chance to award a proven autheur, a director that's going to be remembered by his very personal signature in the future. This film is very Tarantinesque, meaning that he hasn't compromised his view as a Director in order to get respected (remember some efforts by Scott and the now loved Scorsese?)but it's friendly enough to be considered a Best Picture. Goofy? yes... I actually kind of felt that something was wrong in the end... maybe a punchline in the end saying "it would have been great if everything happened this way" or something but to have a fable based on actual events and then lead it towards something that doesn't make any sense might hurt its chances. Nonetheless, it's a great film. And I do think that Pitt's not in his best. 8,5/10
Star Trek (2009): Man this was entertaining, a serious entertainment. I love films that I can "enjoy" and this was one of them. Sadly, we are on a year with ten nominees and this film has been already cited among the best of the years. To explain myself I must say that I love films to eat popconr, and I actually can agree with the academy when they pick up some summer films among their best of the year (ala Gladiator, Titanic, and so on). But in a regular year this would have NEVER been in the race for best picture and the fact that it actually is just proves that the 10 nominees are far from necessary. By its own merits is a great film I highly recommend and that I certainly would see again! 7,5/10
Edited By HarryGoldfarb on 1264353453
Slumdog Millionaire (2008): Second view... hadn't seen it since I watched it on big screen. Guess I liked it a bit more, specially cause back then my expectations were too high and I ended up with mixed feelings towards it. Still think the cinematography and the sound award are way too underserved and a proof that everything that gets overpraised ends up with a dubious place in history. 8,5/10
Ken Park (2002): Disturbing, yes... I was disturbed by some scenes but specially because I wasn't sure what the director was trying to do... Clark and Lachman, the directing team were conciously making a film to impress with underage sex and with highly unlike situation like the one involving the extremely christian father. At some points I even remembered Salo for that matter. Interesting acting by the some of the kids but it failed to deliver something to me... 6/10
Inglorious Basterds (2009): Great... finally a good film. The only way this years's Oscar night can get interesting is by shaking the expected scenario. No war between critics's The Hurt Locker nor mass friendly Avatar. They have the chance to award a proven autheur, a director that's going to be remembered by his very personal signature in the future. This film is very Tarantinesque, meaning that he hasn't compromised his view as a Director in order to get respected (remember some efforts by Scott and the now loved Scorsese?)but it's friendly enough to be considered a Best Picture. Goofy? yes... I actually kind of felt that something was wrong in the end... maybe a punchline in the end saying "it would have been great if everything happened this way" or something but to have a fable based on actual events and then lead it towards something that doesn't make any sense might hurt its chances. Nonetheless, it's a great film. And I do think that Pitt's not in his best. 8,5/10
Star Trek (2009): Man this was entertaining, a serious entertainment. I love films that I can "enjoy" and this was one of them. Sadly, we are on a year with ten nominees and this film has been already cited among the best of the years. To explain myself I must say that I love films to eat popconr, and I actually can agree with the academy when they pick up some summer films among their best of the year (ala Gladiator, Titanic, and so on). But in a regular year this would have NEVER been in the race for best picture and the fact that it actually is just proves that the 10 nominees are far from necessary. By its own merits is a great film I highly recommend and that I certainly would see again! 7,5/10
Edited By HarryGoldfarb on 1264353453