Archive for the ‘Something to Think About’ Category

Are rebellious teenage girls like Jenny (Carey Mulligan) part of an on-screen trend? If so, what's behind that trend?

Between last October and now there have been several high-profile movies released that touch upon the subject of teenage girls trying to fight to avoid their planned futures – or to be more accurate, their futures which others have planned for them. Some examples of these movies are An Education, Whip It, and the recently released Alice in Wonderland.

Jenny (Carey Mulligan), the lead girl in An Education, sees herself as different from the other girls in her high school class, perhaps in terms of maturity, worldliness, intelligence, or simply personal goals. Unlike the other girls in her class she, like so many teenagers, begins to show contempt for the scholastic system within which she sits. Told to be ladylike and that her education is of the utmost importance, Jenny tires of hearing how the only way to success is through the strictly mapped pathway that the education system provides. As a result she rebels against structure and experiments with uncertainty. Likewise, Alice (Mia Wasikowska) is trying to avoid a marriage that both her mother and society have set up for her, either ignorant or indifferent to the fact that she has no romantic feelings for her suitor. The sole rationale behind the union is that she is both young and attractive and her fiancé-to-be is financially comfortable. But worse, Alice is expected to bear the young man’s children so as to fulfill her social role as a woman. Naturally, when she finds herself falling down the rabbit hole and trapped again within the world of Wonderland, she’s not very eager to get home.

Both of these films touch on the same subject occurring at different time periods (Jenny the 1960s, Alice the Victorian era – both in England), which is the illumination of the social role of young women and their rebellion against that role. The question becomes: why do these movies – released within months of each other – ask for our interest in this matter? Is it that the issue is so inescapably attributed to our conception of the average teenager? Moreover, is the issue so inescapably attributed to our conception of the average teenage girl? Bliss (Ellen Page), the main protagonist in Drew Barrymore’s Whip It, is forced to deal with wanting a different future than what her mother has planned for her (roller derby vs. beauty pageants). It would appear that the society within which Bliss resides is not pressuring her to fulfill any kind of specific social role, but she nevertheless feels naturally compelled to resist being led on any path that she herself has not devised. If these representations of teenage girls, depicted across three different time periods, are indeed intended to be considered authentic and representative of the archetype they illustrate, then one must ask what the relevancy is in bringing these characters to our attention at this point in time. Read the rest of this entry »

James Cameron's "Avatar" is the obvious pick for Best Picture, but Kathryn Bigelow's "The Hurt Locker" is just as likely to win

We’ve reached the conclusion to our Oscar Countdown! Below is our analysis of the last two categories. You can find the nominees for Best Director listed under their respective films for easy navigation. Our writers Clifford Bugle and Marisa Carpico collaborated on this final post to our Countdown to ensure that the most amount of thought went into it. We hope you enjoy the Oscars, and it’s not too late to tell us what you think! Send us your thoughts.

Best Picture and Director

We’ve concluded that the science fiction epic Avatar and poignant war drama The Hurt Locker have an equal chance of winning the Oscar for Best Picture, but it’s interesting to figure exactly why that is. Read below to find out why they’re favored to win, and what other nominees might frog leap them to take home the gold statuette. Read the rest of this entry »

It's neck and neck between Sandra Bullock and Helen Mirren for the Best Leading Actress Oscar, but Bullock slightly leads thanks to awards by Critic's Choice, Golden Globes, and SAG

It’s almost time! Going through the final few categories will hopefully help you get in the mood for tomorrow night’s festivities, which are sure to be as exciting as ever. Enjoy our newest analysis!

Also See: Best Supporting Actress, Best Supporting Actor, Best Leading Actor, Best Original Screenplay

Best Actress in a Leading Role

This year’s Best Leading Actress pool is filled to the brim with deserving talent and performances, arguably more so than usual. What isn’t unusual is that it’s a tight race for who is actually going to win the gold statuette. The competition is stiff, but it would appear that the two leaders are Sandra Bullock and Helen Mirren, followed closely by Meryl Streep. Bringing up the rear is, of course, the younger two of the nominees, Carey Mulligan and Gabourey Sidibe, respectfully. Helen Mirren’s performance is said to be the most powerful, however Bullock has earned the majority of the Leading Actress awards leading up to the Academy Awards. Read the rest of this entry »

The Coen Brothers are likely to earn another writing Oscar for their film "A Serious Man," but have stiff competition with Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds" and Mark Boal's "The Hurt Locker"

Continuing our breakdown of the major categories for this year’s 82nd annual Academy Awards, here is our analysis of the nominees eligible to receive the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay.

Also See: Best Supporting Actor, Best Leading Actor, Best Supporting Actress

Best Original Screenplay

The Golden Globes are often a useful bellwether, but since the Hollywood Foreign Press doesn’t separate Original and Adapted Screenplays, Up in the Air’s win there only suggests the outcome of the Adapted Screenplay category at the Oscars.  Quentin Tarantino won the Critic’s Choice for his Inglourious Basterds screenplay so he has a good chance of winning.  However, Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, who have two previous screenplay Oscars for No Country for Old Men and Fargo, have just as strong a chance for A Serious Man.  Moreover, they won with the National Board of Review and the National Society of Film Critics so they may edge out Tarantino for the win.  Mark Boal’s powerful screenplay for The Hurt Locker could pull a surprise win since it beat the Coens at the Writers Guild and the winners there typically win the Oscar as well.  Less likely would be a win for Up which, though emotionally touching, may not be able to compete with the more serious fare offered by the other screenplays.  The least likely winner would be Oren Moverman and Alessandro Camon’s screenplay for The Messenger, which, though powerful, is the nominee that has received the least nominations from other prestigious bodies.
Read the rest of this entry »

Christopher Plummer is this year's frontrunner for the Best Supporting Actor Oscar.

Continuing our Countdown to The Oscars, we are pleased to present our analysis of the Best Supporting Actor category. Like with this column’s previous entries, we examine each nominee’s chances for earning the esteemed Academy Award so that you the reader will have an idea of what to expect come time for the ceremony on March 7th. We here at Movie-Thoughts like to spur debate, so let us know what you think! Tell us if you agree, disagree, and why. In the end, it’s all for fun anyways, right?

Also see: Best Supporting Actress, Best Actor

Best Supporting Actor

We find that this year Christopher Plummer is the most likely to win because of the combination of his age/long tenure as an actor, the quality of his performance, the weight of his performance, the novelty that this is his first Oscar nomination, and the fact that the only thing he has decreasing his odds are the strong suites of the other nominees. Meanwhile, all the other candidates have various issues that could anchor their dreams of delivering a teary-eyed acceptance speech. Critical and/or press momentum haven’t been playing much of a role with this particular category, with the exception that The Lovely Bones (for which Stanley Tucci is nominated) is the only film relevant to this category that has received overwhelmingly negative reviews. With all of this said, let’s get to it! Read the rest of this entry »

Jeff Bridges, who has four nominations under his belt, is this year's front-runner for Best Lead Actor for his powerful performance in "Crazy Heart"

Continuing our analyses of the top categories for the upcoming Academy Awards, here is an in-depth look at the nominees up for Best Actor in a Leading Role by our own Marisa Carpico. Tell us what you think!

Also see Best Supporting Actress

Best Actor in a Leading Role

Jeff Bridges already won the Screen Actor’s Guild Award and the Golden Globe for his role in Crazy Heart, so he’s expected to win the Oscar as well.  However, he faces some strong competition from Jeremy Renner, who won an award from the National Board of Review, for his role in The Hurt Locker.  If Bridges and Renner don’t win, the next most likely candidate is George Clooney for his charismatic performance in Up in the Air.  Surprisingly, Colin Firth’s powerful performance in A Single Man gives him an advantage over Oscar-veteran Morgan Freeman, whose portrayal as Nelson Mandela is impressive, but his nomination wasn’t exactly a considered a sure thing so he is the least likely to win.
Read the rest of this entry »

Jeremy Renner as danger-addicted SFC William James in "The Hurt Locker"

In looking closer at some of the movies released this past year, another connection has revealed itself between two films that on the surface could not be more different. Fantastic Mr. Fox and The Hurt Locker might appear to have nothing in common, with one being an animated feature involving social relationships and animals and the other involving bomb disarming in the Iraq War, but a connection exists between the two films’ main male characters: Mr. Fox (George Clooney) and SFC William James (Jeremy Renner).

Both characters reveal that their personalities revel in danger, needing it’s presence to withhold a sense of fulfillment in their occupations (for Mr. Fox it’s stealing chickens and cider, for William it’s disarming bombs during wartime). Perhaps this need for danger is a modification of the Male Ideal offered by Charles Reich, about which he explains that a man’s value is “derived from the function he performs for society, and whose satisfaction lies in how well he performs his job. Men dominated by technique and training [take] seriously the meritocracy of ability and accomplishment, dedicated to work [towards] goals beyond the individual.” However, I would argue that both characters do not share the same sense of social pressure that Reich’s definition of the Male Ideal implies. So, the “need” for danger must be spawned internally – perhaps within the psyche? Read the rest of this entry »

This is only Mo'Nique's first nomination, but her wins with the Golden Globes, National Society of Film Critics, and SAG gives her the most momentum

Here at Movie-Thoughts we’re taking it upon ourselves to analyze the nominees for this year’s Academy Awards, figuring out who has the best chance to win their category. We’ll be examining major categories like Best Picture and Best Director, but leading up to these we’ll also examine categories like Best Screenplay and Best Actor. Our Marisa Carpico starts us off with the following evaluation.

Best Supporting Actress

Considering she’s won a Golden Globe, a Screen Actors Guild Award and a Critic’s Choice Award, Mo’Nique is the most likely candidate to win.  If by some shocking turn of events Mo’Nique loses, there’s no telling who could win.  Vera Farmiga’s beguiling performance in Up in the Air is a likely front-runner.  Penélope Cruz is an Oscar favorite, but her role in Nine is far too similar to her Vicky Christina Barcelona character, for which she won the award last year.  Maggie Gyllenhaal gave an interesting performance in Crazy Heart, but it’s the weakest of the group.  The dark horse in this category is Anna Kendrick.  Despite a show-stealing performance in Up in the Air, Kendrick’s youth acts against her and she has plenty of time for another nomination.
Read the rest of this entry »

Actor Enver Gjokaj, a man who Marisa says is one to keep an eye on because of his impressive range

We here at Movie-Thoughts find it very interesting to keep tabs on actors throughout their careers, especially from the time when they make their big break to when they become a full-fledged star. Below is a list of 7 actors and actresses from movies and/or television shows that our writer Marisa Carpico contests are worth keeping a close eye on, because you’re bound to see more of them in the future. Some names you might recognize, as they’ve been in the professional acting arena for several years, but they might not have thus far had the kind of notoriety that propels the gifted few into the “A” Class of Hollywood.

————————————————————————————————

Lea Michele: Glee fans will know her as the borderline-obnoxious overachiever, Rachel from Fox’s hit show, but before she lusted over the cute quarterback, she lusted over the cute rebel in the Tony Award-winning Broadway musical Spring Awakening.  As a successful Broadway actress with plays like Awakening, for which she was nominated for a Drama Desk Award, and Les Misérables on her résumé, Michele clearly has talent.  Her abilities are on display in every episode of Glee where she lends her incredible vocals to tracks like “Don’t Stop Believing” and “My Life Would Suck Without You,” both of which had strong performances on the Billboard Top 100 Chart.  However, though her singing is certainly excellent, her acting is just as interesting.  During her show-stopping performance of “Don’t Rain on My Parade” from Funny Girl during the “Sectionals” episode, Michele lent the song an energy and abandon that made her character’s desperate need for fame evident.  Michele’s skill at bringing Rachel to the point of unbearable, but always making her vulnerable and talented enough to keep viewers from hating her is likely what garnered her a Golden Globe nomination.  The big challenge for Michele in 2010 will be to find roles that show off more than just her vocal talents. Read the rest of this entry »

Are we now actively seeking to blur the line between man and machine - as this poster suggests - or do we still fear what could happen if we do (a la Star Trek's Borg)?

By my count there have been three movies released this year that involve the ability to remote control/embody a person or robot (Surrogates, Gamer, and Avatar). All three films deal with this idea differently, but the fact that they were all released within only a few months of each other is intriguing. Somewhere inside these films could lie a connection that says more than any one of them does individually.

In the case of Surrogates, the film makes an argument against the use of humanized robots as a means of living, criticizing in a roundabout way that people (particularly Americans) are on a path to losing their natural desire for human contact. Some might say that living through a robot isn’t actually living (see our review). All in all, the general opinion of the film regarding technology that enables people to avoid actual physical contact is negative to say the least.

Gamer‘s usage of the remote embodiment concept is quite different. For starters, there are no robots; people control other people (prisoners) for use in a virtual videogame experience. So in other words, certain people were able to control other people who had been dehumanized to the point where their lives were worth nothing more than a subjective entertainment value. Obviously, this film’s message is not congruent to Surrogates‘. However, that the message involves the idea of dehumanization by way of technological means does give the two films at least one connection.

Avatar also promotes a different theme with its incorporation of the remote embodiment concept. Instead of making a case against the use of avatars (which in this case are aliens instead of humans), the film actually endorses their utilization. This is most likely due to the film’s apparent theme (suggested in our review), which proposes that an avatar is in fact an allegory for modern telecommunication technologies, and that using such resources ought to be used for the purposes of learning about people different from yourself as opposed to just seeking out like-minded, comparable individuals who aren’t liable to disagree with you. One can reasonably suggest from this that Avatar‘s use of remote embodiment is not about dehumanization but of rehumanization. Thus, those humans in the film who choose to utilize available technology for this purpose are considered the protagonists, and those who do not are considered the antagonists.

If only one thing can be said to connect all three films, it is that they all seem to criticize/warn us about the dangerous path we are on that could lead us to, by way of newer and newer technology, dehumanizing ourselves as well as others. However, Avatar‘s greater message allows us to consider this path less as a straight shot towards doom and more as a double-edged sword. And so, there is no agreement of what will happen, but only an agreement of what can happen. It appears that it is up to us as members of an increasingly technological society to A) retain our basic humanity by not allowing advanced telecommunications to completely substitute direct human contact, and B) use our technological resources to expand the breadth of our humanity by seeking to learn from and understand the different and “unusual.” Personally, it seems that – based on the subject matter of recent sci-fi/action films – there is an increasing trepidation with our society’s increasingly advancing technology, as even this past summer’s Terminator: Salvation sought to ask what will happen if the line between man and machine (i.e. technology) is blurred. The question of whether man as he is defined is inexorably linked to his technology is certainly a relevant one, but alas it is a question for another time.

What do you make of these three films? What conclusions do you draw when considering them connected in some way? Tell us what you think.