Friday, January 31, 2014
Super Bowl Pick
Haven't been this excited about the Super Bowl in a long time. Best offense versus best defence. Northern climate. Formidable factors. Picking the Broncos. Can't wait for the game.
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Captain Phillips
Different worlds collide in Paul Greengrass's objective Captain Phillips, one wherein multiple possibilities exist yet the competition to obtain them is intense, the other, qualified by extremely limited options, life threatening and treacherous, suffocatingly sane.
Captain Richard Phillips (Tom Hanks) rose through the ranks according to a different historical set of his world's cultural economic indicators, which he describes early on during a conversation with his wife (Catherine Keener as Andrea Phillips).
Muse (Barkhad Abdi) then appears in present-day Somalia, a person competing as Phillips had in his youth, but within a market in which standing-out requires fire power, and impacts are made through violent confrontation.
The film doesn't judge.
Both Phillips and Muse have jobs to do and they do them.
Phillips's probing hard-hitting questions boldly challenge the ways in which Muse earns his living, but Muse competently defends his volatile endeavours, redefining impoverishment in the process.
Neither of them concedes.
Neither of them backs down.
The film's a realistic open-minded level-headed examination of how individuals from different nations go about putting food on the table.
Muse does what he can to be Captain Phillips.
Captain Phillips offers constructive recourse.
Captain Richard Phillips (Tom Hanks) rose through the ranks according to a different historical set of his world's cultural economic indicators, which he describes early on during a conversation with his wife (Catherine Keener as Andrea Phillips).
Muse (Barkhad Abdi) then appears in present-day Somalia, a person competing as Phillips had in his youth, but within a market in which standing-out requires fire power, and impacts are made through violent confrontation.
The film doesn't judge.
Both Phillips and Muse have jobs to do and they do them.
Phillips's probing hard-hitting questions boldly challenge the ways in which Muse earns his living, but Muse competently defends his volatile endeavours, redefining impoverishment in the process.
Neither of them concedes.
Neither of them backs down.
The film's a realistic open-minded level-headed examination of how individuals from different nations go about putting food on the table.
Muse does what he can to be Captain Phillips.
Captain Phillips offers constructive recourse.
Friday, January 24, 2014
Her
Permissive inquisitive supple algorithms congenially contravene age-old courting rituals to ambiguously nurture an amorous electronic aesthetic in Spike Jonze's Her, wherein the app deluge is convivially levied, romanticized as a crush, and poetically prorated.
Her offered me new insights into romantic films.
It's not just that they provide heartfelt diagnoses regarding the ways in which different people express their feelings, it's that they can also take contemporary cybernetic enclosures, themselves revealing significant structural shifts in practical cultural interpersonal relations, and affectively normalize them, an extended divergent 21st century version of Data (Brent Spiner) hooking up with Tasha Yar (Denise Crosby), without utilizing monsters or excessive stubbornness, while still examining issues of be/longing and fidelity, and conscientiously theorizing about what it means to be in love.
That's totally romantic.
Simultaneously virginal and promiscuous, Her socially demonstrates the resonant festive frequency of an open-minded ceremonial cooperative, broken up into jaunty quotidian workplace conversations, support networks, and intuitive streamlines.
It asks, is it odd that Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) doesn't let himself go, or would his life have been more fun if he had more intently, or is he right to embrace a more traditional lifestyle, preferring the contact of person-to-person multiplicities?
Thereby challenging its viewer's conceptions of in/formality.
Subjective principalities, digitized, anew.
What are those Belle & Sebastian lines from The Model, "the vision was a masterpiece of comic timing, you wouldn't laugh at all"?
They fit quite well with Her.
Although the perfect mom video game made me laugh.
Surprised Joaquin Phoenix wasn't nominated for best actor.
Her offered me new insights into romantic films.
It's not just that they provide heartfelt diagnoses regarding the ways in which different people express their feelings, it's that they can also take contemporary cybernetic enclosures, themselves revealing significant structural shifts in practical cultural interpersonal relations, and affectively normalize them, an extended divergent 21st century version of Data (Brent Spiner) hooking up with Tasha Yar (Denise Crosby), without utilizing monsters or excessive stubbornness, while still examining issues of be/longing and fidelity, and conscientiously theorizing about what it means to be in love.
That's totally romantic.
Simultaneously virginal and promiscuous, Her socially demonstrates the resonant festive frequency of an open-minded ceremonial cooperative, broken up into jaunty quotidian workplace conversations, support networks, and intuitive streamlines.
It asks, is it odd that Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) doesn't let himself go, or would his life have been more fun if he had more intently, or is he right to embrace a more traditional lifestyle, preferring the contact of person-to-person multiplicities?
Thereby challenging its viewer's conceptions of in/formality.
Subjective principalities, digitized, anew.
What are those Belle & Sebastian lines from The Model, "the vision was a masterpiece of comic timing, you wouldn't laugh at all"?
They fit quite well with Her.
Although the perfect mom video game made me laugh.
Surprised Joaquin Phoenix wasn't nominated for best actor.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
August: Osage County
The loss of a family member begets inconsolable griefs and vitriolic censure as three generations representing different familial traditions gather in mourning.
Character development is dynamically and interactively adhered to as historical ideological super(e)latives contend.
Edges are sharpened.
Balance obliterates.
Pharmaceuticals fuel a tumultuous tirade whose sneering strikes and belittling gripes nurture a bellicose backlash whose ominous offensive jeopardizes a solemn ceremonial meal's digestion.
Rancour.
Heartache.
Cast iron confederacies.
August: Osage County isn't that concerned with subtlety, although the family depicted have spent their lives refraining from using direct forms of communication, and the symbolism in the background of the sequence where Charlie Aiken (Chris Cooper) greets his son (Benedict Cumberbatch) highlights this forthcoming transformation, this move from eggshells to shrapnel.
Early on there's a shot depicting Charlie and Little Charlie within their environment at large and you can see the profile of a Native American Chief in the background.
Subsequent shots zero-in-on the two but the profile of the Chief remains.
I thought the inclusion of the profile would have been stronger if it had been left out of the subsequent shots, until I noticed how it related to the film's greater purpose.
The film subtly and not so subtly examines contemporary and historical perspectives regarding relations between Native Americans and those descended from Europeans.
By first keeping the profile of the Native American Chief in the background, the tragic nature of the dismissive attitudes concerning these relations are reflected.
But keeping the profile in the following shots reflects the empathetic attitudes as well since the profile doesn't disappear, while also foreshadowing the film's overt move from reserved ornamentation to full-on acrimonious onslaught.
The film's embattled matriarch (Meryl Streep as Violet Weston) has fallen apart partially because the traditions she held dear in her troubled childhood have dramatically changed, and her children and grandchildren abide by different cultural codes.
Her last scene shows her seeking comfort from her Native American nurse Johnna Monevata (Misty Upham), whom she's bigotedly dismissed at points, who proceeds to comfort her, possibly understanding what she's going through, painstakingly living on higher ground, higher ground which has been generationally transformed and preserved by some, through an immaculate application of the golden rule.
It's a brilliant synthesis.
Written by Tracy Letts.
Character development is dynamically and interactively adhered to as historical ideological super(e)latives contend.
Edges are sharpened.
Balance obliterates.
Pharmaceuticals fuel a tumultuous tirade whose sneering strikes and belittling gripes nurture a bellicose backlash whose ominous offensive jeopardizes a solemn ceremonial meal's digestion.
Rancour.
Heartache.
Cast iron confederacies.
August: Osage County isn't that concerned with subtlety, although the family depicted have spent their lives refraining from using direct forms of communication, and the symbolism in the background of the sequence where Charlie Aiken (Chris Cooper) greets his son (Benedict Cumberbatch) highlights this forthcoming transformation, this move from eggshells to shrapnel.
Early on there's a shot depicting Charlie and Little Charlie within their environment at large and you can see the profile of a Native American Chief in the background.
Subsequent shots zero-in-on the two but the profile of the Chief remains.
I thought the inclusion of the profile would have been stronger if it had been left out of the subsequent shots, until I noticed how it related to the film's greater purpose.
The film subtly and not so subtly examines contemporary and historical perspectives regarding relations between Native Americans and those descended from Europeans.
By first keeping the profile of the Native American Chief in the background, the tragic nature of the dismissive attitudes concerning these relations are reflected.
But keeping the profile in the following shots reflects the empathetic attitudes as well since the profile doesn't disappear, while also foreshadowing the film's overt move from reserved ornamentation to full-on acrimonious onslaught.
The film's embattled matriarch (Meryl Streep as Violet Weston) has fallen apart partially because the traditions she held dear in her troubled childhood have dramatically changed, and her children and grandchildren abide by different cultural codes.
Her last scene shows her seeking comfort from her Native American nurse Johnna Monevata (Misty Upham), whom she's bigotedly dismissed at points, who proceeds to comfort her, possibly understanding what she's going through, painstakingly living on higher ground, higher ground which has been generationally transformed and preserved by some, through an immaculate application of the golden rule.
It's a brilliant synthesis.
Written by Tracy Letts.
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
The Wolf of Wall Street
What to make of this one.
Comparing Scorsese's Wolf of Wall Street to Oliver Stone's Wall Street could generate some compelling comparative data, in regards to their historical censures.
Has this particular epoch enabled Scorsese to direct without limits, to go beyond Seth MacFarlane and Adam Reed, to freely proceed with neither caution nor complaint in an excessive wanton capitalistic cynosure, to gratuitously salute the golden age of sleaze?
He tests you within.
He bombards you with luscious images of in/accessible voluptuous beauties, interspersing tips on illegally playing the stock market, and then asks you whether or not you're capable of following the lecture, playing with the process of narrativization throughout.
Tantalizing tutelage?
He takes a group of guys who grew up together, installs one as leader after he learns how to make enormous sums of money, they all then make enormous sums of money, and they basically never leave high school for the rest of their lives, and not one of them even so much as ends up in the hospital.
There are funny moments.
But why they needed 180 minutes to retool this tale is beyond me.
There's just no Gravity in this film.
That's arguably the point, and it's presented as a best case example of raunchy sophomoric absurdity.
But there's too much exploitation for me.
It is fun getting to know smart women.
There's one female stockbroker who succeeds but her role's tacked-on, she's belittled in the end, and is initially dependent on the generosity of men.
However, like American Hustle, it's filled with tips on how to avoid being scammed.
Comparing Scorsese's Wolf of Wall Street to Oliver Stone's Wall Street could generate some compelling comparative data, in regards to their historical censures.
Has this particular epoch enabled Scorsese to direct without limits, to go beyond Seth MacFarlane and Adam Reed, to freely proceed with neither caution nor complaint in an excessive wanton capitalistic cynosure, to gratuitously salute the golden age of sleaze?
He tests you within.
He bombards you with luscious images of in/accessible voluptuous beauties, interspersing tips on illegally playing the stock market, and then asks you whether or not you're capable of following the lecture, playing with the process of narrativization throughout.
Tantalizing tutelage?
He takes a group of guys who grew up together, installs one as leader after he learns how to make enormous sums of money, they all then make enormous sums of money, and they basically never leave high school for the rest of their lives, and not one of them even so much as ends up in the hospital.
There are funny moments.
But why they needed 180 minutes to retool this tale is beyond me.
There's just no Gravity in this film.
That's arguably the point, and it's presented as a best case example of raunchy sophomoric absurdity.
But there's too much exploitation for me.
It is fun getting to know smart women.
There's one female stockbroker who succeeds but her role's tacked-on, she's belittled in the end, and is initially dependent on the generosity of men.
However, like American Hustle, it's filled with tips on how to avoid being scammed.
Tian zhu ding (A Touch of Sin)
Both the wealthy and the impoverished receive their fair share of unexpected comeuppances in these loosely intertwined grotesquely plighted a/morality tales, presented en masse as Zhangke Jia's Tian zhu ding (A Touch of Sin), guilty, of having sacrificed.
After the first two vignettes, requisite apprehensions immobilize one in regards to phases 3 and 4, which have the potential to be just as satirically maniacal, just as starkly im/balanced.
Questions of right and wrong atmospherically attire the violence with cold dreaded ethical extinctions, some of the characters not necessarily lacking options, yet inimically immersed in their own substantive slather.
Despair.
Foraged feelings fostered.
Values obliging concomitant abst(r)ains.
Nebulous nuts and bolts.
Complicit chaotic cankers.
Dissonant diabolic docility.
Interactive entropy.
So many reactions.
Consequences aplenty.
My eyes.
Tian zhu ding's so very unhappy.
Nothing's easy in this one.
After the first two vignettes, requisite apprehensions immobilize one in regards to phases 3 and 4, which have the potential to be just as satirically maniacal, just as starkly im/balanced.
Questions of right and wrong atmospherically attire the violence with cold dreaded ethical extinctions, some of the characters not necessarily lacking options, yet inimically immersed in their own substantive slather.
Despair.
Foraged feelings fostered.
Values obliging concomitant abst(r)ains.
Nebulous nuts and bolts.
Complicit chaotic cankers.
Dissonant diabolic docility.
Interactive entropy.
So many reactions.
Consequences aplenty.
My eyes.
Tian zhu ding's so very unhappy.
Nothing's easy in this one.
Friday, January 17, 2014
NFL Conference Championships Picks
New England Patriots/Denver Broncos: it doesn't get any better than this. Patriots versus Broncos in the Conference Championships. Both had great seasons. Both have great teams. Both picked up huge wins last weekend. Picking Denver. Broncos full-speed ahead.
San Francisco 49ers/Seattle Seahawks: if a game could be better than that being played between Denver and New England, this one would be it. Once again, both teams had great seasons, picked up huge wins last weekend, demonstrating that they know how to win in the playoffs. Seattle crushed the 49ers in week 2 but San Francisco came back to beat them in week 14. They split their regular season meetings in 2012 as well, the Seahawks crushing San Francisco in Seattle both times. Seattle has the better defence but the 49ers have more playoff experience. The Seahawks know how to win with the lead, but can they come back late in the game down by 10? If San Francisco can gain such a lead, I think they're headed back to the Super Bowl. Picking the 49ers in one of if-not-the biggest NFC West playoff game/s ever.
Too much excitement for one day.
San Francisco 49ers/Seattle Seahawks: if a game could be better than that being played between Denver and New England, this one would be it. Once again, both teams had great seasons, picked up huge wins last weekend, demonstrating that they know how to win in the playoffs. Seattle crushed the 49ers in week 2 but San Francisco came back to beat them in week 14. They split their regular season meetings in 2012 as well, the Seahawks crushing San Francisco in Seattle both times. Seattle has the better defence but the 49ers have more playoff experience. The Seahawks know how to win with the lead, but can they come back late in the game down by 10? If San Francisco can gain such a lead, I think they're headed back to the Super Bowl. Picking the 49ers in one of if-not-the biggest NFC West playoff game/s ever.
Too much excitement for one day.
Monday, January 13, 2014
American Hustle
Serious sustained elusively sentimental cirrhosis, soberly conceived and symptomatically executed, the established bland underground beacon coerced into serving an opportunistic senseless gold digger, retentively reliant yet arrogantly exploitative, the combination's blinds leaving him susceptible to implosive cracks, their fissures directly proportional to their aggrandizements, seismically de/centralizing, corpus allumé.
Feminine elements complicate and complement the messy procedure as pressures coruscate emotional embers, and logical jealousies prevaricate relational rationalities.
Should this film be taken seriously?
On the one hand, as Irving Rosenfeld's (Christian Bale) character, the intelligent flexible streetwise devoted husband scam artist, suggests, we definitely should be, as his livelihood and familial security depends on it, even though he's a criminal.
On the other, as Richie DeMaso's (Bradley Cooper) character, the brash insubordinate wild-eyed FBI agent, suggests, we definitely should not be, as his reckless and life threatening decisions are simply too preposterous to take, even though he's enforcing the law.
The hilarious repeated transitional scene which sees the camera shoot the ground floor of American Hustle's FBI headquarters and then rapidly shift its focus to the top, suggests that David O. Russell is seriously playfully shining (editing by Alan Baumgarten, Jay Cassidy, and Crispin Struthers).
His beams brightly illuminate upright politician Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner), a true person of the people and loving family man, tricked into accepting bribes.
Ethically, I find it highly problematic when politicians take bribes to stimulate economies through casino construction since casinos can and have ruin/ed the lives of many a low-income worker.
Real worldly, a lot of people don't seem to care about these realities anymore and think being exploited is great.
Rosenfeld doesn't like being exploited although he earns a living exploiting people.
He feels guilty for his actions in relation to Polito's eventual arrest, because even though casino creation is exploitative, Polito is acting on the people's behalf, according to the film's cavalier combustion.
Great film on many levels.
But in terms of bribing politicians to achieve specific ends, it fails to reflectively hustle.
A suave sensational scam?
Not persuasive enough of a play.
But it does offer effective indirect advice on how to avoid being scammed and the script's excellent (written by David O. Russell and Eric Warren Singer).
Which works.
Feminine elements complicate and complement the messy procedure as pressures coruscate emotional embers, and logical jealousies prevaricate relational rationalities.
Should this film be taken seriously?
On the one hand, as Irving Rosenfeld's (Christian Bale) character, the intelligent flexible streetwise devoted husband scam artist, suggests, we definitely should be, as his livelihood and familial security depends on it, even though he's a criminal.
On the other, as Richie DeMaso's (Bradley Cooper) character, the brash insubordinate wild-eyed FBI agent, suggests, we definitely should not be, as his reckless and life threatening decisions are simply too preposterous to take, even though he's enforcing the law.
The hilarious repeated transitional scene which sees the camera shoot the ground floor of American Hustle's FBI headquarters and then rapidly shift its focus to the top, suggests that David O. Russell is seriously playfully shining (editing by Alan Baumgarten, Jay Cassidy, and Crispin Struthers).
His beams brightly illuminate upright politician Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner), a true person of the people and loving family man, tricked into accepting bribes.
Ethically, I find it highly problematic when politicians take bribes to stimulate economies through casino construction since casinos can and have ruin/ed the lives of many a low-income worker.
Real worldly, a lot of people don't seem to care about these realities anymore and think being exploited is great.
Rosenfeld doesn't like being exploited although he earns a living exploiting people.
He feels guilty for his actions in relation to Polito's eventual arrest, because even though casino creation is exploitative, Polito is acting on the people's behalf, according to the film's cavalier combustion.
Great film on many levels.
But in terms of bribing politicians to achieve specific ends, it fails to reflectively hustle.
A suave sensational scam?
Not persuasive enough of a play.
But it does offer effective indirect advice on how to avoid being scammed and the script's excellent (written by David O. Russell and Eric Warren Singer).
Which works.
47 Ronin
Unjustly cast out and stripped of their rank, forced to quibble for crumbs, scrap for sustenance, and transcend for trifles, Carl Rinsch's 47 Ronin patiently wait to seek vengeance, the pressures of time motivationally closing in.
Their Lord was betrayed through bewitching and forced to take his own life to maintain his family's honour.
A humble troubled outcast who renounced his demonic tutelage possesses the forbidden knowledge necessary to arm their ascent.
Composed as a group, they unite forthwith, entrusting enlivened artists with their plans, prognosticating as a matter of necessity.
In absolute domains.
Liked what happens in 47 Ronin which takes place in 18th-century Japan more than the film itself, but I respect what it delivers.
It provides a traditional story steeped in loyalty, overflowing with injustices, told in a traditional way, for audiences respectful of said traditions.
It's a true exercise in modesty considering that it doesn't play-up Kai's (Keanu Reeves) demonic abilities even though such a feature may have increased its salutations.
Form working hand-in-hand with content.
Even the mythical beast isn't shown-off.
Restraint.
Their Lord was betrayed through bewitching and forced to take his own life to maintain his family's honour.
A humble troubled outcast who renounced his demonic tutelage possesses the forbidden knowledge necessary to arm their ascent.
Composed as a group, they unite forthwith, entrusting enlivened artists with their plans, prognosticating as a matter of necessity.
In absolute domains.
Liked what happens in 47 Ronin which takes place in 18th-century Japan more than the film itself, but I respect what it delivers.
It provides a traditional story steeped in loyalty, overflowing with injustices, told in a traditional way, for audiences respectful of said traditions.
It's a true exercise in modesty considering that it doesn't play-up Kai's (Keanu Reeves) demonic abilities even though such a feature may have increased its salutations.
Form working hand-in-hand with content.
Even the mythical beast isn't shown-off.
Restraint.
Friday, January 10, 2014
NFL Divisional Round Picks
New Orleans Saints/Seattle Seahawks: interstellar playoff rematch between these two teams, Seattle having finished the 2010 season with a 7 and 9 record, proceeding thereafter to upset the Saints (11 and 5) in the Wild Card round 41 to 36. They met earlier on this year and New Orleans didn't show up, the Seahawks winning 34 to 7. Seattle had the league's best defence and have only lost once at home in the last two years. Their offence also outscored the Saints by 3. New Orleans won their first playoff road game ever last week but have struggled on the road this season. The memory of their disastrous loss at the hands of the Seahawks three years ago may generate enough spirit to overcome this NFC powerhouse, and they're likely studying Seattle's 34 to 28 loss to the Colts in week 5, but it will still be tough to beat Seattle at home. Picking the Seahawks.
Indianapolis Colts/New England Patriots: New England oddly didn't score very many points several times this year and picked up at least three of their wins late in the fourth quarter, Cleveland almost beating them with a last-second field goal. They, once again, demonstrated that they're a formidable franchise lead by some of the league's best, and they're undefeated at home. The Colts are hot having won 6 of their last 8, pulling off a comeback for the ages last weekend against Kansas City, and are a respectable 5 and 3 on the road. The Patriots have won 5 of their last 7 but not very convincingly. Thinking this is a game during which New England's comeback falls short. Taking Indianapolis.
San Francisco 49ers/Carolina Panthers: Carolina finished with the league's second best defence and respectable offensive numbers. They defeated the 49ers 10 to 9 in week 10 and also beat New England and New Orleans. They passed for 190.2 yards per game, ranked 29th in the NFL, but were able to run the ball with more success. They had a light schedule throughout but still competently overcame most of the teams they faced. San Francisco's schedule was tougher and they picked up just as many wins, their passing game actually ranked 30th in the NFL, but with the 3rd strongest rushing attack. The 49ers have won 4 of their last 6 playoff games and therefore know what it's like to overcome playoff pressures. As a franchise, the Panthers have had their share of playoff success, unexpectedly winning big games on many an occasion. Still, methinks San Francisco's too hot, too seasoned, too ready. Big defensive stands could win the game for Carolina, but methinks the 49ers will force them to make too many. Picking San Francisco.
San Diego Chargers/Denver Broncos: San Diego's had a great season and are definitely a strong opponent. They overcame a tough Bengals team last week in a game that didn't end up being so offensively explosive. The Broncos also had a great season. The Broncos also won big games throughout. The Broncos, are prepared, poised and punishing. Picking the Broncos in a solid AFC West playoff matchup. Go Broncos Go!
Indianapolis Colts/New England Patriots: New England oddly didn't score very many points several times this year and picked up at least three of their wins late in the fourth quarter, Cleveland almost beating them with a last-second field goal. They, once again, demonstrated that they're a formidable franchise lead by some of the league's best, and they're undefeated at home. The Colts are hot having won 6 of their last 8, pulling off a comeback for the ages last weekend against Kansas City, and are a respectable 5 and 3 on the road. The Patriots have won 5 of their last 7 but not very convincingly. Thinking this is a game during which New England's comeback falls short. Taking Indianapolis.
San Francisco 49ers/Carolina Panthers: Carolina finished with the league's second best defence and respectable offensive numbers. They defeated the 49ers 10 to 9 in week 10 and also beat New England and New Orleans. They passed for 190.2 yards per game, ranked 29th in the NFL, but were able to run the ball with more success. They had a light schedule throughout but still competently overcame most of the teams they faced. San Francisco's schedule was tougher and they picked up just as many wins, their passing game actually ranked 30th in the NFL, but with the 3rd strongest rushing attack. The 49ers have won 4 of their last 6 playoff games and therefore know what it's like to overcome playoff pressures. As a franchise, the Panthers have had their share of playoff success, unexpectedly winning big games on many an occasion. Still, methinks San Francisco's too hot, too seasoned, too ready. Big defensive stands could win the game for Carolina, but methinks the 49ers will force them to make too many. Picking San Francisco.
San Diego Chargers/Denver Broncos: San Diego's had a great season and are definitely a strong opponent. They overcame a tough Bengals team last week in a game that didn't end up being so offensively explosive. The Broncos also had a great season. The Broncos also won big games throughout. The Broncos, are prepared, poised and punishing. Picking the Broncos in a solid AFC West playoff matchup. Go Broncos Go!
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Inside Llewyn Davis
Inside Llewyn Davis you'll find a staggering conflicted troubadour torn apart by the loss of his musical partner, problematically fazed.
This guy's a bit of a jerk, depicted as an oddball within folk music culture, gifted and heartwarming while performing, troubling and disruptive while doing anything else.
It's like he's a jaded cynical holier-than-thou 90s caricature surrounded by congenial 1960s good spirits, frustrated by his lack of success, overconfident to the point of paralysis.
He always has to be in control.
It's as if the Coen Brothers are playing a joke with Llewyn Davis (Oscar Isaac), presenting a character reminiscent of Five Easy Pieces's Robert Eroica Dupea (Jack Nicholson), assuming their audience will be unconsciously sympathetic, while making him as unsympathetic as possible, hoping people will still refer to him as tragic.
He's given opportunities.
And unlike Dupea, his community has merits to which he can relate.
His loss perhaps prevents him from noticing these merits.
But his attitude suggests that he may have been directly responsible for his loss (which is likely augmenting his malaise).
Jerry Seinfeld's (Jerry Seinfeld) interactions with Kenny Bania (Steve Hytner) offer a constructive parallel, Kenny functioning as the 1960s good spirit living in the 90s, as if Inside Llewyn Davis primarily concerns itself with this comedic dialogue, with elements of The Master's Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) intermixed.
I was hoping he would take off to the Northern wilderness near the end like Dupea in Five Easy Pieces.
Perhaps he did.
John Goodman (Roland Turner) delivers another exceptional performance.
This guy's a bit of a jerk, depicted as an oddball within folk music culture, gifted and heartwarming while performing, troubling and disruptive while doing anything else.
It's like he's a jaded cynical holier-than-thou 90s caricature surrounded by congenial 1960s good spirits, frustrated by his lack of success, overconfident to the point of paralysis.
He always has to be in control.
It's as if the Coen Brothers are playing a joke with Llewyn Davis (Oscar Isaac), presenting a character reminiscent of Five Easy Pieces's Robert Eroica Dupea (Jack Nicholson), assuming their audience will be unconsciously sympathetic, while making him as unsympathetic as possible, hoping people will still refer to him as tragic.
He's given opportunities.
And unlike Dupea, his community has merits to which he can relate.
His loss perhaps prevents him from noticing these merits.
But his attitude suggests that he may have been directly responsible for his loss (which is likely augmenting his malaise).
Jerry Seinfeld's (Jerry Seinfeld) interactions with Kenny Bania (Steve Hytner) offer a constructive parallel, Kenny functioning as the 1960s good spirit living in the 90s, as if Inside Llewyn Davis primarily concerns itself with this comedic dialogue, with elements of The Master's Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) intermixed.
I was hoping he would take off to the Northern wilderness near the end like Dupea in Five Easy Pieces.
Perhaps he did.
John Goodman (Roland Turner) delivers another exceptional performance.
Sunday, January 5, 2014
Cupcake
A poignant famished wanderlust
through blooming metropolic hushes
vectorized discreet tramways
and billowing arched prescient quays
adorn a trivial conception
blueberry bushels brewed in sessions
overflowing with a taste
of modest bombast, floral straits
Incline marooned modifications
time passing cues reforestation
a hunch submerging checkered plots
abbreviated composed thoughts
demystified incendiary
frisky cinnamon contraries
on Saint-Denis there rests a tavern
to satiate the microfathomed.
Pendant la nuit.
through blooming metropolic hushes
vectorized discreet tramways
and billowing arched prescient quays
adorn a trivial conception
blueberry bushels brewed in sessions
overflowing with a taste
of modest bombast, floral straits
Incline marooned modifications
time passing cues reforestation
a hunch submerging checkered plots
abbreviated composed thoughts
demystified incendiary
frisky cinnamon contraries
on Saint-Denis there rests a tavern
to satiate the microfathomed.
Pendant la nuit.
Saturday, January 4, 2014
Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom
Justin Chadwick offers a selective charismatic altruistic account of Nelson Mandela's (Idris Elba) life in Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom.
Significant events from Mandela's heroic trials are qualitatively condensed then narratively harvested.
It unreels at a fast pace but Elba's calm committed confrontational resolve surreally subdues the passage of time, tantalizingly transforming 30 seconds into two-minutes-forty, proactively producing captivating capsules.
A good companion piece for 12 Years a Slave in terms of the differing approaches adopted to biographically elucidate, McQueen cultivating a shifting pyrodactic panorama, Chadwick proceeding more traditionally.
Chadwick doesn't shy away from presenting the difficulties associated with actively pursuing disenfranchised political agendas, and the toll Mandela's sublime idealism takes on his wives and children are dis/comfortingly displayed.
His first wife leaves him but his second never yields in her championing of his cause while he's imprisoned, suffering jail-time and countless indignities consequently.
Their breakup after he's released is perhaps the most unfortunate disengaging of amorous affections I've ever come across.
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela (Naomie Harris) kept the fire burning brightly throughout his 27 years in prison and seeing them part is tragic if not earth shattering.
But Mandela believed in a non-violent working solution and when provided with the opportunity to politically enact one, engaged.
Taking the resultant monumental fallout in stride.
Not a saint, perhaps, but definitely, a person of steel.
Significant events from Mandela's heroic trials are qualitatively condensed then narratively harvested.
It unreels at a fast pace but Elba's calm committed confrontational resolve surreally subdues the passage of time, tantalizingly transforming 30 seconds into two-minutes-forty, proactively producing captivating capsules.
A good companion piece for 12 Years a Slave in terms of the differing approaches adopted to biographically elucidate, McQueen cultivating a shifting pyrodactic panorama, Chadwick proceeding more traditionally.
Chadwick doesn't shy away from presenting the difficulties associated with actively pursuing disenfranchised political agendas, and the toll Mandela's sublime idealism takes on his wives and children are dis/comfortingly displayed.
His first wife leaves him but his second never yields in her championing of his cause while he's imprisoned, suffering jail-time and countless indignities consequently.
Their breakup after he's released is perhaps the most unfortunate disengaging of amorous affections I've ever come across.
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela (Naomie Harris) kept the fire burning brightly throughout his 27 years in prison and seeing them part is tragic if not earth shattering.
But Mandela believed in a non-violent working solution and when provided with the opportunity to politically enact one, engaged.
Taking the resultant monumental fallout in stride.
Not a saint, perhaps, but definitely, a person of steel.
Friday, January 3, 2014
NFL Wild Card Picks
Kansas City Chiefs/Indianapolis Colts: three of the last five times Kansas City's made the playoffs, they've played Indianapolis, losing every time. They met during the season as well, the Colts winning 23 to 7 on Dec. 22nd. KC lost 5 of its last 7 games while Indy won 5 of its last 7. Both teams struggled when playing competitive opponents during that stretch. The Chiefs were 6 and 2 on the road while Indianapolis was 6 and 2 at home. Kansas City has Andy Reid at the helm whose won many a Wild Card game, but Indianapolis, having lost last year during the Wild Card round, should be more composed this year. The numbers suggest that the Chiefs are doomed but Baltimore finished the 2012 season poorly and played well throughout the playoffs. Can Kansas City pull-off the upset? I think they can. Picking the Chiefs.
New Orleans Saints/Philadelphia Eagles: New Orleans, New Orleans, New Orleans. They generally play well but are prone to self-destruction. The Eagles have a new coach and a quarterback who seems built for success, the two combining to defeat many a challenging opponent this season. The Saints have met Philadelphia twice in the playoffs, winning once, losing once. The Eagles struggled at home while New Orleans had difficulties winning on the road. Both teams respectably won tough games all season long, but the Saints managed to score 31 points against Carolina's formidable (2nd ranked) defence (they also lost to Carolina 17-13). The Eagles let in 141 more points than Carolina this season. Nick Foles has the opportunity to prove that he's the NFC's Joey Flacco. But to do that he has to outperform Drew Brees. Picking New Orleans.
San Diego Chargers/Cincinnati Bengals: this is a huge game. San Diego won 5 of their last 6, only falling at the hands of the Bengals (17-10). Cincinnati also won 5 of their last 6, only falling at the hands of the resurgent Steelers (30-20). While the Bengal's offence has been scoring with unfettered potency, their defence has held some of the league's best offences to lacklustre totals, the Chargers only scoring 10 against them, New England, 6. They've met once before in the playoffs, Cincinnati winning 27-7 in 1981. Cincinnati has home field advantage. Cincinnati has lost 4 Wild Card games in recent years. San Diego is playing at a much higher level than their record suggests. But the Chargers are 4-4 on the road while the Bengals are undefeated at home. Once again, I'm picking, the Bengals. In a close explosive game. Snow could effect the outcome.
San Francisco 49ers/Green Bay Packers: the Pack didn't play that well this year but still sneaked into the playoffs without Aaron Rodgers at the helm for a large chunk of the season. They've outplayed San Francisco the majority of the times they've met in the playoffs however, and the forecast is calling for temperatures of between 3 and -20˚F in Green Bay. The Pack's offence is comparable to San Francisco's but their defence is much much worse. They met in week one, the 49ers winning 34-28, and San Fran's only lost twice since week 3, to New Orleans and Carolina. The 49ers are 6 and 2 on the road, Green Bay, 4, 3 and 1 at home. But the Packers are playing this game at home in January and the temperature will be freezing. According to my knowledge, San Francisco has yet to play in the cold this season, unless it was cold in Washington on November 25th. Atlanta won in Green Bay in January in 2002 but they finished their season in Cleveland on Dec. 29th and played in Minnesota on Dec. 1st. Aaron Rodgers is back and ready to play. Advantage Green Bay. Picking the Pack.
New Orleans Saints/Philadelphia Eagles: New Orleans, New Orleans, New Orleans. They generally play well but are prone to self-destruction. The Eagles have a new coach and a quarterback who seems built for success, the two combining to defeat many a challenging opponent this season. The Saints have met Philadelphia twice in the playoffs, winning once, losing once. The Eagles struggled at home while New Orleans had difficulties winning on the road. Both teams respectably won tough games all season long, but the Saints managed to score 31 points against Carolina's formidable (2nd ranked) defence (they also lost to Carolina 17-13). The Eagles let in 141 more points than Carolina this season. Nick Foles has the opportunity to prove that he's the NFC's Joey Flacco. But to do that he has to outperform Drew Brees. Picking New Orleans.
San Diego Chargers/Cincinnati Bengals: this is a huge game. San Diego won 5 of their last 6, only falling at the hands of the Bengals (17-10). Cincinnati also won 5 of their last 6, only falling at the hands of the resurgent Steelers (30-20). While the Bengal's offence has been scoring with unfettered potency, their defence has held some of the league's best offences to lacklustre totals, the Chargers only scoring 10 against them, New England, 6. They've met once before in the playoffs, Cincinnati winning 27-7 in 1981. Cincinnati has home field advantage. Cincinnati has lost 4 Wild Card games in recent years. San Diego is playing at a much higher level than their record suggests. But the Chargers are 4-4 on the road while the Bengals are undefeated at home. Once again, I'm picking, the Bengals. In a close explosive game. Snow could effect the outcome.
San Francisco 49ers/Green Bay Packers: the Pack didn't play that well this year but still sneaked into the playoffs without Aaron Rodgers at the helm for a large chunk of the season. They've outplayed San Francisco the majority of the times they've met in the playoffs however, and the forecast is calling for temperatures of between 3 and -20˚F in Green Bay. The Pack's offence is comparable to San Francisco's but their defence is much much worse. They met in week one, the 49ers winning 34-28, and San Fran's only lost twice since week 3, to New Orleans and Carolina. The 49ers are 6 and 2 on the road, Green Bay, 4, 3 and 1 at home. But the Packers are playing this game at home in January and the temperature will be freezing. According to my knowledge, San Francisco has yet to play in the cold this season, unless it was cold in Washington on November 25th. Atlanta won in Green Bay in January in 2002 but they finished their season in Cleveland on Dec. 29th and played in Minnesota on Dec. 1st. Aaron Rodgers is back and ready to play. Advantage Green Bay. Picking the Pack.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)