CinemannJanuary 2011

Table of Contents

Cinemann 2

4 Black Swan 6 Somewhere

8 True Grit

10 Little Fockers

12 Weeds

14 The Movies that

Rocked 2010

17 Golden Globes

Dear Reader,

With a plethora of incredible movies in theaters, this issue of Cinemann surveys some of the very best. From the haunting Black Swan to the cheerful Somewhere, these feature films have been defined by brilliant perfor-mances. Daniel Ehrlich takes us through a sur-vey of what movies were outstanding in 2010. We hope you look through these reviews with great anticipation for the Academy Awards.

Follow our magazine at issuu.com/cinemann. If you would like to write for Cinemann please contact us!

Yours Truly,

Andrew Demas and Maggie Reinfeld

Cinemann: Volume Vi, issue 5Editors in Chief

Andrew DemasMaggie Reinfeld

Senior EditorsMatt Taub

Alexandra Saali

Faculty AdvisorDeborah Kassel

Letter From the Editors

Associate Editors Katie Cacouris, Tucker Caploe, Jessica Chi, Zoe

Kestan,

Staff WritersAlice Taranto, Sam Torres,

Charles Sherr, Emma Specter

Contributing Writers Rachel Buissereth, Anise

Charles, David Feuerstein, Jacob Frackman, Abigail

Greenbaum, Bennett Heller, Noah Margulis, Jay Pale-kar, Savannah Smith, Ra-

chel Simerka-Smith, Henry Warder

Cinemann 3

Black Swan, directed by Darren Aronofsky (The Wrestler, Requiem for a Dream), is a psychological thriller about a dancer whose role in Swan Lake com-pletely consumes her and drives her to the point of insanity.

Nina Sayers (Natalie Portman) is a delicate ballerina in the New York City dance company who, after spending years in the background, finally receives the lead role as the Swan Queen. Having the principle role is not easy, though. Nina, who is perpetually striving for absolute perfection, receives criticism, pressure, and sexual signals from her creepy artistic director, Thomas Leroy (Vincent Cassel), who continually voices that while she perfectly embodies the White Swan, her interpretation of the Black Swan is far from flawless. She also faces competition with the other dancers, most specifically Lily (Mila Kunis), who epitomizes the Black Swan and is also in Leroy’s good graces. As Nina tries to find her darker side to fulfill the part, she finds herself going through all sorts of changes that eventually lead her to madness.

The story of Black Swan parallels that of the renowned ballet that it features. Swan Lake tells the story of a White Swan, symbolizing purity and in-nocence, who must fall in love with a prince in order to find liberation. She does, but before she can marry him, the seductive and cunning Black Swan tricks the prince into falling in love with her instead. Out of sorrow, the White Swan kills herself and in doing so, finds freedom. The movie, in a sense, tells the same story – but with a twist.

Don’t let the ballet fool you; this movie isn’t for the lighthearted. The film is filled with profanity, drugs, lesbian love scenes, blood, and terror. The entire movie has you confused as to what’s going on in Nina’s head versus what is actu-ally happening. It has you clutching your seat and screaming in fear of what’s on the screen. Aronofsky uses his previous film techniques, such as tight close ups and short shots that work to keep viewers clutching their seats throughout the entire movie, and yet enjoying another of his films about the total destruction of a human being.

Portman and Kunis performed excellently, both having to train six months beforehand to obtain the body types of professional ballet dancers and to prac-tice the steps required for the film. Portman performed particularly well, por-traying a very difficult role that required not just dancing, but also insanity. Nina’s role is extremely complex, and Portman played it to absolute perfection. Black Swan received three Golden Globe nominations: Best Supporting Actress (Kunis), Best Director (Aronofsky), and Best Picture) and one win for Best Ac-tress (Portman).

If you can look past the terrifying and confusing bits (which, I will admit, is hard to do), Black Swan is twisted, yet oddly beautiful. Ballet is depicted in an entirely new light – one with dementia, ferocity, and horror.

Cinemann 4

by savannah smith

dancetrack

IMdB

IMdB

IMdB

THE

BLACK

SWAN

Cinemann 5

Hollywood is where stars are made. But over the years, the place itself has become a star; it is an idol everyone wants to be with, know about, and emulate. In Somewhere, Hollywood isn’t just a setting, but a character. Directed by award-winning director Sofia Coppola, Somewhere tells the story of a jaded but not unkind famous actor, Johnny Marcoh (Stephen Dorff ), who has lost the meaning of his life. He coasts through with little consequence or conscious-ness in his black Porsche. But when his eleven-year-old daughter, Cleo (Elle Fanning), arrives back in his life, the two begin an adventure that changes Johnny.

Hollywood probably has the largest and most vocal role in Somewhere. The atmosphere of Hollywood and the famous Cha-teau Marmont create the world of the film. The quaint eccentricities like singing waiter Romulu Laki and Johnny’s blistering irresponsi-bility combine to form a clear view of what Hollywood looks like, at least in the perspective of Coppola. Hollywood enables Johnny to be a lifeless drone because he is a celeb-rity. He does not get punished for his transgressions and is coddled by the people who profit from his success. But fame also keeps him severely emotionally isolated. He wakes up in the morning alone,

and yet it always seems to surprise him. Then one day, Johnny wakes up to see his daughter right by his side.

Before Cleo comes, the film is purposefully silent. Life is quiet and with few pleasures (those that come from room service). But with Cleo, Johnny’s world seems a little brighter, with more words and few-er harsh silences. The two seem to have a very happy relationship due to Cleo’s docile and good nature. Cleo never burdens her father or forces him to make her a first pri-ority. It is easy and fun for Johnny to be a father because she never forces him to be a real one. Elle Fanning plays Cleo as a mini adult

Somewhe er

Cinemann 6

by hannah jun

focusfeatures

focusfeatures

focusfeatures

who is both charming and mature. But when Cleo reveals she is still a fragile and sad eleven-year-old child who has an absent father and now an absent mother, her physical transformation during the scene is breathtakingly sad. Elle Fanning continues to prove she has her own distinct talent as an actress.

The film’s premise has all the formulaic components of a heart-warming romantic comedy. In-stead, Coppola shows us some-thing murkier, but perhaps more precious. The end of the film feels both complete and settled in a per-fect conclusion, yet it still leaves the audience shaken out of their com-fort zone and left with a question

mark as to the actual ending and the meaning behind it. So when you finally glean meaning from the ending, you take away something that is uniquely yours. This, in my opinion, makes a great conclusion.

Being a second generation Hol-lywood director, Sofia Coppola has had a lot to prove. She displayed her skills in Lost in Translation, and she again shows her consis-tency and proficiency as a director in Somewhere. It is an excellent ar-tistic piece with warm Californian hues that balance the utter cold-ness and distance the movie cre-ates. This balance leaves you visu-ally warmed and yet feeling cold and melancholic in your seat.

However, compared to Lost in Translation, Somewhere misses a continuing rhythmic beat. This stilt in the movie could be part of the raw emptiness that it tries to portray, but even so, it is not used effectively enough. Though overall, Somewhere is a complex and subtly beautiful story. And perhaps, more importantly, it is a movie to which one can relate. Just as Johnny Mar-coh sits in the dark trying to sort through his seclusion and lack of life, we all have the same loneliness inside us. And like Johnny, we all must find a way to get out of the car and get somewhere.

e

Cinemann 7

focusfeatures

focusfeatures

focusfeatures

focusfeatures

In trying to understand True Grit and its significance in the history of American Western films, I watched several old well-regarded westerns. The differences were shocking. Although True Grit is a remake of an older ver-sion with the same title, the two movies have a very different feel. While the two movies shared the same script, scenery, and a lot of other particulars, the newer version was much darker and more de-pressing than any of the other movies I have seen in this genre.

The Searchers, Stagecoach, and the original True Grit were three films I used for comparison to the new True Grit. While The Searchers shared some of its brutality, sadness, and plot featur-ing a manhunt for those responsible for the death of the main character’s family members, there is a lot of happiness and

smiling in The Searchers. This is a trend I noticed in all of the old westerns that I watched: while they may have had sad plots of revenge, casualties and fatalities of innocent women and children, the old westerns all had happy moments when the cowboys smile, and maybe even laugh or chuckle.

The Coen brothers are known to go their own way with film technique. Maybe being different was good, but it certainly was not completely enjoyable. Most westerns leave the audience with a warm feeling inside, after the cowboy has killed off his nemesis in a duel, or saved his young blonde from an evil tribe of savage Native Americans. Both of these endings were displayed in the old Westerns that I watched, and in many ways the most stereotypical west-ern films.

True Grit may have felt sad only be-cause of the plot, which doesn’t exactly finish off with a happy couple skipping down the streets or a cowboy galloping off onto the prairie victoriously. This movie has dim lighting, and the sec-ond half feels dark and cold, even in the beautiful scenery of the woods, prairies, and mountains. The original movie had much brighter colors, and the charac-ters smiled at more than just Mattie and her horse going for a swim across the river.

One of the other things that both-ered me about this movie is Josh Bro-lin’s being listed as a star, when in fact he has only about eight minutes or so on screen. Nonetheless, he did do a re-markable job in those eight minutes. This was definitely an all-star cast, with great performances from both Matt Da-

True

Cinemann 8

by ross karetsky

IMsB

mon and Jeff Bridges. However, I prefer John Wayne’s 1969 Rooster Cogburn to Jeff Bridges’, which may just be because I favor the classics.

This is a movie to see if you are a western fanatic, but otherwise you will probably just leave the theater a little depressed and disturbed by all the gore. There wasn’t a whole lot of exciting vio-lence, just a fair amount of slow shoot-outs that led to an abundance of blood. Two amputations in one movie was a bit much for me, personally, and watching one of them was even worse.

I definitely enjoyed some aspects of True Grit, but mainly because I like movies that take the viewer into anoth-er time period. I also liked the idea that unlike in your typical western, a girl took the role of the hero and got to play the bravest and most reckless cowboy in

the movie. True Grit makes for a real Debbie

downer of a movie. It was a dark dra-matic action film and was more than a little disappointing. Go out and see it, or rent it, next time you want to feel sad or empty inside. This may sound exagger-ated, but it was definitely how I felt on the walk home from the theater. Yet at the same time, I was intrigued. It wasn’t boring, and the time went by fast, but that may have been because I was wait-ing for a decent fight seen, or something else that could have pulled me in. I real-ized as the credits rolled that this hollow feeling could also have been the end-ing’s purpose, as much as it didn’t work effectively. It left me fascinated, but not satisfied.

This movie definitely symbolizes the decline of the western. It seemed

so unique when ads came up on TV: a Wild West film, in this day and age? No-body watches those anymore. It’s a dead genre. What was once a glorious Era is now a dusty old trend that has gone out of style. True Grit didn’t do much more at the box office other than beat Little Fo-ckers out, which I have heard isn’t saying much. Western is a lost genre, and while I respect the Coen brothers for trying to recessitate an old American tradi-tion, I would rather see a classic west-ern any day than go to the movies for a modern adaptation like this one. Some things are better kept unchanged, and I believe that most filmmakers agree with me. Westerns are no longer popular and True Grit is probably the last one we will be seeing for quite a while.

GriT

Cinemann 9IMsB

First we met the parents in 2000. Four years later, we were introduced to the Fockers. And for the third, and hopefully final time, we were intro-duced to the children in Little Fockers, the third film in the franchise that has long gone bad since its first mega-hit. Although not entirely bad – with some great lines from the all-star studded cast including Robert De Niro, Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Jessica Alba, Dustin Hoffman, and Barbra Streisand – the film was a major step down from the previous se-quel, and even that is hard to accomplish.

The seemingly never ending feud between father-in-law Jack Byrnes (De Niro) and son-in-law Gaylord “Greg” Focker (Stiller) reaches new heights in the third installment of the blockbuster franchise. It takes 10 years for our favorite male nurse to fi-nally “get in” with his father-in-law, but this doesn’t last long, as the old and all-too-familiar misunder-standing, spying, and above all, staring, come roar-ing back. Plain and simple, the familial comedy that was fresh and funny in 2000’s Meet the Parents to-tally evaporates in 2010’s Little Fockers.

The movie’s central question (whether or not Greg Focker can muster up enough admiration from Jack Byrnes to become the “Godfocker”) runs dry, not to mention repetitive. This is just one of the seemingly thousands of plots present in the movie, also among them Sustengo (an erectile dysfunc-tion pill), the twin Fockers’ birthday party, build-ing a new house, and getting the twins into private school. The list goes on and on, and sadly never gets

liTTle FoCkersHow Little Fockers Capped Off A Dis-appointing End to the Once Promising

Franchise

Cinemann 10

by charles scherr

connect.In

any more interesting. The plot and comedy seems tired, and it most likely is after its run through the first two movies.

However, all of this is not to say that the movie was entirely terrible and that the theatre didn’t even chuckle once. Obviously, a cast this good, no matter how bad the script, can produce some funny lines. The cast is far and away the greatest upside to the film. Owen Wilson, in his loved role as the ex-fiancé, did a superb job in being just as funny as he was the first two times around. And watching him attempt to make out with Barbra Streisand was in-teresting, to say the least. Jessica Alba was a nice ad-dition, yet unfortunately she too was sucked into the immature humor that plagued Little Fockers.

Meet the Parents was young and refreshing when it came out. Seeing a plot unfold that pitted the father-in-law against the son-in-law and a battle over the “circle of trust” was genius. Although not as much can be said for Meet the Fockers, the ad-dition of Barbra Streisand and Dustin Hoffman as earthy, smoochy, Jewish parents mixing with their Irish-Catholic in-laws made the movie still respect-able and fun to watch. However, nothing can be said about this final hurrah for the Focker franchise. Why was it made? We don’t know. Probably to expand on the 800 million dollar profit the first two made. But regardless, it was a pitiful ending to what was once a clever and smart comedy. Sadly, it’s time for the series to get the fock out.

liTTle FoCkersHow Little Fockers Capped Off A Dis-appointing End to the Once Promising

Franchise

Cinemann 11connect.In

Cinemann 12

Weeds chronicles the plight of widowed suburban drug dealer Nancy Botwin (Mary Louise Parker). The series is great from a viewer’s standpoint, but mediocre from that of a critic. However, I can turn off the criti-cal part of me while watching and just enjoy the show for its absolutely inspired comedic appeal.

Over the course of nine seasons, the Botwins have paraded around the North American continent like a pack of animals. There is no real sense of direction, and it seems as if the Botwins are perfectly fine with not having a plan and letting the nar-cissistic matriarch of the family poke and prod them over state boarders in a seem-ingly endless continuum. A good portion of the subject matter revolves around Nancy’s parental failures from a responsible per-spective and her success from the opposing viewpoint. I find Ms. Parker’s parental feck-lessness amusing at times. She is miracu-lously able to raise not one, but two prob-lem children. Shane is a murderer educated up to just middle school and Silas dabbles in drug dealing, taking after his mother and two of his ex-step-fathers. Over the course of the series thus far, Nancy has managed to kill off two husbands and indict the third. I love the series, but it’s clear why it’s an open target from a critic’s perspective.

And yet I love to watch it because of the balance it strikes between the gravity of the drug culture and the levity of the family’s stupidity. But I can’t help thinking that this show was written for people without opin-

ions, as virtually every sentence the charac-ters utter is downright disagreeable toward society. For an intellectually relevant topic, the show is not intellectually stimulating whatsoever. It seems to be written for peo-ple who live miles away from a Wal-Mart and even farther away form a Target.

The reason Weeds has been so success-ful is because it has ridden a cultural wave in America where people have become in-terested not only in the legal slices of Amer-ican life, but increasingly, the illegal. It’s no doubt why; a show about criminal acts always has the prospect of being more fun than one that isn’t. In fact, short of Sesame Street, one might be hard-pressed to find a series where the characters don’t at one point do something the law might frown upon. In the real world, the movement to legalize cannabis has spurred people’s in-terests in the topic. Not an episode goes by where the gears of political action commit-tees don’t turn to produce a speech alluding to the benefits of legalization.

However, the show is not interested in exploring the drug culture from which it draws its plot but only seeks to expose the already obvious hypocrisies of American culture. The drug world as a whole has a huge effect on our lives. This show in partic-ular is about marijuana, and later cocaine, but the themes expressed are prevalent throughout the entire industry. This show is built around this culture and what it does manage to dig into is how the substances we consume change our minds and our lives.

There is a lot in the way we consume mood-altering substances, and it is interesting to see changes in the ways we interact, from a restrained manner to a much more open and honest form of discourse.

I would akin Weeds to a restaurant like Chipotle juxtaposed against a McDonalds. Underneath their facades, they are both fast food restaurants with low quality meals you still enjoy eating. Weeds shares this junk food characteristic with most TV shows. You know it’s bad for you, but you’re ad-dicted. People watch The Real Housewives because it entertains in a very basic and human level, but watch too much and your brain might turn to mush. Chipotle is an upscale version of McDonalds with a cre-ative twist; Weeds is the type of junk TV where the writers and producers have tried hard to make you think you aren’t watch-ing an amended version of Jersey Shore. However, Weeds does have a creative setting and interesting power dynamics, combined with the fact that the producers care. It is hard to keep a good level of writing up over nine seasons, but they have done a pretty good job (even though it’s been worsening recently).

Overall, I absolutely love it, sophisti-cated junk and all. In truth, I could say the same thing about 90% of shows on televi-sion. How good the program is cannot be judged off of how far it is from your ideal show; it must be judged off of what it out there. Compared to most shows on or that have ever been on air, I adore Weeds.

weeds

Cinemann 13

by nicholas mccombe

tvwallpaper

Darren Aronofsky is one of my favorite directors, so I can’t say I was impartial going into this one. However, it was more incred-ible than I could have imagined. It was an overwhelming experi-ence, a true cinematic roller coaster ride. It blended the intense character study of Aronofsky’s previous film The Wrestler with the frenzy and paranoia of his early films Requiem for a Dream and Pi. Some people have called Black Swan a horror film, but if all horror films were this psychological and atmospheric, the genre would have far more respect. Natalie Portman’s perfor-mance is mesmerizing, really conveying her character’s break-down from vulnerable innocence to passionate insanity. I could go on and on, but I feel like the words would do no justice. So I’ll just say that by the time the credits rolled, my jaw was dropped. I was genuinely stunned.

Black Swan

I’ve never seen the original, but after seeing the remake, I’m ex-cited to see John Wayne strap on his boots in the first version. Newcomer Hailee Steinfeld does a great job alongside actors Bar-ry Pepper, Josh Brolin, Matt Damon, and Jeff Bridges, who give good performances themselves. I’m not much of a Western or Coen Brothers fan, so if this film was extremely entertaining for me, it says a lot about its strength.

True Grit

I already reviewed this in a previous issue of Cinemann, and my review was glowing, to say the least. It’s really a terrific film: a cocktail of strong emotions, slight bits of humor, and great di-rection. James Franco’s performance was absolutely incredible, arguably the best of the year. Additionally, Danny Boyle manages to pull off quite a lot around a man being pinned by a rock for five days.

127 Hours

The Social Network

Catfish

The Movies That Rocked 2010

Cinemann 14

by danny ehrlich

fanpopdI

gIta

ltre

nds

duMBdruM

This film is a conventional boxer movie: a down-and-out fighter meets a girl and gets back on track. However, the real ingenuity of this film is in its exploration of the re-lationship between protagonist Mickey Ward and his family. All involved give great performances, including Amy Adams as Mickey’s girlfriend, Melissa Leo as his mother, and the best of all, Christian Bale as his crack-addled brother. The acting alone makes this film worthwhile, and the story elevates it further.

The FighterHere we go again… This is another over-rated flick. No explanation of the story is necessary, as all surely know of it by now. It was a well executed, breezy, fun, and occasionally deep film, with a great script by Aaron Sorkin, good direction by David Fincher, and nice acting, especially by Jus-tin Timberlake. However, it’s only that. It wasn’t extremely insightful or the essential film of our generation, as many would claim. That said, it’s still an intriguing and thoroughly entertaining flick.

The Social Network

CatfishYou may have heard of this film just be-cause of the controversy surrounding it. Going into the plot would spoil the sur-prise, but many have accused the supposed documentary of being a farce due to its in-credible twist towards the end. However, what is clear is that this movie gives an interesting view of our generation as well as the potential, both well intentioned and manipulative, that Facebook provides for different people. It is a morality tale of the modern age.

Sofia Coppola really reaches to her roots as a filmmaker. She often focuses on character, much like her father used to do, and the theme of fame. This movie is no exception, revolving around a disillusioned actor and his daugh-ter (Stephen Dorff and Elle Fanning, respectively). It’s a quiet, introspective type of movie that probably won’t be enjoyed by all people, but I found it surprisingly moving.

Somewhere

The Movies That Rocked 2010

Cinemann 15

duM

Bdru

MIM

dBIM

dB

thefIghterMovIe

This film has been heaped with praise, but honestly, it’s overrated. It’s a good film, but not a great one. The best aspect by far is the acting, which is just about superb. Colin Firth gives a stellar performance as the stuttering King of England, but the best performance of all perhaps is that of Geoffrey Rush as his speech therapist. The film is poignant and at times funny as well. Overall, it’s an inspiring, though conventional, period piece. It is an Oscar frontrunner, which disappoints me be-cause I fear it will be forgotten quite quickly in the years to come (à la The English Patient).

The King’s Speech

Only Christopher Nolan could develop a highly intelligent, claustrophobic, and deep experience in a blockbuster this effec-tively. It was by far the best of all this year’s big-budget popcorn flicks. The concept of a dream heist was full of possibilities and Nolan took advantage, creating a film as layered as the dreams within the film. The only other thing left to be said is that he makes the most out of his actors, with memorable performances by Ellen Page, Michael Caine, and Leonardo Dicaprio, among others.

Inception

After being delayed for so many months, this film probably came as a pleasant surprise for those who suspected that the postpone-ments were due to its quality. Michael Cera is quite often type-cast, but here, his common role as an awkward teen really hit its stride. Seeing him play the daring alter ego, Francois Dillinger, of his meek Nick Twisp was a hilarious change of pace for the ac-tor. Overall, the film is a light, enjoyable, and ultimately heartfelt, mixing an element of fantasy with a realistic portrayal of the feel-ings many modern adolescents experience.

Youth in Revolt

Cinemann 16

Why couldn’t this movie have been more successful with mainstream audiences? This is the kind of superhero movie we need: a bold mix of humor, action, and interesting characters who aren’t afraid to push bound-aries. In short, it was the best superhero film since The Dark Knight.

Kick AssThis documentary encapsulates the coura-geous life of NFL player Pat Tillman, who enlisted in the war in Afghanistan. The film is thought provoking in its exposure of the corruption in the government’s handling of Tillman’s death and it definitely left me ques-tioning.

The Tillman Storyhonorable mention

IMsB

IMsB

IMsB

IMsB

IMsB

The Golden Globe Awards

Cinemann 17

nBcnyt

nytnyt

IMsB

The 2011 Golden Globes were stan-dard fare: no surprising winners, plenty of unworthy nominees, and lots of bored celebrities in attendance who appeared in-different to the results (except for Helena Bonham Carter, who looked genuinely pissed off when she did not win Best Sup-porting Actress). I did expect more from Robert De Niro’s Cecil B. DeMille speech, but oh well; he still deserves the recogni-tion and may just be the “greatest actor alive,” as Matt Damon called him in his lukewarm introduction. The Globes have always been a fun holdover on the road to the Oscars, so you just have to not take them so seriously (giving The Tourist a Best Picture nomination in the Comedy or Musical category? It wasn’t good, and it wasn’t a comedy or a musical!). With that in mind, I guess the Globes were as successful (albeit bland) as they are any year. Let’s take a look at the winners and should’ve-been winners:

1.Best Motion Picture – Drama:Black SwanThe FighterInception – should’ve wonThe King’s SpeechThe Social Network – did win

I thought all of these nominees were at least very good. That being said, Inception

was the only of the five that transcended the typical movie-going experience and truly transported me into another world. It may have lacked performances of the same caliber as, say, Natalie Portman in Black Swan or Christian Bale in The Fight-er, but with Inception, director Christopher Nolan achieved any filmmaker’s ultimate goal: to truly make us forget about the real world while being absorbed in his and to want to go back to it again after we have left. It is that definitive, extremely rare cin-ematic experience that only comes around once in a long while.

2.Best Motion Picture – Comedy Or Musi-cal:Alice in WonderlandBurlesqueThe Kids Are All Right – did winRedThe Tourist I won’t say which film should’ve won in this category, as I only got the chance to see The Tourist. I will say, however, that I’m glad it didn’t win.

3. Best Director – Motion Picture: Darren Aronofsky – Black SwanDavid Fincher – The Social Network – did winTom Hooper – The King’s Speech

Christopher Nolan – Inception – should’ve wonDavid O. Russell – The Fighter

Nine out of ten people will tell you that David Fincher deserved this award. The Social Network was an entertaining, well-acted, interesting film, but Fincher didn’t leave me thinking. My greatest criticism of his film is that it was terribly one-dimen-sional and it took the easy way out in tell-ing Mark Zuckerberg’s story, portraying him as the wrongdoer without providing any alternative viewpoint. If you want pro-vocative filmmaking, Christopher Nolan will leave you awestruck while pondering about reality and existence. Also, let’s not forget those slow-motion, gravity-defying fight scenes in Inception that only a truly great filmmaker could realize.

4.Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture – Drama: Jesse Eisenberg – The Social NetworkColin Firth – The King’s Speech – did winJames Franco – 127 HoursRyan Gosling – Blue ValentineMark Wahlberg – The Fighter

I have yet to see 127 Hours, so I will not say who should’ve won in this cat-egory. I will saw, however, who should’ve won out of the four nominees I saw: Ryan Gosling. Colin Firth was exceptional, no

Cinemann 18

by matt taub

nyt

nyt

doubt about it, and I’m happy to see him win, but Gosling delivered the kind of performance in Blue Valentine that dis-tinguishes a good actor from a great actor. In a film that cuts constantly between dif-ferent points in time, Gosling effortlessly transforms from a young James Dean-esque lady’s man to an old(er), balding, borderline alcoholic in a role that had him showcasing enough chops and cha-risma to remind me of a young Marlon Brando.

5.Best Performance by an Actress in a Mo-tion Picture – Drama: Halle Berry – Frankie and AliceNicole Kidman – Rabbit HoleJennifer Lawrence – Winter’s BoneNatalie Portman – Black Swan – did winMichelle Williams – Blue Valentine

In this category, I saw only Portman and Williams, both of whom were fantas-tic, but I’m glad Portman won. It has to be difficult for an actress to play the role of someone lost in her own reality, but Portman did it with grace and achieved in her performance that very balance be-tween technical precision and pure emo-tion that Black Swan studies.

6.Best Performance by an Actor in a Mo-tion Picture – Comedy Or Musical:

Johnny Depp – Alice in WonderlandJohnny Depp – The TouristPaul Giamatti – Barney’s Version – did winJake Gyllenhaal – Love And Other DrugsKevin Spacey – Casino Jack

7.Best Performance by an Actress in a Mo-tion Picture – Comedy Or Musical:Annette Bening – The Kids Are All Right – did winAnne Hathaway – Love And Other DrugsAngelina Jolie – The TouristJulianne Moore – The Kids Are All RightEmma Stone – Easy A

For this category too I only saw The Tourist, and am again grateful that it was not awarded anything.

8.Best Performance by an Actor In A Sup-porting Role in a Motion Picture:Christian Bale – The Fighter – did winMichael Douglas – Wall Street: Money Never SleepsAndrew Garfield – The Social NetworkJeremy Renner – The TownGeoffrey Rush – The King’s Speech

I did not see The Town, but it’s really hard for me to imagine anyone but Chris-tian Bale winning this. His was my favor-ite performance of the year.

9.Best Performance by an Actress In A Supporting Role in a Motion Picture:Amy Adams – The FighterHelena Bonham Carter – The King’s SpeechMila Kunis – Black SwanMelissa Leo – The Fighter – did winJacki Weaver – Animal Kingdom

I haven’t seen Animal Kingdom yet, but I would’ve been happy with any of the other four nominees in this category tak-ing home the prize. They were all great, but if I had to choose I would probably have chosen Leo, too (though Kunis is a close, close second).

10.Best Screenplay – Motion Picture:Simon Beaufoy, Danny Boyle – 127 HoursChristopher Nolan – InceptionStuart Blumberg, Lisa Cholodenko – The Kids Are All RightDavid Seidler – The King’s SpeechAaron Sorkin – The Social Network – did win

I haven’t seen 127 Hours or The Kids Are All Right yet, and though I’m not the biggest Social Network fan, it deserved this award. If we’re talking dialogue and narrative structure, this is a great script. The film lacks depth, but I think that’s more of a directorial fault.

Cinemann 19

foxIM

dB

new

sok

socI

alIt

elIf

e

CinemannHorace Mann School231 West 246th StreetRiverdale, NY 10471