digital dystopia in full swing
That’s right, Neo IS the one, as my 304 students in the Spring 2016 FILM 80S class are finding out. Big fun.
That’s right, Neo IS the one, as my 304 students in the Spring 2016 FILM 80S class are finding out. Big fun.
I was right about Spotlight (best picture), and Mark Rylance (best supporting actor) and Leo DiCaprio (best actor). Not too shabby given my lackluster attendance at nominated movies.
Gotta confess that I was at Opera Parallele‘s terrific performance of “The Champion” jazz opera in the City during most of the Oscars, and arrived home in time to watch the last (big) three awards.
I’m thinking that like the two party system, the Academy Awards might need some revolutionary shake-up. We’ll see.
First off, let me admit that I haven’t seen all the films nominated this year. But that won’t stop me from making a few informed (and highly opinionated) predictions.
This was the year in which nominated films exhibited similar virtues—seamless ensemble acting. E.g. Spotlight and The Big Short. So superbly acted, directed, and edited were these films that they appear to have come together by a sort of magical internal collaboration. Still, having said that, I’m thinking that Spotlight should take both Best Picture and Best Director awards.
The harder issues deal with individual acting awards. And as always, I have to deal with the Academy’s tradition of honoring actors for a body of work, e.g. Sly Stallone, or for their age, e.g. Charlotte Rampling. I haven’t seen Creed, but I’ll bet Stallone hits all the marks and wouldn’t mind one bit to see him take the Best Supporting Actor award. But my heart belongs to the uncanny Mark Rylance, who played the spy traded for Francis Gary Powers in Bridge of Spies, with a series of electrifyingly subtle gestures—an eyebrow here, the upturn of a wrist there. Mesmerizing.
And while we’re on the subject of Rampling, (more…)
Paintings by Frank Galuszka—from the lake district of Italy to the Davenport coast— at Gabriella Cafe, January through March 2016.
How could this many members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences be wrong? I wondered as I rummaged around in my purse for some dental floss.
Once found, the floss gave me the excuse I needed to stay in my seat during this turgid, self-absorbed exercise in shots of rain-splashed car windows and 1950s cloche hats.
Let me place my cards on the table: Cate Blanchett let her lipstick do the acting, while poor Rooney Mara was forced to simply stare, bug-eyed like an extra from Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
This was a film without a director, without a point, and with precious little more than a centrally-located mink coat and ugly shoes.
At no time did I believe in any of the male actors, or in any of their dialogue. If there was once a well-written novel by Patricia Highsmith behind this exercise in faded Kodachrome, it could no longer be detected in the film.
Could it be that the reason why a few of my woman friends liked it was that it was about lesbian liberation? That it suggested that woman, even in the darkest 1950s, could find solace in each other’s arms? Yes, but it was a lackluster, boring film. Message or no message, it was unbearable.
Blanchett smoking cigarettes was one of the most self-conscious, studied, mannered acts I’ve ever seen in film. Tossing back martinis during the day does not make her a role model of feminist freedom. It wasn’t even believable. I simply failed to find the film in this commercial for tightly-coiffed hair and bourgeois interior decoration. But I did manage to consume a bag of popcorn and then floss afterwards.
Salon: Tuesday, Dec. 8 6-8pm.
My painting exhibit is currently showing at Gabriella Cafe & Gallery, in downtown Santa Cruz.
Come and check out this unexpected and colorful work, including many very recent pieces.
Even better, make plans to join me next Tuesday — December 8 — for dinner at 6, followed by a mesmerizing glimpse inside my painting process and some choice words about my upcoming book.