The Return of Sam

Truly speaking, the talk around the movie's homosexuality and the Sean Penn's wanting more scenes in the movie than the original script made me uncomfortable and I delayed watching it for quite sometime. Maybe my judgements are still biased.
If playing a homosexual is worth winning an Oscar then the supporting actor should also have won it but if the case is not this then I feel Michael Rourke's acting was at par with Sean's. The movie was a piece of history and a quite hair-raising one at that and though it may have been nicely written, its not quite extraordinarily portrayed other than the fact of being a gay. Overall, it might be revolutionary and an emotional movie for a community or an area, its certainly not a pick for an Indian and certainly not for me. My Rating (6/10)

em rof hguone suoiruC

That plain English, just backwards - Curious enough for me.

The story is just too vivid to imagine until F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote it way back in 1921. Along with modern technology, make-up and visual effects, this movie is a treat to watch. Like any other drama, it has a steady beginning, even a hint of boredom but soon engrosses the viewer and at no point in the next 150 minutes it gives a feel of sheer excellence. Leave alone the weird topic, the portrayals all equally authentic and for once I know why Brad Pitt is so adored by ladies. His looks as a 16year old Benjamin are stunning and full credit to the make-up artist for making him look that young. If Brad can do it, so did Cate Blanchett. She at least deserved a nomination for this role alongside him. The movie, as all narrative ones, truly catches the viewers off guard.
I think after the Indian debacle, PWC needs to count the votes again, at least for this movie... (My rating - 8/10)

Wrestling the way through

I am a fan of WWE, but I dont know what happens to the stars after 20years of their retirement. If what is shown in "The Wrestler" is true, then I think they deserve better.
I have absolutely no idea about who Mickey Rourke is except that he played 'Marv' in Sin City (that too found out after seeing his filmography). The movie has a major part of shooting with the cameraman on foot around the actors giving a feeling of a home movie. The injuries shown in the movie from the glass, barb wire and staples are said to be really sustained by Mickey in the movie and all credit to him for going through it, after all he was a professional boxer and had to have his face reconstructed. Giving him a nomination, well thats debatable but he has done a fine enough job well worthy of credit. As for Marisa Tomei, no offence but what did she do do land a nomination alongside Meryl Streep and Kate Winslet. She's seen hardly in the movie and sometimes pole dancing or lap dancing.
All in all a decent movie to watch. Nothing in it that you will miss if you dont watch but do watch... (My Rating - 6.5/10)

81st OSCAR - The Great Indian Rope Trick

DISCLAIMER - Views are personal
-------------------------------


I consider myself a decent enough connoisseur of movies having watched about 1000 odd of them in the last 8-10 years and almost 400 during MBA itself. First I started watching just for fun and then soon landed among friends who like to dissect movies critically.

The 74th Academy Awards were my first and only that I have watched till date and to me they provided the best competition with movies like- A Beautiful Mind, LoTR, Molin Rogue, Training Day, Ali, I am Sam, Monster's Ball, Bridget Jones diary, Iris, Black Hawk Down, Memento, Shrek, Harry Potter, Pearl Harbour etc.; certainly one of the best lot in a single year. 'twas the first after 9/11 and had more of a political drama attached to it which came to light when the top honours went to African-Americans. No offence to the community, I was not alone to say that there were better actors in the same year.

The Oscars had been troubled by sagging viewership for the past 3-4 years. The new director Sid Giddens had the responsibility to revive the lost sheen. How to do that is a "Million" dollar question or i should say a"2 Million Rupee" question. Nominated in 9 categories and 10awards was according to me a perfect stunt. I dont know how many people of Indian origin live in US but they would be less then those glued to TV sets today morning and with each award the viewership only increased.

I have not watched all the nominations of this year and will update my views shortly. As of now, "SM" is a nice movie having emotions, good story telling, nice technicalities and music. First things first, A.R. Rehman did a very good job but there are better works of his(maybe its the first time the Award Committee got to hear him). I dont know the technicalities of sound but as a layman couldn't see how "SM" had even been nominated in the sound editing category(maybe they were only thinking of songs). With condolence and due respect to the family members of late Heath Ledger, his award was more of emotional gesture than a critical one. But why was the film missing from the Make-up category, I am still kind of amazed.

With 8 wins its hard to get off from "SM". Its cinematography was commendable but beating "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" in best editing and best picture is a bonus. On the other hand "TCCoBB" beating "The Dark Night" and "Hellboy-2" for "makeup" is highly surprising. "The Duchess" truly had amazing costumes and no doubt deserved it.

Well, as you can see there are still some categories I have left out since have not watched the movies but as of now, Slumdog has truly become a millionaire.