Critical Film Condition

Ever since the Academy Awards I was intrigued as to why “Slumdog Millionaire” won all those awards, specially since I thought “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” was one of the most amazing motion pictures in recent memory.

And since movie theaters here in Munich took awhile longer to be able to show the movie, it took awhile for me to find out.

First, a little history lesson. Danny Boyle, who won, among other things, a Best Director Oscar this year for this movie, started his career with movies like “Shallow Grave” and “Trainspotting”… I hear the sounds HUH and OH being uttered in sequence, and YES, the guy who directed “Trainspotting” just won a shit-load of Oscars… Back to the topic:

“Slumdog Millionaire” is set in Mumbai, India, where Jamal Malik is one question away from winning 20 million rupees in “Who wants to be a Millionaire”… Since he is nothing but a slumdog, he is brought in for violent questioning, where he starts to tell his life story by explaining how he answered each of the questions correctly. Among other things, it is revealed that Jamal had a very hard life, and is still seeking a lost love from his youth.

A simple plot turns into an amazing story about friendship, trust, honor, love and fate. Jamal is a street-smart, but very naive guy, played very confidently by Dev Patel, and his very true-love for Latika (Freida Pinto) has to become challenges unimaginable by people who live in the first-world. Where many compare “Slumdog Millionaire” with “City of God”, the similarities end when you realize that “Slumdog Millionaire” is, in essence, a beautiful love story about the effect that faith and destiny has on our lives. While thematically both movies differ a lot from each other, the brilliant editing in this movie might show similarities with “City of God”, but again instead of bringing up a fast-paced rhythm to keep the action going fast, “Slumdog” does it to encompass its main subject: making the best out of any situation. With all its tragedy, it manages to transgress the layer of sadness with brilliant editing and photography, making the public never feel sorry for Jamal, but instead root for him throughout the whole experience.

I am not here to compare “Slumdog Millionaire” with “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” because we review movies as single items, not grading them compared to other works of film-making. I still think that “Benjamin Button” is a more impressive achievement, both technically and in narrative terms, but that doesn’t distract from the fact that “Slumdog Millionaire” is an incredible emotional tour-de-force, that will make you think twice before giving up or thinking that your life sucks. It is about much more than a kid from the slums with a chance to live a good life. It is about the greatest feelings of love and persistence, and reaping the rewards for truly believing that everything can come true.

And it’s just an incredible joy to watch.

Popularity: 4%

Actually I have no idea how to start a unidirectional discussion on a grievous, colossal, gargantuan topic like this.

Facts are probably a good idea: the movie is based on the German book “Der Vorleser” by Bernhard Schlink, a German law professor and judge. It was published in Germany in 1995 and in the United States in 1997, with Oprah Winfrey famously pushing sales with her “Book Club”. It is on the curriculum of most schools in Germany by now, as it should be. And I sincerely mean that.

Growing up in Germany, I was confronted with all shades of shady to dark grey to the hellishly black facets of this heavyweight from a very early age: from downright comical explanations by teachers why half of Berlin was the only area in color on the map of East Germany to horror stories of people being deported by the Gestapo to educational school trips to the concentration camp site in Dachau to deaths and life-long injuries on both sides my family (German and American) to confusions whether it was appropriate to hoist a Germany flag anywhere (until it became fashionable during the Soccer World Cup a lifetime after WWII).

Trying to grasp the magnitude of the Holocaust and its consequences has always been like trying to stop a rabid bear with a sewing needle.

The book spans a colorful array of uncomfortable topics: the German generation gap, illiteracy, age difference in relationships, guilt and of course the Holocaust. “The Reader” deals with the question whether a sense of its origins and magnitude can be adequately conveyed solely through written and oral media. This question is increasingly at the center of Holocaust literature in the late 20th and early 21st century, as the victims and witnesses of the Holocaust die and its living memory begins to fade.

The movie is almost a complete visual translation of the book. Director Stephen Daldry and screenwriter David Hare stick to the book except for a miniscule amount of poetic license and I think that was a smart decision. The story follows two people who meet under very rare circumstances. One is too young to remember and the other too hard-eyed to look back.

It opens in post-WWII Germany when teenager Michael Berg (played by German actor David Kross) becomes ill and is helped home by Hanna Schmitz (Kate Winslet), a stranger twice his age (to avoid legal consequences, the crew delayed the filming of sexually explicit scenes until after actor David Kross’ 18th birthday). Michael recovers from scarlet fever and seeks out Hanna to thank her. The two are quickly drawn into a passionate but secretive affair. Michael discovers that Hanna loves being read to and their physical relationship deepens. Despite their intense bond, Hanna mysteriously disappears one day and Michael is left confused and heartbroken. Eight years later, while Michael is a law student observing the Nazi war crime trials, he is stunned to find Hanna back in his life – this time as a defendant in the courtroom.

Although Kate Winslet in my opinion should have been nominated for “Revolutionary Road” instead of or along side of “The Reader”, she won the Oscar for “Best Actress”. And this was a truly tough gig. And she admittedly did it brilliantly. I saw the movie in German so I truly cannot say anything about her German accent, but I expect it is nothing less than spot-on.

And David Kross is astonishing alongside Winslet. It is a little bit of a shame that all the spotlight was on her during the award season because he does a stellar job. The one point I awarded for “Funness” is actually for the nude scenes. I know there was a lot of critical discussion for the, let’s call it “European” approach to the sex scenes but in my opinion they fit nicely with the taste of the entire tour de force.

And Ralph Finnes is always exactly right for and in anything.

Among the many German actors are Karoline Herfurth, Bruno Ganz, Burghart Klaußner, Hannah Herzsprung and Alexandra Maria Lara. Producers Sydney Pollack and Anthony Minghella both died before the completion of the movie. As the film was nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards, the Academy made an exception from their rules not to name more than three producers as nominees because of this rare circumstance. In the end the two producers Donna Gigliotti and Redmond Morris who took over duties were nominated as well as the posthumously honored Minghella and Pollack.

The movie certainly poses a litany of questions, but all of them are worth pondering. It is heavy but in my opinion you just cannot be too educated about (especially recent) history. If you want to jump-start the old hamster on the wheel in the brain, this on is for you.

No frills, just questions in your head.

Popularity: 4%

First things first, a little history lesson: Harvey Bernard Milk (1930-1978) was an American politician and the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in California, as a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Politics and gay activism were not Milk’s early interests; he did not feel the need to be open about his homosexuality or participate in civic matters until around age 40, after his experiences in the counterculture of the 1960s.

Milk moved from New York City to settle in San Francisco in 1972 amid a migration of gay men moving to the Castro District in the 1970s. He took advantage of the growing political and economic power of the neighborhood and ran unsuccessfully for political office three times. His theatrical campaigns (My name is Harvey Milk and I’m here to recruit you!“) earned him increasing popularity, and Milk won a seat as a city supervisor in 1977, a result of the broader social changes the city was experiencing.

Milk served 11 months in office and was responsible for passing a stringent gay rights ordinance for the city. On November 27, 1978, Milk and Mayor George Moscone were assassinated by Dan White, another city supervisor who had recently resigned but wanted his job back.

Using flashbacks from a statement recorded late in life and archival footage for atmosphere, this movie traces exactly this time span from his 40th birthday to his assassination.

It took about a fraction of a nanosecond for me to love this movie. From the first frame until the credits, Sean Penn is a gay man. And I know gay men. I have a gay husband and at least half a dozen gay boyfriends. I have no idea how Sean Penn did what he did, but it was an amazing performance and the Oscar was well-deserved.

It is difficult to create tension in a screenplay that gives away the ending right at the beginning. But Dustin Lance Black just does it and deservedly scored an Oscar for it.

Not relying on the history buffs, the conclusion is actually shown within the first minutes of the movie and miraculously does not hurt it at all. And like in “Titanic”, you just know it is inevitable, but you are completely unprepared for the iceberg – due largely to the fact that Sean Penn is simply a stratospherically brilliant actor. And director Gus Van Sant manages to be low-key and in-your-face at the same time. The beginning sequence consists of gay men in bars hiding their faces in order to remain anonymous and then chronicles the changes that occurred in society during the life of Harvey Milk. His interlacing of narrative and documentary styles is both effortless and flawless. And I especially liked the editing and the way that the archive footage was weaved seamlessly into the scenes, making it difficult to tell them apart even for a trained eye. It creates a great atmosphere, recreating San Francisco and the beginning of the gay rights movement.

The movie also sports a stellar cast including Josh Brolin who is brilliant as the repressed Dan White (who shot Harvey Milk). James Franco as adorable as Scott Smith, Harvey’s boyfriend whom he relocates to San Francisco with, Emile Hirsch and his much discussed hair “condition” and matching geek goggles as Cleve Jones, Alison Pill as Harvey Milk’s lesbian campaign manager Anne Kronenberg (very butch!), Victor Garber as Mayor George Moscone, Denis O’Hare (who ironically is openly gay) as State Senator John Briggs. And of course Anita Bryant has a couple of newsreel appearances (Scary!!!)

If I had to find something that I didn’t like I’d say the movie is slightly too long. But I kinda don’t want to.

Popularity: 2%

At the very end of the Oscars Ceremony last night, the Academy provided us with a small glimpse of some of the great movies that we’ll have the pleasure to watch in the year 2009. I’ve actually added this clip to our blog, without naming any movies because even I got some surprises along the way. Hope you enjoy it:

Popularity: 8%

Well, it was that time again: movie geeks from around the world get excited by the conglomerate of shenanigans that is the Academy Awards, or as the friends call it, the Oscars. In Germany, we have to endure the show starting at 2AM and, as expected, it went way beyond the expected schedule, with host Hugh Jackman wrapping it up at six.

Of course, Renny and Andi joined me with chips and beer, proving that the Academy Awards is the perfect way to replace our complete disinterest in soccer, and we were cheering for our favorites, something that thankfully wasn’t recorded in any way because it would have gotten us a safe place in the geek Hall of Fame. And in expecting the unexpected, we got something that left us with a bitter aftertaste, proving that the Academy will always be the Academy, no matter what.

The Oscars are about the show and not about the winners, everybody knows that. But believing in change is healthy. Hugh Jackman was not only fresh, he was so good that his limited screen-time was the biggest disappointment. His opener was nothing short of brilliant, toying with current subjects like the financial crisis and the lack of important nominations for comic book movies and his own “Australia”: “The Academy loves to salute range: In “The Reader”, Kate Winslet who is British, plays a German… Nominated. In “Tropic Thunder”, Robert Downey Jr. plays an Australian actor playing an african-american… Nominated. Whereas me, an Australian playing an Australian in a movie called “Australia”… Hosting. Because of the recession, everything is being downsized. Next year I’ll be starring in a movie called “New Zealand”.” What ensued was a display of Jackman’s multiple talents, using cheap props in a musical performance, not “good for an action star”, simply AMAZING. Anne Hathaway joined him on stage, also shamelessly showing a powerful singing voice. Jackman had to finish by remembering that he, the tuxedo-wearing dancer and singer, is in fact Wolverine. Talk about finishing with a bang… Or maybe not, since a second musical act directed by Baz Luhrman had him performing a duet with Beyonce Knowles and KILLING it. Amazing.

But unfortunately, that was about it for Hugh Jackman, who was limited to short descriptions of the events that followed. And it’s in these events and awards that the Academy shows that it is not ready yet to acknowledge that cinema has changed, over the last 40 years. It seems that they have a hard time fitting into newer trends, and when they do, they overdo it and time it badly. Bollywood has played an important role in worldwide cinema for the last twenty years (or much longer) and only now, with an Indian movie directed by a Brit they decide to recognize it. “Slumdog Millionaire” might be a remarkable movie, but it is obvious that all the accolades it got from the Academy, specifically, are results of the shame felt by not giving the REAL Bollywoodian productions in the past their due respect.

There were, of course, the obvious awards: never had I or anyone for that matter any doubt that Heath Ledger was going to win. Not only because his Joker was one of the most remarkable performances in recent memory, but because not giving him the damn thing would put the Academy in a very tight spot with both the press and the public. “Wall-E” was another sure winner. Then there were the surprises here and there, with Sean Penn being one of the few to beat Mickey Rourke in an award ceremony recently, something that Penn himself recognized at the end of his speech. Pennelope Cruz was another “surprise”, although she was my personal choice for supporting actress. Kate Winslet, like Martin Scorcese a few years back, was the “pity” Oscar. Kate is one of the best actresses in the World right now (“of her generation” is the right term, but that would be a serious understatement), and she should have gotten an Oscar a long time ago.

I don’t want this post to take forever, so I’m not even going to START talking about “The Dark Knight”. The Academy gave it two awards, and in their minds “this should at least appease some of the fans”.

But then there’s “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”. Again, I agree that “Slumdog Millionaire” might be an incredible movie (I haven’t had a chance to see it yet), but “Benjamin Button” is, both technically and as a motion picture experience altogether, one of the most incredible achievements ever. While “Australia” was hyped as the new “…Gone with the Wind”, David Fincher’s “Benjamin Button” managed to merge incredible technical innovations with the kind of dramatic storytelling that reminds us why we love movies… It’s up there, in my highly qualified opinion, with “Casablanca”, “Citizen Kane” and “Forrest Gump”. But still, the Academy wasn’t ready to acknowledge the talent of David Fincher, who shocked the World and helped shape cinema in the new millennium with “Fight Club”… Strangely, it instead acknowledged Danny Boyle, who directed “Trainspotting” and “28 Days Later”. Yes, you could say that rewarding a director like Boyle is a sign of change, but why does it always have to have a little political footnote to it. Boyle is a brilliant director, and in any other year I would agree with all these awards, but when you’re rivaled by something as amazing as “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”, it just doesn’t cut it.

In the end, it was the same story all over again. The Academy played it safe, and the least interesting thing during the night were the awards. Hugh Jackman is definitely the best host since Billy Crystal and is a welcome change for years to come… Let’s just hope he gets a little more working-time in the next round.

82nd Academy Awards in 2010: Jackman for pres… err… Host.

Popularity: 4%

Well, it’s been a long time coming, but here it is, people: Critical Film Condition Television, Episode 1. Naturally, this episode serves as a little introduction, as well as an Oscar report. In the future, CFC.tv is going to become a little “best of” video summary of what has happened since the last episode.

Well,  without further ado, here’s the video :-) :

Popularity: 4%