Tag Archives: the king’s speech

Link Dump: #20

Anne Hathaway can try – and best of luck to her – but she’ll never out-Catwoman the beloved Eartha Kitt. I mean, her last name was “Kitt”! You can’t get more Catwoman-y than that. Luckily for Anne, though, she’ll undoubtedly outdo the previous incarnation – i.e., Halle Berry’s. Guess we’ll just have to wait until 2012 to know for sure! In the meantime, some links:

  • Runt of the Web has a very funny observation about “Why I Need To Quit Facebook.”
  • I think these film noir woodcuts by Guy Budziak may be the coolest things ever. Feel free to contradict me on that… but you’ll probably be wrong.
  • Oh, women. First they’re menstruating all over the place, now they’re falling asleep during movies. Luckily AskMen.com’s scienticians are here to tell us the very scientific reasons why!
  • If you’ve never checked out Banksy’s website, it’s got a great collection of his bitingly satirical graffiti pieces, both in and out of doors.
  • Speaking of Oscar nominees, aren’t the Coen Bros. awesome? This chart contains all 15 of their films to date, plus info about actors they’ve reused.
  • Christopher Hitchens in Slate points out a few of the “gross falsifications of history” present in The King’s Speech. A glossy piece of prestigious fluff chooses to overlook unpleasant truths? I know, I’m shocked too! (Matt Singer of IFC responds with a comparison to The Social Network.)
  • I always love jokey photoshopped posters, so TheShiznit brings us “If the Best Picture nominee posters told the truth.” The alterations of are of varying quality, and to be truly nitpicky, neither Love and Other Drugs nor The Ghost Writer was nominated. But it’s worth a laugh. And no matter what you do, there’s no way to make that poster for The King’s Speech worse.
  • This was published last June, but I just discovered it: an essay by Matt Mazur talking about Fassbinder alongside The Night of the Hunter. As a massive fan of both, I had to read it.

On the search term front, we don’t have much this week. But there is the odd, lie-filled “why aren’t gay men attractive”; the extreme long “first atempt menses vigina in indian femle with clear videos,” which doesn’t seem sure what it’s searching for; and finally, the ominous “pictures of pussys you’re not supposed to see.” Which pictures are those, exactly? Do I even want to know?

2 Comments

Filed under art, Cinema, Feminism, Media

Once more unto the breach!

Since I turned in the first draft of my comps project on Monday, I now have a life again! And that life, of course, involves blogging. I feel like I’m about to go into casual film writing withdrawal or something; so much time spent maintaining a stern, academic tone can be suffocating. So let’s get wacky, why don’t we! Just like Bertie in The King’s Speech, let’s throw off the shackles of pomp and circumstance, and start acting… well, acting however the hell we want to. After all, as Sean Parker says in another Oscar nominee, “This is our time.”

Yeah, I’m just all intoxicated with the joy of freedom, movies, and awards season (even if all the awards are just the problematic, self-congratulatory products of industry politics), and I want to write, write, write! So first of all, I want to write about a subject near and dear to my heart: horror director Lucky McKee (of May fame). As you may have heard, he recently had a film debut at Sundance. It was largely overlooked in the midst of all the Red State hoopla, but it sounds fascinating and disturbing—always the best combination.

It’s called The Woman and it involves the feral, nonverbal woman of the title being taken in and “educated” by the abusive, sociopathic patriarch of an average American family. Sound deeply weird? Yeah, I think we’re in prime McKee territory, folks. Better yet, The Woman‘s premiere screening was the site of a hysterical outbreak by one particularly vocal McKee detractor, who declared that “this film ought to be confiscated, burned… there’s no value in showing this to anyone!” You can watch footage of the event at the link above. Oh, and a woman was injured trying to walk out of the screening. You can read McKee’s well-reasoned response here.

And yes, as indicated by the picture above, I did watch The King’s Speech immediately after the nominations were announced. It didn’t exactly set my world on fire. It’s occasionally cutesy, and shows some fine British dry wit in its best moments, but for the most part, it’s just well-mounted historical fluff. Compared to something like The Blind Side, certainly, it’s high art—I’m not exactly outraged that it’s posed to possibly sweep the Oscar race—but it’s hardly in the league of daring, even ingenious films like The Social Network, Black Swan, or Winter’s Bone.

I love HBC as much as the next weirdo, but it’s sad to see her nominated for a role where she mostly just smiles and nods, when she’s done such ferociously good work in the past. And seriously, Geoffrey Rush is anything but a Supporting Actor. That’s just silly. But I’ll get more into all of this as February 27 approaches (and with it, my 21st birthday!). For now, suffice it to say that The King’s Speech was, to quote the impression my friend Rebekah had gotten, “pretty OK.” With that, may an era of renewed blogging begin! (Oh, and fun fact: did you know that HBC is nobility, as well as the great-granddaughter of a British PM? Like Wallis Simpson, Tim Burton clearly quasi-married above his social station!)

Leave a comment

Filed under Cinema, Media, Meta