No Strings Attached

Director: Ivan Reitman (My Super Ex-Girlfriend; was producer for I Love You, Man & Up In the Air)
Screen Play Writer: Elizabeth Meriwether
Actors: Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher

As a premed nerd, one scene that made me smile was " you give me premature ventricular contraction", which is a problem when your heart skips a beat. I love lines that have science or math references. So intelligently romantic.

Anyhow, the movie is about two "friends with benefits". However, the movie hints that they were each other's "love at first sight". Thus, in a way, the movie contains somewhat cliche theme that there are soul-mates in the world that are attracted to each other no matter how different they are. So again we learn that there are just certain people in this world that you just cannot forget, because of circumstances that make the relationship seem like a destiny.

Carrying on with the theme, the movie was actually very well made for a "chick-flick". I really thought every transitions were smooth, the acting was very well done, shots were just pretty enough for a romantic comedy. I knew that the director was experienced at least. So, luckily, there was nothing about the movie that I frowned upon. Just a good homored romantic comedy.

I really liked the personalities of the characters and how they were played. Natalie Portman did a fabulous job of a smart, cold hearted doctor who is way too serious about her career that she has no time for love. I think those "workaholic" women are somewhat trendy in the movies these days. I think there are definitely elements in those characters that working women these days can really relate to. Like, there's this "new" contrasting goal in life for women, like getting a great career and finding the right person to love. It's a difficult dilemma that maybe all women in 21st century face.

Then, for these women, there are always the prince charming who follows these beautiful but busy women around. Especially for Ashton Kutcher, he always plays the guy who falls in love with girls who are workaholics, wrapped up in their career that they have no room in their minds for love. Like, he loves Jessica
Alba in Valentine's Day. Kutcher has this charming image that he can make anyone fall in love with him, and besides, he has the best "I am hurt by love" look, that makes all the audience to feel so bad for him. Oh man, I have to stop watching his movies.

Overall, the movie was a pretty well made romantic comedy, made with an experienced eye.

The King's Speech

If you have seen this year’s Oscar, then you would probably know how well The King’s Speech was made. From acting to screen play to directing, the highly praised movie was one of the best films made in 2010. It’s quite interesting to learn that the movie was produced by an independent film production company based in London, England - See-Saw Films, instead of a big companies like BBC Films. In addition, Tom Hooper is a rising director from London, who has focused mostly on television series. Thus, it maybe both element of the independent films that made The King’s Speech more aesthetically pleasing in the aspect of cinematography and the screen play.

            The King’s Speech is based on a true story. King George VI – played by Colin Firth – suffers from a speech impediment. With the rising use of the radio in the 1930s, a speech impediment was detrimental to the loyal family. As a duke, George VI had to give public announcements through the radio or even at a public event. However, because of his speech problems, Prince George VI was losing his confidence to contribute to the national politics. In finding a remedy for his problem, he seeks every speech therapist in England. Sick and tired of going through crazy therapies ranging from speaking while stuffing the mouth with marbles to smoking cigarette to alleviate nervousness, Prince George VI puts his last bet on a shabby actor – whom calls himself a therapist, not a doctor – Lionel Logue (played by Geoffrey Rush).

Although Lionel is not a licensed professional, he takes the duke through special trainings that fixes the innate problem to his speech impediment – to provide an opportunity to regain confidence about speaking. Through trial and error, tears and smiles, the gap between the loyal heir and an aged actor became nonexistent towards the end of the movie.

Although this piece of history from England maybe a very interesting historical fact, without the artistic directing and cinematography, the movie could have been very dry with merely the historical element. Every scene seemed to be very thought out; especially the proportions with the space in the room and the actors were very different from the conventional scenes. For example, the character’s face was often concentrated on one side of the screen, providing more negative space. On top of the unusual proportions on the screen, the color palette – gray and brown – in the movie fit right into the theme, giving a very neutral but a hint of gloomy mood to the film. All these components put together created every scene a piece of artwork.

Of course, the superb acting needs to be recognized. Colin Firth has acted the role of royalty in several movies. What shocked the audience was his ability to act a dignifying duke with a speech impediment. He exemplified the frustration with the disorder as well as with his country perfectly, delivering every sense of what the character feels. In addition, Helena Bonham Carter showed that she is a superb actress who can succeed in any genre, from someone bizarre as Bellatrix Lestrange in the Harry Potter movie to someone as sweet and elegant as the Queen Elizabeth in The King’s Speech. Definitely two thumbs up for the actors as well as the casting director.

Overall, the movie is one of the best made films of 2010 with a great history lesson, artistic scenes, and a lesson of friendship across the social status. 

Sideways

c

I think there is something beautiful and amazing about being so oblivious to the techniques of cinema and fully understanding the deep meaning. I don’t understand how some awards are given out for a movie, I mean; I don’t fully understand the standard of aesthetics. See, this is the beauty that I am talking about, this wonder, a mixture of fear of being wrong with little bit of hope that everyone has different opinions. Sideways received tons of awards and praises, including an Oscar for the best screenplay.Honestly, the movie was deep but boring. From reading the reviews and critiques, I began to truly wonder what is the standard for a "good movie".

But Sideways really made me think about the mix of coding made by the writer, and the acting that supports the written words, which can ultimately even change the encoding of the meaning of the story for the viewers.

Sideway is such a sadistic comedy. It’s a dry comedy with a mix of life lessons intertwined with finding love, which can be defined in multiple ways. There is just constant flux that takes place in the movie, whether it be the constantly changing mood the feelings of the main character, or thoughts about love, that the only solid thing that grips the audience in place is simply wine.

So the movie is about a week of freedom for a groom-to-be with his best man. They go on a trip to go around bunch of vineyards in California  (even this part made me wonder, WHY? More about that later) But of course, the groom-to-be, Jack, wants more than just wine tasting and talking about pinot. While Jack goes crazy trying to find a girl to enjoy his last minute freedom, the main character, Miles, have way too much going on in his mind, from his ex-wife to his book that’s not getting published for years now. Along the way, he meets a wonderful lady named Maya, who he shares a similar interest in life with. Because of his sour situation in life, Miles is afraid of starting a relationship with Maya. Mile’s complicated and frustrating actions toward love and life makes the entire movie gloomy and hopeless. Actually, even Jack’s dumbfounded way of weighing love so lightly adds to the theme of the movie.

The juxtaposition of wine and life, the forced metaphor, was great. Wine ages and eventually reaches its peak, like people. How beautiful. But except for that, the whole movie is just so sour and really gives off that “deep-purple” mood like the actual wine.

You got to be in one of “those mood” to enjoy this movie. If you were looking for a comedy, DO NOT REACH FOR THIS MOVIE. It’s really one of those movies you ought to watch by yourself with a glass of dark wine, on one of those “I am just a little depressed” days.