Black Swan

When you watch a ballet performance or a theater play or anything that involves live performances you expect the character’s emotions to transpire to the audience. In theater this is done mainly by actors, in ballet this is done by the dancer’s performance and the choreography.
Darren Aronofsky does with Black Swan what a live performance does to the audience.
The story is simple: Nina, a young ballet dancer at New York’s Lincoln Center is cast as the lead in Tchaikovsky’s Swan Lake and she has to play both the white and the black swan. The execution of this contradiction seems impossible at first, but Nina artfully overcomes it with the cost of her own sanity.
The real story, the one that pulsates in our minds, is how much Nina is going to choose to sacrifice of her life in order to bring this duplicity on stage. We know she has sacrificed a lot by the way she lives. The apartment feels like a cage, a cell almost, you can almost touch the austerity, the claustrophobic feel. And her mother, a former ballet dancer, has turned her room into a shrine for Nina, one of the most thrilling sites ever.
At work, things have the same feel. In the repetition room black is predominant, the other dancers are dressed in black and the autocratic ruler of the house, Thomas (Vincent Cassel), a beastly character well known for his affairs with other dancers is fully aware of his power and of art’s fragility.
Just like ballet, the movie is a perfect union between actors and choreography. In charge of the choreography, Aronofsky masterfully shapes each scene to lure the audience and play with it’s senses. The unsettling soundtrack (created by Clint Mansell) expands on Tchaikovsky’s Swan Lake themes, the character’s close-ups enhance the emotion, the movement of the camera stuns the viewer and sets him in the spotlight on stage.
As a whole, Black Swan is like a live performance that has been practiced to exhaustion and has rendered perfection. It’s a movie that is haunting and takes pride in being a form of art. Just like ballet.

The Social Network

The Social Network is about a kid that while inventing the greatest tool to socialize in the world, he is also the loneliest guy on the planet. The movie's background story is the creation of the Facebook phenomenon, but the main subject is Mark Zuckerberg's ahead-of-time thinking. His views on everything look and sound different but are completely rational.

What he's not good at is, you guessed it, socializing. He is connecting everybody, even if they don't want it, but cannot manage to connect himself. He falls into all the corporate tricks, makes all the wrong friends and drags his best friend with him into the pit.

Don't get me wrong, he's not a bad guy (he says so himself in the movie). He's just a genius of our time and sometimes, if not most of the times, that's bad. He's created an almost indispensable tool of socializing, and inevitably has positioned himself where he is almost untouchable and not in an Al Capone kind a way. His friends are all Facebook friends. Which basically translates what Facebook realy is (and not only Facebook but mostly all other online social networks). A platform that lets each individual share what he wants. That doesn't mean it's necessarily true. Saying hello on Facebook and "Like"-ing it is not the same with saying hello face-to-face, smiling or shaking hands.

True friendship is based on true emotion. And that's what Facebook is missing.

In terms of cinematic experience, this is an Oscar-worthy. From directing to actors, even visuals, music, everything is on the spot, carefuly crafted.

You won't be sorry for the two hours spent in the dark.

Hollywood is desperate !

You can hear the producers screaming: What's the next big hit !!!

I mean, it's obvious. Less and less money go into original ideas because no-one is willing to take any risks. That mean that producers, agents and hollywood execs have no idea what genre/idea/subject will flood theaters with fans of the big white screen.

All of them put their money in safe, secure investments like franchises (the neverending graphic novel adaptations), sequels (Twilight, Shrek, Harry Potter two parts!) and remakes (Karate Kid, The Crazies, Clash of the Titans the list goes on and on)

Others are still looking for the next Paranormal Activity (which usually happens each 10 years) and ofcourse, there's a sequel or two in place which will probably  bomb at the box office.

In the meantime the trend-setters invest in gems like Inception, Splice, Monsters or know how to guess what the public wants (making Salt after the russian spies were captured in USA - now isn't that a funny coincidence?).

Even better for movie-fans, big directors and actors go into developing TV projects since the public is tired of feeling cheated when exiting the cinemas (what did I pay for? why did I waste my time? - all those movie-fanatic existential questions)

Good thing for the coming Oscar season. Maybe we'll get a taste of what good quality movies used to be. Before it's too late.

iPhone's Marketing Power

Was coming out of Phones4u with my new iPhone 3GS in my backpack and felt like having some coffee.

I knew Starbucks had wi-fi so I stopped at one nearby. After waiting at the long queue and getting my grande cappucinno, I went upstairs with the obvious intention to get the iPhone out of the box.

But, as it turned out, the whole process is not just any process.

I've found an empty table somewhere in the middle of the sitting area and maybe five or six other tables were occupied. Added some more sugar into my cup, shake well and took a sip.

I opened my backpack and took out The iPhone Box. All wraped up and brand new. Now, I'm not exagerating here, but since I was the newest coffee-lover arrived in the room, usually the rest of the patrons scan u before u become just another coffee drinker.

But when I took out the box and went looking for the sign where to start un-wrapping, the rest of the patrons turned to watch me.

Suddenly I was in the center of attention. I was on stage. I felt a little weird but I carried on. I took off the plastic wrap and slowly opened the box (slowly because that's how it opens, not that I wanted to). And there it was. The iPhone. Looking sleek and shiny as I was expecting it to look. I wondered at the piece of technology in my hands, my eyes glimmered with satisfaction and some form of fullfilment. Then I went on to see what else is inside.

And that's when my audience got back to their usual.

Now, I know I was not the only person having an iPhone in that room and I know it's not the best smart-phone out there. But everybody in the room recognized the device and seing it in the box, the actual users remembered their "moment of discovery", when they first opened the box. And they wanted to see me live that moment right there, at a table in Starbucks, having a capucinno.

They knew that I was gonna live a moment to remember, as they are all remembering their moment of discovery.

Now, that's what I call a product that creates customer experiences.

Un Prophete

In regia lui Jaques Audiard, Un Prophete este filmul frantuzesc comparabil cu Nasul, si daca varianta americana se intinde pe trei parti, Un prophete face acelasi lucru in doua ore si jumatate.

Povestea arabului Malik (Tahar Rahim) inchis intr-o puscarie alaturi de cei mai periculosi mafioti si transformarea sa dintr-un un infractor intr-un mafiot nemilos este transpusa fara prea multe dialoguri, ci mai mult prin jocul actoricesc.

Malik se afla intr-o situatie relativ simpla. Don-ul napolitan Cesar Luciani (numele nu este o simpla coincidenta) il forteaza sa ucida un martor incarcerat in aceeasi puscarie ce trebuie sa supravietuiasca pentru a putea depune marturie. Fiind singurul care are acces la aripa arabilor si “curtat” de catre martor, Malik are de ales: il ucide sau este ucis.

Intr-o scena de intensitate maxima, Malik il ucide, si devine protejatul don-ului. Dar nu se opreste aici. El este eliberat cateva zile pe saptamana, pe cautiune, timp in care duce la bun sfarsit misiuni pentru don, urcand rapid pe scara ierarhica. Transformarea sa este brutala, realitatea cruda din puscarie schimbandu-l in esenta, metamorfozandu-se psihic dintr-un delicvent marunt intr-un mafiot necrutator.

Pe un ton putin mistic, Malik mafiotul isi conduce viata si ia deciziile in urma unor viziuni bizare (dar pline de simbolistica) sau aparitii hipnotizante ale victimelor sale, iar rezultatele sunt pe masura. Ingeniozitatea planurilor sale il duc pana in varf pe scara ierarhica si puterea sa crescanda se oglindeste in comportamentul respectuos al celorlalti.

Stilul filmului este realist si brutal, scenele violente fiind la limita dintre antrenant si suportabil. Cu o tema ce putini au crezut ca mai poate fi abordata cu succes, si mai ales in acest fel, Un Prophete depaseste cu mult asteptarile si isi revendica bine-meritatul loc printre clasici.

Replica favorita:

Malik: “Listen, we’ll kill them but they can’t see it coming”

Shutter Island - inchisoarea mintii

In longeviva sa cariera, regizorul Martin Scorsese nu a abordat niciodata genul thriller. Desi orice a purtat amprenta sa a fost un succes, thriller-ul nu a fost pe placul sau. Iata ca acum, Scorsese regizeaza un thriller prin definitie, si o face in stilul specific, marcant.

Actiunea filmului este plasata in 1954, pe insula-fortareata Shutter Island devenita spital ce gazduieste cei mai periculosi bolnavi mintali pe care alte institutii i-a refuzat. Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) si Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo), doi detectivi cu trecut dubios, sunt trimisi sa investigheze disparitia unui pacient (Emily Mortimer) in conditiile in care este imposibil sa evadezi de pe insula.

Atmosfera filmului este tensionata chiar din primele minute. Muzica, vremea proasta si cadrele apropiate stabilesc evident caracteristica noir a filmului. Insula este inspaimantatoare cu malurile abrupte, zidurile sinistre si mimele gardienilor si pacientilor la un loc, cel putin inchizitorii. Lafel sunt si apartitiile doctorului Cawley (Ben Kinglsey) care pare a avea un singur scop: sa impiedice bunul mers al anchetei.

Momentele de thriller provin insa din bagheta magica a regizorului Scorsese: scenele flash-back ce dezvaluie trecutul lui Teddy sunt finisate la perfectie, luminile si miscarile camerei se potrivesc ideal, dialogurile cu subtext in abundenta, iar actorii, in special DiCaprio, exceleaza la fiecare gest. Violenta nu este covarsitoare, dar tensiunea crescanda parca prevesteste si sporeste momentele violente, lasand urme adanci in psihicul spectatorului.

Toate aceste tehnici aduc aminte de The Shining, al genialului Stanley Kubric, si isi merita locul printre clasici. Shutter Island este un thriller-psihologic necrutator si inteligent, pe alocuri dur si admirabil din punct de vedere vizual.

Replica favorita

Teddy: “You know this place makes me wonder: which would be worse? To live as a monster or to die as a good man?”

Discover your imagination

Can anybody tell me what is "a song that you love" ? I suppose it's something that makes you feel something. Or just sounds good. But if it just sounds good, it doesn't mean you love it. It just plays in your car, in your headphones or on your favourite radio station. A song that you love is a song that you just sit and listen to it. A song that echoes in your brain, in your mind, in your imagination.

Here's an exercise:

Pick a song that you truly love. The one that "echoes". Play it once. Twice.

The third time, while listening to it, the moment you feel something, write that feeling down in an adjective or a couple of words. Do this througout the song.

Then put the pen down. Look at what you wrote. Analyse the words and see what feelings you just had. The stronger the feeling were, the more you love the song.

Here's what I've picked: Audiomachine - "House of Cards". It's a short song that plays in a lot of trailers.

You can listen to it here

And here's what ran through my mind while listening to it:

ritual

quiet

relaxing

angelic

high spirits

grand

warmth

beautiful

luminous/ irradiant

warmth

challenging

up-lifting

engaging

something is coming

silence before the storm

severe

terifiyng

pain

killing

powerful

wripping apart

sublime

cry

end of the world

lost love

no use living

sky falling

resolute

Looking back at the list, it's actually a glimpse of my imagination and what happened with my mind when the music played. It's images transposed into words. And reading it afterwords reminds me exactly of what I was thinking in that moment.

Depending on your mood, the same song can bring up other words, but writing your feelings down is like an open window to your imagination.

Anybody dare to try it? Using your lovely song, ofcourse.

Oscarul, spectacol prin definitie

What a night!

Iata ca a trecut si festivitatea Oscarurilor, cea mai importanta noapte a tuturor celor implicati sau pasionati de film, o noapte cu momente inedite, orgolii ranite dar si noi oportunitati pentru castigatori.

"Spuma" show-ului a fost cei doi comedianti-prezentatori, Steve Martin si Alec Baldwin ce au decis sa nu faca lafel ca Jack Hughman anul trecut: s-au decis sa nu danseze. In schimb, nu au abandonat traditia, si l-au co-optat pe Neil Patrick Harris sa faca numarul pentru ei. Si a iesit excelent.

In schimb, cei doi s-au axat pe stand-up-ul de inceput ca sa incalzeasca putin atmosfera. Nu au ezitat sa comenteze decizia academiei de a mari numarul nominalizarilor pentru Cel mai Bun Film, cand au remarcat ca tot Hollywood-ul se intreaba acum: “Cat fac 5 ori 2?”.

Apoi l-au incurajat pe Vanatorul de Evrei, Christopher Waltz din Inglorious Basterds, spunandu-i ca in sadistica sa cautare a ajuns acum sa fie inconjurat de evrei. Si nu au ezitat sa mentioneze relatia “speciala” care s-a format intre fostii soti Kathryn Bigelow si James Cameron, cand au anuntat ca dupa nominalizarea la aceeasi categorie, Kathryn i-a trimis lui Cameron un buchet de flori cu un cronometru (aluzie la subiectul filmului regizat de ea, Hurt Locker, despre un genist in razboiul din Irak).

Desigur, filmul preferat al celor doi este Hangover, dupa spusele lor, una dintre cele mai bune comedii din ultimul timp, din nou aluzie la faptul ca o comedie nu a reusit sa fie nominalizata la vreun premiu important pana acum.

De mentionat si ochelarii 3D pe care cei doi i-au purtat pentru a-l putea vedea pe James Cameron, probabil unul dintre momentele de top din intreg spectacolul.

Momentele amuzante au continuat si in timpul decernarilor, cand Ben Stiller a inmanat premiul pentru Cel Mai Bun Machiaj machiat ca un Na’Vi (specia extraterestra cu coada din Avatar), iar personajele din filmele de animatie nominalizate si-au spus parerea, in stilul propriu, despre cum e sa fii nominalizat.

Cele doua sectiuni In Memoriam dedicate una lui John Huges, scriitor de film decedat anul trecut, si una dedicata oamenilor de film ce au incetat din viata recent, au infasurat statueta aurie cu esarfa neagra, amintind Hollywood-ului de cei ce nu mai sunt.

Steve Martin a incheiat ceremonia scurt si la subiect, mentionand ca “This show has lasted so long that it makes Avatar look like it happened in the past!” (Show-ul acesta a durat atat de mult incat Avatar pare ca s-a intamplat in trecut!) iar Alec Baldwin a dat start-ul petrecerilor.

De ce 10 ?

Anul acesta categoria Cel mai Buna Film in concursul suprem dupa statueta parfumata cu aur, pe nume Oscar, s-a extins la 10 nominalizari.

Oare de ce?

Ultima data cand s-au nominalizat 10 filme pentru premiul cel mare a fost in 1943, dupa care s-au nominalizat doar 5. Intre anii 1931 si 1943 au fost si 8 nominalizari dar chiar si 12. De ce dupa 67 de ani s-a revenit, tocmai anul acesta, la formula initiala de a nominaliza 10 filme ?

Raspunsul e destul de simplu: ratings.

Festivitatea Oscarurilor este una dintre cele mai vizionate show-uri din lume, probabil cea mai vizionata. Competitori puternici sunt finala campionatului modial de fotbal sau Super Bowl-ul american.

Pe de alta parte, Oscarurile inchid sezonul premierilor la Hollywood si marcheaza schimbarea sezonului din filme “grele” (drame, biografii, musical) la cele “primavaratice” (comedii romantice, animatii, fantasy, dar si actiune).

Dar probabil cel mai intemeiat motiv de a extinde numarul nominalizarilor de la 5 la 10 este predictibilitatea. Pana la seara Oscarurilor sunt alte festivitati de premiere, mai putin sau mai mult faimoase, care prezinta aceleasi nominalizari si scad din intensitatea “emotiei” de a ghici, spera sau castiga Oscarul, dar mai important, din a urmari spectacolul live. Caci aceasta este miza ABC (organizatorul evenimentului si detinatorul exclusivist a drepturilor de difuzare a ceremoniei) cand vine vorba de Oscaruri: cati mai multi oameni in fata televizoarelor, indiferent pe ce post se retransmite sau pe ce site se difuzeaza in direct.

Dupa doi ani la rand in care rating-ul per show a scazut considerabil, decizia de a mari numarul nominalizatilor pentru Cel Mai Bun Film nu face decat sa sporeasca “misterul” din jurul intrebarii “cine va castiga?” si mai ales sa scada nivelul predictibilitatii.

Iar asta va duce inevitabil la cresterea numarului de spectatori/telespectatori si implicit al rating-ului

De ce “The Hurt Locker” atat de repede pe ProTv?

Banuiesc ca multi dintre noi am vazut reclama la ProTv la “ The Hurt Locker” ce ruleaza duminica la 22:30 pe ProTV, film cu 9 nominalizari la Oscar anul acesta si mari sanse la Cel Mai Bun Film. Multi dintre noi s-au si intrebat daca e adevarat, daca e o farsa sau daca macar se poate ca un film lansat in Romania pe 29 septembrie anul trecut si cu atatea nominalizari, sa poata rula la TV. Ei bine, se poate si asta datorita puterii de decizie a anumitor persoane din staff-ul ProTv ce se ocupa cu alegerea filmelor ce vor rula pe post.

Pe de alta parte, filmul a fost prezentat pe 4 septembrie 2008 la festivalul de film de la Venetia, unde a avut un prim succes rasunator. Daca cineva dintre acele persoane cu putere de decizie ar fi fost prezent la lansare, pe langa succesul din partea publicului si al juriului, ar fi auzit si parerile criticilor de film si jurnalistilor (care decid castigatorii la Golden Globes) si decizia de a achizitiona drepturile de difuzare ar fi fost simpla.

Ceea ce si s-a intamplat. Avand in vedere ca orice film independent este ieftin (comparativ cu productiile blockbuster hollywood-iene) si cauta sa recupereze investitia in productia filmului, achizitionarea lui “The Hurt Locker” a fost accesibila la momentul respectiv.

Insa decizia cu adevarat inteleapta a ProTv-ului a fost de a astepta rularea pe post pana dupa sezonul premiilor la Hollywood, incurajata probabil si de vestile bune despre film ce veneau din presa si de la festivaluri.

Astfel, ProTV isi asigura o bine-meritata audienta, filmul ruland chiar in seara decernarii premiilor Oscar si probabil de nenumarate ori de-acum inainte in cazul in care va castiga premiul cel mare.

Nomination and Predictions

Here are the nominees for the 82nd Annual Academy Awards (meaning Oscars) and my pick on who will win (the grey titles) :

Best Picture

"Avatar"

"The Blind Side"

"District 9"

"An Education"

"The Hurt Locker"

"Inglorious Basterds"

"Precious"

"A Serious Man"

"Up"

"Up in the Air"

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role

Jeff Bridges - "Crazy Heart"

George Clooney - "Up in the Air"

Colin Firth - "A Single Man"

Morgan Freeman - "Invictus"

Jeremy Renner - "The Hurt Locker"

Best Performance by an Actress in Leading Role

Sandra Bullock - "The Blind Side"

Helen Mirren - "The Last Station"

Carey Mulligan - "An Education"

Gabourey Sidibe - "Precious"

Meryl Streep - "Julie & Julia"

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role

Matt Damon - "Invictus"

Woody Harrelson - "The Messenger"

Christopher Plummer - "The Last Station"

Stanley Tucci - "The Lovely Bones"

Christopher Waltz - "Inglorious Basterds"

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role

Penelope Cruz - "Nine"

Vera Farmiga - "Up in the Air"

Maggie Gyllenhaal - "Crazy Heart"

Anna Kendick - "Up in the Air"

Mo'Nique - "Precious"

Best Director

James Cameron - "Avatar"

Kathryn Bigelow - "The Hurt Locker"

Lee Daniels - "Precious"

Jason Reitman - "Up in the Air"

Quentin Tarantino - "Inglorious Basterds"

Best Original Screenplay

"The Hurt Locker" - Mark Boal

"Inglorious Basterds" - Quentin Tarantino

"The Messenger" - Alessandro Camon, Oren Moverman

"A Serious Man" - Joel Coen, Ethan Coen

"Up" - Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Thomas McArty

Best Adapted Screenplay

"District 9" - Neil Blomkamp, Teri Hatchell

"An Education" - Nick Hornby

"In the Loop" - Jesse Armstrong

"Precious" - Geoffrey Fletcher

"Up in the Air" - Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner

Best Cinematography

"Avatar"

"Das weisse Band - The Red Ribbon"

"Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"

"The Hurt Locker"

"Inglorious Basterds"

Best Editing

"Avatar"

"District 9"

"The Hurt Locker"

"Inglorious Basterds"

"Precious"

Best Art Direction

"Avatar"

"The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus"

"Nine"

"Sherlock Holmes"

"The Young Victoria"

Best Costume Design

"Bright Star"

"Coco avant Channel"

"The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus"

"Nine"

"The Young Victoria"

Best Make-up

"Il Divo"

"Star Trek"

"The Young Victoria"

Best Soundtrack

"Avatar" - James Horner

"Fantastic Mr. Fox" - Alexandre Desplat

"The Hurt Locker" - Marco Beltrami, Buck Sanders

"Sherlock Holmes" - Hans Zimmer

"Up" - Michael Giacchino

Best Song

"Crazy Heart" - T-Bone Burnett, Ryan Bingham ("The Weary Kind")

"Faubourg 36" - Reinhardt Wagner, Frank Thomas ("Loin de Paname")

"Nine" - Maury Yeston ("Take it All")

"The Princess and the Frog" - Randy Newman ("Almost There")

"The Princess and the Frog" - Randy Newman ("Down in New Orleans")

Best Visual Effects

"Avatar"

"District 9"

"Star Trek"

Best Animated Feature Film

"Coraline"

"Fantastic Mr. Fox"

"The Princess and the Frog"

"The Secret of Kells"

"Up"

Best Foreign Language Film

"Ajami" (Israel)

"Das Weisse Band" (Germany)

"El Secreto de sus ojos" (Argentina)

"Un prophete" (France)

"La teta asustada" (Peru)

Best Documentary

"Burma VJ"

"The Cove"

"Food Inc."

"The Most Dangerous Man in America"

"Which Way Home"

Winners will be announced tonight, 7th of March at 8PM Pacific Time, 3AM European

Avatar/Goliath vs Hurt Locker/David

With 6 days left to go before the big night, apparently the top contenders for the Academy’s Best Picture prize are The Hurt Locker and Avatar. Can anybody believe that? Small, indie production but with a powerful human-side battling against the golem in all shapes and sizes but with innovative technique? Doesn’t this look like a battle from the holy books? Yes, it does. It’s exactly like David and Goliath. And here’s what I think will be the aftermath of such a confrontation.

Crunching last box-office scraps, Avatar/Goliath is tired of the same food for last couple of months. He chewed out of other wannabes like Twilight, Sherlock Holmes, It’s Complicated, Daybreakers, Book of Eli, Lovely Bones, Edge of Darkness and many others. And now he’s biting his way into The Oscars with 9 nominations, including for the big one. A thought at which Avatar/Goliath grins everytime it crosses his mind. But he is tired. He’s tired of no real competition. Tired and furious on people not understanding what he has achieved and what he represents. He feels the eyes of the Gods/Academy carefully watching him almost feeling their breath warming up his backhead. The pressure is gaining on him, even if he’s as big as Titanic. Even bigger.

Somewhere in the far distance something slowly climbs uphill. It’s been a long year for Hurt Locker/David and he has reached incredible levels. He took on any challenges that his people gave him and he surpassed all. He came to the New Lands/USA in mid-year and didn’t became a sudden sensation in the box-office arena. But he slowly conquered the souls of his watchers and built a strong army of followers. Key-followers. His efforts have paid off. He carries the responsibility of 9 Oscar nominations, the most important ones.

Avatar/Goliath turns to see this ant approaching and feels his anger chocking him when he sees who it is. Nevertheless, he’s heard before of this... Hurt Locker/David.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: How dare you show your poster in front of me, scum? How dare you come near me? You’re not even the same genre!

HURT LOCKER/DAVID: But we’re being watched by the same crowd, sport! Just wanted to come here and assess the situation. See whats your status.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: Be gone, indie! Before I smash you with my 500 million production costs!

HURT LOCKER/DAVID: What? And send my ass flying to... Pandora?... Touching. I think your only fans between the Gods/Academy all travelled to the Blue-people planet and communication was interrupted. They can’t cast their vote throughout the Universe, mate.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: There are no limits to what I can do! I am the King !

HURT LOCKER/DAVID: You need a couple of humans, that can actually feel, to drag your blue-tail back to reality.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: Who are you to tell me what reality is?

HURT LOCKER/DAVID: You know me. I’m the one who stole the main prizes in front of your big-round eyes and made people feel human again. I’m the 11 million production that took the audience by surprise and reminded everybody about the terrible things we force ourselves to commit. About an unnecessary war that you so eagerly promote.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: You cannot compete with the simbolism of my war! My war is eliberating!

HURT LOCKER/GOLIATH: Your war is a fairy tale! It’s Pocahontas. Ridiculous.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: Made people dream again! Don’t you think they need that?

HURT LOCKER/GOLIATH: People need to realize the situation this world is in ! The situation our proud army is in. I’m their wake-up call!

AVATAR/GOLIATH: I stand for fulfilling people’s dreams. It’s the perfect drug.

HURT LOCKER/GOLIATH: War is a drug too. Powerful drug. You’ll see soon enough.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: You threaten me, bug?! You stand in front of innovation? In front of evolution? The future?

HURT LOKER/GOLIATH: I stand for a story that inspires people, not brainwash them. I stand for directors with passion who want to send a message, I stand for low-budget quality movies in these times of crisis!

Avatar/Goliath swiftly brings out his cutting-age-new-generation-stereoscopic-camera and slams it to the ground making the world tremble.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: Can you compare yourself to that??

Hurt Locker/David stares at the magnificent piece of movie-weaponry. A truly awesome site.

HURT LOCKER/DAVID: What use for it if what it shows is just someone else’s imagination? If it draws people to see it it’s because of the imagery, but not because of the feelings it stirs.

AVATAR/GOLIATH: It will get me what I want. Recognition.

HURT LOCKER/DAVID: It’s never enough, isn’t it?

Avatar/Goliath grins at the thought of it.

HURT LOCKER/DAVID: Don’t you get it? Don’t you understand that the prizes are... unobtainable? People minds are shifting. People are starting to get out of their sofas and look outside the window. They’re starting to take notice, to care, to act. It’s this world’s people that will show you that big things can be achieved by small people when there’s passion.

A moment of silence as this sinks in. Hurt Locker/David stands to leave.

HURT LOCKER/DAVID: I guess I said what I came here to say. I’ll fire my sling in six-day time and it will hit you where it hurts the most. In your pride.

Without any fear, he turns his back to Avatar/Goliath and walks away. The hill is silent now. Silent before the storm.

The "good" about The Oscars

It seems like Hollywood is following tradition. The nominees for this year's Academy Awards Best Actor are mainly the good ol' villain characters that delighted us with great performances since the 1990ies. Looking back, the majority of Best Actor Winners are evil characters. In the past 20 years, 12 out of 19 awards were won by actors who played bad/evil/pitiful characters. Here they are:

1990 - Jeremy Irons for Reversal of Fortune - he plays a evilish wealthy socialite who hires a law professor to overturn his convictions for attempted murder

1991 - Anthony Hopkins for Silence of the Lambs - well, not much to say about that

1992 - Al Pacino for Scent of a Woman - not so evil but definetly a tough guy

1995 - Nicholas Cage for Leaving Las Vegas - playing an alcoholic who drank away his family, friends and job

1997 - Jack Nicholson As good as it gets - couldn't get more malicious than that

1999 - Kevin Spacey for his portrayal of a depressed suburban father in a mid-life crisis in American Beauty

2001 - Denzel Washington doing hard-life and mischievous training with a rookie in Training Day

2002 - Adrien Brody as the no-dignity-in-the-face-of-war Pianist

2003 - Sean Penn for ruthless king of the neighborhood in Mystic River

2005 - Phillip Seymour Hoffman as the controversial Capote

2006 - Forest Whitaker portraying the sadistic King of Scotland

2007 - Daniel Day Lewis performing hauntingly in There Will be Blood

This year the contenders are all playing characters that one way or another are not modern-citizens that kids should take as ideals in life (besides Morgan Freeman playing Nelson Mandela in Invictus). George Clooney plays the man with the downsizing axe in Up in the Air, Jeremy Renner the twisted almost suicidal Irak-war genist in Hurt Locker, Colin Firth is the deeply depressed lonely gay teacher in A Single Man and Jeff Bridges the broke country-singer with no care for life in Crazy Heart.

And guess what? Jeff Bridges is favourite.

So what's up with Hollywood's love for the bad guys? Or maybe a bad guy's physical and moral traits are easiear to portray than say... Dalai Lama. Or maybe we "feel" for them. Be it compasion from the Academy or simply genious acting, the balance favours the dark side so far. Morgan Freeman winning this year will slightly change the situation.

But my money is still on Jeff Bridges. That's probably because "I hate most people"