Let me start off by saying this: I like to watch basketball. If you don’t like basketball, , you probably will not want to watch Inside the NBA over the multitude of other programs on your television, because despite all of the banter and distractions going on, it still is primarily a show based around basketball.
The show is a post-game wrap-up and commentary on the day’s action by Studio Host Ernie Johnson and Analysts Kenny Smith and Charles Barkley. Now, any national sports broadcast besides ESPN immediately scores points with me, so Inside the NBA does not have to be great to earn my viewership.
It airs on TNT, usually after NBA game coverage, and often digresses into impromptu discussions, debates and jokes. The commentators view highlights, post-game interviews and discuss NBA related issues, all in an hour time frame.
The commentary often veers off topic however, and while showing highlights the commentators will be laughing about some joke, or speaking about some other issue, and often times highlights are skipped for the sake of allowing banter to continue. To be frank, this is not the most professional or efficient highlight coverage or analysis available.
With that in mind, the commentary offered by Analysts is often insightful, and based out of real basketball experience and knowledge. Discussion usually is usually stimulated by Johnson, who often has to be the one to try and bring the show back to order when it digresses too far. Johnson has a fairly comfortable repoire with his two analysts and understands them well enough to know how to ask questions that will allow their experience to be helpful.
Kenny “The Jet” Smith offers a good balance in the program, holding his opinions when necessary and debating with Barkley occasionally and functions very much as a bridge between the more business/ESPN like Johnson, and the ever-blunt Barkley. His opinions are often well thought out however, and a respected player in his own right, Smith contributes very meaningfully to the panel.
And of course, the show includes commentary by Sir Charles. Analysis by Barkley, while not always popular, and often opinionated, is often based out of his own experience with the game of basketball. As one of the greatest power forwards to ever play the game, he explains his views in a way that is very clear, based on experience that understands the value of leadership, mental toughness, playing habits. Barkley is often quite blunt in stating his opinions, which often does not win him many enemies, drawing criticism from players like Tracy McGrady and Lebron James, but the fact remains that he has his opinion and whether you agree with him or not, his opinions are often very well argued and based on valid points.
Occasional commentary by Chris Webber is helpful, as he provides some more technical basketball analysis, having recently retired, and has the ability to comment on the work of the coaches, having played with many of them in his career. Beyond that, Barkley and Smith are very much “Insiders” on the NBA, in that they know people and know the way things work, so when you watch the show, you really are able to get a sense of what players, coaches and GM’s take into account, and are discussing when you watch the show.
The mood on the show is consistently light, and often entertaining if not always a serious basketball analysis program. Discussions of how Sam Cassel looks like Golum, how Charles used to work as a Pipebreaker, and how Twitter is for losers (Johnson and Smith each have their own twitter), seem to come just as frequently as the highlights, which keep this show entertaining and worth the time of the casual and serious basketball fan.
If nothing else, it’s better than ESPN.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Donuts: Delicious Leftovers.
J Dilla was one of the most prodigious producers who ever lived. Throughout his career he produced beats for Common, A Tribe Called Quest, Slum Village, De La Soul and a plethora of other work. His career, however, was cut short as he was diagnosed with Lupus. An auto-immune disease, Lupus caused his body to produce anti-bodies to natural forming cells; in short, his body was killing itself. However, before his death, he produced his final work, "Donuts" from a hospital bed, releasing the album on his 32nd birthday. He died three days later.
This remnant of a great musical mind continues to give to the world however. His final work, while obviously critically acclaimed, marks something much more than just another great album by a talented producer.
What Dilla has done is leave an emotionally charged, energetic and stylish musical milestone that will have a profound impact on the listener who lets him in.
To understand how to listen to Donuts, one must trust the producer. What I mean when I say this is that, usually, when I listen to music, I already have a clear idea on what I like and don't like. Usually, before I have even heard the music, there is a pre-disposition to what the listener will and will not enjoy. In order to really appreciate Donuts however, one must approach the album with an open mind, forgive perceived mistakes, and simply listen to the entire thing.
There are only a handful of albums I own where I would recommend against skipping over boring or unpleasant tracks, but Dilla has created such a work. His album is hip-hop through and through: it ranges from funky dance beats, to slow rhythm and blues samples. The entire album is instrumental, and most tracks only last a minute and a half, so if you don't like a song, rest assured that it will probably be over quickly, and beyond that, Dilla probably designed the album so that you wouldn't like it.
The album moves in such a way that mimics symphonic compositions of centuries past, in that he will create beautiful, delicious beats that will leave you wanting more, and follow these songs with dissonance, sounds that aren't necessarily appealing or natural. However, Dilla utilizes dissonance in such a way that you can truly appreciate all of the harmony and synergy of his high points, and the emotional messages and danceability that come from this album at it's high points easily make it worth sitting through the dissonance. I can't emphasize enough that this album must be experienced in it's entirety if you want to be able to fully appreciate the artistic merit of this music. And if you can simply get through 90-120 second intervals of dissonance and confusing, often unstable beats, you will consistently be rewarded.
Technically, Dilla showcases his strong points masterfully in his final release. His drums are consistent, intriguing but never overwhelming. They provide a distinct flavor to his beats and are truly the strength of his work, not just Donuts, but all of his work in general. On tracks such as "Workinonit" and "Bye", his drums are perfectly featured. His knack for dramatic vocal samples is demonstrated throughout the album, from obscure works to much more well known R&B artists.
It is the messages that these samples mask that truly make Donuts a wonderful experience however. Songs like "Stop" include a soulful R&B sample hauntingly singing "You're gonna want me back. You're gonna need me one day." Other songs include atmospheric moaning and sounds of longing in the background. "Two can win" features an incredibly clean sample that reaches a wonderfully high pitch and blends perfectly with a detailed instrumental. By the time you reach the album's final tracks, which contain the essence of a dying artist's goodbye to the world, you will not want the album to be over.
Dilla's traditional faults over vamping the dissonance beat for too long, of being overly cryptic in his messages, and of possibly utilizing too many strange sounds are easily overlooked when put into the perspective of the album as a whole, and beyond at, are quite probably intentional.
Regardless of wether you consider yourself a hip-hop expert, or completely avoid the genre at all costs, Donuts is an album anyone who approaches it with an open mind can appreciate as a masterpiece.
RATING: 5 out of 5.
This remnant of a great musical mind continues to give to the world however. His final work, while obviously critically acclaimed, marks something much more than just another great album by a talented producer.
What Dilla has done is leave an emotionally charged, energetic and stylish musical milestone that will have a profound impact on the listener who lets him in.
To understand how to listen to Donuts, one must trust the producer. What I mean when I say this is that, usually, when I listen to music, I already have a clear idea on what I like and don't like. Usually, before I have even heard the music, there is a pre-disposition to what the listener will and will not enjoy. In order to really appreciate Donuts however, one must approach the album with an open mind, forgive perceived mistakes, and simply listen to the entire thing.
There are only a handful of albums I own where I would recommend against skipping over boring or unpleasant tracks, but Dilla has created such a work. His album is hip-hop through and through: it ranges from funky dance beats, to slow rhythm and blues samples. The entire album is instrumental, and most tracks only last a minute and a half, so if you don't like a song, rest assured that it will probably be over quickly, and beyond that, Dilla probably designed the album so that you wouldn't like it.
The album moves in such a way that mimics symphonic compositions of centuries past, in that he will create beautiful, delicious beats that will leave you wanting more, and follow these songs with dissonance, sounds that aren't necessarily appealing or natural. However, Dilla utilizes dissonance in such a way that you can truly appreciate all of the harmony and synergy of his high points, and the emotional messages and danceability that come from this album at it's high points easily make it worth sitting through the dissonance. I can't emphasize enough that this album must be experienced in it's entirety if you want to be able to fully appreciate the artistic merit of this music. And if you can simply get through 90-120 second intervals of dissonance and confusing, often unstable beats, you will consistently be rewarded.
Technically, Dilla showcases his strong points masterfully in his final release. His drums are consistent, intriguing but never overwhelming. They provide a distinct flavor to his beats and are truly the strength of his work, not just Donuts, but all of his work in general. On tracks such as "Workinonit" and "Bye", his drums are perfectly featured. His knack for dramatic vocal samples is demonstrated throughout the album, from obscure works to much more well known R&B artists.
It is the messages that these samples mask that truly make Donuts a wonderful experience however. Songs like "Stop" include a soulful R&B sample hauntingly singing "You're gonna want me back. You're gonna need me one day." Other songs include atmospheric moaning and sounds of longing in the background. "Two can win" features an incredibly clean sample that reaches a wonderfully high pitch and blends perfectly with a detailed instrumental. By the time you reach the album's final tracks, which contain the essence of a dying artist's goodbye to the world, you will not want the album to be over.
Dilla's traditional faults over vamping the dissonance beat for too long, of being overly cryptic in his messages, and of possibly utilizing too many strange sounds are easily overlooked when put into the perspective of the album as a whole, and beyond at, are quite probably intentional.
Regardless of wether you consider yourself a hip-hop expert, or completely avoid the genre at all costs, Donuts is an album anyone who approaches it with an open mind can appreciate as a masterpiece.
RATING: 5 out of 5.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Review: Right America Feeling Wronged
On most Wednesdays, I wake up, usually around 7:30 and run around my house trying to get to my 8:10 class on time. I usually get there by 8:20 only moderately dazed and confused, and sit down ready to learn. Last Wednesday, Master of Science Paul DeBolt, our professor, reiterated consistency theories of Mass Communication: the ideas of Selective Perception, Selective Exposure and Selective Retention.
Selective perception is the idea that how we interpret messages is based on what our current perception already is, that we what goes along with what we believe with in things.
Selective Exposure means that we avoid exposing ourselves to the things which cause cognitive dissonance, or things that firmly go against what we believe and make us uncomfortable.
Selective Retention means that we only remember things that are in alignment with what we believe.
The professor went on to say that we all had preferred forms of media that we go to, such as television and the internet, and would often seek out the information or go the sites/channels that we wanted, that were in agreement with what we believed. He invited to monitor how we viewed mass media and test ourselves.
That night I went home and went on a social networking site, and checked my email, pretty boring stuff. However, when it came time to relax for five minutes while my mother cooked dinner I plopped on the couch and turned on the TV. I usually check sports briefly, then will look for a movie and this night I saw something on HBO that was about the presidential campaign, and many of the voters who supported McCain.
The program was called Right America: Feeling Wronged, and premiered on HBO on February 16th. It is a film by Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of Speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi. It documents the sentiments of McCain supporters from the campaign trail during the 2008 election.
Originally, when I got to the movie, I saw that people were espousing ideas which went firmly against my own. Of course, I’m sure they had reasons for their beliefs, but for the first few minutes I had a strong feeling of wanting to change the channel. However, I realized I was experiencing cognitive dissonance and decided to stay with the program. Who knows if I would have stayed with the station if I had not been to class that day, that is an entirely other discussion however.
The film deals with people from all walks of life who are united by the cause of McCains campaign. Some people simply support McCain’s economic policies, his social policies or were more a fan of his character. However, many of the people seemed to be firmly against Obama, and this was the subject of a good portion of the video. Racists, economists and staunch religious supporters all spoke out against Obama concerned that he was a supporter of terrorists, that he was a socialist and that he was/is the antichrist.
While obviously the questions aren’t totally unbiased and the film is cut to make a specific point, which becomes clear by the end, it was overwhelming at how much people wanted McCain to win this election. Some said they felt that God had put them in place so that they could help McCain triumph. Many believed that the country was headed for imminent doom if Obama won.
There really were all kinds of views expressed among McCain supporters, some saying that they condemned any hate towards one group and simply wanted to support their candidate. There was one scene however, which showed a sign at a rally/congregation that said people believed there was a war in the country between the Christians and the Homosexuals, and that McCain needed to win to protect the lives of unborn children. Others said they felt that the country’s media did not represent their views and the only outlet that gave them the truth was Fox News.
I confess, when I first saw some of these viewpoints, I was legitimately baffled. Because of my personal beliefs, I never judge anyone’s views as totally untrue or unfounded, but I just had so many questions for these people about why they believed what they believe. These views were so different from my own, and I have taken a long time to analyze many different viewpoints to find what I believe to true. Are we really so divided in this country that there can be this huge amount of people whose views are SO inexplicably different from my own?
When Pelosi asked one of the people what all McCain supporters had in common, they replied “We all hate the same things.” A lot of times the sentiment picked up at McCain rallies was just anger. Many of the people interviewed in the film said they felt like the people on the coasts just didn’t care about them and looked down on them. They felt they were just the states people flew over to get other places.
I am not a liberal or a conservative, and I believe that this film, while it can at times show a bias, does address one of the biggest issues facing our country: how divided we really are. There is a total disconnect between the major cities of the country and the smaller, more rural and folksy parts. Culturally, politically, in language, we are very different and this film does show how some people in other parts of the country from my own are feeling. This film showed me how disconnected I really am from other parts of my country, and how much farther we have to go before we will be able to unite and solve first our own problems, and eventually the problems of other nations. After it was over, I can definitely say that I am glad I kept watching.
Rating: 4 out of 5 (It was somewhat biased).
Selective perception is the idea that how we interpret messages is based on what our current perception already is, that we what goes along with what we believe with in things.
Selective Exposure means that we avoid exposing ourselves to the things which cause cognitive dissonance, or things that firmly go against what we believe and make us uncomfortable.
Selective Retention means that we only remember things that are in alignment with what we believe.
The professor went on to say that we all had preferred forms of media that we go to, such as television and the internet, and would often seek out the information or go the sites/channels that we wanted, that were in agreement with what we believed. He invited to monitor how we viewed mass media and test ourselves.
That night I went home and went on a social networking site, and checked my email, pretty boring stuff. However, when it came time to relax for five minutes while my mother cooked dinner I plopped on the couch and turned on the TV. I usually check sports briefly, then will look for a movie and this night I saw something on HBO that was about the presidential campaign, and many of the voters who supported McCain.
The program was called Right America: Feeling Wronged, and premiered on HBO on February 16th. It is a film by Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of Speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi. It documents the sentiments of McCain supporters from the campaign trail during the 2008 election.
Originally, when I got to the movie, I saw that people were espousing ideas which went firmly against my own. Of course, I’m sure they had reasons for their beliefs, but for the first few minutes I had a strong feeling of wanting to change the channel. However, I realized I was experiencing cognitive dissonance and decided to stay with the program. Who knows if I would have stayed with the station if I had not been to class that day, that is an entirely other discussion however.
The film deals with people from all walks of life who are united by the cause of McCains campaign. Some people simply support McCain’s economic policies, his social policies or were more a fan of his character. However, many of the people seemed to be firmly against Obama, and this was the subject of a good portion of the video. Racists, economists and staunch religious supporters all spoke out against Obama concerned that he was a supporter of terrorists, that he was a socialist and that he was/is the antichrist.
While obviously the questions aren’t totally unbiased and the film is cut to make a specific point, which becomes clear by the end, it was overwhelming at how much people wanted McCain to win this election. Some said they felt that God had put them in place so that they could help McCain triumph. Many believed that the country was headed for imminent doom if Obama won.
There really were all kinds of views expressed among McCain supporters, some saying that they condemned any hate towards one group and simply wanted to support their candidate. There was one scene however, which showed a sign at a rally/congregation that said people believed there was a war in the country between the Christians and the Homosexuals, and that McCain needed to win to protect the lives of unborn children. Others said they felt that the country’s media did not represent their views and the only outlet that gave them the truth was Fox News.
I confess, when I first saw some of these viewpoints, I was legitimately baffled. Because of my personal beliefs, I never judge anyone’s views as totally untrue or unfounded, but I just had so many questions for these people about why they believed what they believe. These views were so different from my own, and I have taken a long time to analyze many different viewpoints to find what I believe to true. Are we really so divided in this country that there can be this huge amount of people whose views are SO inexplicably different from my own?
When Pelosi asked one of the people what all McCain supporters had in common, they replied “We all hate the same things.” A lot of times the sentiment picked up at McCain rallies was just anger. Many of the people interviewed in the film said they felt like the people on the coasts just didn’t care about them and looked down on them. They felt they were just the states people flew over to get other places.
I am not a liberal or a conservative, and I believe that this film, while it can at times show a bias, does address one of the biggest issues facing our country: how divided we really are. There is a total disconnect between the major cities of the country and the smaller, more rural and folksy parts. Culturally, politically, in language, we are very different and this film does show how some people in other parts of the country from my own are feeling. This film showed me how disconnected I really am from other parts of my country, and how much farther we have to go before we will be able to unite and solve first our own problems, and eventually the problems of other nations. After it was over, I can definitely say that I am glad I kept watching.
Rating: 4 out of 5 (It was somewhat biased).
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
EA bails with 'Skate 2'
When Electronic Arts (EA) title, Skate premiered for both Xbox 360 and PS3 gaming consoles in 2007, it had radically changed the face of skateboarding video games with its innovative controls along with the rich, smooth, textural atmosphere bringing a greater feeling of realism from the board to players' hands.
Fast forward to nearly two years from that, with the highly anticipated sequel, but clumsy release of Skate 2.
Since Skate's conception, it has received overwhelming critical acclaim, despite features still to be improved as well as added.
A fundamental improvement addressed from the original game included patchwork for the stale and stiff "bailing" physics. Players now have the option of controlling how and even when their character can separate themselves from their skateboard. While in midair, players have the option of simply jumping away from their board and toggle the analog controls to which they can contort and sprawl in almost any way they can imagine for a more intense, brutal or even hilarious fall.
The option of the player's character getting off their skateboard is now available, while also giving them the freedom to move around obstacles and even grab objects such as rails and ramps to move them where ever players see fit. Though this was the proposed biggest improvement, it ultimately proved to be the worst.
Moving around ambulatory objects seemed too unrealistic due to the awkward movement of characters, making them somewhat superhuman, giving them the ability to move things like huge ramps with ease.
The graphics seemed to be a little off as well. IGN had criticized Skate 2's graphics for not being sharp enough, but that seems almost completely opposite. The game's graphic design of the renovated city of San Vanelona appeared to be too sharp and too grainy.
The controls are more or less the same with the addition of several new tricks and variations of older ones, mostly hand/grab implemented. The hand/grab alternatives allow new flip, grab and grind moves. The new tricks are a nice feature, but not enough to save the game's travesty in its entirety.
Character creation is downgraded from the original Skate. Players have very limited creative possibilities with facial and body structure. The facial presets are awful and even after fiddling with contrast, they become eventually indistinguishable and pretty much the same face anyway.
Camera and playback angles are also very weak. In the original, angles were limited, but it was quite simple to move between different screen shot perspectives. Whereas in this sequel, the camera and playback work can seem just way too confusing, leaving it a struggle to find the right shot to play back a selected time frame of a recorded skate session.
Overall, this was a terrible game. I had high hopes and was very disappointed. I didn't even feel the storyline of this game is worth going over because of its poor construction. Skate 2 reminded me too much about the flaws of the (almost) long forgotten Tony Hawk Pro Skater franchise and actually about how much I missed those games. I guess that can be one of the only positives added to the short list, though ironic.
Rating: 2/5
Fast forward to nearly two years from that, with the highly anticipated sequel, but clumsy release of Skate 2.
Since Skate's conception, it has received overwhelming critical acclaim, despite features still to be improved as well as added.
A fundamental improvement addressed from the original game included patchwork for the stale and stiff "bailing" physics. Players now have the option of controlling how and even when their character can separate themselves from their skateboard. While in midair, players have the option of simply jumping away from their board and toggle the analog controls to which they can contort and sprawl in almost any way they can imagine for a more intense, brutal or even hilarious fall.
The option of the player's character getting off their skateboard is now available, while also giving them the freedom to move around obstacles and even grab objects such as rails and ramps to move them where ever players see fit. Though this was the proposed biggest improvement, it ultimately proved to be the worst.
Moving around ambulatory objects seemed too unrealistic due to the awkward movement of characters, making them somewhat superhuman, giving them the ability to move things like huge ramps with ease.
The graphics seemed to be a little off as well. IGN had criticized Skate 2's graphics for not being sharp enough, but that seems almost completely opposite. The game's graphic design of the renovated city of San Vanelona appeared to be too sharp and too grainy.
The controls are more or less the same with the addition of several new tricks and variations of older ones, mostly hand/grab implemented. The hand/grab alternatives allow new flip, grab and grind moves. The new tricks are a nice feature, but not enough to save the game's travesty in its entirety.
Character creation is downgraded from the original Skate. Players have very limited creative possibilities with facial and body structure. The facial presets are awful and even after fiddling with contrast, they become eventually indistinguishable and pretty much the same face anyway.
Camera and playback angles are also very weak. In the original, angles were limited, but it was quite simple to move between different screen shot perspectives. Whereas in this sequel, the camera and playback work can seem just way too confusing, leaving it a struggle to find the right shot to play back a selected time frame of a recorded skate session.
Overall, this was a terrible game. I had high hopes and was very disappointed. I didn't even feel the storyline of this game is worth going over because of its poor construction. Skate 2 reminded me too much about the flaws of the (almost) long forgotten Tony Hawk Pro Skater franchise and actually about how much I missed those games. I guess that can be one of the only positives added to the short list, though ironic.
Rating: 2/5
Monday, February 23, 2009
Survival, destiny, love, and money
The story of "Slumdog Millionaire" revolves around Jamal Malik, a young man whose entire life was built upon survival. Born in the slums of Mumbai, India, Jamal's journey through life is filled with excitement, fear, love, and loneliness. He has one determination throughout the story, to fulfill his destiny of being with Latika, a girl he meets shortly after the death of his mother. He finds Latika at multiple occasions in his life, only to repeatedly lose her to unfair circumstances, often caused by his companion and older brother, Salim. This determination eventually leads to Jamal becoming a contestant on the Indian version of "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?", in hopes that he may find his lost love again.
The film is a masterpiece of multiple genres. It is mostly a terrific film about love, revolving around Jamal's devotion to being with Latika. But it is also a drama, with crime and gangsters and betrayals.
The storyline manages to be both linear and complex at the same time. All the flashbacks are shown in chronological order, but each shows how each character has evolved at that point in time. For example, at times, Salim is incredibly thoughtful and protective of his younger brother. And at other times, when circumstances have changed, and he sees a selfish opportunity to success, he is willing to completely crush Jamal's feelings.
There is also a lot of comedy in the film, thanks to an excellent screenplay. Strange circumstances and clever wordplay lead the audience to laughter in a way that is usually unheard of in films of this type.
Perhaps the greatest element of the film, however, is the soundtrack. A.R. Rahman creates a mix of classic Indian music and strong percussion to create a fitting score for the film. Every important part of the movie, whether it be a chase scene or one of romance, is enhanced by overwhelmingly perfect music. "O...Saya", which was composed and performed by A.R. Rahman and popular artist M.I.A., and "Latika's Theme" are two particularly great examples of how the music has an enormous impact on the tones of certain scenes. In the later parts of the film, where the acting slowly starts to lose its charm, the music is one of the only elements that makes the audience smile or tear up.
Director Danny Boyle also does an incredible job at portraying both slum life and city-life in a modern India. There are scenes where the camera positioning and zoom are sharply changed - something that would normally be annoying in most films - but it is done so well in touch with the music that it is almost indiscernible.
If there is one weakness in the film, it is lead actor Dev Patel. Throughout the film, his facial expressions are incredibly bland. The only way to see what emotions his character might be going through is through the dialog. His face at his happiest moment is the same as at his saddest: wide-eyed and a slightly open mouth.
It is truly a shame for Patel's acting to be the weak link in the film, considering that Ayush Mahesh Khedekar, who played the young Jamal Malik, turned out to be an incredible actor. His portrayal of a boy whose only worry is survival is incredible. One particularly memorable scene occurs in which Jamal walks along with his older brother, in hopes that his singing abilities will pave a way for his future. In a truly childlike joyful manner he says, "Aaj hamara time badalgaya, bhai" (Subtitled:"The good life, here we come"). That one line is so incredibly believable that it invokes memories within audience members of times when they were young and things were going well for them.
Overall, the film is easily one of the best of the year. The poor acting by the lead actor is greatly overcome by the strong script, cinematography, and soundtrack.
Rating: 5/5
The film is a masterpiece of multiple genres. It is mostly a terrific film about love, revolving around Jamal's devotion to being with Latika. But it is also a drama, with crime and gangsters and betrayals.
The storyline manages to be both linear and complex at the same time. All the flashbacks are shown in chronological order, but each shows how each character has evolved at that point in time. For example, at times, Salim is incredibly thoughtful and protective of his younger brother. And at other times, when circumstances have changed, and he sees a selfish opportunity to success, he is willing to completely crush Jamal's feelings.
There is also a lot of comedy in the film, thanks to an excellent screenplay. Strange circumstances and clever wordplay lead the audience to laughter in a way that is usually unheard of in films of this type.
Perhaps the greatest element of the film, however, is the soundtrack. A.R. Rahman creates a mix of classic Indian music and strong percussion to create a fitting score for the film. Every important part of the movie, whether it be a chase scene or one of romance, is enhanced by overwhelmingly perfect music. "O...Saya", which was composed and performed by A.R. Rahman and popular artist M.I.A., and "Latika's Theme" are two particularly great examples of how the music has an enormous impact on the tones of certain scenes. In the later parts of the film, where the acting slowly starts to lose its charm, the music is one of the only elements that makes the audience smile or tear up.
Director Danny Boyle also does an incredible job at portraying both slum life and city-life in a modern India. There are scenes where the camera positioning and zoom are sharply changed - something that would normally be annoying in most films - but it is done so well in touch with the music that it is almost indiscernible.
If there is one weakness in the film, it is lead actor Dev Patel. Throughout the film, his facial expressions are incredibly bland. The only way to see what emotions his character might be going through is through the dialog. His face at his happiest moment is the same as at his saddest: wide-eyed and a slightly open mouth.
It is truly a shame for Patel's acting to be the weak link in the film, considering that Ayush Mahesh Khedekar, who played the young Jamal Malik, turned out to be an incredible actor. His portrayal of a boy whose only worry is survival is incredible. One particularly memorable scene occurs in which Jamal walks along with his older brother, in hopes that his singing abilities will pave a way for his future. In a truly childlike joyful manner he says, "Aaj hamara time badalgaya, bhai" (Subtitled:"The good life, here we come"). That one line is so incredibly believable that it invokes memories within audience members of times when they were young and things were going well for them.
Overall, the film is easily one of the best of the year. The poor acting by the lead actor is greatly overcome by the strong script, cinematography, and soundtrack.
Rating: 5/5
Interview film a thrilling experience
"You were a worthy opponent."
Those were not the words of a boxer or a crime-fighter. They were the words of President Richard Nixon, said to television presenter David Frost in the end of the recently released film "Frost/Nixon".
And though the two never exchanged physical punches or jabs at any point throughout the film, it was a fitting quote.
"Frost/Nixon" is the story behind David Frost's career-making interviews with President Richard Nixon shortly after his resignation from office in 1974.
At a time where over two-thirds of the population wished for a public apology by Nixon for his attempt to cover-up his involvement in the Watergate scandal, Frost decided that he would take it upon himself to provide the people with a deep, thorough interview with the ex-President. As the film progresses, both men begin to realize that if they don't come out as the stronger person in the interviews, their careers and reputations would be done for.
The resulting drama creates a thrilling and tension-filled experience, comparable to that of a good action film, but without a single act of violence throughout the entire film.
Frank Langella and Michael Sheen, who play Nixon and Frost respectively, both expertly demonstrate the strong, yet repressed emotions hiding within their characters. In scenes of the film where the interviews are being taped, Langella and Sheen manage to masterfully portray two people who respectfully loathe each other, who almost wish to get into a fistfight, but don't because they know they can't win that way.
Overall, the film manages to use eloquent language and interviewing skills to create an exhilarating masterpiece. "Frost/Nixon" may very well be one of the best films of 2008, even better than "The Dark Knight" with only a fraction of the marketing.
Rating: 5/5
AccentAdvocate's scene.blog
Hey readers,
The Advocate is dedicated to bringing the latest news and reviews in the Arts and Entertainment category, commonly refered to by us as 'Scene'.
This blog will serve as a place where our writers can post reviews and blog about the latest in music, movies, video games, books, etc., as well as some overlooked relics from past eras.
We hope to update multiple times per week, and we hope you follow us for your Arts and Entertainment news.
Thanks for reading,
Shahruz Shezi Shaukat, Online editor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)