Plz do abide to our Terms & Condition:

    • Do not paste URL Links directly in any content instead post them as Hyperlink inside a text.
       
    • To post a Link directly use instead Bookmark.
       
    • If we find anyone posting beyond the warning we will immediately terminate your account without any warning. 

Pages

    No pages created yet

    Highest Rating

      Wall

        • In this video, Socialxpand explains tips to manage the social media profiles for your business to get the new contract and positive review and avoid complaints.
          • SocialXpand Contract
            SocialXpand Contract shared a link
            • SocialXpand Contract
              SocialXpand Contract rated King of Thieves's Rating with 5 stars
                Entertainer
                • 5/5 (1 votes)
                Blog by Entertainer

                Thumb king thieves image 2

                “King of Thieves” is a heist film inhabited by a grey-haired gang of British acting royalty, men who had, in their younger days, played all manner of criminals and hustlers. Leading the pack is Michael Caine, who has embodied some of the most clever and most sadistic criminals the cinema has ever known. Backing him up are gritty thespians like Ray Winstone, who was Gal in “Sexy Beast” and Michael Gambon, the thief of “The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover”. Jim Broadbent is also present, and though cast against type, his acting resume does include “Boss” Tweed in “Gangs of New York” among other shady roles. The trio is joined by Tom Courtenay, who was once confined to a cinematic reform school for theft in “The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner”.

                That’s a lot of robbery expertise for one movie. And the advanced ages of these actors make them as unlikely a band of suspects as the real-life crooks they portray. Those men were responsible for 2015’s Great Hatton Garden robbery, the biggest jewel heist in London’s history. The caper was so intricate and well-executed that investigators initially assumed it to be the handiwork of a much younger European robbery syndicate. Imagine the surprise when the true villains turned out to be several senior citizens with rap sheets as long as their lifespans.

                With this cast and this story, “King of Thieves” should have been a homerun for any director. But James Marsh (“The Theory of Everything”) can’t decide if he’s making a light comic caper like “Going in Style” or a heavy, terrifying crime drama like “Mona Lisa.” Not even a master of both genres like Caine can navigate the wildly shifting tone of Joe Penhall’s sloppy script. The result invites confusion and ultimately indifference on the viewer’s part. When one character makes a joking reference to Alec Guinness’ brilliant Ealing comedy “The Lavender Hill Mob” the comparison does this film no favors.

                I mentioned “Going in Style” because both films concern themselves with rowdy old men who choose robbery as a means of trying to outrun the Grim Reaper. But both versions of that film stacked the deck with reasons that force their characters’ hands. Here, the idea seems to stem from boredom more than anything else. “King of Thieves” starts out with Brian Reader (Caine) reminiscing with his wife (Francesca Annis) just before her sudden death. At the funeral, his partners in crime keep talking about old victories and Reader becomes hungry for an invigorating score.

                A heist film is only as good as the execution of its caper set pieces. The fun of films like this is reveling in the often Rube Goldbergesque ways someone can steal something. Reader’s plan involves drilling through walls, pushing over heavy cabinets, a perpetually drunk fence, a lookout who can neither hear nor stay awake and a skittish young safecracker named Basil (Charlie Cox) who is way out of his league. Somehow all this manages to sit onscreen generating little interest. Meanwhile, Marsh overcompensates with unnecessary quick cuts and on-the-nose needle drops, drawing attention away from the mechanics and the minutiae of Reader’s plan.

                In keeping with the proverb about “honor amongst thieves,” the alliance starts to fray as soon as the team succeeds. This leads to the only spark of intrigue “King of Thieves” offers: Who earns the film’s title? One could predict that it’s Brian Reader, who masterminds the heist yet walks away right in the thick of things. Could he secretly be orchestrating a  complicated plot to sow distrust amongst his team in the hopes they’ll all off each other and leave the  riches to him? Is it Winstone’s brawny Danny Jones, the muscle of the team? Or is it Gambon’s Danny the Fish, the fence with a very small bladder and a very big booze habit? The deserving heir to the throne is obviously the one who doesn’t get caught.

                Penhall based his script on an intriguing, informative Vanity Fair article by Mark Seal. I highly recommend reading the source material instead of spending nearly two hours watching this film. “King of Thieves” is a disappointing mess that lacks both suspense and a clear identity. Not even the occasional joy of seeing these fine actors riff with one another can save it.

                 




                Original: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/king-of-thieves-2019
                By: Odie Henderson
                Posted: January 25, 2019, 3:44 pm

                • SocialXpand Contract
                  SocialXpand Contract rated The Invisibles's Rating with 5 stars
                    Entertainer
                    • 5/5 (1 votes)
                    Blog by Entertainer

                    Thumb invisibles image

                    "I thought I was the only one." 

                    The words are said by Hanni Lévy, one of the 7,000 Jews who hid in Berlin after it was declared "free of Jews" by Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels in May of 1943. The sense of isolation, of being "the only one," was overwhelming: there was no way to collect or pass on information, no way to meet up with others in the same situation. It was every person for themselves. The Jews survived by adopting disguises, trading stuff on the black market, hiding in secret rooms and abandoned buildings; many were sheltered by Communists, also under siege (leftover resistance from the rise of Hitler), or by sympathetic Germans. Claus Räfle’s film "The Invisibles," using an equal mix of documentary and re-enactments, tells the story of four of those "invisible" Jews, Cioma Schönhaus, Eugen Friede, Ruth Arndt, and Hanni Lévy, all of whom are interviewed for the film. All four managed to hide in Berlin without detection from 1943 to the end of the war, an extraordinary feat. Of the 7,000 Jews who hid in Berlin, only 1,700 survived.

                    Along with the interview footage with the actual people, there are elaborate re-enactments of each person's tale. Cioma (Max Mauff) escapes deportation by forging documents that say he is employed in Berlin. A talented artist, he sets himself up as a forger, working for various people (some highly connected in the regime), narrowly escaping detection on a number of occasions. Hanni (Alice Dwyer) dyes her hair blonde, and wanders the streets, finding protection from an unlikely source. Ruth (Ruby O. Fee) hides beneath widow's garb, which blends her in with all the war widows in Berlin at that time, and then gets a job as a maid in the home of an actual Nazi. And Eugen (Aaron Altaras) is slightly protected at first since his father was a Gentile, but when that is no longer possible he is sheltered by a Communist family who hate the Nazis. 

                    The reenactments are elaborate, mini feature-films, really. Räfle intersperses the action with grainy newsreel footage of Berlin in the 1930s, happy Germans smiling and shopping and eating: the sunshiny surface concealing the rot underneath. 

                    "The Invisibles" is four separate narratives, woven together, pulled along by the interview subjects providing their testimony for the camera. These people are all in their 80s and 90s, and their memories of those days are vivid. They're all engaging storytellers. What we see in the re-enactments is what we've just been told in the interview, and so the sequences have a redundant quality. We're watching what we've just been told. This creates a distancing and fictionalizing atmosphere, which doesn't serve the film or the purposes behind it. Let the people speak for themselves.

                    It is, as always, the details that stick with you. Lévy describes the nervewracking sensation of being able to walk the streets openly, camouflaged by her blonde hair. Cioma's journey is the most gripping. He creates a bustling forgery business, working out of spare rooms or an abandoned garage, always on the verge of being detected. How Cioma works the system, how he flourishes in the underworld - what was a crime in normal times saves his life - would make a fascinating standalone tale. Eugen ends up in the home of a group of people who actively resist the Nazis, and who harbor the famed Werner Scharff, who actually escaped Theresienstadt, returning to the Jewish underground, telling horrible stories of what was being done to the Jews in the camps, stories which everyone found unbelievable at first. Scharff, Eugen, and the others form a group called the "Community for Peace and Development", whose main activity was trying to get the word out by secretly printing leaflets on an illegal printing press. (Scharff was arrested again in 1944 and executed at Sachsenhausen.)

                    Gathering testimony from survivors is an essential work of historians, even more so now since the "news" is increasingly vulnerable to manipulation, and with anti-Semitism on the rise, on the march yet again. Steven Spielberg established the Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation in 1994, as a place to archive the taped stories of survivors. Survivors are old now. They are dying off. The interviews in "The Invisibles" are an important piece of the story: they show the ingenuity of those in hiding, the sheer daring it took to figure out the best way to survive. Lévy says, "I don't know if I was scared or not. I just know I had the will to live." Her words are more powerful than any reenactment could ever be. 

                    To compare, the Steven Spielberg produced "The Last Days" was a harrowing emotional experience, an unblinking confrontation with the monstrosity of the Nazi regime and the injustice wrought upon the Jewish people (I am still haunted by the comment from one survivor in "The Last Days": "That's when I stopped talking to God."). "The Last Days" showed, without a shadow of a doubt, the very real dangers involved in naming an entire people as "other." Once you label a whole group as less than human, as "bad people," as beyond the pale and not worthy of protection, you can punish with impunity. It's genocidal language. The Rwandan genocide unfolded in an atmosphere of violence and paranoia, with the Tutsis referred to constantly in a barrage of propaganda as "cockroaches." People may hesitate to murder another human being, but nobody feels bad about killing a cockroach. Joseph Goebbels' entire job was to make the Jews seem sub-human; they were rats, vermin, an "infestation" into the purity of German culture. 

                    That urgency - the urgency of reminding people "this is what happens, this is what prejudice looks like in its most grotesque form" - is missing from "The Invisibles." The dual structure keeps it from cutting close to the bone. However, these are stories that need to be told. In 1942, Victor Klemperer, a Jewish man living in Dresden with his German wife, feeling the vice of Nazi terror closing in around him, declared in his journal (which was eventually published in 1998): “I shall go on writing. That is my heroism. I will bear witness, precise witness!” A film like "The Invisibles" is part of bearing "precise witness." We clearly need reminders, and constant ones, of the end result of "otherizing" an entire group of people.




                    Original: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-invisibles-2019
                    By: Sheila O'Malley
                    Posted: January 25, 2019, 3:43 pm

                    • SocialXpand Contract
                        Entertainer
                        • 5/5 (1 votes)
                        Blog by Entertainer

                        Thumb breslin hamill

                        One of the numerous strengths of the HBO documentary “Breslin and Hamill: Deadline Artists” is how its directors Jonathan Alter, John Block and Steve McCarthy propose that a former news cycle is repeating itself now. In one clip, disgraced vice president Spiro Agnew launches an attack on “the evil liberal media” and how it is poisoning and distorting the facts of the Nixon presidency, and one almost expects him to yell “fake news!” In another, someone casually mentions the impending demise of the printed newspaper before adding that this was back in 1972. And in a third, a much younger incarnation of a certain politician is shown spouting the same vein of divisive racial hatred as he is right now. The film slyly implies that we’re trapped in a news-based remake and makes us long for the writers who covered it first.

                        Those writers, Jimmy Breslin and Pete Hamill, should be familiar to anyone born and bred in the New York City area within the last six decades. They were larger-than-life newspapermen whose columns changed the way news stories were covered. Their words leapt off the page, spoken fluently in the dialects of their well-known personalities. Theirs was the era of the hard-drinking, deadline-making, truth-seeking, typewriter pounding (and oddly enough, always male) grouchy beat writers romanticized in entertainments like “The Front Page” and “All the President’s Men.”  Despite a celebrity status that eluded most of their journalistic brethren, Hamill and Breslin’s prose remained in the trenches with the common man, always seeking empathy for the downtrodden while challenging the powers that be.

                        The two native New Yorkers appear onscreen in interview footage shot in 2015. They have an easy rapport, riffing off one another while exchanging stories of their heydays. In the timeline, Breslin’s column appeared first, the trendsetter sent to liven up things at “New York’s most boring newspaper,” the New York Herald Tribune. In 1962, Breslin’s style became so popular that other papers wanted their own version. Enter Pete Hamill, who was nothing like Breslin prose-wise, but whose heart and compassion bled as deeply into the newspaper ink as Breslin’s did. Hamill had been a reporter at the New York Post before manning the type of column he would write for decades.

                        In 1976, the duo were both under the auspices of “New York’s Hometown Paper,” the Daily News, which is where and when I discovered them. Before that, Breslin and Hamill crossed paths many times while working their respective beats, including on the day Senator Robert Kennedy was shot. Both men helped subdue Sirhan Sirhan. “I sat on his feet,” Breslin tells us. “You rode in the ambulance with him, didn’t you?” Hamill asks. Breslin says yes, reminding us that Kennedy was still alive en route to the hospital. “Breslin and Hamill: Deadline Artists” also reveals that it was Hamill who convinced RFK to consider running, an action for which the current day Hamill expresses some regret. “I never became friends with another politician after that,” he tells Breslin.

                        The Kennedys haunt the documentary several times. Breslin wrote one of his most well-known columns a few days after November 22, 1963, a hauntingly beautiful interview with the African-American man who dug President Kennedy’s grave at Arlington National Cemetery. Snippets from that article (and many others by both men) appear on screen, with the late Breslin’s words (he died in 2017) being read by writer Michael Rispoli and Hamill reciting his own. Years later, Hamill would date Jacqueline Onassis, a story Breslin would use to very amusing effect in one of his own columns. 

                        The talking heads in “Breslin and Hamill: Deadline Artists” are a fascinating mix of relatives, actors, directors, former journalists turned best-selling novelists and other writers who either worked with the film’s subjects or were competitors. Spike Lee turns up to talk about Breslin’s work, but for some reason he’s absent when the subject turns to Breslin’s dealings with the Son of Sam, David Berkowitz, the subject of Lee's film "Summer of Sam." Tom Wolfe and Gay Talese supply color commentary as only they can. Earl Caldwell talks about the newsroom atmosphere at the tabloids, and how Breslin didn’t mind going to the rowdiest Black hangouts with him to get stories. And there are reminiscences by family members, many with language as blue as you’d find in a reporter’s local bar.

                        Some prominent women are also present, with informative quotes from journalist Gail Collins and Cibella Borges, a police officer whose story was prominently told by Breslin across numerous columns. Hamill and Breslin also speak of the mysterious Anne Marie, the woman who sat between the two in the newsroom. Anne Marie had a very particular set of investigative skills that I wouldn’t dare spoil here. 

                        Though their names are in the title, the real stars of “Breslin and Hamill: Deadline Artists” are the words they wrote. Several times, I was moved by the descriptions chosen by the filmmakers. It is here where I must disclose my own bias: I grew up in Jersey City, New Jersey reading their columns, and so many of the defining events of my lifetime (Nixon’s resignation, 9/11, the Central Park Five) were filtered through this prism. So I was most appreciative of this film’s construction, its focus on words and its warts and all treatment of its subjects.

                        At the end, we’re left with the burning question of whether history’s repeat will have journalists to cover it who are as good as those who witnessed it the first time. Strangely enough, this film has hope that it will. I remain pessimistic and sad, but so what? As Jimmy Breslin once said, we weren’t put on this Earth to be happy.




                        Original: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/breslin-and-hamill-deadline-artists-2019
                        By: Odie Henderson
                        Posted: January 25, 2019, 3:44 pm

                        • SocialXpand Contract
                          SocialXpand Contract rated Serenity's Rating with 5 stars
                            Entertainer
                            • 5/5 (1 votes)
                            Blog by Entertainer

                            Thumb serenity 2019

                            Serenity” is terrible and insane, and will surely end up being one of the worst films of 2019. But it’s also such a wildly ambitious roller coaster ride that it must be experienced, preferably with friends, to laugh together at its cheesy dialogue, over-the-top performances and multiple, major plot twists.

                            So I guess what I’m saying is, see it …?

                            Writer/director Steven Knight, whose 2014 Tom Hardy drama “Locke” is a compact marvel of precision and suspense, once again tries to dazzle us with narrative daring. But what ends up happening is that he partially pulls the rug out from underneath us about halfway through, then yanks the whole thing out by the end, then waves the rug around in the air as if to joyfully shout: “Ha! This is the rug you were standing on! See? It’s not underneath you anymore!” Giant twists like the ones that ultimately come to define “Serenity” often can be thrilling, and can provide some enjoyment in trying to go back in your mind and search for clues. What Knight does as his game becomes clearer, however, only raises more questions than he answers – and some of those questions are downright icky.

                            It all starts out as a seemingly straightforward neo-noir, full of damaged characters and desperate circumstances. Matthew McConaughey chews up the sunny scenery as the improbably named Baker Dill, a chain-smoking, rum-swilling Iraq war veteran who spends his days as the captain of a fishing boat for hire on the idyllic, tropical island of Plymouth. Dill is obsessed with an elusive, behemoth tuna he’s nicknamed Justice (in a not-so-subtle bit of symbolism), a quest so famous, it’s a constant source of conversation wherever he goes. Djimon Hounsou is his dutiful and pious first mate, Duke, a black character who’s such a pure voice of reason and so willing to sacrifice his own well being for Dill’s greater good that he borders on magical.

                            One day, a chic blonde from Dill’s past comes sauntering through the door of the island’s only bar: Anne Hathaway’s Karen, his ex and the mother of the couple’s teenage son, from whom Dill has become estranged. Karen is now miserably married to the man she left Dill for: Jason Clarke’s Frank Zariakas, a monstrous man of shadowy wealth who abuses her verbally and physically. As film noir femme fatales tend to do, Karen has tracked Dill down to offer him an unsavory proposition: Take Frank out on the boat, pretend it’s a fishing trip, ply him with alcohol and push him overboard to let the sharks devour him. If he does it, she’ll pay him $10 million.

                            Now, at this point (or even long beforehand) you’re probably wondering to yourself: Is Knight serious? What was he thinking making a movie that’s smothered in a pulpy tone and brimming with clichéd types? It’s all so arch: Does he mean it, or is this some sort of parody? We haven’t even gotten to Diane Lane’s character, the beautiful older woman who lies about her bungalow all day in silky robes, looking through the slats in the shutters, waiting for Dill to stop by so she can pay him for a roll in the hay (with some truly cringeworthy post-coital repartee). She literally leaves this room once – and that’s to go to Dill’s house. The film’s treatment of its female characters is not exactly woke.

                            Watching “Serenity” reminded me a bit of the way I felt while watching “Tully” – which is a way better film on every level, for the record. But similarly, it made me wonder: Did Diablo Cody mean to write a manic pixie dream girl character with this perky nanny? Certainly she knows better than that. Or is some other hidden undercurrent at work here? With “Tully,” there was indeed a twist that changed everything we’d seen, but it was clever and ultimately poignant. We can’t say the same for “Serenity.” And that’s about all we should say about that.

                            Similar to “Collateral Beauty” and “The Book of Henry” – recent dramas with esteemed casts that went off the rails in enjoyably awful ways – “Serenity” is the kind of bonkers movie that truly must be seen to be believed, if not for its misguided storytelling aspirations then at least for its preponderance of naked McConaughey. (Dill has a propensity for diving nude off the cliff in front of his ramshackle home and calling it a shower. He also shouts at the sky a lot, which is fun.) As for Knight, “Serenity” remains his Big Symbolic Tuna – a wily beast of mythical proportions that remains tantalizingly out of reach.




                            Original: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/serenity-2019
                            By: Christy Lemire
                            Posted: January 25, 2019, 3:45 pm

                            • SocialXpand Contract
                              SocialXpand Contract rated The Image Book's Rating with 5 stars
                                Entertainer
                                • 5/5 (1 votes)
                                Blog by Entertainer

                                Thumb image book image

                                You have to hand it to Jean-Luc Godard: he's 88 now and has been making movies since the late 1950s, but everything he makes in this late, hyper-experimental phase is still the movie equivalent of a drink you expected to be stiff but not that stiff.  

                                His latest work "The Image Book" starts with a closeup of a hand pointing a finger upward, followed by closeups of text shown on an old-fashioned video display terminal, then a pair of hands cutting film on a 20th century Steenbeck editing table, and two more pairs of hands writing words on paper. By the time it ends, it has ruminated on the rise of the image, the fall of the word and the pulverization of every form of information into a nonstop stream of "content;" drawn connections between the mechanization of genocide during the Holocaust and colonization; created a kind of self-contained film-within-a-film, romanticizing the Arabic-speaking world through four decades' worth of movie clips; and handed viewers a continuous analogy for the film's own stylistic techniques by grouping together dozens of clips from movies involving trains ("trains of thought," perhaps?).

                                But what is "The Image Book" about, you ask? Or maybe you don't, if you've seen a Godard film made after about 1980. 

                                Godard, one of the original pioneers of the French New Wave, has been an international celebrity for decades, and a controversial one. He's feuded with some of the major figures in world cinema and major film festivals, and with luminaries in the arts and politics. He's been a vocal activist for Palestinian causes and has been accused of anti-Semitism, always insisting that he's anti-Zionist but not anti-Jewish; the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, which gave Godard an honorary award in 2010, said in a statement, ""Antisemitism is of course deplorable, but the academy has not found the accusations against Godard persuasive." In interviews about his movies he comes across as alternately prankish and sour, well-read and a bit of a charlatan, somewhat like Orson Welles back in the day. He conducted a press conference at the 2018 Cannes film festival via iPhone. For the 2005 press conference for "Notre Musique," he invited a representative of the French Actors and Technicians Union to appear in his place, then sat in the audience while a list of grievances against the French government was read. 

                                None of this will necessarily inform your appreciation of "The Image Book"—except maybe the Zionism part, and only in a roundabout way; the Arabic section plays like a semi-coherent love letter to a region and its artists, albeit one that frequently oversimplifies and renders exotic the thing being praised. As I've said in previous writing on this director, Godard's montage films are best experienced as a direct tap into the restless mind of the director who wrote, directed, produced, and edited them, and also narrated, in the portentous, croaky voice of a fairy tale creature muttering prophecies from a bog. It moves in fits and starts, deliberately. Even more so than in other recent Godard essay movies, the images, dialogue, music, sound effects, black screens, and moments of silence seem to operate at cross-purposes. 

                                As hard as it is to assign star ratings to certain movies, it's even harder with a work like "The Image Book," a free-associative meditation on language, the image, extinction, and a lot of other things. The movie itself often seems to be disintegrating as you watch it, or trying and failing to cohere. Godard is one of those directors who can't really be evaluated in relation to other filmmakers, only to himself, so distinctive and often impenetrable is his style. Just as it's difficult to articulate why certain Robert Altman, Spike Lee or Terrence Malick films hit your sweet spot and others do very little for you even though they're using many of the same techniques, it's hard to articulate why one post-millennial Godard picture comprised mainly of chopped-up film clips and discontinuous sound, dialogue and music hits the intellectual and visceral bulls-eye, but another leaves you cold. 

                                Caveats aside, this is, in my estimation, a typically stimulating but opaque and deliberately frustrating late-period Godard film, good but not great, distinguished primarily by the fact that it's the first Godard film to use no actors at all. But obviously, that tossed-off description won't mean anything to a person who has never seen any others, or whose experience of Godard is limited to the handful of early Godard films that are still taught regularly in schools, like "Breathless," "Contempt," "Masculin Feminin" and "Week End." And I wouldn't want to discourage anyone who has never seen a film like this before and wants to give it a go, as long as they know what they're in for.

                                The editing piles moments upon moments and thoughts upon thoughts, few of which are ever permitted to complete themselves. Godard deliberately builds in dozens, maybe a hundred transitions or moments of emphasis that in other films would be interpreted as technical errors or basic errors of competence. The sound drops out. The image freezes. The colors are so oversaturated that classic Hollywood film clips (many of them from films that Godard and his New Wave compatriots praised as critics) seem as if they could be 1980s music videos that had been recorded on VHS, badly damaged in a flood, then somehow inexplicably restored and added to Godard's hard drive. 

                                Some of the historical footage appears to have been taken from YouTube and up-rezzed, creating enormous pixillated bricks throughout the image; this was also a characteristic of Godard's "Goodbye to Language," and one wonders if he didn't seek out better-quality material because he just doesn't care about that anymore or because he finds the degraded image beautiful in its own way, or at least interesting enough to stand on its own and be stared at on a big screen, or a big TV, or a phone.  I counted seven moments where the image suddenly changes aspect ratio from correct to incorrect, in the middle of presenting itself to us—this could be either a funny or sad way of getting across the idea that, when everything becomes content, or data, such distinctions scarcely matter anymore, so cinephiles might as well stop getting hung up on them. But it's Godard, so who can say? 

                                Intellectually, the movie is the opposite of rigorous. It's all over the place, like an old and easily distracted uncle who keeps changing the subject. Unless you're intimately familiar with every film, philosopher, political thinker, novelist, poet, and public figure quoted during the movie's running time, it will be impossible to accurately guess why a certain image track was paired with another film's soundtrack, or why a third piece of media suddenly came in—and it's possible that even Godard can't explain why he did certain things, because he's never really been good at that, or interested in that. The supertitles are explanations that explain nothing, practically a joke on the idea of explaining things. The subtitles come and go. If you don't speak fluent French, you're going to miss a lot. 

                                Or maybe you'll sit back and experience this film, like so many late Godard films, as a primarily imagistic, sonic, and even physical experience, a battering and rearrangement of the senses, akin to a rollercoaster ride aimed at students of the humanities. I saw it twice and came away from it both times feeling discombobulated and sad and frustrated, because I felt like I was watching the entire history of civilization, and one of its most important filmmakers, fragmenting and imploding on the screen, ashes to ashes, dust to dust. But I also felt certain that Godard had put that opening finger on something—that in his halting, sometimes half-assed way, he'd found the pulse of an era, perhaps a civilization, in the process of dying, to be replaced by something we haven't seen yet.




                                Original: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-image-book-2019
                                By: Matt Zoller Seitz
                                Posted: January 25, 2019, 3:45 pm

                                • SocialXpand Contract
                                    Entertainer
                                    • 5/5 (1 votes)
                                    Blog by Entertainer

                                    Thumb screen shot 2019 01 22 at 3.40.58 pm

                                    ROGER USED TO SAY that the Oscar awards season was like the Christmas season for Santa. And we used to anticipate it with all the joy of Christmas. These days there are so many awards shows even before the Oscars, that it not quite as heightened, but it is still something I look forward to with great relish. Yesterday morning, however, it felt as if I had traveled back in time. I had gotten up early to watch the Oscar nominations announced live, as I annually do, and amidst all the excitement and well-deserved recognition, there was a distinct pang of disappointment. When the category for Best Documentary Feature was revealed, I was saddened to see Morgan Neville's "Won't You Be My Neighbor?" not among the five nominees. Not only was it the most popular and profitable documentary of 2018, it embodied the empathetic philosophy of its subject, Fred Rogers, a trailblazing television friend of countless children.

                                    Watching this documentary brought me back in touch with just how much of a visionary Mr. Rogers was about the human condition, and the fact that in the end, there is only love. He was a compassionate subversive wrapped in the disarming cotton candy of a children's show. In many ways, the Oscars' failure to nominate this film reminded me of when "Life Itself," Steve James' widely acclaimed and beloved film about my husband was snubbed four years ago. This is after both films won many critics' and other awards, including the Producers Guild Award for Best Documentary.

                                    That being said, I couldn't be more thrilled for the five films that did end up getting nominated, especially "RBG," Julie Cohen and Betsy West's stirring tribute to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, as well as two debut features I had the pleasure of giving awards to when I was on the Documentary Jury at the Sundance Film Festival in 2018, RaMell Ross' "Hale County This Morning, This Evening" and Bing Liu's "Minding the Gap." I am so excited to see these remarkable talents going the distance, and I will be cheering them on during the Oscar telecast on Sunday, February 24th. Each filmmaker has a fresh and distinctive voice that makes you excited to see whatever they happen to do next.

                                    Despite 2018 being an extraordinary year for female filmmakers, not one of them was nominated in the Best Director category. However, I was happy to see Nadine Labaki included in the Best Foreign Language Film category for "Capernaum," a staggering Lebanese drama about a 12-year-old boy who sues his parents for "divorce" after their desperate actions of neglect result in unthinkable tragedy. The performances by young Zain Al Rafeea and toddler Boluwatife Treasure Bankole are among the greatest by children in cinema. Labaki's film was one of two favorites I had at the Cannes Film Festival, the other being "Cold War," the latest swooningly romantic work from Polish auteur Pawel Pawlikowski. The film received a total of three nods, including Best Director and Best Cinematography.

                                    Of course, leading the Foreign Language nominees this year is another black-and-white gem, Alfonso Cuarón's "Roma," wherein the filmmaker recreates the Mexico City of his youth, juxtaposing the intimate story inspired by his family's housekeeper (Yalitza Aparicio) with the political turmoil engulfing the nation. Both first-time actor Aparicio and veteran Mexican star Marina de Tavira earned acting nods, enabling the film to tie with Yorgos Lanthimos' delightfully strange "The Favourite" for the most nominations: 10 apiece. Though the Best Actress category is incredibly strong, I truly believe this will be the year of Glenn Close. This is the revered performer's seventh Oscar nomination, and her portrayal of a housewife living in the shadow of her husband (Jonathan Pryce) in Björn Runge's "The Wife" will very likely earn her the accolade. I was also delighted to see Regina King in the Best Supporting Actress category for Barry Jenkins' "If Beale Street Could Talk." In addition to Best Picture nominees "Roma" and "The Favourite" is Bradley Cooper's reimagining of "A Star Is Born," which made for one of the most romantic movie experiences of 2018. 

                                    Here's hoping two of the year's most historic nominated films become winners on Oscar night: Ryan Coogler's "Black Panther" (with seven nominations) and Spike Lee's "BlacKkKlansman" (with six). Coogler's Marvel blockbuster was the highest-grossing film of 2018, and has now become the first superhero picture to earn a Best Picture nomination. My one regret is that Michael B. Jordan didn't get a deserved nomination for Supporting Actor.

                                    In "BlacKkKlansman," Lee's witty yet bracing telling of a true-life tale takes the audience full circle from the 1970s, when a black policeman (John David Washington) infiltrated the Ku Klux Klan, to the increasingly outward displays of racism in our modern world. This film has earned Lee his first Oscar nomination for Best Director. If he wins, he will become the first African-American filmmaker in history to triumph in this category (Roger Ross Williams was the first African-American director to win an Oscar, though it was in the category of Best Documentary Short Subject). Please Oscar voters, Do The Right Thing!

                                    To see the complete list of nominees for the 91st Academy Awards, click here.




                                    Original: https://www.rogerebert.com/chazs-blog/my-joys-and-sorrows-of-the-2019-oscar-nominations
                                    By: Chaz Ebert
                                    Posted: January 23, 2019, 4:11 pm

                                    • SocialXpand Contract
                                      • 5/5 (1 votes)

                                      SocialXpand is an incredible Social Media Marketing organization, in which all the talented group attempts to down the objections, negative audit. They likewise work for rank positive audits for the new work contract. Every one of the works is associated with Digital showcasing and Social media advertising. Today we will find out about social bookmarking.

                                      Social bookmarking makes reference to sparing web hyperlinks to sites that you need to remember. You can spare these social bookmarks for yourself or elevate them to impart to other people. There are specific social bookmarking web locales where clients bookmark numerous sites and after that label them with numerous illustrative words and expressions. This empowers different people to look by each one of those terms to discover every one of those pages. Most social bookmark destinations propel clients to deal with their social bookmarks with easygoing labels. These sites typically contain data and actualities about the scope of clients who have book-stamped explicit web website. The web destinations likewise, for the most part, offer web sustains for their arrangements of bookmarks. On the off chance that you enroll in this supply you are a la mode as to new bookmarks. As far as its conceivable outcomes for promoting and publicizing, the substantially more frequently a site page is distributed and labeled, the significantly more traffic that site will probably get. Individuals are significantly more prone to visit a web website that has been spared as a bookmark by others.

                                      Online networking sites are by clarification more open than customary web locales, and along these lines it is essential to remember that as the utilization of the Website carries on to develop and create with the selection of Web 2.0 applications, infection flare-ups and different types of Web-borne potential dangers known as "malware" keep on developing also. All things considered, clients need to ensure that they have enough web security that shields against Web 2.0 threats, with multi-layered arrangements that utilization an assortment of investigation procedures (e.g., heuristics, conduct examination, hostile to infection marks and framework shrewdness that can vitality constant examination of URLs), including ongoing filtering. There are many web security organizations master in these arrangements that can be situated on the Internet technology.

                                      By means of Social media websites and social bookmarking websites, we can upgrade our business and revenue. We can spread our site connects to another site to get a backlink, which is befitting to us to build our site DA (Domain Authority) and VPA (Page Authority). SocialXpand Company remembers about these actualities dependably to take care of out their customer's concern.

                                      Much Thanks to you for your precious time.

                                      • SocialXpand Contract
                                        • 5/5 (1 votes)

                                        This post is about social media marketing and its facts to work with without complaints.

                                      • watch my new video about social media marketing
                                        • SocialXpand Contract
                                          SocialXpand Contract shared a link

                                          Technology is Our Most Important Need at This Time

                                          Socialxpand | Latest Technology Will Helps You to Grow Your Business

                                          socialxpandcontract.blogspot.com

                                          Socialxpand taking advantages of new technology to maintain the reviews and complaints and the new contract portion for their clients acc...

                                        • Socialxpand uses the social media sites to do the marketing and puts the new ads at there according to the people interest. 
                                        • Socialxpand | Technology Helps The People to Get New Contracts for Their Business
                                          Socialxpand uses the social media sites to do the marketing and puts the new ads at there according to the people interest. 
                                          • SocialXpand Contract
                                            SocialXpand Contract updated their avatar
                                            SocialXpand Contract

                                          No friends yet.

                                          Albums

                                            No items to display

                                            Videos

                                              More videos

                                              Let SocialXpand Contract know what you think!

                                              There are no polls of SocialXpand Contract yet.