BAFTAS

The BAFTA's always seem to fill me with an odd combination of emotions , something between being  inspired , proud , excited with an inevitable edge of envy. As usual Stephen Fry was on top form as the night's host , bounding with British humour and a tad too many humorous references to his sexuality in my opinion. It was certainly a spectacular year , with many many famous faces in attendance and for once in a while one film did not overshadow the rest ; halleluyah!

5 things right about 2013 Bafta's
1.The very British Bond picking up Outstanding British Film
2. Billy Connelly dubbing the Bafta trophy 'a death mask on a stick' , he has a point they have a slightly dark era to them , perhaps a change is in order?
3.Daniel Day Lewis and his ability to mock himself for his over method acting , as always he deserves the top prize.
4.David O Russell thanking his son in an amiable acceptance speech for best screenplay.
5. The Imposter winning , and sigh the Academy can't even give it a nomination.

6 things wrong about 2013 Bafta's
1. Paloma Faith's opening , was everyone at the Grammy's?
2. Tarantino turning the tables and enforcing Bafta to feel grateful for his support of their organisation , a little to blase and nonchalant for my liking.
3. Chris Tucker , I had to immediately slam down the volume , he just has an irritable voice.
4. Someone on twitter quipped Anne Hathaway's acceptance speech longer than her screen time , perhaps true indeed , too much of a shaky hyperbole of humbleness and surprise.
5.Eddie Redmayne sick , not an ideal time for illness.
6. Is it just me or were a lot of winners absent?

I am admittedly slightly synical in character and thus I found more things wrong than I did right , even though I had more things to agree with than most years. Above all I am just upset that my invite happened to get lost in the post again , Royal Mail ey? What are we to do?  To repeat I'm glad that the winners varied across films , however I found Argo slightly bland and feel it did not deserve it's winnings. Perhaps it was just a process of elimination , I mean Hooper , Bigelow , Lee and Spielberg have all been there before - did they simply want something new? Anyway mostly I'm happy , Ang Lee should have got more appreciation for the tremendous achievement of turning the unfilmable in to a magnificent cinematic adventure. As per Bafta make me feel proud to be British , I feel we are just simply more civilised than the over rehearsed speeches , bouts of performances and the inevitable cheese of American awards shows. Now I'm left a bit dumb founded , I have no idea what will win the Oscars , none what so ever. Meanwhile I will continue practising my Bafta winners speech , and waiting for my invite.

Zero Dark Thirty

What's it all about? Much like Argo , Zero Dark Thirty dramatises another secret government mission , although this time it follows the recent hunt for al - Qaeda terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden ; which ultimately culminated in his death on 6 May 2011. 

Starring? Jessica Chastain , Joel Edgerton , Chris Pratt 

I remember clearly the announcement of Bin Laden's death last year , strangely enough it was my birthday and the royal wedding had occurred only a few days prior ; nonetheless it was an uplifting long weekend. Within this however lies a key dilemma for the film-maker , how can one build up edge-of-your-seat suspense when the entire audience is well aware of the missions success? Somehow director Katherine Bigelow manages , despite the 153 minutes , to execute a film that is constantly intriguing  and plentiful with suspense. Bin Laden's death is inevitable , and yet we are incredibly captivated by how indeed the secret services got there. It is a though rally entertaining film , Bigelow and writer Mark Boal show a clear skill in portraying the entire American 'war on terror' in the length of a single film. Its acted tremendously , with a generous cast and some well known faces popping up unexpectantley from time to time. Chastain gives a confident and authentic performance as the lead , providing films answer to Homeland's Carrie Mathison , only without the bipolar. It is is unarguably a brilliantly executed film , surpassing the mark with performances , dialogue , effects and cinematography. However  my issue with Zero Dark Thirty lies amidst the well accomplished action.  It does not shy away from placing torture in front of the audience , stating clearly that these methods were used to successfully find a terrorist. It unarguably edges towards being pro-torture and yet I find it almost brave that aside from its opinion it presents the matter so frankly. On the other hand Zero Dark Thirty makes me slightly uneasy , the release of restricted government files so soon after the incident makes me extremely sceptical ; is this propaganda?  Certainly America is conveyed as the empowered heroes , with little time reflecting on the effect the 'war on terror' has had on the Middle East. Perhaps it is the British in me talking , but I found myself being reminded of certain Team America scenes , the portrayal of almighty America distracts from the skill of the film making. The propagandist elements lets it down somewhat , yet looking past this it is an achievement for all involved , capturing tension  in a way that Argo fails to do. I am left with one question for The Academy , where's Bigelow's nomination?

Verdict? 4.5 Stars , hugely entertaining and captivating propaganda. 

Catcher In The Rye

Ok so it's not a film , and judging by Salinger's distaste for the industry we aren't going to see a cinematic version any time soon. Anyhow I thought I'd change it up and review a book I just finished . Catcher In The Rye follows a young Holden Caulfieds bildungsroman , in which he gets kicked out of school and well wonders around New York smoking a lot. Alas , there is much more too Catcher In The Rye than Caulfield's odd encounters and his rambling complaints about anything and everything phony.  Beneath the chatter is an adolescent struggling with adulthood , seeing himself as the hunter catching childhood in the rye before it falls away. I suppose at seventeen in my last year of education I do somewhat relate. It's almost like a masculine Bell Jar , but with more wit and frankness. The plot merges together in a hazy motion , reading more like an almost montage , blurred by memory. The narrative is interestingly childish and boyishly rude all together , the prose is clean and offers a strangely entertaining perception of reality. An engaging and a tragically authentic coming of age ,  not a markably refined sense of plot but heartfelt nonetheless. It is somewhat in-concise , yet a confusingly enjoyable read - at 218 pages its well worth the time.

Verdict? 4 Stars , symbolic , witty and perceptive yet struggles to evoke an emotional response.