Can A Football Visor Fit On A Lacrosse Helmet

Vallanzasca, ANGELS OF EVIL (Italy, 2010) by Michele Placido

course ours is a strange country ... I was convinced, you never know why, we were a people become numb and anesthetized to all, without any shame and disgrace. But incredibly wrong I was! I must therefore express my most sincere apologies to the 'value' League member David U who with great courage and dignity, took a tough stance against Michele Placido, director who is about to land in theaters with its Italian- Vallanzasca The angels of evil , fictionalized biography of the famous bandit. Says U " Having advertised the mafia in the world and made famous by the bloody north to south of Banda Magliana of Rome, not yet satisfied the bad teacher Michele Placido and 'ascended the pulpit to elevate to hero's ruthless murderess Renato Vallanzasca .
Oooh! Finally someone who is angered by serious things! Other than the nonsense of these days ... so much noise for some 'fling' erotic a poor man who is anointed by the Lord, working all day for us and most persecuted of Jesus Christ! In short, the usual communist plot that is able to raise a fuss out of nothing to hide the true atrocities italic, like this movie blasphemous and heretical signed by a director known subversive and Communist-Old ... and what the heck!

Returning serious (even if it is not easy), if I were Michele Placido absolutely would not give weight to the controversy that accompanied the creation and distribution of its film . Meanwhile, because it's all free publicity (and I think Placido, director already sailed, underneath where the laughs in his sleeve.) And why has not anything really to blame his conscience, as it would be absurd to crucify a director for having filmed a drama about a gangster. As if it were not gangster movies ever filmed, and how if you do not know that, since there is a cinema, the characters 'My Own Private Idaho' was always fascinated audiences, without being emulated or glorified by the public. It would be like Americans, just to understand, accused Michael Mann for directing Public Enemy, the film telling the 'managed' by John Dillinger ... on, let's be serious! So The Godfather? And Once Upon a Time in America? And Scarface, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, The Departed, Carlitos Way, The Untouchables ... if Scorsese, Pacino and DeNiro had lived and worked in Italy would have to be hungry!

Ok, here it is better to close it. And we try to talk a bit 'of the film, which is the most important thing.
The only concern for us cinephiles, if anything, was what to expect from this movie because the director Placido is a more reversible character of Dr. Jekyll, beautiful and very capable of alternating film thickness ( lost in love, A Hero Borghese, Romanzo Criminale ) to untold trouble (see the tremendous Wherever You ol'irrisolto Big Dreams ). No problem, however. I tell you now that Vallanzasca is a good movie. A genre film that recalls the films 'cop' Italian of the '70s, full of rhythm, shooting, action and drifting. And before you know something ... you can argue that in this case this is not a problem: we are not dealing, in fact, not a treatise on the years of lead, or in defense of the feared gangster as the families of the victims, but an honest product which reconstructs very well be the figure of the bandit that the climate of the time without getting lost in the maze-historical sociology. Do not expect, in short, another Crime Novel: This is simply the story of a man who has chosen (though not the need, as he himself declared) to be on the wrong side. Needless to say that most
the success of the film can be attributed to Kim Rossi Stuart , which is great in its interpretation of the 'bandit Italy's Most Beautiful' (as Vallanzasca was called then): the perfectly aligned, so impressive in scope, look, appearance and speech ... a reason more to see this film, and to reject the sender to the controversy created art.

RATING: * * *

Prices For Putty Hill Skateland On Saturdays

GOLDEN GLOBES: Triumph 'The Social Network'

David Fincher and The Social Network are low as the Golden Globes 2010: it would be trivial and too easy to talk about victory 'announced': course in the name of Facebook, the most lucrative and revolutionary invention of the 'year zero'. But Fincher's film is not only that: it is a big and unforgiving portrait of contemporary society, built on a beautifully classic and attractive. An extraordinary 'thriller feelings' which is already an icon of our time, and it deserves all the accolades: In addition to those for best dramatic film and best director added that for the best screenplay (doveroso!) and, surprisingly, also that for the soundtrack. And if you see a good morning by morning it is easy to predict success at the upcoming Oscars, including the Golden Globes are more reliable than the antechamber.

Sure, the fans know how to differentiate Globes awards in two categories: drama and comedy (as opposed to that Oscar is unique), but it's really hard to believe that this year we are able to extract a comedy The Social Network the most coveted prize. Firstly because, as mentioned, we are faced with an absolute masterpiece, and then because in truth the level of brilliant films in competition this year was quite low, if we think that among the candidates was also impossible The Tourist understand well what I mean ... In the end the victory went to The boys are doing well Lisa Chodolenko film that chronicles the misadventures family members of a lesbian couple struggling with the problems of everyday life. But we believe that the award to Annette Bening (who beat the wire the 'wife' Julianne Moore) is already more than enough.

Nothing to say even the pair of dramatic actors rewarded: if the premium Colin Firth was predictable (magnificent King George VI in The King's Speech ) less obvious but well-deserved was the victory of good Natalie Portman and good in Black Swan Darren Aronofsky, the film is not yet released to us but on the Israeli-American actress performance art bet with my eyes closed. Just as there seems deserved the statuette of the talented Paul Giamatti it version of Barney : his interpretation of 'save' a film otherwise literal deboluccio. Among the non-actors, finally, winning the 'Aces' Christian Bale Melissa Leo of The Fighter, yet another drama about the world of boxing ... certainly not original, but in any case, both players winning a long-deserved recognition.

These, then, the main verdicts. The focus now moves on the prize 'more', that is the Oscars, whose nominations will be announced on 25 January, and must then wait another month (February 27) to know the names of the winners. But you will see that the names in contention are not much different from those mentioned above ... is already on then a fight to the vote between Portman and Bening between actresses and between Firth and Giamatti among men. Although Hollywood has long been the law in force 'unwritten' (but very valuable) that will (almost) always rewarded with the same interpretation of the dramatic actor or actress. Unlucky for
instead I am the love of Luca Guadagnino , the only Italian in the race, beaten by Denmark in a world of the five best foreign films. It must be said, however, that for the small Italian film was already a success to reach nominations, among other things, accompanied by a flattering result for the American box-office. It still remains in contention for the possibility of the ultimate prize ...
But there will be time to talk it over.

WINNERS:

- Best drama: The Social Network David Fincher
- Best Comedy: The boys are doing well Lisa Cholodenko
- Best director: David Fincher for 'The Social Network'
- Best dramatic actor: Colin Firth for 'The King's speech'
- Best brilliant actor: Paul Giamatti for ' The version of Barney '
- Best dramatic actress: Natalie Portman for' Black Swan '
- Best actress brilliant Annette Bening for' The guys are good '
- Best Actor prot. Christian Bale for 'The Fighter '
- Best Supporting Actress prot. Melissa Leo for' The Fighter '
- Best Foreign Language Film: In a better world by Susanne Bier (Denmark)

Scores And Ritz Recipe

Which 'version' do you prefer? The eternal debate between cinema and literature

finally arrives in the room Barney's version, the cinephile awaited implementation of the cult novel Mordecai Richler : ne I had already spoken at the time of the preview 'Venice' of the film (see here ), but it was inevitable that I would be back on the subject. Not so much because the film directed by Richard J. Lewis is particularly memorable (anzi. ..) but because once again, as always happens when it is brought to the screen a story of great success, you turn on the age-old question about what is right (or should) remain more or less faithful to literary text. And of course the more famous book, the greater the controversy ... especially if the writer can not or will not cooperate with the screenplay, so that it becomes 'free' based on the novel. In this case it was not really possible (Richler died in 2001), but there have been countless cases in which the authors of the books in question are more or less explicitly disowned the film version, not to mention the fans 'irreducible' Taliban and the written press who often refuse 'whatever' the film considering it almost a sacrilege (think the saga of The Lord of the Rings ).

start by saying one thing: I have not read the novel by Richler and therefore can not make comparisons with the film: I can only say that the film is a convenzionalissima Lewis and predictable romantic comedy-style American, but it certainly is not unwatchable all except irreverent, 'incorrect', caustic, non-conformist as it seems to be the text from which it comes.
But this is not the point.
The question is: How far you can push the 'loyalty' to the novel? And to what extent the director (or writer) can get 'putting their'?

I believe, first, that making comparisons is eternally wrong cinema and literature are two arts that can not be compared in any way. Are simply DIFFERENT. The novel is the highest expression of thought, without limitations or restrictions, and the film must necessarily be a summary. But this should not be (at least not always) at the expense of film, because the cinema is the 'summa' of all intellectual arts (literature, image, music) as saying someone smarter than me ... Any other form of representation can not have the same direct and immediate ability to represent reality. The feelings that can give us some images of the film could not be caused by any form of artistic expression. Take 2001: A Space Odyssey : Arthur Clarke takes dozens of pages to go from 'Dawn of Man' today, and are often considerable. But Kubrick single frame (the mythical scene of the bone thrown into the sky becomes a spaceship that) all the sums in an extraordinary way.

said this, it is obvious that there can be great books and bad movies, or the opposite. But I find that the comparison is impossible, and I think that the director has the sacred right (and I think even the duty) to translate the novel according to his vision, putting his words and not merely a slavish pursuit of philology. I'll be back again The Lord of the Rings : in my opinion is a wondrous film saga, I do not think it would be possible to achieve better than Peter Jackson did : yet most of those who read and loved the book claim that the film is 'reductive' with respect to the novel (despite the twelve total hours of film!). But it was inevitable that it was considering the bulk of the story, and Jackson has had the merit of not 'copy' purely literary text, but to stage a film 'personal', as amended, different yet excellent, which I believe has nothing to inferior compared to Tolkien's tome.

The same thing can not seem instead to be called Barney's version, but even here the choice should be respected directors and producers that he wanted to give their cut of the film, which each case must be neither to glorify nor to belittle the work of Richler: directing a film very often those who use the literary text as a canvas or as a cue, then giving birth to film adaptations absolutely 'free', with very different concepts and styles.
And I find that this is absolutely right. Understanding that everyone is master of giving their opinion.

Heart Gold Working Rom

TRON LEGACY (USA, 2010) by Joseph Kosinski


will be getting older, you will see that perhaps too many movies and are always more 'canny' in front of the big screen, but I'm beginning to think it is really Labranca Thomas (see his book ' Collateral 'latest issue of FilmTV): 3D is just back in theaters and is already being boring. Why is not the 3D that makes a good movie: to limit makes it more spectacular, more visually appealing, but if history is not boring is that 'Third dimension' makes it less boring, but ... In some ways even more bored, bewildered by a barrage of special effects that add still further the vision. 3D should be like the referee in football, a referee is much better at the very least it should be noted during the game. If the referee becomes the protagonist, then it means that something is wrong ... in the cinema is the same thing: if we realize that we are watching a movie and this concerns us only because we bring the infamous 'glasses', we are certainly not paid off by what passes before my eyes.

All this to say that Tron Legacy is a huge disappointment. Despite the dazzling 3D staging highly hi-tec and skintight overalls Olivia Wilde: If the first Tron, one of 82, was at least creative and innovative in some ways, despite its apparent simplicity, this pointless remake is really the triumph of boredom It is a film of great visual impact (eccimancherebbealtro!!), but completely unsupported by a proper screenplay: the situations are so obvious and repetitive that really seems to be inside a video game, not to mention the dialogues, at times, are even horrifying ( "As the sun" - "It 's beautiful and warm" . sic!)

Tron Legacy is develops through the accumulation, throwing it on fire all the 'meat' which we are immediately overwhelmed by special effects, but you get tired very soon, because the story does not hold, the characters are essentially 'invisible' to their smallness and the damage ' impression of not knowing what to do, a bit 'as Inter's Rafa Benitez: It is unnecessary to have large budgets and big names (something like 160 million dollars spent!) if you do not have thoughts. Kosinski's film winks now Matrix, now Nirvana, even 2001: A Space Odyssey , without having any idea about where is going.
But meanwhile the kids are having fun in the room with his glasses, draw popcorn, joking with their mobile phones ... I guess I'm really invecchaindo!

RATING: * *