This years Oscars look to be more low key with less big name movies nominated then I can remember in a long time. The nominees for best picture are:
The Artists
The Descendants
Extrememly Loud and Incredibly Close
The Help
Hugo
Midnight in Paris
Moneyball
The Tree of Life
War Horse
I have seen four of these films so far. The first one I watched was "The Help." The film chronicled the struggles of the servants in Jackson, Mississippi during the 1960's. Emmas Stone plays an author who wants to write a book from the perspective of a black housekeeper. Interweaving the fiction with reality, the film does a very good job of expressing just how dismal things were back then even as the civil rights movement hit full stride. I thought it was a very good film overall; the acting was good, the story superb, the cinematography was adequate. I look for this to be a front-runner at this year's awards. Io bet this has a 1/2 chance to win.
The second film I saw was "The Tree of Life." This film was directed by Terrance Mallick and pushed the boundaries of what a film can be. With very little discernible plot or timeline, the film focused more extensively on the emotions of the characters and the themes presented by the plot. It will not give anything away to say that a family finds out one of their sons has passed away and the film then shows what has led up to this and what feelings are expressed as a result of the death. The actual event is never shown, I don't even remember finding out how the son died. The plot and actual events are truly secondary in this film. Even as this film challenges the traditional beginning/ middle/ end of traditional film making, it does a great job addressing the themes addressed by the screenwriter and director. Using some of the most beautiful cinematography to date, it captures each characters moods, emotions, and beliefs without truly filming a conventional scene. It is almost a series of impressionistic paintings shown in conjunction with a central idea to express the ides the director wants us to see which are quite open to interpretation even after the film ends. It was a very interesting (and slightly tedious- especially then middle 25 or 30 minutes with no humans appearing at all) look at how a film can get its message across while still managing to be called a film. I don't think it will win; it is too avant-garde for the academy to pick and rightfully so. I give this a 1/10 chance to win.
The third film I have watched was "Moneyball." It starred Brad Pitt as Billy Beane, the Oakland A's general manager who changed the thinking in baseball by embracing the ideology of Bill James, the Godfather of statistics. While it was slightly entertaining, I have no idea why it was chosen for best picture. The cinematography was repetitious, the acting was OK if you buy Brad Pitt's interpretation of Billy Beane as a charismatic, swashbuckling, GM who didn't seem to care about his paycheck or his livelihood (which I did not). The screenplay was overwrought with Hollywood shtick and reeked of conventions best left in the 80's and 90's (can we have another close-up of Brad Pitt brooding in his pick-up truck? Please just one more.) I will say Jonah Hill did a great job of playing the anti-Jonah Hill assistant GM; Peter Brand. His performance saved the film. In short, this is a mildly entertaining look at the Hollywood version of baseball culture that somehow didn't ring authentic to me at all. I wouldn't recommend watching it to be honest and if you do, please do so with a grain of salt and a bottle of Pepcid AC as it may upset your stomach. Not a chance to win.
The fourth film I saw was "Hugo." It is about a boy, Hugo, who lives in a train station as he has been orphaned. Directed by Martin Scorcese, the cinamatography was excellent as was the story. Hugo meets one of the pioneers of filmmaking, Goerges Melies (portrayed by an outstanding Ben Kingsley) and the story unfolds from there. While serving as a film history lesson, the script manages to maintain its focus on being a "kid movie" while not overtly feeling like one. This is the first "kids movie" that has been nominated that actually should have been. I recommend it to everyone, young and old for the script, beautiful special effects, perfect period costumes and makeup, great performances by Kingsley and Sasha Baren Cohen, and the fantastic lesson in early filmmaking and the pioneering effects that Melies and the Lumiere Brothers had on filmmaking. Had the Oscars not alreay taken place, I would have moved this right next to "The Help" as my front-runner for the Oscar. Next up, I am watching "The Descendants" tonight and am expecting an outstanding film. I have heard nothing but good and am really looking forward to it.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
Friday 2/2 BLOG!
In honor of Valentine's Day, Clark Dooley and I have decided to do some candy flavored beer research so Clark bought a bottle of Boulevard Chocolate Ale and I picked up two bottles of Chocolate Stout. We decided to drink the Boulevard Chocolate Ale first.
Brewer: Boulevard Brewing Company, Kansas City
Beer: Boulevard Smokestack Series Chocolate Ale
Style: Ale albeit 9.1% alcohol
Price: $12.99 for a pint bottle- not cheap
Clark claims that all of his KC homies are going crazy for this so he had to try it. Here are the ratings:
Appearance: Amber Caramely Smoky- not clear at all.
Mouthfeel: Kind of prickly, very bubbly.
Smell: surprisingly weak- can't really smell anything. Clark smells malt but it is not strong.
Taste: Definitely malty; the label says it is a malt beverage so I guess that makes sense. As for the chocolate, it is very apparent at the beginning of the drink but disappears quickly. I am not a fan to be honest; especially for $13 a pint. Not a real good start. Amy said it was like McEwans with sugar. John says that the four pale ales may have dulled his taste buds but he wants to know where the chocolate is. Clark says his homies can keep it in KC.
Overall rating: I say a 2.5 Clark says a 1.75. Not a stellar start.
Sidenote: Michelle is putting lip gloss on right now. Watch out TP holders. By the way, if you ever invite Michelle over, hide the wine.
On to the second!!!
Brewer: Rogue Brewery (usually a solid brewer- haven't had a bad one yet)
Beer Name: Rogue Chocolate Stout
Beer Style: Chocolate Stout
Price: $6.99 if memory serves correctly
Appearance: Looks like beer. Very dark. Almost black. Slight head; good lacing on the glass.
Mouthfeel: Very smooth but substanial. A nice feel.
Smell: Again, not a very strong smell. I'm starting to wonder if I have a cold. What I can smell is a slight chocolate smell with a hint of some kind of nuts.
Taste: Ummmmmmmmmmm. Now we have a beer. This is good stuff. Definitely more chocolaty and beery. Very smooth and the chocolate starts strong and fades into a slightly bitter aftertaste. The stout taste is smooth and not too bitter. It is a balanced beer which tastes good from start to finish. I recommend it highly for your Valentine's Day drinking. Clark says very choclatey, not cocoaey... Good beer.
Overall Rating: I say 3.5, Clark says 3.5 also. Good stuff.
And the last Chocolate beer for the night...
Brewer: Wells and Youngs Brewery, England
Beer Name: Young's Double Chocolate Stout
Beer Style: Chocolate Stout
Price: Want to say $5.99 but not for sure.
Appearance: Dark, choclatey, can't see through it at all.
Mouthfeel: Tingly, somewhat flat feel to it.
Smell: Smells like black licorice to me; sort of an anise smell.
Taste: Very smooth as well here. This is a professionally made beer as well. A little more bitter then the Rogue and slightly more malty. Clark doesn't care for the malt. We both agree that it is good but not quite as good as the Rogue.
SIDENOTE: Manchester United beat Chelsea in the 94 FA Cup final. Cantona scored twice from the spot. Programming note: United beats Chelsea Sunday AM on Fox. Better then the Super Bowl. Tune in.
BONUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My bro in law, Erick has decided to brew his own beer. He gave me a sample beer of each kind tonight and I told him I would review both on the blog tonight. Here goes!!!!
BREWER: Erick Todd brewing company
BEER NAME: Bo Pellini sucks nuts brown ale
Beer Style: Nut brown ale
Price: Ask Erick
Appearance: Ummm brown, cloudy, very bubbly
Mouthfeel: Smooth with a bubbly undertone, kind of champagney
Smell: Somewhat sweet in a mixed vegetableish way; can't say I've ever smelled this smell before- not necessarily bad- just very different
Taste: Very smooth- somewhat bland but we have been drinking chocolate stout for the last two hours as well so anything beneath paint thinner is going to be bland at this time. I think this would make Bo Pellini proud; if he wasn't a walking vagina... which he is. Go Penn State! And Michigan, Ohio St., Minnesota, Northwestern etc. Clark says go Illinois and Wisconsin and anyone we forgot.
Overall rating: Not bad. I'm going to have to shorten the name of the beer to retain blog space. From here on out, we are referring to it simply as "Bo Pellini sucks nuts". I give the "Bo Pellini Sucks Nuts" a 3.0. A good effort for a first time brewer. Gives me hope for future offerings. Clark says a good Newcastle feel; 3.2 overall.
BREWER: Erick Todd Brewery
BEER NAME: Erick's Wheatholer Ale
BEER STYLE: Wheat Ale
PRICE: Ask Erick (less then the Boulevard chocolate- that Clark can gaurantee)
SIDENOTE: CLark and I love to say Peter "SCHMIECHEL" Say it a few times-"SCHMIECHEL, SCHMIECHEL, SCHMIECHEL" See, I told you. And try to sound German. Makes it even funner.
Appearance: Light golden and very clear. Looks like a very summery beer.
Mouthfeel: Clark says slightly resembles alka seltzer. I think it is bubbly also. But only up front. Smooths out as it goes down. A good feel to it overall.
Smell: Clark says enticing. Very fruity. I say bubblegummy with a hint of baby poop. Or bananas; whichever.
Tatse: Clark says OOOhhh, ummm, and nothing else. Waiting... waiting... nothing. Clark says it tastes bubbly. Maybe the four pale ales have gotten him after all. Oh wait, he says it needs to sit a couple, two years. After a few drinks, I am pleasantly surprised. This doesn't taste like it smells. It is good. I could drink this all summer long. Has a hint of Belgium in it; especially the aftertaste. A very complex wheat beer that is light enough to please most palates but complex enough to keep your interest. File this away under "keeper" (unlike Taylor Martinez to the NFL scouts).
Overall rating: I'm going 3.5 with the potential to increase given a 6 pack in the driveway at a later date. Clark says the Stroh's factory farted out a 3 for this one. Obviously, I'm not making that up...
Good job Erick. Looking forward to the new one that you are brewing tonight. Hope you have as much fun making it as I had drinking these. And listening to Clark's pearls of alcohol wisdom...
Until next time, thanks for reading. Two oatmeal stouts coming next unless I finish the Scotch Ale blog I started last weekend. I LOVE SCOTCH ALE...
Brewer: Boulevard Brewing Company, Kansas City
Beer: Boulevard Smokestack Series Chocolate Ale
Style: Ale albeit 9.1% alcohol
Price: $12.99 for a pint bottle- not cheap
Clark claims that all of his KC homies are going crazy for this so he had to try it. Here are the ratings:
Appearance: Amber Caramely Smoky- not clear at all.
Mouthfeel: Kind of prickly, very bubbly.
Smell: surprisingly weak- can't really smell anything. Clark smells malt but it is not strong.
Taste: Definitely malty; the label says it is a malt beverage so I guess that makes sense. As for the chocolate, it is very apparent at the beginning of the drink but disappears quickly. I am not a fan to be honest; especially for $13 a pint. Not a real good start. Amy said it was like McEwans with sugar. John says that the four pale ales may have dulled his taste buds but he wants to know where the chocolate is. Clark says his homies can keep it in KC.
Overall rating: I say a 2.5 Clark says a 1.75. Not a stellar start.
Sidenote: Michelle is putting lip gloss on right now. Watch out TP holders. By the way, if you ever invite Michelle over, hide the wine.
On to the second!!!
Brewer: Rogue Brewery (usually a solid brewer- haven't had a bad one yet)
Beer Name: Rogue Chocolate Stout
Beer Style: Chocolate Stout
Price: $6.99 if memory serves correctly
Appearance: Looks like beer. Very dark. Almost black. Slight head; good lacing on the glass.
Mouthfeel: Very smooth but substanial. A nice feel.
Smell: Again, not a very strong smell. I'm starting to wonder if I have a cold. What I can smell is a slight chocolate smell with a hint of some kind of nuts.
Taste: Ummmmmmmmmmm. Now we have a beer. This is good stuff. Definitely more chocolaty and beery. Very smooth and the chocolate starts strong and fades into a slightly bitter aftertaste. The stout taste is smooth and not too bitter. It is a balanced beer which tastes good from start to finish. I recommend it highly for your Valentine's Day drinking. Clark says very choclatey, not cocoaey... Good beer.
Overall Rating: I say 3.5, Clark says 3.5 also. Good stuff.
And the last Chocolate beer for the night...
Brewer: Wells and Youngs Brewery, England
Beer Name: Young's Double Chocolate Stout
Beer Style: Chocolate Stout
Price: Want to say $5.99 but not for sure.
Appearance: Dark, choclatey, can't see through it at all.
Mouthfeel: Tingly, somewhat flat feel to it.
Smell: Smells like black licorice to me; sort of an anise smell.
Taste: Very smooth as well here. This is a professionally made beer as well. A little more bitter then the Rogue and slightly more malty. Clark doesn't care for the malt. We both agree that it is good but not quite as good as the Rogue.
SIDENOTE: Manchester United beat Chelsea in the 94 FA Cup final. Cantona scored twice from the spot. Programming note: United beats Chelsea Sunday AM on Fox. Better then the Super Bowl. Tune in.
BONUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My bro in law, Erick has decided to brew his own beer. He gave me a sample beer of each kind tonight and I told him I would review both on the blog tonight. Here goes!!!!
BREWER: Erick Todd brewing company
BEER NAME: Bo Pellini sucks nuts brown ale
Beer Style: Nut brown ale
Price: Ask Erick
Appearance: Ummm brown, cloudy, very bubbly
Mouthfeel: Smooth with a bubbly undertone, kind of champagney
Smell: Somewhat sweet in a mixed vegetableish way; can't say I've ever smelled this smell before- not necessarily bad- just very different
Taste: Very smooth- somewhat bland but we have been drinking chocolate stout for the last two hours as well so anything beneath paint thinner is going to be bland at this time. I think this would make Bo Pellini proud; if he wasn't a walking vagina... which he is. Go Penn State! And Michigan, Ohio St., Minnesota, Northwestern etc. Clark says go Illinois and Wisconsin and anyone we forgot.
Overall rating: Not bad. I'm going to have to shorten the name of the beer to retain blog space. From here on out, we are referring to it simply as "Bo Pellini sucks nuts". I give the "Bo Pellini Sucks Nuts" a 3.0. A good effort for a first time brewer. Gives me hope for future offerings. Clark says a good Newcastle feel; 3.2 overall.
BREWER: Erick Todd Brewery
BEER NAME: Erick's Wheatholer Ale
BEER STYLE: Wheat Ale
PRICE: Ask Erick (less then the Boulevard chocolate- that Clark can gaurantee)
SIDENOTE: CLark and I love to say Peter "SCHMIECHEL" Say it a few times-"SCHMIECHEL, SCHMIECHEL, SCHMIECHEL" See, I told you. And try to sound German. Makes it even funner.
Appearance: Light golden and very clear. Looks like a very summery beer.
Mouthfeel: Clark says slightly resembles alka seltzer. I think it is bubbly also. But only up front. Smooths out as it goes down. A good feel to it overall.
Smell: Clark says enticing. Very fruity. I say bubblegummy with a hint of baby poop. Or bananas; whichever.
Tatse: Clark says OOOhhh, ummm, and nothing else. Waiting... waiting... nothing. Clark says it tastes bubbly. Maybe the four pale ales have gotten him after all. Oh wait, he says it needs to sit a couple, two years. After a few drinks, I am pleasantly surprised. This doesn't taste like it smells. It is good. I could drink this all summer long. Has a hint of Belgium in it; especially the aftertaste. A very complex wheat beer that is light enough to please most palates but complex enough to keep your interest. File this away under "keeper" (unlike Taylor Martinez to the NFL scouts).
Overall rating: I'm going 3.5 with the potential to increase given a 6 pack in the driveway at a later date. Clark says the Stroh's factory farted out a 3 for this one. Obviously, I'm not making that up...
Good job Erick. Looking forward to the new one that you are brewing tonight. Hope you have as much fun making it as I had drinking these. And listening to Clark's pearls of alcohol wisdom...
Until next time, thanks for reading. Two oatmeal stouts coming next unless I finish the Scotch Ale blog I started last weekend. I LOVE SCOTCH ALE...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
