February Celebrations:

 ... the Oscar winners and presentations
February 28th, 2011

Well, now that the Acadmy Award winners have been deterimined for this year, I think that most of the awards were well-deserved, if predictable, and I was glad to see The King’s Speech win all of its oscars for Best Actor, Best Director, and Most Original Screenplay, as well as the Best Picture award. The awards were meaningful for the Director, Tom Hooper and Screenwriter, David Seidler apparently for personal reasons, (as well as meaningful and inspiring to most viewers who were touched by the movie).

On another note, I was surprised to see Inception win four Academy awards, all in categories like Cinematography and Sound Editing. While The Social Network did not make it for Best Picture, it actually won the Film Editing award, which I did not expect, but I think that it was definitely deserved and makes total sense in light of the flashback technique they used to tell the story in the movie. It was also exciting to see the movie and its director, Aaron Sorkin, win for Best Adapted Screenplay as well as for Most Original Score; perhaps a more fitting tribute than just Best Picture would have been. I thougt the the background music of the movie was just as exciting and interesting as the movie and fit the story well.

The only real disappointment of the evening for me, was not seeing Geoffrey Rush win the Best Supporting Actor award for The King’s Speech, even though Christian Bale was very good in The Fighter. It would have been really exciting to see The King’s Speech win that award too, as I think he did an excellent job and was an extremely memorable character — which would certainly be one of the elements looked for in a performance like this, but the movie itself will be remembered for many years to come just because it was such a great story as well as moment in history, and Colin Firth’s performance was great as well.

I also thought that Natalie Portman’s award was well-deserved and that she did an excellent acting job in her portrayal of the Black Swan.

One of the best moments of the evening was, in fact, the presentation of the Best Picture award, when they replayed the actual King’s speech from the movie, against a backdrop of scenes from all of the other Best Picture-nominated movies, in which the actors and actresses demonstrated similar emotions and feelings to those being parlayed by the actual words of the speech, capturing some of the universal emotions that human beings experience in such circumstances. I thought that was a very creative ending to the awards show, and lent more excitement to the presentation of the Best Picture award, even though most everyone already knew it was going to be, “The King's Speech.”

 

A Comparison of The King’s Speech and
The Social Network
(written before the above)

ebruary is healthy heart month, and also one of my favorite months of the year! While the beginning of the month had a blast of cold air with record-breaking snowstorms, lately the snow has subsided, and things have been warming up a bit with a few signs of spring on the horizon. February is also a month of celebrations, including Valentine’s Day, and the Academy Awards. With that in mind, I think it is always fun to consider what some of my favorite movies of the past year have been.

So, getting first to the movies, I have to say that my two favorites this year were, The Social Network and The King’s Speech. The Social Network is a semi-fictionalized account of how Facebook was developed and created by Mark Zuckerberg from his Harvard dormitory room. It has 8 Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Adapted Screenplay, and Best Actor (Jesse Eisenberg), as well as Best Original Score, Film Editing, Sound Mixing and Cinematography. The story is told through a series of flashbacks throughout the movie, going between scenes of Mark Zuckerberg and his legal counsel seated around a conference table, with the opposing counsel and their clients who have brought lawsuits against him; to the action scenes that retell the chain of events that led to the lawsuit, (as well as the creation of Facebook). It is a very effective approach to storytelling and screenwriting, and one of the elements that makes the movie so good, in addition to the realistic portrayal of the characters and the emotional ordeals they each face, by the actors. Although not all of the scenes in this movie are necessarily enjoyable to watch, the means of using flashbacks to convey the timeline of events makes for a very exciting story, and the fact that it is based on the real-life events of Mark Zuckerberg and the other students from Harvard, makes it all the more so.

The King's Speech is about the previously untold story of King George VI’s (Prince Albert, the current Queen Elizabeth’s father) ascension to the throne; and how he overcame a serious speech impediment in the process, as well as dealing with timely historical events. It has 12 Academy Award Nominations, including Best Picture, Best Actor (Colin Firth), both Best Supporting Actor (Geoffrey Rush), and Actress (Helena Bonham-Carter), as well as Best Director (Tom Hooper), Original Screenplay, Cinematography, Original Score, Art Direction, Costume Design, and Sound Mixing. I especially liked the role that Geoffrey Rush plays as Bertie’s (the King’s) speech therapist, Lionel, in addition to Colin Firth’s oustanding performance as the future King.

While there were other good movies out this year too in the Best Picture category, these two films really stood out to me as the most interesting. The films are about completely different people and circumstances, but they share some similarities in terms of telling compelling stories based on true events, through exciting plots and acting skill. Both main characters in the films rise to the occasion in their respective roles, and both actors, Jesse Eisenberg as well as Colin Firth, do an excellent and insightful job of representing their characters. Although the movies are about different times, as well as people and events, both can be said to be representative of their times. One might wonder how The Social Network — a modern-day tale about a computer geek who invents this new computer network through which people can interact socially and share visual information with each other through an online site called “The Facebook” — could have something in common with greatness? But after seeing the movie, one can understand how the character (as well as Mark Zuckerberg in real life) does achieve this, despite facing serious legal allegations and setbacks along the way, and also deals with his own betrayal of friendship and/or ethics. It is, ironically, left for the viewer to decide what the ultimate merits (or vices) of the social networking site are, as well as the Mark Zuckerberg of the movie, or of the real Facebook for that matter, in terms of how it has taken over most of our lives. However, the story is still one about creative invention and achieving tremendous success, against odds. At the time of its making it may have also been an unfinished story in some ways — with regard to the pending legal cases that had yet to be resolved. ^{see footnote 1}

The King’s Speech is, by contrast, a historical drama about a member of the British royal family who had to face some of his own demons to overcome a severe stutter in the early part of the 20th century, prior to World War II. He must take control and run his country at a time of war and great uncertainty (when Britain was being attacked by Germany), after he asks his older brother, Edward, who is in line for the throne, to step aside due to his philandering behavior and his association with the American divorcée, Wallace Simpson. It is a remarkably told story in terms of how Lionel Logue, the Australian speech therapist, works with “Bertie” to overcome his problem, and his past, bringing out his best leadership qualities. And also, how Bertie himself, who was very hesitant and unsure of his capabilitites, ultimately succeeds in becoming a capable monarch. The King's Speech is a moving story about character and how that prevails in the face of emotional obstacles, conveyed through great acting skill on the part of Firth. The movie is enhanced by wonderful costumes and set design, and filming locations and cinematography as well. Some reviewers have suggested that the historical facts of Bertie’s ascension to the throne, as well as the timing of the role that Lionel played as his speech therapist, were altered to create a better drama and story in the film. Apparently, this was done by condensing the events of a 10-year period into a much shorter timeline, to make it appear that Edward’s abdication occurred around the same time as Bertie’s work with the speech therapist, according to David Freeman in his movie review for the Los Angeles Times. ^{see footnote 2}

Although these two movies are in many ways fundamentally different, one similarity that both The Social Network and The King’s Speech share, besides being great stories in my opinion, is that both are stories about communication on a basic level, as well as technology. To elaborate upon this point, I would like to show how in both movies there is a clash of traditional values, versus new, and/or innovative values and thinking, along with a technological advancement. In The King’s Speech this is illustrated when Bertie takes to the old-fashioned microphone at the stadium, in front of a large crowd at the races and is unable to speak without losing his confidence and train of thought, and beginning to stutter. It is Lionel, his speech therapist, whose innovative and non-traditional ways of coaching him finally allow Bertie to overcome his psychological barriers and the problem, and to be able to stand and speak clearly and concisely before his countrymen by the end of the movie using the microphone.

A similar clash of values occurs in The Social Network. In this case, it is between the traditional old-school values of the Harvard Winkelvoss twins, and Mark Zuckerberg’s brash way of dealing with them, in his quest to invent the code for Facebook; as well as the events that followed from that. The clash is highlighted in a most unforgiving way when the Winkelvoss twins go to see then President of Harvard, Larry Summers, and complain to him that Mark has stolen their idea for the website, using excerpts from the Harvard handbook to back up their claims. Mr. Summers’ response is curt and to the point essentially telling them that, “at Harvard people are always inventing things.” And he suggests that they should “get over it and go invent something else,” (themselves). While this wasn’t very nice, nor was Mark Zuckerberg’s betrayal, it does show how in today’s world, modern business ethics are shaping outcomes, and traditional values are changing due to technology and the Internet. This point is further emphasized when Mark Zuckerberg moves to California and takes up with Sean Parker, inventor of Napster fame, and another (morally corrupt) coder. While peer-to-peer file-sharing may have been an accidental discovery, in the movie Sean is depicted as an operator who knows how to make money, and leads Mark to the people and opportunities which will allow Facebook to become an invaluable investment commodity. Although I don’t really think Mark was as morally corrupt in the way that Sean Parker was, it appears that he was influenced by him and may have benefitted in many ways from his business relationship with Parker, and perhaps this is one of the reasons that Facebook was so successful. How much of this actually happened though, is hard to know, but most likely there is some truth to it all.

In another interesting twist, the movie itself has in some ways not only become a part of, but has also eclipsed the real-life Facebook story; and while we may not know all of the details of the real-life story, we now have a more complete picture of both Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg because of the movie. This is not to say that Facebook has not been a good thing, or advanced the Internet. It most definitely has, and Mark Zuckerberg has also done good things with his company like giving a huge monetary donation to the New Jersey public school system this past fall, as well as spreading his company across the globe to other countries, for free. Facebook is now a means for people all over the world to share ideas, as well as other information including, photos, news articles, company profiles, ways to organize events and fundraising for organizations, as well as myriad other possibilities of connecting ideas and people. It has enabled a means of communication that prior to this, only existed in part, through websites, photo-sharing sites like Flickr, or in such things as blogs, emails, and list-serves. The advanced PHP code that drives Facebook has enabled all of these web capabilties to be rolled into one, very powerful web application and ; social networkiing mechanism which, along with other types of sharing mechanisms across the Internet such as the open-access platform that allows for people to “like” things on other websites besides just Facebook now, has given people the ability to share almost any type of information across the globe in real time, proving to be an extremely effective tool for communication. Its reach has been far and wide, and as we have seen most recently, it has even played a role in the uprisings in Egypt and the Middle East. A world without Facebook would in fact, be hard to imagine now, and probably there is no “going back” from what we have all become used to in terms of technological advancement of the Internet. And the technology continues to change at a rapid pace - for example, just look at how mobile technology has become the next "Internet frontier."

Simultaneously, the conflict between technology and ethics is one that we have seen frequently, in the age of the Internet —where it has been difficult to draw the line between traditional intellectual property law, and new inventions or applications of code and software; or even simply, just how much information should be shared online. Where in fact, should the line should be drawn between the invention of new code for a website, versus stealing someone else’s (supposedly copyrightable) idea for a website? This is a question whose answer is not entirely clear. Computer code is in fact, copyrightable, but then again so are ideas. In the movie, I think it is fair to say that Mark may have taken some elements of the idea for Facebook from the Winkelvoss twins, who had entrusted him and asked him to be their business partner in the venture of builidng the Harvard Connection site. Or, the other possibility is that both came to a similar idea at the same time. However, on the opposite side of this issue, is the simple fact that the Winklevoss twins needed Mark to create the code to develop their idea and their website; and without that there basically would not have even been a Facebook. So who owns the idea, versus the execution of it, is still a higly debatable question —and therein lies one of the problems with our modern technology world where things are changing so fast, it is hard to keep up with them from a regulatory standpoint. In the movie as in real life, the parties to the lawsuit reach a settlement rather than taking it to a jury to decide. The actors in The Social Network like Jesse Eisenberg, were extremely effective in portraying Mark as well as his relationships with his roommate, Eduardo Saverin, and the Winkelvoss twins — an element that made the movie totally believeable and exciting. But the comparison that I would like to bring out between this movie and The King’s Speech, is that both explore the issue of traditional values and ideas versus innovation, even though they take place in different centuries, and involve characters who experience completely different life circumstances and problems. However, the characters both share the commonality of using communication devices to accomplish something important. The dilemma between technological innovation and tradition, as well as ethics also illustrates the fact that, while we may be influenced by the events of our times, as well as by its technology and also human nature, it is the outcome that matters —or more precisely, how the technology is used, and what it does for individuals or for a society in the end. You can goof up with a microphone, as well as a computer. But in The King’s Speech, it is the therapist’s speech coaching that allows the King to get used to the microphone (which was the technology of his day), and to become a successful and convincing leader and speaker. It might also be said that he faced the moral dilemma of having to ask his brother to abdicate from the throne. The movies differ however, in many other ways, including in the moral character and role of the main character, so I would not compare them beyond this. It is just interesting to see the contrast between technology of the past, and how it influenced a country and a time in its history, versus the computer technology of today, and how that has done the same.

This past year also seems to have been the “Year of the Documentary,” especially with regard to films about urgent issues with overtly political messages. Just reviewing the titles for nominees in this category are revealing. For example, “Inside Job” and “Gasland” suggest exactly what these movies and issues are about. Inside Job looks at the factors that led to the breakdown in the financial and housing markets through the use of predatory lending practices, credit default swaps, and a serious lack of regulation on Wall Street, all of which contributed to the global economic crisis. In addition, it also investigates who is to blame. Gasland reviews the potential environmental impacts on clean air and water of drilling for natural gas through hydraulic fracturing of the bedrock; and Restrepo looks at the devastating effects on the lives of soldiers that the war in Afghanistan has taken. ^{footnote 3} Another good movie which covered the financial collapse in a fictionalized way, but was not nominated for an Oscar, was Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.

Usually, there are a couple of other categories that I love which include Art Direction, Cinematography, Costume Design and Best Animated Feature Film. Black Swan was amazing in terms of cinematography, and Natalie Portman’s dancing and acting skill too, but it was not one of my favorite films this year as I thought it was too dark and psychological. However I do think that Natalie Portman will win the Oscar for Best Actress, and I think it is a toss-up in terms of Black Swan and The King’s Speech in the Cinematography and Film Editing categories. The Social Network was also nominated in both of these categoires, too, which makes it even harder to choose or predict which one will win for each. I am going with The King’s Speech for Cinematography, and Black Swan for Film Editing.

I usually like the Harry Potter movies as well as other films that fall under the Costume Design or Visual Effects categories, such as Alice in Wonderland or The Tempest, but have only seen the Harry Potter movie so far in these categories. This year under the animated movies, I did like How to Train Your Dragon, which I think I would make a great Oscar choice/favorite, but did not see either The Illusionist, or Toy Story 3, which is a contender under the Best Picture category as well. I just saw the Oscar-Nominated Animated Shorts this week, and have to say that The Gruffalo was the best story and best animated in my opinion, but there were several others that used interesting animation effects like Madagascar, carnet de Voyage, and Night and Day, as well as The Lost Thing. See: http://oscar.go.com/nominations, for the Short Film (Animated) category nominees, YouTube for trailers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDwQFyZG3WQ.

Comparing these to some of last year’s animated films, I also liked Coraline, the trailer for which can still be seen on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyUwEO7xelY; and another small, but very charming Irish film which I did not actually see in the theatre, but learned about on the Internet, called The Secret of Kells. I enjoyed both of these movies for their creativity in story-telling as well as graphic illustrations, artwork and animation. You can read more about them on the Internet!

Be sure to check out the websites for The Social Network, and The King's Speech. They are fun to look at with lots of informative links about the stories, characters and actors. In the case of The Social Network, there is also a tab full of news articles and critiques which have been written about Mark Zuckerberg and the Facebook phenomenon, the film, and what it all means, as well as videos on how the movie was actually made.

And, for a complete listing of Academy Award nominees as well as to fill out your own ballot or review the movies, visit: http://oscar.go.com.

Footnotes:

1.) See: What did the Winkelvoss Twins think of “The Social Network?” Interview, Piers Morgan Tonight | February 8, 2011.

2.) Perspective: How True is the King’s Speech?
By, David Freeman, Special to The Los Angeles Times | February 13, 2011.

3.) Oscars.com — Check out the reviews of these films under the nominations tab/category for Documentary Features.

Other Reviews worth reading:

Is Civility Enough to Sustain a Film?
Firth is Royalty Even if ‘King's Speech’ is a little stiff
By, Ty Burr | Movie Review, The Boston Globe, December 17, 2010.

“The real story” on Mark Zuckerberg | Business Insider, from an article adapted from Wikipedia, November, 2010.

Mark Zuckerberg’s Most Valuable Friend | CNBC.com | October 3, 2010.

________________________________________

Have a Happy February, (hope you had a Happy Valentine’s Day,) enjoy the Oscars, and Healthy Heart Month!

Since February is also Healthy Heart month, you might enjoy visiting the American Heart Association site for women, or help spread the word through Facebook.

February celebrations: The Oscars and Valentines

back to the top