3
entertainment
Monday Feb. 1, 2010 www.newsrecord.org
covering campus and beyond
ROBERT’S
RANTS robert kirchgassner
Award season strikes again Academy Award time is upon us with nominations to be announced Feb. 2 and the show is to air March 7. As usual, it’ll have a great deal of coverage. Of all the movie awards (Golden Globes, Emmys, SAG Awards, etc.), the Oscars have always been the most famous. If an actor or filmmaker has won one, or even been nominated for one, you can be sure the phrase ‘Academy Award winner’ or ‘Academy Award nominee’ will almost always precede their name whenever it’s spoken or written. More than any other award, the Oscars draw criticism when one isn’t awarded to an artist who is viewed as a shoo-in. An example is “Shakespeare in Love” winning the Best Picture Oscar instead of “Saving Private Ryan” at the 1998 Academy Awards. Likewise, Al Pacino has been praised as one of our finest actors since his star-making performance in “The Godfather” (1972), for which he received his first nomination. But he would be nominated seven more times before finally receiving one for “Scent of a Woman” (1992). Also scrutinized is when a film or artist isn’t even nominated, even with unanimous praise from the critics and public. In many of these cases, it’s because the film in question might be an independent production and the Oscars, for the most part, give nominations to films that come from major studios (an exception to this was the 1999 drama “Boys Don’t Cry,” which gave Hilary Swank her first Oscar). However, there are cases when even studio productions get overlooked. For example, “The Untouchables” (1987), was a critical and box-office hit which won four Oscar nominations, but none of them were for Best Picture. When a long-beloved artist is finally given an Oscar, many believe that it was simply a sympathy vote or a sort of life achievement award. Many view Pacino’s win in this manner as well as Martin Scorsese’s Best Director Oscar for “The Departed” (2006) after he, like Pacino, had years of nominations with no wins. All this focus on the Oscars has led many –– mostly those who work behind the scenes in the Hollywood community –– to be slow to, or in some cases, never acknowledge the talent many Oscarless actors, actresses or directors have. This results in such artists to be underrated for much of their careers. For instance, British actor Christopher Lee made the Guinness Book of World Records in 2001 as the actor with the most screen credits. However, he has never been even nominated for an Oscar, despite the fact that most critics acknowledge his acting talent. This could be due to the fact that he became a star with his work in the horror genre with films such as “Horror of Dracula” (1958), a genre which the Oscars rarely gives statuettes to. Hence, some people have viewed him as simply a ‘horror actor,’ even though he’s done a number of non-horror pictures. To put it simply, such people place too much emphasis on this specific award as an affirmation of an artist’s talent. Sure the trophy looks cool and it may be fun to have one in your hands, but a person in the filmmaking business never getting one shouldn’t invalidate his or her talent, especially since there are many other awards honoring the best in film, which they could potentially win. Just allow their body of work to determine their legacy. Jeff Bridges is set to get his fifth nomination for “Crazy Heart” (2009), as he has already won both the Golden Globe and the SAG award for that performance. He was previously nominated for “The Last Picture Show” (1971), “Thunderbolt and Lightfoot” (1974), “Starman” (1984) and “The Contender” (2000). If the fifth time proves the charm for him, there will doubtlessly be some people who will view this as much of a ‘sympathy Oscar’ as they do the wins for Pacino and Scorsese. Bridges has always been one of my favorite actors, so I’d be happy if he wins this year. It occurs to me, though, that he’ll be in good company whether he gets an Oscar or not.
Chip reeves the news record
Trying to give a full, comprehensive review of “Mass Effect 2” in 600 words is like trying to sum up the Bible in a 10-page comic book. It can’t be done. But I will try to hit the important points of this 20 to 40-hour game. The latest installment in developer Bioware’s trilogy, “Mass Effect 2,” is simply one of the most emotionally immersive games out there, as well as being a top-notch action packed RPG third-person shooter. ME2 picks up where the first game ended, with the player controlling Commander Shepard –– a natural-born leader who travels galaxies fighting off many types of enemies for the greater good. The story begins with Commander Shepard being hired by Cerberus, a giant renegade corporation that works outside of the Alliance. Humans are being taken and harvested by The Collectors, a strange amphibianesque multi-eyed alien race that is working for the Reapers, enemies from the first “Mass Effect.” Shepard must build a team while finding the technology to track down the Collectors and hopefully destroy them. From the beginning of the game, the story is thick. Every conversation has multiple response options, each with a consequence. Over time, the decisions you make add up, making the character a paragon or renegade, otherwise known as good or evil. The depth of relationships you can build with your team and crew is unbelievable for a video game. You can even pursue a sexual relationship with a character. Near the end of the story, many prior decisions will greatly affect the course of the game, as the game has multiple endings. The fighting mechanics of ME2 have been significantly improved, rivaling any of the top third-person shooters out there. Compared to the first Mass Effect, the game has 100 percent more action, the missions are longer and the fighting areas are more diverse. A cover system has been implemented, which makes the combat more realistic and the battles longer. The biotic and tech powers one can wield are also a fun asset to bring to a fight. A player can tell his character to use throw, hurtling an enemy into the air like a clay pigeon at a skeet shooting range, or overload, which overwhelms the enemy’s shield capacity and causes it to explode. The enemy artificial intelligence is also improved: they now move together and use their powers effectively, which makes for a more re w a rding e xpe rie nc e . Getting better weapons and armor
is much different in ME2 than the previous game. Now, there isn’t a plethora of weapons and armor upgrades to find all across the galaxy. Instead, you must find research projects that enhance or upgrade the few weapons and armor types available. The upgrades require different types of elements found by scanning the many planets in the galaxy. And a word on the galaxy in ME2 –– It is gigantic. And you can explore it all, or at the very least, scan it all. You can’t visit every
planet, but you can still retrieve minerals from them via probes. ME2 has a few faults, but nothing game altering. The inability to visit planets that are not apart of the main missions takes away from the RPG element and sometimes leaves the game feeling a bit linear. Also, the upgrade system will leave some wanting more, although I didn’t mind it. And scanning planets for minerals can get tiresome, but there are ways to do it quicker, it just takes some practice. And finally, while the
photos courtesy of mct campus
story, writing and voice acting are literally some of the best in the video game business, even borrowing the voice acting talents of Martin Sheen, the voice of Shepard is somewhat unfeeling, which takes away from some of the emotional scenes. However, this game is a must-have. Even though it came out at the beginning of the year, I would bet a large sum of money that ME2 will be on most people’s list for a possible Game of the Year.
“Dear John,” don’t write back megan fingerman the news record
Boy meets girl. Girl falls in love with boy. Girl goes off to school. Boy goes off to the war. Sounds like the typical love story, doesn’t it? In the film adaptation of Nicholas Sparks’ novel “Dear John,” the love story between Savannah Lynn Curtis (Amanda Seyfried) and John Tyree (Channing Tatum) unfolds like a dinner napkin –– flat and predictable. Don’t get me wrong –– I am a sucker for love stories, but even Channing Tatum’s fine features left me staring at my watch as the entire film dragged on. The movie, which is loosely based off the book, follows Seyfried and Tatum’s characters from early 2001 through 2008, as sea and thousands of miles of desert separate them. Letters are sporadically sent to one another confessing truths in each, allowing them to fall deeper in love. Unlike the book, each character has been altered to fit in this absurd love story. While Savannah is supposed to be a brunette in the book, Seyfried has lavish locks of wavy blonde hair and has no faults, unless you count cursing.
The News Record founded in 1880
509 and 510 Swift Hall University of Cincinnati 45221-0135
This effect will be ... massive
Office phone 556-5900 Office fax 556-5922
The News Record, an independent, student-run news organization of the University of Cincinnati’s Communication Board, is printed during the school year every Monday, Wednesday and Thursday, except holidays and examination periods, from its office located in 509 Swift Hall and is distributed to the UC community. The News Record distributes to more than 80 locations and has a weekly circulation of 22,500. One copy per person is free. Additional copies can be picked up at The News Record office for $1.
Tatum’s version of Tyree is less than appealing (sorry girls). Besides the fact that he needs to take a few acting classes, his on-screen crying abilities made me shed a couple of tears, but only momentarily as his blasé and boring personality continued until the end. Another factor that irked me was the emphasis of Tyree’s father and his coin collection.
In the book, the importance of coins was outweighed by his job as a postal driver and his quietness as a single father. Seriously? I love to compare movies to their books, but this was such a doozy because nothing in the book translated quite right onto the big screen. I admit that most movies that have been adapted from books hardly compare to their counterpart, but I was extremely disappointed because Sparks’ books have been adapted before into successful films including: “The Notebook,” “Message in a Bottle,” and my personal favorite, “A Walk to Remember.”
The script was well written and Seyfried’s acting was top notch, but something other than originality lacked in this rendition of a modern love story. What that is, I can’t put my finger on, but even though I highly recommend the book I wouldn’t swear off the film. Take precaution that this is a major chick flick. So men, make sure you reap a reward after seeing this with your girlfriends. And girls, yes, Tatum is dreamy, but his poor acting skills are overlooked by his charm. Adventure out, pay the matinee ticket price and attempt to find the missing link to this poorly executed adaptation of “Dear John.”
photo courtesy of sony pictures
Editor-in-Chief taylor dungjen
News Editors gin a. ando amanda woodruff
enTertainment editor sean peters
Chief Photographer Justin Tepe
CLASSIFIEDS Manager Kelsey Price
ManaginG Editor kareem elgazzar
OPINIOn Editor JAMIE ROYCE
Business & Advertising Manager SEAN KARDUX
Spotlight/ college living editor ariel cheung
copy editor joy bostick Bridget McDermott
Graphic Designers Aaron kurosu Akshata Wadekar
Advertising representatives THOMAS AMBerg KRYSTAL DANSBERRY Jenaye Garver
Director of Student Media Len Penix
Sports Editors garrett sabelhaus Sam ElliotT
Multimedia Editor Blake hawk Photo Editor coulter loeb
Production Designer mitul dasgupta