Showing posts with label Writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Writing. Show all posts
"Inside Llewyn Davis" Stars Grace Both the Red Carpet and Concert Stage in New York City
Oct. 3, 2013
NEW YORK – The 51st New York Film Festival has just begun and it is already bringing out the big names. Present at the festival's premier of "Inside Llewyn Davis" last Saturday were directors Joel and Ethan Coen, stars Oscar Isaac and Carey Mulligan, and numerous other cast and crew members.
 |
| Carey Mulligan and me at the New York Film Festival's premier of "Inside Llewyn Davis." (Photo by Adrienne Straley) |
The premier came on the heels of a press screening of the film just days earlier during which the Coens revealed that it is "probable" they will make the transition from film to digital shooting for future projects. Two of cinema's remaining traditional auteurs embracing the digital age is sure to stir up some grumbling among film purists, and even Joel himself told media he was not "wildly enthusiastic about the idea," however, talk of the Coens was nothing short of flattery on the red carpet Saturday.
"I would never want to mess with a Coen brother script," said Mulligan ("Never Let Me Go," "An Education," "Shame") when asked if there was any improvisation on the set of the film. "I was just given this gift of a role with these amazing sort of ranting monologues and I was just so lucky."
 |
| John Goodman signs autographs for fans at the red carpet premier. (Photo by Michael Iannucci) |
Isaac ("Drive") pointed to the guidance he received from the brothers during shooting (in what was his first lead role) as "more than I could even possibly comprehend" and cast member Garrett Hedlund ("Tron," "Four Brothers") told Hilary Lewis of The Hollywood Reporter that he knew the film was going to be something special as soon as he saw the Coen name attached to it.
Coen brother film regular John Goodman ("The Big Lebowski"), who apparently has some of the more memorable lines in the film, previewed his witty banter on the red carpet. "We are pretty serious about our damn comedy," said Goodman of his relationship with the Coens.
Another aspect of the "Inside Llewyn Davis" earning considerable praise from critics and early audiences alike is its music. The film (about the Greenwich Village folk scene in 1961) features a soundtrack co-produced by T-Bone Burnett and Marcus Mumford of the popular band Mumford & Sons (and husband to Mulligan). Mumford helped write some original music for the movie, including the much-talked about track (featured in some trailers for the film) "Fare Thee Well (Dink's Song)." The film will also feature music performed by cast member Justin Timberlake (though certainly not the type of music you're used to hearing from him). Apparently the pop star isn't half bad as a folk artist.
.JPG) |
| The New York Film Festival red carpet. (Photo by Adrienne Straley) |
While Oscar nominations for the film are already expected in many of the major categories, the score seems all but a definite lock for one. In fact, Mumford, Mulligan and others from the film performed at a concert celebrating the music of the film just a day after its premier in New York. It is pretty hard to imagine a movie that features such a talented cast and skillful direction yet remains focused around its music not getting at least a nomination for its score.
Also in attendance at the red carpet premier were cast members F. Murray Abraham, Max Casella, Alex Karpovsky, and Jeanine Serralles.
"Inside Llewyn Davis" plays twice more at the New York Film Festival (Oct. 5 and 11) before its wide release Dec. 20. I will be at the Oct. 11 showing so expect a review soon!
Three Key Elements to Look for in "12 Years a Slave"
Oct. 5, 2013
In honor of Steve McQueen's new film, "12 Years a Slave," which screens at the New York Film Festival this week, here are the top three key elements of McQueens first two films, "Hunger" and "Shame," that are likely to resurface in his newest work:
- Long shots - McQueen's use of long takes is among the most powerful in recent cinematic years. His first film, "Hunger," features a much-talked about 17 1/2 minute long shot as its centerpiece. The shot, which covers the penultimate discussion between infamous Irish Republican Army member Bobby Sands (Michael Fassbender) and a priest (Liam Cunningham) about whether or not Sands should begin what ultimately proves to be a fatal hunger strike in 1981, covers 28 pages of script and is considered to be the longest single shot on film. It effectively draws attention to the serious moral decision being made and sets emphasis on the next shot immediately following its cut, one that delves into the psychology of deep belief in a cause via an intense Fassbender. All that follows in the film is the direct result of this interchange; without the long shot, the film's ending would prove empty. Watch part of the long take here (the important cut comes at 7:05 and continues here).
The long shot also comes into play in McQueen's second feature, "Shame." This time its use is much less important to the plot of the film, and much more important to the underlying themes of the movie not yet fully understood by the viewer at the time of the shot. After allowing his sister to stay at his apartment, sex addict Brandon (Fassbender) soon finds himself in the awkward position of playing host to a late-night hook-up between his sister and his boss. After sounds of the affair take over the apartment, Brandon goes out for a late night jog to escape. Here starts the shot; a tracking shot the follows Brandon jogging for several minutes (and many blocks of NYC streets) set to an ironic piano score. Brandon is both literally running away from the sex of his sister, and at the same time is figuratively running away from sex itself, as his addiction is a more serious problem than the audience is fully aware. The camera stays perfectly on pace with Brandon; running (which in reality of the movie is simply not acknowledging) will not help him escape from his addiction.
- A direction-matching performance - In both "Hunger" and "Shame" McQueen's brutal direction style is perfectly complimented by the performances of Fassbender. In "Hunger" Fassbender's unflinchingly determined and physical portrayal of Sands matches McQueens show-all style; McQueen's determination lies in his quest to portray the conditions of Irish jails during the protests of the late 70's and early 80's exactly as they were, while Fassbender's is a literal determination to adhere to his character's beliefs. In "Shame," meanwhile, McQueens directorial techniques play the foil to Fassbender's character's weakness, with camera takes panning to and lingering on the triggers of Brandon's addiction. Both films feature a striking physicality that is embodied both in Fassbender's actions and McQueens images.
"12 Years a Slave" is McQueen's first film without Fassbender as the leading man (he is a supporting character instead), but all signs from trailers as well as early reviews are that Chiwetel Ejiofor is a force to be reckoned with as Solomon Northup; it is very conceivable to see his character's determination to make is through the rigors of slavery matching what will surely be McQueen's determination to portray all the ugliness that was slavery. There is also talk of Fassbender as a towering supporting figure, and that he plays a slave owner suggests he could effectively play into McQueen's portait of slavery.
- The truth - There is something about McQueen's films that make you feel as though you are watching the perfect combination of art film and documentary. This is due to many things: his lean scripts, the raw performances he draws from his actors, and his willingness to show vile or disturbing images at the risk of turning off viewers (jail walls of "Hunger" are often painted with feces by the inmates themselves) to name a few. "Hunger" shows the viewer the truth behind protests (and the cruelty they often invoke) and "Shame" shows the viewer the truth behind sex addition.
"12 Years a Slave" automatically has an extra built-in value in truth above and beyond "Shame", as it is based on a true story. That, combined with McQueen's penchant for truth in images, will likely give audiences a wholly authentic experience, because the disturbing images they are being shown actually happened (as was the case with "Hunger").
"12 Years a Slave" has largely received rave reviews thus far in its limited showings, and by all accounts figures to be a major contender come award season. I will be at the New York Film Festival's Oct. 8 showing of the film, so expect a review soon!
The long shot also comes into play in McQueen's second feature, "Shame." This time its use is much less important to the plot of the film, and much more important to the underlying themes of the movie not yet fully understood by the viewer at the time of the shot. After allowing his sister to stay at his apartment, sex addict Brandon (Fassbender) soon finds himself in the awkward position of playing host to a late-night hook-up between his sister and his boss. After sounds of the affair take over the apartment, Brandon goes out for a late night jog to escape. Here starts the shot; a tracking shot the follows Brandon jogging for several minutes (and many blocks of NYC streets) set to an ironic piano score. Brandon is both literally running away from the sex of his sister, and at the same time is figuratively running away from sex itself, as his addiction is a more serious problem than the audience is fully aware. The camera stays perfectly on pace with Brandon; running (which in reality of the movie is simply not acknowledging) will not help him escape from his addiction.
"12 Years a Slave" is McQueen's first film without Fassbender as the leading man (he is a supporting character instead), but all signs from trailers as well as early reviews are that Chiwetel Ejiofor is a force to be reckoned with as Solomon Northup; it is very conceivable to see his character's determination to make is through the rigors of slavery matching what will surely be McQueen's determination to portray all the ugliness that was slavery. There is also talk of Fassbender as a towering supporting figure, and that he plays a slave owner suggests he could effectively play into McQueen's portait of slavery.
"12 Years a Slave" automatically has an extra built-in value in truth above and beyond "Shame", as it is based on a true story. That, combined with McQueen's penchant for truth in images, will likely give audiences a wholly authentic experience, because the disturbing images they are being shown actually happened (as was the case with "Hunger").
Q & A with "12 Years a Slave" Director Steve McQueen Plus Cast Members Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Fassbender and Lupita Nyong'o
Acclaimed director Steve McQueen is known among cult fans as one of the harshest film makers in today's cinema. He is also known as one of the most talented up-and-comers in the business. Now his reputation is set to make its way into the consciousness of casual film fans worldwide, as his new film, "12 Years a Slave" is creating huge buzz on the film festival circuit as an early Oscar favorite. The film tells the true story of Solomon Northup, a free black man who was kidnapped and sold into slavery in 1841. McQueen was on hand to unveil his film to audiences at the New York Film Festival this Tuesday and answered questions for fans and media alike:
a.jpg) |
| Director Steve McQueen at the New York Film Festival's opening screening of his new film, "12 Years a Slave." (Photo by Michael Iannucci) |
A: I think it has been brewing inside me since I've been conscious of it. Someone asked me the question the other day: "When was the first time you heard about slavery?" And I could never remember. All I could remember was shame and embarrassment as a person, as a child. That was the only thing I could think of and as you discover certain things about your past you start thinking about things. But that's when things start, when you have an idea of what has gone on in the world.
Q: It would have been easy for you to make this film with a kind of anger, but you keep from moralizing in the film. How did you approach the actual shooting of this?
A: I wanted to understand it and engage with it. It was like going into someone's apartment blindfolded and you're feel, your touch, your senses, these things take over the obvious. The obvious makes you interpret things in a way which sometimes is a false because morals come into play. You have to be honest; you have to be brute; you have to be direct, otherwise you're kidding yourself.
Q: This is not a traditional narrative of the slave experience. Were you initially interested in depicting the more traditional experience of slavery before you arrived at this particular story?
A: I didn't really know what the traditional idea of slavery was. I wanted to find out what it was really. I went in with open eyes. I couldn't go in there with a preconceived notion because that's just not me. The whole idea for me was a free man who gets caught into slavery and what I liked about that is that everyone in the audience can relate to Solomon, being taken away from his family so therefore you're on that journey with him.
Q: There doesn't seem to be a real moment of despair for Solomon in the film. Does that have to do with his Christian faith, something he shares with his oppressors?
A: I didn't see it in a sense of Christianity. In the book he calls on God a lot, but for me it was about his own self-determination, courage, and the gathering up of his own will in order to keep on going.
Q: Where does the hatred of Paul Dano's character originate?
A: Our idea was that this guy was beaten by his father. I come from a West Indian family and a lot of parents beat their children. This comes from slavery. You see something and you think it's good to do to your children. That was the idea with Paul's character.
Q: How did you work with cinematographer Sean Bobbitt to achieve the images of the film?
A: I've been working with Sean Bobbitt for the last 13 years. First we talk about color. This was the first time I've shot outdoors in an environment that was so lush. Our costume designer, Patty Norris, took earth samples from all three of the plantations to match them with the clothes and talked to Sean to deal with the temperature of each plantation and each character temperature. There was a lot of that kind of minute detail.
Q: What drew you to Solomon Northup's story?
A: Solomon's story actually matched my original idea and it was just so striking. It was like a Brothers Grimm fairy tale; the darkest, deepest, most haunting fairy tales which end happily ever after but you go through hell to get there.
Q: This is your third movie with Michael Fassbender. Did you have him in mind for the character of Edwin immediately when casting?
A: Yes, he was always my choice for that and he's an amazing actor. Personally, I think he's the most influential actor of his time right now. People want to be an actor because of him; people want to be in a movie because of him; people want to make a movie because he could be in it. He has that kind of pull.
Q: Is there a certain scene from the film that stays with you when you look back on it?
A: Not really. I mean, the whole thing stays with me. It's just the experience. It's the whole shebang for me.
Q: How did you find Lupita?
A: How did she find us? I mean, over a thousand girls auditioned for this role. I got her audition tape and I couldn't believe it. I just thought, 'Is she real?' And she was. She's amazing.
Q: What did you learn about the psychology of slavey in making this film?
A: Survival. I'm here because some of my ancestors survived slavery in whatever way they could. Could you imagine being born a slave? I think that's the worst thing that could happen to a human being. Someone who doesn't think of themselves as anything other than what their so-called master thinks of them, which is nothing. It's a deep psychological wound. Deep.
The Cast:
"12 Years a Slave" features one of the best casts of the year. Chiwetel Ejiofor plays lead Solomon Northup and is an early lock for the Academy Award for Best Actor, McQueen regular Michael Fassbender gives a powerful performance as evil slave owner Edwin Epps and Lupita Nyong'o, in her American acting debut, is undoubtedly the biggest surprise of the film as the most horribly abused of slaves, Patsey. They were on hand in New York to answer questions as well. |
| Steve McQueen and cast members Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Fassbender and Lupita Nyong'o fielding questions about "12 Years a Slave." (Photo by Michael Iannucci) |
Ejiofor: Yes, I've known Steve for a while. I met him for the first time after "Hunger" and that was a great film as well and I knew he was an incredibly talented director right. After a couple of years he called me about this.
Q: How did you go about humanizing the character Edwin Epps?
Fassbender: I think through the fact that he's in love with Patsey. He can't quite wrap his head around that or handle it because of the time he's in so he sets about destroying her, but I thought that was a very human aspect to the character.
Q: What was it like being on this level in your American debut?
Nyong'o: At first it was a little bit intimidating but Steve is just such a great director that it's easy to work your way into the characters and once we got going it just flowed.
Q: How difficult was it to shoot the long take in which Solomon is forced to whip Patsey?
Fassbender: That was actually a harder scene to watch, for me personally, than it was to film because there were a lot of technical elements in the scene. We knew that we were going to shoot it in one take and there were quite a few actors involved in the scene so we all had to keep our rhythms and our space in addition to keeping the rhythm with Sean behind the camera. So there's that dance going on; there's the distance between the players, the camera, and for me personally I had to hit a mark so I didn't hit Lupita but we tried to get as close as possible.
Ejiofor: I think in some of those sequences which ostensibly look hard to shoot weren't because we were very deep down the rabbit hole at that point and I think focus on set in those times was so high that we were just in there to try to tell the story.
Q: What do you walk away from this film with?
Ejiofor: So much. It was a life changing experience for me and it really opens up my work in acting.
Fassbender: Just the satisfaction of making it. It's a very important film and I'm just happy to be able to share it with everyone.
Nyong'o: An unforgettable experience. It's not every day or even every film for that matter that you become a part of something so important.
In Honor of the Upcoming Release of "Nymphomaniac," the Top Five Films of Director Lars Von Trier
 |
| Lars von Trier has earned a reputation as one of the best and most controversial directors in contemporary cinema. (Photo by Georges Biard) |
With polarizing Danish director Lars von Trier's new film, "Nymphomaniac," set for a Christmas release, hype has been steadily building over the past few months. It began when the director announced that the film will be an introduction to a new genre of film, digressionism. The two part film, which seems set to be on par with the ballsy director's most controversial as it will feature unsimulated sex, something star Shia LaBeouf claims to be absolutely for real, has been promoted through a slow release of content to the public. Every month the film's official website has been releasing a new short clip to introduce the chapters of the film, each ambiguous and more suggestive than the last. Recent releases have also included a set of risqué promo photos. In honor of von Trier's latest exploits, here is my list of the director's top five films:
5. "Europa" (1991) - The third and final film of von Trier's first trilogy also serves as the final film before his style transformation. This is not to say that the film veers that far away from typical von Trier traits; it is experimental, surrealistic and above all else, dark (some critics have noted that the film imitates many film-noir conventions), all things that scream von Trier. However, the director's next film, "Breaking the Waves," saw a switch to almost entirely handheld and grainy camera work broken up with highly stylized still shots, something that would become a trademark of a von Trier film in his later work. In that respect, "Europa" is a much more formalistic von Trier. It is beautifully shot in black and white with an occasional burst of color (sometimes both within the same shot) and tells the story of an obliviously idealistic American (Jean-Marc Barr) who sets off to work as a train conductor in post World War II U.S.-occupied Germany. He falls for a femme fatale (Barbara Sukowa) and soon finds himself in the middle of a terrorist conspiracy. Though it is not typical von Trier as film fans have come to know him, "Europa" remains one of his best.
4. "Antichrist" (2009) - No film has created more controversy in recent years than von Trier's "Antichrist." The film's premier at the 2009 Cannes Film Festical saw at least four people faint due to its explicit content and von Trier was even asked by a journalist to justify bringing the film to Cannes, to which he famously replied that he considered the audience to be his guests and that he did not need to justify the film. The reason for the outcry is obvious: the film features graphic sex, uncensored self-mutilation and thematic elements that have been viewed by some as antifeminist. Some scenes of the film are, in fact, extremely hard to watch. Yet there are many aspects of the film that are too intriguing for serious film fans to ignore. In fact, for all of its high profile negative response, critical reception of the film has been just about split down the middle. It's opening scene, one of von Trier's steadily shot montages, is among the more beautiful of his career. It is shot in black and white slow motion with a very deep focus and features a couple (Charlotte Gainsbourg and Willem Dafou) having what appears to be passionate sex. At the same time, the couple's child, a young baby, climbs out of a window and falls to his death. All of this is set to the exquisite "Lascia ch'io pianga" by George Frideric Handel. The scene is both shocking and beautiful, which is a good indication of what is to come. The rest of the narrative deals with the couple's attempts to stem grief resulting from the death of their son, and as they retreat to a cabin in the woods, madness prevails. For all of its naysayers, and as hard as it is to watch, scenes of stunning beauty make "Antichrist" a must-see for von Trier fans.
3. "Melancholia" (2011) - Von Trier has admittedly suffered from depression over the years (he wrote "Antichrist" during one of his all-time lows) and in 2011, he took to his profession to attack his affliction head-on. In "Melancholia" one gets the feeling that what they are being shown is beyond research; it's the type of thing one must know first hand. Coming from an experimental director like von Trier, this is not exactly as it sounds, but there is a pervading authenticity throughout the film. "Melancholia" tells three interwoven stories split into two chapters. The first is that of Justine (a brilliant Kirsten Dunst in her best performance to date), a sufferer of chronic depression who is attempting to get married and lead a normal life. The second story belongs to Claire (Charlotte Gainsbourg), Justine's sister who cares for her during her depression episodes, and the third is the impending end of the world at the hands of a rogue planet named Melancholia that is predicted by scientists to be on a collision course with Earth. Von Trier uses this premise to explore the parallels of depression and everyday life. In the real world, the depressed cannot function, but in the face of a disaster, roles are reversed. "Melancholia" features gorgeous cinematography, daring performances and a powerful vision of depression and destruction.
2. "Dancer in the Dark" (2000) - Every experimental director has at least one film that is grossly overlooked, and this is von Trier's. What "Dancer in the Dark" should be viewed as is an absolute confirmation of von Trier as an actor's director and one of the most unlikely in film history at that. On paper his style should take attention away from performances and place it instead on the making of his films, yet time and again he draws spectacular performances from his stars. Notably, these performances are never replicated again by the stars. The first and most notable of these performances is his shaping of Emily Watson's "Bess" in "Breaking the Waves"; although Watson has had a couple of compelling performances since ("Hilary and Jackie" among others), nothing comes close to her acting debut with von Trier. In "Dancer in the Dark," von Trier provokes an absolutely heart-wrenching and scarily authentic performance from Icelandic singer Björk, who had only previously appeared in one film. Björk plays Selma, a Czech immigrant who has come to the United States with her son, Gene, and is struggling to make ends meet with a factory job and very poor eye sight. Selma is the embodiment of innocence (the film is the third and final addition to von Trier's "Golden Heart Trilogy" which focuses on innocence wronged) and as she is continually taken advantage of, von Trier simultaneously plays with your heart-strings. The film's ending is, typical of all great von Trier scenes, both haunting and beautiful. It's a shame that what this film shows of von Trier's ability to draw pure performances from his leads was not truly recognized until what he drew from Kirsten Dunst in "Melancholia" because it takes notoriety away from what is an all-time great film. Björk was so emotionally drained from the role that upon completion of the film, she claimed she would never act again, which makes sense, as this is the type of performance actors and actresses often leave a part of themselves in. Experimental as always, von Trier uses a compelling combination of musical numbers and drama to achieve his final product, but it is what he forces out of his star that makes "Dancer in the Dark" a special film.
Reel Rant: Greatest Injustices of the Past Several Years of Academy Awards
Nov. 9, 2013
It's that time of year again: awards season. Each ceremony brings different opinions and lots of surprises, some good and some bad. The season's culminating ceremony, however, is also its most predictable. That the Academy Awards are traditionally previewed with articles that split "what should win" and "what will win" into separate categories is telling of what is usually to come: they're going to get it wrong. For fans of experimental, art house and even independent cinema, there is very little to enjoy in watching the highest profile middlebrow film of the year hailed as the "best picture." In fact, anyone who enjoys cinema of controversial nature of any kind will likely be disappointed by the Oscars. While it is going to be difficult for the panel to ignore what I, in my humble opinion, believe to be the best picture of the year so far in director Steve McQueen's masterful "12 Years a Slave" (although it is still very early in the race with many contenders still to come), I've learned to expect nothing. In honor of the upcoming awards season, here are the greatest injustices of the Academy Awards of the past several years:
The 85th Academy Awards Ceremony was undoubtedly one of the worst in recent memory; it would be easier to list what the panel actually got right. The biggest injustices came in the four major categories, however. Let me start with Best Picture. It was difficult to take this race seriously from the time the nominees were announced because the film I believe was and is the best of 2012, Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master," was left out. The film is experimental to say the least and certainly has its detractors, but there is no one world making more compelling cinema at the moment than Anderson, and explosive, powerfully acted scenes like a jail room confrontation between Joaquin Phoenix's Freddie Quell and Philip Seymour Hoffman's Lancaster Dodd lift "The Master" above anything else in 2012. For me, Michael Haneke's heart-wrenching "Amour" is a close second, and as it was nominated for the award, I naturally felt it deserved the win. Instead, the award was given to the suspenseful but ultimately safe "Argo" by Ben Affleck.
Best Actor was equally as disappointing. Many consider Daniel Day-Lewis to be the greatest actor in the world today, something I believe to be true. His portrayal of Abraham Lincoln is transformative, but 2012 should have been the year of the return of Joaquin Phoenix. Credit to the Academy for nominating him in spite of a high profile interview in which he called the ceremony "bullshit," but a completely unbiased panel would have rightfully given him the award. His performance in "The Master" is the stuff of legends; it is very reminiscent of a young Marlon Brando, both in range and commitment. Day-Lewis's Abraham Lincoln is flawlessly executed, but Phoenix's Freddie Quell is far more compelling and the psychological commitment far deeper. Day-Lewis's win was expected by most, but not rightfully so.
Jennifer Lawrence is one of the most talented young actresses in the world today and it is damn near impossible not to love her persona, but to be perfectly frank, I would have been satisfied with any of her competitors winning Best Actress, just not her. This was a close race to be sure. Jessica Chastain's Maya was a revelation and the driving force of "Zero Dark Thirty," Emmanuel Riva's Anne effectively broke hearts and records in "Amour" (the oldest ever nominee for the award), Quvenzhane Wallis's Hushpuppy was powerful enough to deserve a win without the feel-good story bias involved in her age and even though Naomi Watts's role as Maria Bennett in tsunami tear-jerker "The Impossible" was brief, she handled the considerable physicality of the role with grace. Lawrence was the middlebrow choice of the pack, so of course, the panel handed her the award. In truth, while nothing was wrong with her performance as Tiffany, there was nothing truly captivating about it; all four of her competitors were, in one way or another, thoroughly compelling.
I'm not sure where the Academy was going with their choice in nominees for Best Director. No Paul Thomas Anderson? No Kathryn Bigelow? The race was not legitimate from the start, and like Best Picture, the deserving nominee, Haneke, was not awarded.
Just a notably bad year in a collection of bad years for the Oscars.
It's that time of year again: awards season. Each ceremony brings different opinions and lots of surprises, some good and some bad. The season's culminating ceremony, however, is also its most predictable. That the Academy Awards are traditionally previewed with articles that split "what should win" and "what will win" into separate categories is telling of what is usually to come: they're going to get it wrong. For fans of experimental, art house and even independent cinema, there is very little to enjoy in watching the highest profile middlebrow film of the year hailed as the "best picture." In fact, anyone who enjoys cinema of controversial nature of any kind will likely be disappointed by the Oscars. While it is going to be difficult for the panel to ignore what I, in my humble opinion, believe to be the best picture of the year so far in director Steve McQueen's masterful "12 Years a Slave" (although it is still very early in the race with many contenders still to come), I've learned to expect nothing. In honor of the upcoming awards season, here are the greatest injustices of the Academy Awards of the past several years:
2012:
 |
| Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master" was largely ignored by the Academy. (Photo by Jürgen Fauth) |
Best Actor was equally as disappointing. Many consider Daniel Day-Lewis to be the greatest actor in the world today, something I believe to be true. His portrayal of Abraham Lincoln is transformative, but 2012 should have been the year of the return of Joaquin Phoenix. Credit to the Academy for nominating him in spite of a high profile interview in which he called the ceremony "bullshit," but a completely unbiased panel would have rightfully given him the award. His performance in "The Master" is the stuff of legends; it is very reminiscent of a young Marlon Brando, both in range and commitment. Day-Lewis's Abraham Lincoln is flawlessly executed, but Phoenix's Freddie Quell is far more compelling and the psychological commitment far deeper. Day-Lewis's win was expected by most, but not rightfully so.
Jennifer Lawrence is one of the most talented young actresses in the world today and it is damn near impossible not to love her persona, but to be perfectly frank, I would have been satisfied with any of her competitors winning Best Actress, just not her. This was a close race to be sure. Jessica Chastain's Maya was a revelation and the driving force of "Zero Dark Thirty," Emmanuel Riva's Anne effectively broke hearts and records in "Amour" (the oldest ever nominee for the award), Quvenzhane Wallis's Hushpuppy was powerful enough to deserve a win without the feel-good story bias involved in her age and even though Naomi Watts's role as Maria Bennett in tsunami tear-jerker "The Impossible" was brief, she handled the considerable physicality of the role with grace. Lawrence was the middlebrow choice of the pack, so of course, the panel handed her the award. In truth, while nothing was wrong with her performance as Tiffany, there was nothing truly captivating about it; all four of her competitors were, in one way or another, thoroughly compelling.
I'm not sure where the Academy was going with their choice in nominees for Best Director. No Paul Thomas Anderson? No Kathryn Bigelow? The race was not legitimate from the start, and like Best Picture, the deserving nominee, Haneke, was not awarded.
Just a notably bad year in a collection of bad years for the Oscars.
2011:
 |
| Michael Shannon's career-best performance in "Take Shelter" was snubbed by the Academy. (Photo by Flickr user Nicogenin) |
Another year in which the four major categories just flat out stunk. I have an unconventional pick for best film of the year, and I fully understand that many may not share this point of view, but the best thing I saw in 2011 was Jeff Nichol's "Take Shelter." Yes, it is a lower budget independent feature, but the output is all that should matter, and there was nothing else in 2011 quite like the psychological punch of "Take Shelter." Not to give it Best Picture is one thing, but no nomination? Good old Academy. Likewise, no nomination for Michael Shannon in the film's lead role was an atrocity. While I don't like the absence of the movie in the Best Picture line up, I expected it. This was unexpected and wrong. One would be hard-pressed to find a greater level of intensity in a performance than Shannon's.
As for those actually nominated, Terrence Malick's beautiful and ambiguous "The Tree of Life" deserved the win, and in history will be considered the cinematic achievement of 2011. Then there's "The Artist," perhaps the most middlebrow nominee of the past decade. There is nothing special about it (in fact, I find it to be flat out boring and grossly overrated). Even if you didn't watch the ceremony, you could have guessed which one the Academy would chose. "The Artist" also won Best Director (Michel Hazanavicius) and Best Actor (Jean Dujardin); it did not deserve either.
Best Actress was the only category not plagued by an "Artist" nominee, yet the panel found a way to stink it up anyway. Kirsten Dunst gave the best performance of the year (as well as her career) as Justine in Lars von Trier's "Melancholia" (which was also wrongly ignored for Best Picture and/or Director), but of course, she was not nominated. In what was otherwise a somewhat barren year for actress nominees, I felt that Michelle Williams did enough as Marilyn Monroe in "My Week with Marilyn" to deserve the award. But the great Meryl Streep was also nominated. She's an all-time great, but her turn as Margaret Thatcher in "The Iron Lady" is not one of her best performances. In this case, she won the award not based on merit, but because of her reputation.
2010:
This year wasn't as bad as 2011 or 2012, but still the major awards were safe as can be. I see "127 Hours" as the best film of 2010 based on a virtuoso performance from James Franco and the fact that there has seldom been a film so inspiring in history. This is likely to be viewed as another unconventional pick in the eyes of many, but since when has "conventionality" been a defining quality of great cinema? Anyway, 2010's Best Picture winner, "The King's Speech," is solid, but not the best film of the year. If not "127 Hours," I would have liked to see Darren Aronofsky's "Black Swan" take home Best Picture and Best Director. "The King's Speech" got both. It also got Best Actor (Colin Firth). Let's be real: watch Franco cut his own arm off and then watch Firth simply stutter away for two hours and you tell me whose performance was more compelling.
2007:
 |
| Both "There Will Be Blood" and "No Country for Old Men" were shot in Marfa, Texas at the same time. (Photo by Flickr user Movie Stars and Rockets) |
I'm skipping 2008 and 2009 because there was nothing I felt strongly enough about to consider an injustice those years. 2007, however, is the home of, in my eyes, the biggest Academy Award injustice of the past several decades. Paul Thomas Anderson's "There Will Be Blood" is the best film of the past 10 years. That is probably the most steadfast opinion I hold in contemporary cinema. "There Will Be Blood" features the greatest performance in the career of the greatest actor of this generation (Day-Lewis), an incredibly interesting and creatively adapted screenplay by Anderson, one of the most effective minimalist scores I've ever heard by Radio Head's Jonny Greenwood and countless other flawlessly executed cinematic intangibles. It is the reason Anderson is my favorite contemporary director.
2007 was a landmark year in cinema; it's not common that two all-time great films are released in the same year, but that is exactly what happened with Joel and Ethan Coen's "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood" (interestingly enough, the two were shot within miles of one another in Marfa, Texas at the same time and smoke from the set of "There Will Be Blood" interfered with a day of shooting for the Coens). Both are great, but "There Will Be Blood" is greater. As a result, it should have taken both Best Picture and Best Director. "No Country" took both, however, and in any other year it would have been well-deserved. But not 2007.
2007 was a landmark year in cinema; it's not common that two all-time great films are released in the same year, but that is exactly what happened with Joel and Ethan Coen's "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood" (interestingly enough, the two were shot within miles of one another in Marfa, Texas at the same time and smoke from the set of "There Will Be Blood" interfered with a day of shooting for the Coens). Both are great, but "There Will Be Blood" is greater. As a result, it should have taken both Best Picture and Best Director. "No Country" took both, however, and in any other year it would have been well-deserved. But not 2007.
Roger Ebert: the Man Who Revolutionized Film Criticism
December 12, 2013
In April of this year, the film universe was saddened by the passing of "the best-known film critic in America."
Roger Ebert was not only one of the industry's most well-known pundits, he was one of its very best. Whether it was breaking new ground in becoming the first film critic to win the Pulitzer Prize for Criticism or his infamous on air reviewing of films during which he would coin the now common place idiom "Two thumbs up," Ebert was able to do what few critics before him could: popularize film criticism.
In a way, what Ebert did for film criticism is similar to what director Steven Spielberg did for the movie industry with the marketing and release of his 1975 thriller "Jaws." In the film, Spielberg created a first of its kind: the high concept film, or a film of a simple premise that can be easily pitched in 25 words or less. "Jaws" went on to become the first film to gross over $100 million in rentals and effectively built the summer blockbuster secret to box office success we know today.
Ebert, on the other hand, brought the secret of mainstream success to those who write about film. Not long after he started his career as a film critic in 1967, Ebert was already gathering attention for his work. Pauline Kael, who is widely regarded as the most influential film critic of her generation (right before Ebert's), called Ebert's early columns "the best film criticism being done in American newspapers today" shortly after she first read them.
Soon, Ebert, on the heels of his successful start in the business, became a co-host on a weekly film review television show called "Sneak Previews." Though the show started out as a local production in Chicago, it was soon picked up by PBS and shown to audiences nationwide.
Over the years, the show continued to draw successful ratings even through a number of network and name changes. It arguably reached it's most well-known period as "Ebert & Roeper and the Movies" from 2000-2002 when Ebert's fellow Chicago Sun-Times columnist Richard Roeper joined him as co-host.
"I remember the show being a big hit right away," said Raritan Valley Community College film professor and Ebert acquaintance Mark Bezanson. "I think that the show reached a lot of people, not just because it was accessible physically on television, but because it was accessible on a critical level. A lot of film critics talk in a sort of pretentious code, and Ebert took all that and put it in people language so to speak."
"The 'two thumbs up' thing didn't hurt the appeal either," Bezanson added.
What set Ebert apart from other film critics, in addition to his television exposure, was the simplicity of his critical style. He utilized straightforward film rating techniques such as a four star system as opposed to the many other wider ranging systems used, like one-to-10 scales. He also invented and trademarked the "two thumbs up" phrase which rated a movies success based on whether it received thumbs up or down from Ebert. The phrase quickly garnered universal appeal as it gave many the opportunity to quickly decide whether or not to see a film.
"The 'two thumbs up' thing was a big help when my husband and I would try to plan a weekend trip to the movies without the kids," said film fan and mother of three Carol Paterno. "I love movies but I never really had time to figure out what was worth seeing when they were little. And Roger Ebert was normally right so it became a pretty reliable thing for us."
In addition to gaining the approval of general audiences, Ebert also became popular with film insiders, particularly those with a taste for experimental films not popular with mainstream audiences, because of his approval and openness to such films.
Though he did not like the idea of top 10 lists, one he submitted to the 2012 Sight & Sound poll of the greatest films of all time included both Stanley Kubrick's 1968 evolution epic, "2001: A Space Odyssey," and Terrence Malick's 2010 wide-scaling life meditation, "The Tree of Life." The two films are examples of art house features with cult followings from both past and present eras and, upon release, each had just about as many detractors as they did admirers. Ebert praised them as two of the greatest of all time, however, in what was his signature "relative, not absolute" style of reviewing.
Interestingly enough, the beginning of Ebert's popularization of film criticism came in the same year that Spielberg reinvented the box office equation. Ebert first started as a television co-host in 1975, the same year "Jaws" was released. Ebert said of the film: "There are no doubt supposed to be all sorts of levels of meanings in such an archetypal story, but Spielberg wisely decides not to underline any of them. This is an action film content to stay entirely within the perimeters of its story." He knew how the film would revolutionize the business; he was in the process of doing the same to his own.
In his book, "The Great Movies," Roger Ebert explores what are, in his view, the 100 most essential cinematic works in history. The timeline above lists those 100 by release date, director and stars. (All information is via Imdb.com and all photos without attribution are by unknown photographers and are in the public domain)
In April of this year, the film universe was saddened by the passing of "the best-known film critic in America."
Roger Ebert was not only one of the industry's most well-known pundits, he was one of its very best. Whether it was breaking new ground in becoming the first film critic to win the Pulitzer Prize for Criticism or his infamous on air reviewing of films during which he would coin the now common place idiom "Two thumbs up," Ebert was able to do what few critics before him could: popularize film criticism.
In a way, what Ebert did for film criticism is similar to what director Steven Spielberg did for the movie industry with the marketing and release of his 1975 thriller "Jaws." In the film, Spielberg created a first of its kind: the high concept film, or a film of a simple premise that can be easily pitched in 25 words or less. "Jaws" went on to become the first film to gross over $100 million in rentals and effectively built the summer blockbuster secret to box office success we know today.
Ebert, on the other hand, brought the secret of mainstream success to those who write about film. Not long after he started his career as a film critic in 1967, Ebert was already gathering attention for his work. Pauline Kael, who is widely regarded as the most influential film critic of her generation (right before Ebert's), called Ebert's early columns "the best film criticism being done in American newspapers today" shortly after she first read them.
Soon, Ebert, on the heels of his successful start in the business, became a co-host on a weekly film review television show called "Sneak Previews." Though the show started out as a local production in Chicago, it was soon picked up by PBS and shown to audiences nationwide.
Over the years, the show continued to draw successful ratings even through a number of network and name changes. It arguably reached it's most well-known period as "Ebert & Roeper and the Movies" from 2000-2002 when Ebert's fellow Chicago Sun-Times columnist Richard Roeper joined him as co-host.
"I remember the show being a big hit right away," said Raritan Valley Community College film professor and Ebert acquaintance Mark Bezanson. "I think that the show reached a lot of people, not just because it was accessible physically on television, but because it was accessible on a critical level. A lot of film critics talk in a sort of pretentious code, and Ebert took all that and put it in people language so to speak."
"The 'two thumbs up' thing didn't hurt the appeal either," Bezanson added.
_by_Roger_Ebert.jpg) |
| Roger Ebert is remembered as the most well-known film critic in America. (Photo owned by Roger Ebert) |
What set Ebert apart from other film critics, in addition to his television exposure, was the simplicity of his critical style. He utilized straightforward film rating techniques such as a four star system as opposed to the many other wider ranging systems used, like one-to-10 scales. He also invented and trademarked the "two thumbs up" phrase which rated a movies success based on whether it received thumbs up or down from Ebert. The phrase quickly garnered universal appeal as it gave many the opportunity to quickly decide whether or not to see a film.
"The 'two thumbs up' thing was a big help when my husband and I would try to plan a weekend trip to the movies without the kids," said film fan and mother of three Carol Paterno. "I love movies but I never really had time to figure out what was worth seeing when they were little. And Roger Ebert was normally right so it became a pretty reliable thing for us."
In addition to gaining the approval of general audiences, Ebert also became popular with film insiders, particularly those with a taste for experimental films not popular with mainstream audiences, because of his approval and openness to such films.
Though he did not like the idea of top 10 lists, one he submitted to the 2012 Sight & Sound poll of the greatest films of all time included both Stanley Kubrick's 1968 evolution epic, "2001: A Space Odyssey," and Terrence Malick's 2010 wide-scaling life meditation, "The Tree of Life." The two films are examples of art house features with cult followings from both past and present eras and, upon release, each had just about as many detractors as they did admirers. Ebert praised them as two of the greatest of all time, however, in what was his signature "relative, not absolute" style of reviewing.
Interestingly enough, the beginning of Ebert's popularization of film criticism came in the same year that Spielberg reinvented the box office equation. Ebert first started as a television co-host in 1975, the same year "Jaws" was released. Ebert said of the film: "There are no doubt supposed to be all sorts of levels of meanings in such an archetypal story, but Spielberg wisely decides not to underline any of them. This is an action film content to stay entirely within the perimeters of its story." He knew how the film would revolutionize the business; he was in the process of doing the same to his own.
"Her" is a Beautiful Exploration of Love and Technology
December 21, 2013
It may sound like a bad joke to say that the most intimate sex scene of the cinematic year is between a man and his computer, but that is exactly the type of magical web Spike Jonze weaves in his new film, "Her."
The scene features nothing more than a black, existential screen and what you would imagine phone sex between a madly-in-love couple set apart by distance would sound like. Unfortunately for the lovers in this case, that distance can never be lessened.
Theodore Twombly (played by Joaquin Phoenix) is at a lonely crossroads in his life. His appearance is upbeat, consisting of high-waisted pants, brightly colored button downs, thick-rimmed glasses and a caterpillar mustache, yet there is a sadness in his demeanor. For work, he writes beautiful, moving love letters for other people whose relationships he traces. Though his writing reveals his sweet soul, Theo has little use for it in his own life. The nearing end of his relationship and marriage to a woman he grew up and "experienced everything with" has left him pessimistic about life. If he has already experienced everything with Catherine (Rooney Mara, who looks much better with eyebrows), he wonders, won't everything else from this point on be redundant? In reality, the relationship has been over for sometime. All that's left is the signing of the divorce papers; the validation of an end that Theo is not yet ready to accept.
Feeling spontaneous in his mopey boredom, Theo purchases a new, highly advanced operation system. He assigns the system a female voice and soon enough she has given herself a name. "Samantha," (a revelatory Scarlett Johansson) is sweet, bright and witty, and strikes a nerve in Theo. Though he remains stuck in the shadow of his past and is not interested in real women for anything more than bodily urges, Theo's relationship with Samantha is as honest and free-flowing as it is confounding to him. She is constantly evolving and developing a deeper desire to want, feel and experience the world the way humans do, and he, a hopeless dreamer, is looking for new ways to look at the world. He finds just that in Samantha and the two soon find themselves so deeply in love that they are able to make love through nothing more than their voices.
To tell much more of the plot would be to ruin Jonze's wonderfully introspective love story. It is refreshing to see such an unconventional concept treated with the delicacy and skill it deserves. The script, also written by Jonze, is wholly original and often hilarious. It is peppered with social commentary on the possible impact of the new age of technology on humans in the not too distant future (the film keeps a healthy balance between sci-fi and actuality) through the use of things like interactive video games played by Theo.
The film also effectively balances humor with pathos; there are many scenes that at one moment, have you on the verge of laughter, yet remain one cut away from a major emotional revelation. One that jumps out features a surrogate body service for human-operating system relationships. After Samantha experiences some difficulties in her relationship with Theo, some relating to Theo's divorce and others to the physical limitations between the two, she hires a young woman to act as her "body" while the two make love. At first funny, the scene quickly shifts to intensely awkward viewing when Theo finds the experience too weird to go through with and then accidentally reveals reservations he has about the relationship.
Certain parts of the film delve briefly into metaphysical matters (in Samantha's existence and its meaning), but they are largely used as metaphors for cycles of the modern relationship, Jonze's depiction of which is perhaps the most accurate and honest in recent memory; don't be surprised if any or many of the conversations between Theo and Samantha are carbon copies of ones you've had with a significant other. As a result, all of the joy and heartbreak are palpable.
If ever a voice were to be deserving of acting nominations, it would be Johansson's. To be able to carry a scene without actually being seen is at least as difficult than carrying one with just actions and no sound, a favorite of the Academy (I'm looking at you, "The Artist"). The range she is able to cover merely through intonation is deeper than most actors' or actresses' on-screen range.
Phoenix, meanwhile, is as powerful as ever. Some may label him as a tight-cast flawed, wanderer, but a comparison between this role and his previous in last year's "The Master" should quiet such talk. Last year's "Freddie Quell" was a a flawed wanderer indeed, but he was a volatile, rude, often thoughtless damaged soul. In that role, it was Phoenix's intensity coupled with emotional range that brought the performance to into the realm of greatness. Theo, on the other hand, is a thinking man; he is a skilled and poetic writer in addition to a polite and socially comfortable man despite. His flawed wandering stems the vulnerability that the ending of his marriage brings upon him. The characters are similar on a very thin surface layer, but, in fact, could not be more different. Phoenix covers both flawlessly.
Amy Adams, who seemingly can do no wrong of late, has a small role as Theo's longtime best friend and neighbor. Her screen time is brief, but she still remains impressive as a more subtly damaged counterpart to Theo.
Also noteworthy in the film are the score, featuring songs by Arcade Fire (like Supersymmetry, which was written specifically for the film though it appeared on the band's most recent album) and Karen O, and the cinematography, by Hoyte van Hoytema. All of the intangibles help build Jonze's vision of a warm, yet technologically dependent not-so-distance future.
At its core, "Her" is the most intimate, timely romance in many years. It asks many questions of its viewers, perhaps the broadest, yet most important of which is: what makes love? Considering how intimately crafted the chemistry between Theo and Samantha is, it's hard to imagine that Jonze is far off from an answer. (Grade: A+)
It may sound like a bad joke to say that the most intimate sex scene of the cinematic year is between a man and his computer, but that is exactly the type of magical web Spike Jonze weaves in his new film, "Her."
The scene features nothing more than a black, existential screen and what you would imagine phone sex between a madly-in-love couple set apart by distance would sound like. Unfortunately for the lovers in this case, that distance can never be lessened.
Theodore Twombly (played by Joaquin Phoenix) is at a lonely crossroads in his life. His appearance is upbeat, consisting of high-waisted pants, brightly colored button downs, thick-rimmed glasses and a caterpillar mustache, yet there is a sadness in his demeanor. For work, he writes beautiful, moving love letters for other people whose relationships he traces. Though his writing reveals his sweet soul, Theo has little use for it in his own life. The nearing end of his relationship and marriage to a woman he grew up and "experienced everything with" has left him pessimistic about life. If he has already experienced everything with Catherine (Rooney Mara, who looks much better with eyebrows), he wonders, won't everything else from this point on be redundant? In reality, the relationship has been over for sometime. All that's left is the signing of the divorce papers; the validation of an end that Theo is not yet ready to accept.
Feeling spontaneous in his mopey boredom, Theo purchases a new, highly advanced operation system. He assigns the system a female voice and soon enough she has given herself a name. "Samantha," (a revelatory Scarlett Johansson) is sweet, bright and witty, and strikes a nerve in Theo. Though he remains stuck in the shadow of his past and is not interested in real women for anything more than bodily urges, Theo's relationship with Samantha is as honest and free-flowing as it is confounding to him. She is constantly evolving and developing a deeper desire to want, feel and experience the world the way humans do, and he, a hopeless dreamer, is looking for new ways to look at the world. He finds just that in Samantha and the two soon find themselves so deeply in love that they are able to make love through nothing more than their voices.
To tell much more of the plot would be to ruin Jonze's wonderfully introspective love story. It is refreshing to see such an unconventional concept treated with the delicacy and skill it deserves. The script, also written by Jonze, is wholly original and often hilarious. It is peppered with social commentary on the possible impact of the new age of technology on humans in the not too distant future (the film keeps a healthy balance between sci-fi and actuality) through the use of things like interactive video games played by Theo.
The film also effectively balances humor with pathos; there are many scenes that at one moment, have you on the verge of laughter, yet remain one cut away from a major emotional revelation. One that jumps out features a surrogate body service for human-operating system relationships. After Samantha experiences some difficulties in her relationship with Theo, some relating to Theo's divorce and others to the physical limitations between the two, she hires a young woman to act as her "body" while the two make love. At first funny, the scene quickly shifts to intensely awkward viewing when Theo finds the experience too weird to go through with and then accidentally reveals reservations he has about the relationship.
Certain parts of the film delve briefly into metaphysical matters (in Samantha's existence and its meaning), but they are largely used as metaphors for cycles of the modern relationship, Jonze's depiction of which is perhaps the most accurate and honest in recent memory; don't be surprised if any or many of the conversations between Theo and Samantha are carbon copies of ones you've had with a significant other. As a result, all of the joy and heartbreak are palpable.
If ever a voice were to be deserving of acting nominations, it would be Johansson's. To be able to carry a scene without actually being seen is at least as difficult than carrying one with just actions and no sound, a favorite of the Academy (I'm looking at you, "The Artist"). The range she is able to cover merely through intonation is deeper than most actors' or actresses' on-screen range.
Phoenix, meanwhile, is as powerful as ever. Some may label him as a tight-cast flawed, wanderer, but a comparison between this role and his previous in last year's "The Master" should quiet such talk. Last year's "Freddie Quell" was a a flawed wanderer indeed, but he was a volatile, rude, often thoughtless damaged soul. In that role, it was Phoenix's intensity coupled with emotional range that brought the performance to into the realm of greatness. Theo, on the other hand, is a thinking man; he is a skilled and poetic writer in addition to a polite and socially comfortable man despite. His flawed wandering stems the vulnerability that the ending of his marriage brings upon him. The characters are similar on a very thin surface layer, but, in fact, could not be more different. Phoenix covers both flawlessly.
Amy Adams, who seemingly can do no wrong of late, has a small role as Theo's longtime best friend and neighbor. Her screen time is brief, but she still remains impressive as a more subtly damaged counterpart to Theo.
Also noteworthy in the film are the score, featuring songs by Arcade Fire (like Supersymmetry, which was written specifically for the film though it appeared on the band's most recent album) and Karen O, and the cinematography, by Hoyte van Hoytema. All of the intangibles help build Jonze's vision of a warm, yet technologically dependent not-so-distance future.
At its core, "Her" is the most intimate, timely romance in many years. It asks many questions of its viewers, perhaps the broadest, yet most important of which is: what makes love? Considering how intimately crafted the chemistry between Theo and Samantha is, it's hard to imagine that Jonze is far off from an answer. (Grade: A+)
Glassboro Board of Education Meeting Features New Principal Hiring and Technology Presentation
Oct. 28, 2013
GLASSBORO, N.J. – Thomas E. Bowe Elementary School is no longer without a principal, as the Glassboro Board of Education has approved the hiring of David Kelk as the interim principal of the school.
Kelk will serve as the school’s principal for the remainder of the 2013-2014 school year. He is standing in for former principal Ron Ferraro, who recently requested to go back to his previous position of vice principal. The Board of Education unanimously approved Kelk’s hiring at their October meeting.
“Earlier in the year Mr. Ferraro had requested to go back to being vice principal and we accepted that letter and immediately opened up a search,” said superintendent Mark Silverstein. “This time of the year is a very difficult time to conduct a search, but I was committed to getting leadership in the building ASAP.”
Kelk is taking on the position as an experienced school administrator. He is coming out of retirement after previously serving as Clearview Middle School’s vice principal for 13 years and principal for 10 years. Earlier this year Kelk served as the interim principal of Overbrook High School.
According to Silverstein, Kelk will be introduced to the staff on Friday and will officially start at the school on Monday.
The meeting also saw the Technology Department give a presentation on the technological updates being implemented in the district’s schools.
Although the presentation was listed as the department’s “annual report,” presenter and Glassboro Public School Director of Technology George Weeks noted that it had actually been several years since the last technology report was given. As a result, Weeks’ presentation covered the technological updates in the district over the better part of the last decade.
“In the last 9 years there has been a lot of stuff that we’ve done,” said Weeks. “For example, we’ve centralized the phone system. When I got here we had seven buildings and six different kinds of phone systems; if you called from this building [Beach Administration Building] to the high school it was a local phone call and if you spoke to the guidance counselor for four hours that was a four hour phone call that you paid for. Now it costs us nothing because we use our private fiber network to interconnect everything.”
According to Weeks, the private fiber network also connects the seven public school buildings to Rowan University as well as Glassboro’s municipal buildings.
Weeks also listed the recent additions of shared Internet services to increase Internet speed, leasing programs to constantly refresh equipment and an academic content management system called Schoolwires, which gives every teacher his or her own website where students can post blog and pod cast entries, as some of the biggest changes of recent years.
“We’re beginning to get to the tipping point where more and more teachers are beginning to utilize the tools that we’re bringing in for them,” said Weeks.
Other recent technological advancements in the schools include a more efficient printing system that, according to Weeks, is saving the district a minimum of $40,000 a year in comparison to the previous system, updated emergency contact systems that allow the schools to immediately notify parents of “anything and everything” through things like text message and email, interactive classroom technology such as SMART Board interactive whiteboards and a new cafeteria tracking systems that allow parents to put money into a student’s account online to pay for lunches.
“We have all kinds of stuff going on now that wasn’t 10 years ago,” said Weeks. “Pretty much now if it plugs into the wall, we have something to do with it.”
In other business:
• Silverstein gave a presentation on violence and vandalism during the 2012-2013 school year which included 25 total offenses consisting of 20 acts of violence, one act of vandalism, two weapon related offenses and two substance abuse offenses. This represents a drop of 32 total offenses from the previous school year.
• Silverstein also gave a presentation on standardized test scores from grade to grade over the past two school years in the district. Results showed needs for improvement in grades three through six, where scores either dropped from 2012 to 2013 or did not notably improve. Results from grades seven and eight through high school, however, showed considerable improvement culminating in the highest language arts and math HSPA test scores in Glassboro High School history for 2013.
• Glassboro High School senior Breanna Willis was sworn in as a non-voting board member. It is a policy of the district to have representatives of the student government at every board meeting and Willis is currently Glassboro High School’s vice president.
GLASSBORO, N.J. – Thomas E. Bowe Elementary School is no longer without a principal, as the Glassboro Board of Education has approved the hiring of David Kelk as the interim principal of the school.
Kelk will serve as the school’s principal for the remainder of the 2013-2014 school year. He is standing in for former principal Ron Ferraro, who recently requested to go back to his previous position of vice principal. The Board of Education unanimously approved Kelk’s hiring at their October meeting.
“Earlier in the year Mr. Ferraro had requested to go back to being vice principal and we accepted that letter and immediately opened up a search,” said superintendent Mark Silverstein. “This time of the year is a very difficult time to conduct a search, but I was committed to getting leadership in the building ASAP.”
Kelk is taking on the position as an experienced school administrator. He is coming out of retirement after previously serving as Clearview Middle School’s vice principal for 13 years and principal for 10 years. Earlier this year Kelk served as the interim principal of Overbrook High School.
According to Silverstein, Kelk will be introduced to the staff on Friday and will officially start at the school on Monday.
The meeting also saw the Technology Department give a presentation on the technological updates being implemented in the district’s schools.
Although the presentation was listed as the department’s “annual report,” presenter and Glassboro Public School Director of Technology George Weeks noted that it had actually been several years since the last technology report was given. As a result, Weeks’ presentation covered the technological updates in the district over the better part of the last decade.
“In the last 9 years there has been a lot of stuff that we’ve done,” said Weeks. “For example, we’ve centralized the phone system. When I got here we had seven buildings and six different kinds of phone systems; if you called from this building [Beach Administration Building] to the high school it was a local phone call and if you spoke to the guidance counselor for four hours that was a four hour phone call that you paid for. Now it costs us nothing because we use our private fiber network to interconnect everything.”
According to Weeks, the private fiber network also connects the seven public school buildings to Rowan University as well as Glassboro’s municipal buildings.
Weeks also listed the recent additions of shared Internet services to increase Internet speed, leasing programs to constantly refresh equipment and an academic content management system called Schoolwires, which gives every teacher his or her own website where students can post blog and pod cast entries, as some of the biggest changes of recent years.
“We’re beginning to get to the tipping point where more and more teachers are beginning to utilize the tools that we’re bringing in for them,” said Weeks.
Other recent technological advancements in the schools include a more efficient printing system that, according to Weeks, is saving the district a minimum of $40,000 a year in comparison to the previous system, updated emergency contact systems that allow the schools to immediately notify parents of “anything and everything” through things like text message and email, interactive classroom technology such as SMART Board interactive whiteboards and a new cafeteria tracking systems that allow parents to put money into a student’s account online to pay for lunches.
“We have all kinds of stuff going on now that wasn’t 10 years ago,” said Weeks. “Pretty much now if it plugs into the wall, we have something to do with it.”
In other business:
• Silverstein gave a presentation on violence and vandalism during the 2012-2013 school year which included 25 total offenses consisting of 20 acts of violence, one act of vandalism, two weapon related offenses and two substance abuse offenses. This represents a drop of 32 total offenses from the previous school year.
• Silverstein also gave a presentation on standardized test scores from grade to grade over the past two school years in the district. Results showed needs for improvement in grades three through six, where scores either dropped from 2012 to 2013 or did not notably improve. Results from grades seven and eight through high school, however, showed considerable improvement culminating in the highest language arts and math HSPA test scores in Glassboro High School history for 2013.
• Glassboro High School senior Breanna Willis was sworn in as a non-voting board member. It is a policy of the district to have representatives of the student government at every board meeting and Willis is currently Glassboro High School’s vice president.
Booker and Lonegan Wage Heated Final Debate at Rowan University
Oct. 15, 2013
GLASSBORO, N.J. – With the U.S. Senate race for New Jersey nearing its conclusion, candidates Cory Booker and Steve Lonegan traded jabs over topics like the health care reform, gay marriage and gun laws during their final debate.
The debate saw Democratic candidate Booker repeatedly accuse his opponent, Lonegan, Republican mayor of Bogota, N.J., of being a “Tea Party extremist.” Lonegan, meanwhile, painted a portrait of Booker as someone more interested in Hollywood than helping the state.
The two faced off in front of a packed house in Rowan University’s Pfleeger Concert Hall. They are contending to replace Attorney General Jeffery Chiesa, who was selected to fill in for the late Frank Lautenberg, as the U.S. Senate representative of New Jersey.
The focus of Lonegan’s criticism of Booker throughout the debate was the current state of Newark, N.J., where Booker is serving as mayor. Lonegan noted the high taxes the state is spending on development of the city as well as its high unemployment and crime rates.
“All you need to do is go into any small business and they’ll tell you how they’re being crushed by high taxes, overregulation, runaway crime and rampant high school drop out rates,” said Lonegan.
Lonegan had one of the more noteworthy comments of the night when he said that people cannot swim in Newark’s Passaic river because of the amount of dead bodies floating in it. He also made claims that Booker is more concerned with his celebrity than actually fixing Newark’s problems.
“14-year-old Ali Henderson was shot to death in the streets of Newark while he was on the Jimmy Fallon show telling people what a great job he was doing,” said Lonegan.
In rebuking Lonegan’s claims, Booker brought up a bail out that Lonegan received from the government for the finances of Bogota in 2006. He also said that Newark is going through its biggest economic boom in 50 years and that the city’s crime rate has dropped in the past year.
“Crime is down with a 27 percent reduction in shootings,” said Booker. “We’re making tremendous progress in the city of Newark.”
The debate began with the candidate’s assessments of the handling of the government shutdown. Lonegan graded Congress’s handling of the shutdown a “B,” placing blame on President Barack Obama, whom he graded an “F.” Democratic nominee Booker, on the other hand, gave Congress the “F.”
“The government is really being shut down because of Tea Party extremists in Washington,” said Booker. “I believe we need to send people to Washington that are going to being people together to work together.”
When asked about the president’s health care plan, a major factor in the shutdown, Booker said that the problems lie in its implementation. He noted benefits of the plan such as enabling young people to stay on their parents’ plans longer.
Lonegan, meanwhile, said that Obama care is “bringing chaos into the market place” and that it should be postponed for a year in order to work out its issues.
“It threatens the health care of millions of Americans,” said Lonegan. “The system is simply not ready to be implemented.”
Among the more heated topics of the night’s debate was gay marriage, which was recently ruled to be legal in New Jersey by Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson. Lonegan stated that his opposition of same-sex marriage stems from his belief that marriage between a man and a woman is “the greatest institution ever devised by the mind of man to raise a child.”
When pushed on whether or not he believes gay couples should be allowed to adopt, Lonegan questioned its long-term effects on children.
“I have mixed feelings about that,” he said.
Booker cited equality under the law as his reason for supporting gay marriage and accused Lonegan of being hypocritical on the matter.
“This is a fundamental principle under the law,” said Booker. “He says he supports liberty, but you can’t be free to marry who you want.”
Gun control legislation was also debated, as Booker pushed the issue of background checks, which he believes should be required for all gun sales.
“I believe, like the overwhelming majority of New Jerseyans, even gun owners, that we should end secondary markets not doing background checks,” said Booker. “My opponent is supported by the NRA.”
Lonegan answered this by claiming that he doesn’t believe legal gun owners have committed any of the crimes on the streets of Newark. He also feels that mandatory background checks are an invasion of privacy.
“It’s not legal gun owners, people who buy guns legally, that commit crimes,” said Lonegan. “Criminals don’t pay attention to these laws.”
Booker also took issue with Lonegan’s anti-abortion views, noting that his opponent does not believe a woman should have the right to an abortion in cases of rape or incest. The abortion argument would eventually stretch the hour-long debate to its limits allowing no time for closing statements.
The election will take place this Wednesday.
GLASSBORO, N.J. – With the U.S. Senate race for New Jersey nearing its conclusion, candidates Cory Booker and Steve Lonegan traded jabs over topics like the health care reform, gay marriage and gun laws during their final debate.
The debate saw Democratic candidate Booker repeatedly accuse his opponent, Lonegan, Republican mayor of Bogota, N.J., of being a “Tea Party extremist.” Lonegan, meanwhile, painted a portrait of Booker as someone more interested in Hollywood than helping the state.
The two faced off in front of a packed house in Rowan University’s Pfleeger Concert Hall. They are contending to replace Attorney General Jeffery Chiesa, who was selected to fill in for the late Frank Lautenberg, as the U.S. Senate representative of New Jersey.
The focus of Lonegan’s criticism of Booker throughout the debate was the current state of Newark, N.J., where Booker is serving as mayor. Lonegan noted the high taxes the state is spending on development of the city as well as its high unemployment and crime rates.
“All you need to do is go into any small business and they’ll tell you how they’re being crushed by high taxes, overregulation, runaway crime and rampant high school drop out rates,” said Lonegan.
Lonegan had one of the more noteworthy comments of the night when he said that people cannot swim in Newark’s Passaic river because of the amount of dead bodies floating in it. He also made claims that Booker is more concerned with his celebrity than actually fixing Newark’s problems.
“14-year-old Ali Henderson was shot to death in the streets of Newark while he was on the Jimmy Fallon show telling people what a great job he was doing,” said Lonegan.
In rebuking Lonegan’s claims, Booker brought up a bail out that Lonegan received from the government for the finances of Bogota in 2006. He also said that Newark is going through its biggest economic boom in 50 years and that the city’s crime rate has dropped in the past year.
“Crime is down with a 27 percent reduction in shootings,” said Booker. “We’re making tremendous progress in the city of Newark.”
The debate began with the candidate’s assessments of the handling of the government shutdown. Lonegan graded Congress’s handling of the shutdown a “B,” placing blame on President Barack Obama, whom he graded an “F.” Democratic nominee Booker, on the other hand, gave Congress the “F.”
“The government is really being shut down because of Tea Party extremists in Washington,” said Booker. “I believe we need to send people to Washington that are going to being people together to work together.”
When asked about the president’s health care plan, a major factor in the shutdown, Booker said that the problems lie in its implementation. He noted benefits of the plan such as enabling young people to stay on their parents’ plans longer.
Lonegan, meanwhile, said that Obama care is “bringing chaos into the market place” and that it should be postponed for a year in order to work out its issues.
“It threatens the health care of millions of Americans,” said Lonegan. “The system is simply not ready to be implemented.”
Among the more heated topics of the night’s debate was gay marriage, which was recently ruled to be legal in New Jersey by Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson. Lonegan stated that his opposition of same-sex marriage stems from his belief that marriage between a man and a woman is “the greatest institution ever devised by the mind of man to raise a child.”
When pushed on whether or not he believes gay couples should be allowed to adopt, Lonegan questioned its long-term effects on children.
“I have mixed feelings about that,” he said.
Booker cited equality under the law as his reason for supporting gay marriage and accused Lonegan of being hypocritical on the matter.
“This is a fundamental principle under the law,” said Booker. “He says he supports liberty, but you can’t be free to marry who you want.”
Gun control legislation was also debated, as Booker pushed the issue of background checks, which he believes should be required for all gun sales.
“I believe, like the overwhelming majority of New Jerseyans, even gun owners, that we should end secondary markets not doing background checks,” said Booker. “My opponent is supported by the NRA.”
Lonegan answered this by claiming that he doesn’t believe legal gun owners have committed any of the crimes on the streets of Newark. He also feels that mandatory background checks are an invasion of privacy.
“It’s not legal gun owners, people who buy guns legally, that commit crimes,” said Lonegan. “Criminals don’t pay attention to these laws.”
Booker also took issue with Lonegan’s anti-abortion views, noting that his opponent does not believe a woman should have the right to an abortion in cases of rape or incest. The abortion argument would eventually stretch the hour-long debate to its limits allowing no time for closing statements.
The election will take place this Wednesday.
Glassboro 2013 Municipal Budget Introduction Includes 4-cent Tax Increase
April 2, 2013
GLASSBORO, N.J. – During Tuesday’s regular meeting of the mayor and council the borough of Glassboro introduced its 2013 municipal budget at $22.5 million including a tax increase that would result in an extra $84 for the year for the average property owner.
The proposed budget calls for a $12.3 million tax levy to be paid by local taxpayers, about $450,000 more than in 2012. The budget also includes a 4-cent tax increase, meaning an increase of 4 cents per every $100,000 of assessed property value. This makes for a tax increase of $7 per month and $84 for the year for the average-assessed borough home, which is valued at $187,848. Last year’s municipal budget also saw a 4-cent tax increase, while 2011’s only included a 0.8-cent tax increase.
Among the main reasons for this year’s proposed tax increase is a 14 percent increase in health benefits and pensions, which accounts for nearly 3 cents of the 4-cent tax increase. During the public portion of the meeting Glassboro resident Luis Perez spoke out on the increase of such for borough employees and called for the council to “trim the fat.”
“The fact remains that we’re going to increase taxes in spite of the millions of dollars we’re collecting from Rowan Boulevard,” said Perez, who has been a resident of Glassboro for the past 53 years. “More fat has to be trimmed. We’ve got too many benefits in this town.”
Borough Business administrator Joe Brigandi said that despite the steadily increasing insurance cost of the borough, employees are now slowly being nudged towards putting their money into a joint insurance fund.
“The amount we’re receiving (in benefits) is nowhere near what the increase in premiums was,” said Brigandi.
While the revenue of the Rowan Boulevard redevelopment project has pulled about even with its costs for the borough so far, it has also contributed to a decrease in real estate ratables, as the 90 properties previously located at the redevelopment sites brought in almost $300,000 annually in property taxes. The decrease in tax revenue has also contributed heavily to the tax increase.
“We’ve had less revenue to deal with,” said councilman Anthony Fiola of the results of the decline in ratables. “We can’t go out and open up a fruit stand to make revenue.”
Brigandi pointed out, however, that eventual property tax revenue from the project has the potential to more than fill the void left by the previous properties. Fiola also expressed confidence in the project.
“Rowan Boulevard has not cost us a penny in taxes,” said Fiola. “We’ve had as much revenue as expenses from it. Rowan Boulevard has been a benefit for us.”
The public will have a chance to discuss the budget during a public hearing that will be held on April 23 at borough hall.
GLASSBORO, N.J. – During Tuesday’s regular meeting of the mayor and council the borough of Glassboro introduced its 2013 municipal budget at $22.5 million including a tax increase that would result in an extra $84 for the year for the average property owner.
The proposed budget calls for a $12.3 million tax levy to be paid by local taxpayers, about $450,000 more than in 2012. The budget also includes a 4-cent tax increase, meaning an increase of 4 cents per every $100,000 of assessed property value. This makes for a tax increase of $7 per month and $84 for the year for the average-assessed borough home, which is valued at $187,848. Last year’s municipal budget also saw a 4-cent tax increase, while 2011’s only included a 0.8-cent tax increase.
Among the main reasons for this year’s proposed tax increase is a 14 percent increase in health benefits and pensions, which accounts for nearly 3 cents of the 4-cent tax increase. During the public portion of the meeting Glassboro resident Luis Perez spoke out on the increase of such for borough employees and called for the council to “trim the fat.”
“The fact remains that we’re going to increase taxes in spite of the millions of dollars we’re collecting from Rowan Boulevard,” said Perez, who has been a resident of Glassboro for the past 53 years. “More fat has to be trimmed. We’ve got too many benefits in this town.”
Borough Business administrator Joe Brigandi said that despite the steadily increasing insurance cost of the borough, employees are now slowly being nudged towards putting their money into a joint insurance fund.
“The amount we’re receiving (in benefits) is nowhere near what the increase in premiums was,” said Brigandi.
While the revenue of the Rowan Boulevard redevelopment project has pulled about even with its costs for the borough so far, it has also contributed to a decrease in real estate ratables, as the 90 properties previously located at the redevelopment sites brought in almost $300,000 annually in property taxes. The decrease in tax revenue has also contributed heavily to the tax increase.
“We’ve had less revenue to deal with,” said councilman Anthony Fiola of the results of the decline in ratables. “We can’t go out and open up a fruit stand to make revenue.”
Brigandi pointed out, however, that eventual property tax revenue from the project has the potential to more than fill the void left by the previous properties. Fiola also expressed confidence in the project.
“Rowan Boulevard has not cost us a penny in taxes,” said Fiola. “We’ve had as much revenue as expenses from it. Rowan Boulevard has been a benefit for us.”
The public will have a chance to discuss the budget during a public hearing that will be held on April 23 at borough hall.
Recent Arrest Links Glassboro Man to 2011 Armed Robbery
March 11, 2013
GLASSBORO, N.J. – A Glassboro man was arrested Tuesday on a warrant for a 2011 armed robbery after a recent arrest proved to be the missing link in the case, police said.
Dequan Allen, 19, also known as Daquan, was charged with robbery, kidnapping and theft after his fingerprints from a recent arrest were found to match those pulled from evidence found in an unresolved armed robbery case dating back to over two years ago, police said.
Allen was arrested on Jan. 23, 2013 for an alleged robbery in which he and another man, Quashon Winchester, 20, who remains at large, stole a cell phone and $100 in cash from a man sitting in a vehicle off of South Academy Street, police said. Police Chief Alex Fanfarillo said the two told the man that they were carrying weapons during the robbery, however, investigation later proved that the threats were “a bluff on the part of the robbers” and no weapons were found. Allen was later charged with robbery, theft, terroristic threats and conspiracy for his role in the incident.
As Allen was being processed for the charges stemming from the January arrest, a delayed Automated Fingerprint Identification System hit found a positive match between Allen’s fingerprints and latent prints discovered on evidence collected from the scene of an unresolved 2011 armed robbery, police said.
According to the official police report from the incident, on Jan. 21, 2011 at around 8:30 p.m., a young man holding a black handgun snuck into the kitchen of the Crown Fried Chicken on East High Street, locked a female employee inside of the freezer and took an unspecified amount of cash. The man was seen fleeing from the scene with three additional suspects.
After some time went by, a customer heard the employee screaming and banging on the freezer door and set her free. The employee then called the police and described the suspect as approximately 5 feet 8 inches in height and between 16 and 19 years old, but no arrests were made in connection with the case until now.
Allen was turned over by police to the Gloucester County Jail. He was issued a no-bail warrant by Superior Court Judge Colleen Maier, police said. He is scheduled to appear before a judge at a date still to be determined.
Fanfarillo said that the case is being left open as the three additional suspects seen fleeing the Crown Fried Chicken on Jan. 21, 2011 are still at large, but he noted that there is little known about them and cases this old are hard to solve as it is.
GLASSBORO, N.J. – A Glassboro man was arrested Tuesday on a warrant for a 2011 armed robbery after a recent arrest proved to be the missing link in the case, police said.
Dequan Allen, 19, also known as Daquan, was charged with robbery, kidnapping and theft after his fingerprints from a recent arrest were found to match those pulled from evidence found in an unresolved armed robbery case dating back to over two years ago, police said.
Allen was arrested on Jan. 23, 2013 for an alleged robbery in which he and another man, Quashon Winchester, 20, who remains at large, stole a cell phone and $100 in cash from a man sitting in a vehicle off of South Academy Street, police said. Police Chief Alex Fanfarillo said the two told the man that they were carrying weapons during the robbery, however, investigation later proved that the threats were “a bluff on the part of the robbers” and no weapons were found. Allen was later charged with robbery, theft, terroristic threats and conspiracy for his role in the incident.
As Allen was being processed for the charges stemming from the January arrest, a delayed Automated Fingerprint Identification System hit found a positive match between Allen’s fingerprints and latent prints discovered on evidence collected from the scene of an unresolved 2011 armed robbery, police said.
According to the official police report from the incident, on Jan. 21, 2011 at around 8:30 p.m., a young man holding a black handgun snuck into the kitchen of the Crown Fried Chicken on East High Street, locked a female employee inside of the freezer and took an unspecified amount of cash. The man was seen fleeing from the scene with three additional suspects.
After some time went by, a customer heard the employee screaming and banging on the freezer door and set her free. The employee then called the police and described the suspect as approximately 5 feet 8 inches in height and between 16 and 19 years old, but no arrests were made in connection with the case until now.
Allen was turned over by police to the Gloucester County Jail. He was issued a no-bail warrant by Superior Court Judge Colleen Maier, police said. He is scheduled to appear before a judge at a date still to be determined.
Fanfarillo said that the case is being left open as the three additional suspects seen fleeing the Crown Fried Chicken on Jan. 21, 2011 are still at large, but he noted that there is little known about them and cases this old are hard to solve as it is.
Floyd Mayweather: Lacking Legacy
April 29, 2013
As Floyd Mayweather Jr. prepares to enter the professional boxing ring for the 44th time in his career this Saturday with a record yet to be blemished, comparisons to all-time great fighters are rampant in the media. An undefeated record is often enough for a casual fight fan to throw around greatness comparisons, and with a larger than life personality matched only by that of a prime Muhammad Ali, Mayweather is often placed upon a pedestal reserved for the greatest fighters in boxing history. The casual fan could easily be forgiven for such ignorance, but boxing’s media should know better.
The consensus greatest fighter of all-time in most legitimate boxing circles, the late Sugar Ray Robinson, holds a record of 128 wins with 84 knockouts against a lone defeat. It is true that knockout percentage does not make a fighter, and Mayweather’s lack of power should not lower his rank. On the contrary, it should raise it as Mayweather has dominated his opponents, who often possess a sound power advantage over him, over a longer period of rounds than would otherwise be the case by ending his fights early with knockouts. However, the significant differences between Robinson’s record and Mayweather’s 43-0 mark is in both activity and quality of opposition.
Robinson fought as often as every month for many years of his career. To be fair and put this in perspective, that is a feat not possible in today’s boxing climate. The build-up of fights in the media as well as the increasing costs of putting on a show complete with undercard in today’s much more expensive venues does not allow for that type of frequency among top fighters; the days of small ballrooms and auditoriums as major fight venues are no more. However, Mayweather has fought only seven times in the past seven years, all the while maintaining a consensus No. 1 or No. 2 pound-for-pound ranking (save for his “retirement”). The difference in activity here is so stark that it is beyond comparison even when taking in to account the different time periods; Mayweather’s activity may be enough to hold a world ranking in the current boxing atmosphere, but all-time greatness calls for much more.
In addition to fighting nearly every month, Robinson, a natural welterweight, conquered both the welterweight and middleweight divisions, moving up not only to fight bigger fighters, but great bigger fighters. Robinson would often give up as much as 20 pounds to his opponents, yet consistently faced greats like Jake LaMotta (whom he fought an unprecedented six times, winning five) and Carmen Basilio, each when they were in the prime of their hall of fame careers and at their comfortable middleweight division. Mayweather simply does not take such risks.
Mayweather’s highest profile career victory to date came against Oscar De La Hoya in 2007. De La Hoya is a future hall of famer in his own right, however, by the time Mayweather got to him, he was already well past his prime and just a couple of fights away from getting obliterated into retirement by Manny Pacquiao. And still, Mayweather only won a close split decision over him, a far cry from Robinson’s emphatic, career-defining 13th round knockout of Jake LaMotta, a man known for an iron chin, in their sixth and final fight. Mayweather faced future hall of famer Juan Manuel Marquez in 2008 and dominated him, yet the win was marred by the fact that Marquez was jumping up two weight classes to face Mayweather, gave up 17 pounds to him on fight night and still avoided a knockout. As previously stated, knockout power does not define a fighter, but the truly great ones can finish when given such advantages as Mayweather was; Robinson knocked out LaMotta as the smaller fighter.
Mayweather’s career is not without significant impressive wins that do not have asterisks next to them in the eyes of boxing historians. His dominant five knockdown 10th round stoppage win over the late and previously undefeated Diego Corrales, who was arguably in his prime at the time of the fight is a prime example and to many, stands as his greatest victory. However, such wins are few and far between for Mayweather, with his more recent wins ranging from over matched opponents like the late Arturo Gatti and one-hit-wonder Carlos Baldomir to over-the-hill former greats like Shane Mosley to squeakers against fighters he should have dominated such as Jose Luis Castillo and Miguel Cotto.
The ability to jump weight classes also is a common qualifier for greatness, and Mayweather has done just that, winning titles from super featherweight to light middleweight. What makes weight class jumping so impressive, however, is the idea of a smaller fighter beating a bigger fighter because of superiority in overall skills. While Mayweather always wins because of his skills, he did not give up weight in the same way that Robinson did when jumping up; he merely grew into the weight classes as he began his career at the young age of 19 and was still filling out as he moved up the ranks.
Perhaps comparisons to Robinson are not even fair to Mayweather as their fighting eras are so vastly different. However, it is Robinson’s legacy that has come to define all-time greatness and the current pound-for-pound ranking system, and other all-time greats have had to adhere to the same qualities as Robinson to some degree to earn their stripes: quality of opposition coupled with dominance and activity regardless of weight.
A lesser fighter than Robinson who is still considered to be an all-time great is Roberto Duran. Duran lost 16 times in his career, yet is widely considered to be one of the greatest of all time. This has a lot to do with the Robinson factor in terms of the qualities that make up his legacy: Duran was one of the most dominant lightweight fighters of all-time, yet moved up several weight classes throughout his later career to challenge himself with bigger and better fights. He fought all of the best fighters of his generation, from Sugar Ray Leonard to Marvelous Marvin Hagler, in the primes of their careers, sometimes winning and sometimes losing, but always giving a good account of himself and never avoiding any fighters. Duran was steadfast in attempting to move his career up the achievement ladder.
Mayweather has also faced a large majority of the best fighters of his generation. Many, however, were well past their primes. There are two major factors that will forever haunt Mayweather’s legacy, the first of which being the fact that Mayweather continually turned down huge money offers to fight dangerous welterweight threat Antonio Margarito at a time when Margarito was favored by many to beat Mayweather. He blatantly avoided the fight. Secondly, the lack of a Pacquiao fight in Mayweather’s career (largely due to consistent balking by the fighters until Pacquiao’s ring presence deteriorated) will forever tarnish Mayweather as a fighter who never proved himself against the best of his generation. The same certainly can’t be said of Duran, Hagler, Leonard or Thomas Hearns, who all fought each other at or close to their primes.
Mayweather is unquestionable one of the greatest talents in the history of boxing and would give any all-time great a hell with his supreme skills and near flawless defensive wizardry. However, it takes more than talent to be an all-time great. Quality of opposition, activity and overall fearlessness in terms of career decisions make for a gaping hole in Mayweather’s otherwise impenetrable defense.
As Floyd Mayweather Jr. prepares to enter the professional boxing ring for the 44th time in his career this Saturday with a record yet to be blemished, comparisons to all-time great fighters are rampant in the media. An undefeated record is often enough for a casual fight fan to throw around greatness comparisons, and with a larger than life personality matched only by that of a prime Muhammad Ali, Mayweather is often placed upon a pedestal reserved for the greatest fighters in boxing history. The casual fan could easily be forgiven for such ignorance, but boxing’s media should know better.
The consensus greatest fighter of all-time in most legitimate boxing circles, the late Sugar Ray Robinson, holds a record of 128 wins with 84 knockouts against a lone defeat. It is true that knockout percentage does not make a fighter, and Mayweather’s lack of power should not lower his rank. On the contrary, it should raise it as Mayweather has dominated his opponents, who often possess a sound power advantage over him, over a longer period of rounds than would otherwise be the case by ending his fights early with knockouts. However, the significant differences between Robinson’s record and Mayweather’s 43-0 mark is in both activity and quality of opposition.
Robinson fought as often as every month for many years of his career. To be fair and put this in perspective, that is a feat not possible in today’s boxing climate. The build-up of fights in the media as well as the increasing costs of putting on a show complete with undercard in today’s much more expensive venues does not allow for that type of frequency among top fighters; the days of small ballrooms and auditoriums as major fight venues are no more. However, Mayweather has fought only seven times in the past seven years, all the while maintaining a consensus No. 1 or No. 2 pound-for-pound ranking (save for his “retirement”). The difference in activity here is so stark that it is beyond comparison even when taking in to account the different time periods; Mayweather’s activity may be enough to hold a world ranking in the current boxing atmosphere, but all-time greatness calls for much more.
In addition to fighting nearly every month, Robinson, a natural welterweight, conquered both the welterweight and middleweight divisions, moving up not only to fight bigger fighters, but great bigger fighters. Robinson would often give up as much as 20 pounds to his opponents, yet consistently faced greats like Jake LaMotta (whom he fought an unprecedented six times, winning five) and Carmen Basilio, each when they were in the prime of their hall of fame careers and at their comfortable middleweight division. Mayweather simply does not take such risks.
Mayweather’s highest profile career victory to date came against Oscar De La Hoya in 2007. De La Hoya is a future hall of famer in his own right, however, by the time Mayweather got to him, he was already well past his prime and just a couple of fights away from getting obliterated into retirement by Manny Pacquiao. And still, Mayweather only won a close split decision over him, a far cry from Robinson’s emphatic, career-defining 13th round knockout of Jake LaMotta, a man known for an iron chin, in their sixth and final fight. Mayweather faced future hall of famer Juan Manuel Marquez in 2008 and dominated him, yet the win was marred by the fact that Marquez was jumping up two weight classes to face Mayweather, gave up 17 pounds to him on fight night and still avoided a knockout. As previously stated, knockout power does not define a fighter, but the truly great ones can finish when given such advantages as Mayweather was; Robinson knocked out LaMotta as the smaller fighter.
Mayweather’s career is not without significant impressive wins that do not have asterisks next to them in the eyes of boxing historians. His dominant five knockdown 10th round stoppage win over the late and previously undefeated Diego Corrales, who was arguably in his prime at the time of the fight is a prime example and to many, stands as his greatest victory. However, such wins are few and far between for Mayweather, with his more recent wins ranging from over matched opponents like the late Arturo Gatti and one-hit-wonder Carlos Baldomir to over-the-hill former greats like Shane Mosley to squeakers against fighters he should have dominated such as Jose Luis Castillo and Miguel Cotto.
The ability to jump weight classes also is a common qualifier for greatness, and Mayweather has done just that, winning titles from super featherweight to light middleweight. What makes weight class jumping so impressive, however, is the idea of a smaller fighter beating a bigger fighter because of superiority in overall skills. While Mayweather always wins because of his skills, he did not give up weight in the same way that Robinson did when jumping up; he merely grew into the weight classes as he began his career at the young age of 19 and was still filling out as he moved up the ranks.
Perhaps comparisons to Robinson are not even fair to Mayweather as their fighting eras are so vastly different. However, it is Robinson’s legacy that has come to define all-time greatness and the current pound-for-pound ranking system, and other all-time greats have had to adhere to the same qualities as Robinson to some degree to earn their stripes: quality of opposition coupled with dominance and activity regardless of weight.
A lesser fighter than Robinson who is still considered to be an all-time great is Roberto Duran. Duran lost 16 times in his career, yet is widely considered to be one of the greatest of all time. This has a lot to do with the Robinson factor in terms of the qualities that make up his legacy: Duran was one of the most dominant lightweight fighters of all-time, yet moved up several weight classes throughout his later career to challenge himself with bigger and better fights. He fought all of the best fighters of his generation, from Sugar Ray Leonard to Marvelous Marvin Hagler, in the primes of their careers, sometimes winning and sometimes losing, but always giving a good account of himself and never avoiding any fighters. Duran was steadfast in attempting to move his career up the achievement ladder.
Mayweather has also faced a large majority of the best fighters of his generation. Many, however, were well past their primes. There are two major factors that will forever haunt Mayweather’s legacy, the first of which being the fact that Mayweather continually turned down huge money offers to fight dangerous welterweight threat Antonio Margarito at a time when Margarito was favored by many to beat Mayweather. He blatantly avoided the fight. Secondly, the lack of a Pacquiao fight in Mayweather’s career (largely due to consistent balking by the fighters until Pacquiao’s ring presence deteriorated) will forever tarnish Mayweather as a fighter who never proved himself against the best of his generation. The same certainly can’t be said of Duran, Hagler, Leonard or Thomas Hearns, who all fought each other at or close to their primes.
Mayweather is unquestionable one of the greatest talents in the history of boxing and would give any all-time great a hell with his supreme skills and near flawless defensive wizardry. However, it takes more than talent to be an all-time great. Quality of opposition, activity and overall fearlessness in terms of career decisions make for a gaping hole in Mayweather’s otherwise impenetrable defense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)