Pregnant Benedict Cumberbatch is a vision at the Oscars

It's been pretty interesting over the last few days since the Oscars 2015 watching the evolution of the #AskHerMore campaign which was quickly thrown back into the spotlight. On Tuesday this week a Huffington Post article flashed up on my Facebook newsfeed related to Keira Knightley at the Oscars. The title was 'Pregnant Keira Knightley is a vision at the Oscars.' I actually clicked on it because I was expecting an ironic article about sexism on the Red Carpet.

This article sums up the whole issue quite concisely - unfortunately, with no self-awareness or irony thrown in. To keep it simplistic let's tally the times different issues are mentioned:

Pregnancy III
Outfit II
Nomination I

The one mention of her Oscar nomination was as a side-note in commas in a sentence dedicated to Keira Knightly talking to Ellen about 'being pregnant during awards season'.

There are several possible reasons why Keira Knightley gets this coverage while every other media outlet worth it's salt is quoting Benedict Cumberbatch in his interview, post losing the Actor in a Leading Role Oscar to Eddie Redmayne, saying that 'there is no such thing as 80% of losers, everyone here won' and other soundbites NOT related to his wife's pregnancy.

Keira actually has nothing else interesting to say. 
In fact, maybe Keira herself is a bit of a sexist and really does think only about a) babies and b) clothes and c) what her husband wants to eat or drink. Which is a reasonable assumption considering the only quote from Keira herself in the article again only mentions her husband and baby.

This assumption is quite easily countered by an alternative Red Carpet interview from below. Keira seems to have quite a lot to say for herself, her character and the entertainment industry in general.

So what else could it be?

Journalists are only asking what audience's want to hear.
As Oscar Raymundo suggested it's down to the fact that this, to steal a phrase from Scarlet Johanneson, rabbit-food journalism is what 'audience's are tuning in for.' It's more difficult to argue with this assumption. Is what people want to hear what is available to them?

The top three hits on YouTube as sorted by relevance for 'Keira Knightley Interview Oscars 2015' came up with this:

The first hit is just the camera panning up and down Keira's outfit. No words necessary. The second is again focusing on the pregnancy, and finally (going for the win) the third result combines both being pregnant and what she is wearing to the Oscars.

Sorting the results again by view count tells a different story - the first hit is Keira Knightley performing Lost Stars, the second is again the Jimmy Kimmel interview titled being pregnant at the Oscars and the third hit is a commentary on Best Supporting Actress winner predictions.

It's not exactly scientific but it's certainly not conclusive that audience's just want to hear about dresses, and shoes, and manicures, and babies from female stars. I'm not saying that fashion should be taken out of the equation entirely. It's important also to acknowledge the pain and effort of the many talented designers showcasing their work on the Red Carpet as well.

Instead and simply that the embarrassing, notable gap in the number of interesting and stimulating questions asked to male versus female nominees should be lessened. The common excuses of what 'the audience want to hear' or that 'the Red Carpet is just about fashion' is just not cutting it anymore. That's the real meaning of #AskHerMore.

Speaking for myself I think I can handle hearing a little bit more too.

A life through the eyes of Boyhood

Boyhood is literally stunning. Not in an artsy, quirky, trying too hard kind of way. It's authentic and raw and draws you in so that your whole life just seems like another random assortment of moments that we'll never make any sense out of. There was no story, no moral, or reason, or judgement. Shit happens, sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad. People take a role throughout the movie, some disappear suddenly and never reappear and some come back one day into Mason's life totally unexpectedly. The actors don't overplay dramatic scenes, it's a drama in that you feel life is just continuing for the time that the camera is not rolling. The story was just life.

Watching the actor who plays Mason, Ellar Coltrane, grow up in every sense of the word is so real it's disconcerting. The film was shot at 18 month intervals over 12 years. Richard Linklater captured Mason from the age of 6-18 years old. The transformation is awesome, and awkward, to watch. Boyhood captures Mason physically changing from a cute 6 year old with a button nose and total enthusiasm, into an awkward teenager to becoming a confident stoner college student studying photography.

His voice changes, his jaw lengthens, he goes through acne and the bit where boys grow their hair long and then one parent or another forces them to cut it under protest, the phase where his limbs are too long for his body, the dreaded chubby phase and the bit where his vocal chords flutter and stutter until they deepen and settle.

It made me think of my two little brothers. Every phase I remember (the bit with the horrible long hair and the difference it made when they were forced to cut it made me laugh) even bits they've forgotten. Somehow Linklater captured these universal moments that live in every older sibling and Mother's memory of the boys they watched grow up.


The difference about Boyhood is that this is not a movie illustrating still snapshots of someone growing older to show the aging process itself. It's about capturing moments throughout time and the piercing realisation of the rate of speed that these moments pass us by.

It's profound and it's brilliant. It's about nothing and everything. It's subtle and it's completely raw. One thing for certain: It's 100% worth the time to watch it.

50 Shades of Boring

The best way to review 50 Shades of Grey is by a list of 10 sex scenes which contained more sexual tension than the entire movie and, just to make it that bit more of a challenge (but not really), involved less nudity:

1. Leo and Kate steamy in the carriage in Titanic.

2. The Wolf of Wallstreet 'Does Daddy want some?' scene.

3. Pretty much any moment in American Pie.

4. The piano sex scene in Pretty Woman. Especially great comparison with the totally crap piano sex scene in 50 shades.

5. The Natalie Portman // Mila Kunis fantasy scene in Black Swan.

6. The before battle scene in 300.

7. The rain kiss in The Notebook.

8. Dirty Dancing - any time they dance. Particularly when Baby rubs Johnny's chest.

9. Keira Knightley and James McAvoy in the library in Atonement.

10. The pottery wheel scene in Ghost.

As it turns out trying to make 50 Shades of Grey into a family-friendly teen-focused movie does not work. How could a movie about sex be so boring?

Initial thought was the entire lack of nudity destroyed any sexiness this movie could have hoped for. However, nudity really isn't necessary to make a sex scene sexy - refer to above list. It might have been the total lack of charisma/strength/control exuding from Jamie Dornan. Granted the man is a looker, but he just does not get how to play Christian Grey. The aura from the books is simply absent.

It might have been quite possibly the worst sound track that ever happened to a movie. Particularly note the helicopter journey. Or it might have been the sex scene edits: neck, breast, from chest to navel, leg carefully angled to hide nudity, Grey's tensed ass - cut, repeat.

Entirely honestly the most exciting thing was the hilarity factor of Ana's pubes. 

Jupiter ain't no Trinity

Just like Jupiter Ascending ain't no Matrix. How could the Wachowski's have written this?

The first thing that sprung to mind after stepping out of Jupiter Ascending was well that went 'full geek.' Although it's always refreshing to watch an original sci-fi creation that hasn't been rehashed in several thousand increasingly less inspiring versions it was a wholly disappointing effort by the Wachowski's. Now I realise that the Matrix was 16 years ago. But the difference in character depth and overall storyline is so clear it's almost painful for any Matrix fan to sit through. I mean scratch the Matrix fan bit. It was just painful to sit through. (The only redeeming factor was the general spectacular spectacle of the costumes and CGI sets.)

It is obvious within Jupiter Ascending that crucial plot points were cut out for time purposes resulting in the layers of story, depth of characters and general 'sense' of the plot becoming so convoluted as to descend into pure geek fantasy. And not in a good way. Particularly the bizarre love scenes between Channing Tatum and Mila Kunis who have as much chemistry as two dead weasels thrown into a sack together.. on a good day.

I love Channing Tatum as much as the next girl. And his portrayal at Caine at least hinted at some kind of multidimensional character. But really Jupiter? She made not a single empowered choice throughout the entire movie and appeared to necessitate rescuing by another man roughly every ten minutes throughout the film. Whether it was Caine rescuing her from another bad guy or a robotic man leading her through layers of bureaucracy to claim her title. Generally it felt like a really quick who's who of ridiculous, overly-exaggerated cosmic bad guys outsmarting the unfortunate and completely passive, but dolled-up, bimbo.

And why oh why is everyone apparently fine with the fact that every other planet in the Universe is being 'harvested' and people being liquified (into life extending elixir... haha)? I mean come on Jupiter. Well you can just forget any hope of a strong female lead. Instead Jupiter goes back to her life which appears to mainly involve cleaning toilets despite this, some would consider life-altering, knowledge. And she's pretty content.. After all she got the man (slash rabid wolf) so I mean what else does a girl need? Forget the fact that we've just spent the last two hours learning that she is now Queen of the Universe and actually owns Earth. She just wants to clean toilets, date her man, forget about the liquifying of the residents of other planets and have a quiet life.

I'm not trying to embark upon a feminist rant but.. Well she's no Trinity. Who is a hacker if you remember. And fights like a badass. She don't need no man.

I feel like if Trinity had been Jupiter, and generally less make up had been used - how unpractical is it really to cake yourself to that extent while cleaning houses - and there had been some sort of thought put into character development - this whole movie could have had an entirely different reception.