On Sunday, Feb. 12, Prince’s discography was released on Spotify. Emerald Arts and Culture writers Sararosa Davies and Dana Alston took this opportunity to fully immerse themselves in Prince’s music by exclusively listening to The Purple One’s catalog. Here are their responses, with a podcast detailing their experiences during this wild Prince marathon.

Dana’s reaction:

My first exposure to Prince came in 2007 at the tender age of 11. He was the artist chosen for the Super Bowl Halftime Show that year, and his performance was marked by a ridiculous torrent of rain. The downpour was so severe that officials considered canceling the show. At one point, Prince was called and asked if the rain was going to hinder him.

His response: “Can you make it rain harder?”

Standing on a stage designed in the shape of his “Love Symbol,” he defied the weather, and delivered the greatest and most unlikely Super Bowl Halftime performance of all time. He delivered song after song, usually accompanied with genius guitar solos, while the world came crashing down around him. My mother, who grew up an avid fan, was enamored. A love of Prince is in my genes, but it took me almost ten years to fully understand his music,his impact and his persona.

The fearlessness, energy and openness on display during that performance defined him. Prince began as a musical genius in the funk genre. But as he evolved and delivered his masterpieces during the 1980s, he was impossible to predict. He explored pop on songs like “When You Were Mine” (a personal favorite). He dabbled in protest and politics in “Controversy” and “Sign O’ The Times.” He conquered the world with “Purple Rain,” his magnum opus. There was nothing he couldn’t do.

Listening to his albums front to back only proves how musically invincible he was. Not even a thunderstorm on national television could slow him down. He could get through life, no matter what it threw at him, through his art. He made living easier for the rest of us, one note at a time.

Sararosa’s reactions:

Growing up in the Minnesota music scene meant I was surrounded by references to Prince whether I was attending a show at First Avenue in Minneapolis or hearing about his dance parties at his home and recording studio, the fortress-like Paisley Park in Chanhassen, Minnesota, a Twin Cities suburb. Despite being constantly surrounded by purple, I had no idea just how big his impact was on the entire world. He’s not just a hometown hero and that became evident when he died.

I was always familiar with Prince’s image and his impact on the “Minneapolis sound,” but to be completely honest, I had barely listened to his music before he passed away. My dad used to play me “Raspberry Beret,” but that didn’t quite stick until now.

I remember meeting up with my friend Cecilia a couple days after Prince passed away. She told me about her experience reporting on First Ave’s honorary all-night dance parties.

Cecilia slept in the utilities closet at First Ave one night during those dance parties. Recently, months after she told me this, it hit me that maybe I should actually listen to the Purple One.  If people were dedicating that much time to him and sleeping in cramped spaces just to cover how people mourned him, why wasn’t I doing the same thing?

Months later, here I am. I took a plunge into Prince’s music for a week and am more aware of his impact beyond Minnesota, more aware of just how versatile his sound was. From early albums like the self-titled, disco-y “Prince” to the 45 minute long, one-track album “Lovesexy” there’s truly something for every mood and for every person.

I’d like to think that by finally listening to his music I’m coming full circle. In a way, I’m now able to mourn him as more than just a Minnesotan music legend. Some of his discography is hit-or-miss (“Around the World in a Day”) and some of it’s plain genius (“Purple Rain” and “1999”), but still, who knew that after a week straight of Prince I still wouldn’t be done yet? I’m ready for more. Open those vaults at Paisley Park, please!

The post Prince for a week: two Emerald writers take the purple plunge appeared first on Emerald Media.

“Key & Peele” was one of the most widely successful and acclaimed sketch comedy series in recent memory. Written largely by Jordan Peele and performed by Peele and his cohort Keegan-Michael Key, the show was celebrated for tackling issues of inequality and race relations while still generating enough laughs to reach the White House. Everything from sports to “Power Rangers” to slavery was fair game during the show’s five seasons on air.

But while the series was certainly daring, the announcement that Peele would make his directorial debut in the horror genre with “Get Out” was met with understandable skepticism. “From comedy to jump scares” doesn’t exactly sound like a natural transition. Peele has showcased some chops as a sketch writer, but his ability to craft a 90-minute film remained to be seen.

Luckily, the results are entertaining, scary and hilarious. “Get Out” is a smart, capable horror-comedy that offers fascinating and introspective commentary on race and post-racism while still offering decent, though somewhat middling, scares. Peele puts forward a fine first effort — one that presents uncomfortable observations on the subtle inequalities that people of color face day-to-day.

The plot follows Chris (English actor Daniel Kaluuya), a Black, 20-something student dating Rose (Allison Williams), who is white. Their relationship recently hit the four-month mark, and Rose has decided to take Chris to visit her parents. Chris is open to the idea, but wary. Rose has not told either of her parents that her boyfriend is Black. She laughs off Chris’s concern. “They would have voted for Obama for a third term,” she explains. “They’re not racist.”

Never mind that their house is cared for by two Black servants who seem oddly at ease with their positions. Or that Rose’s father Dean (Bradley Whitford) pointedly brings up the fact that his father raced against Jesse Owens. Or that Rose’s mother Missy (Catherine Keener) casually hypnotizes Chris in the dead of the night “to help him quit smoking.” Later, when a large crowd of wealthy white visitors attend an annual party at the property, Chris constantly feels under surveillance. Is he being… watched?

Peele holds off answering any questions until the final act, at which point the film’s more satirical elements begin to overpower its scariness. In the meantime, he keeps us marvelously entertained. “Get Out” is a solid thriller, but its biggest surprises lie in its laughs. The script includes genuine hilarity between overbearing tension, thanks in part to a side-splitting performance from Lil Rel Howery as Chris’ concerned friend. The combination succeeds in consistently keeping the audience from ever feeling too comfortable.

The main problem with the film is how few sequences or moments are actually frightening. Outside of a small number of jump scares and the film’s general creepiness, there’s not much that will make viewers jump out of their seats. Peele’s mistakes behind the camera, which mostly result from his lack of directorial experience, are to blame. It’s tough to surprise your audience when too many scenes are slowed to a crawl, seemingly to generate some extended tension. Other small issues like a mis-framed close-up become bigger problems when repeated continuously.

Still, “Get Out” deserves praise for its content. One of Peele’s main arguments seems to be that Chris being Black is impossible to ignore for a white family like Rose’s. That’s not a subject that horror films typically dare to address. Peele has crafted a film from a perspective too often ignored in cinema. And with recent events bringing race to the forefront of American politics, we need that perspective more than ever. This film is about race because it simply has to be.

Watch the trailer for “Get Out” below: 

The post Review: Jordan Peele’s ‘Get Out’ combines racial commentary with predictable horror appeared first on Emerald Media.

On Saturday, Feb. 18, the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry in Portland, Oregon, opened “The Art of the Brick,” a LEGO-themed special exhibit created by artist Nathan Sawaya. The exhibit, which features a variety of complex sculptures and art pieces made of thousands of LEGO bricks, intends to take the medium “from child’s toy to sophisticated art form and beyond,” according to the OMSI website.

Jennifer Powers, featured exhibit assistant manager at OMSI, hopes the popularity of LEGO and Sawaya’s impressive installations will attract a broad audience. Some of the sculptures are made of more than 20,000 individual bricks and vary wildly in visual style. “Yellow,” which greets visitors at the front of the exhibit, features a LEGO-ized man tearing a hole in his chest to reveal an empty interior. Other pieces include recreations of popular paintings like the “Mona Lisa.”

“It’s just awe-inspiring,” Powers said in an interview. “[The exhibit] is such an amazing combination of art and science.”

“Yellow” by Nathan Sawaya (Courtesy of OMSI)

“The Art of the Brick” emerged out of Sawaya’s need for a creative outlet while working as a corporate lawyer in New York. “Most nights I would find myself snapping bricks together even before I ate dinner,” Sawaya said in an email to the Emerald. “It felt good after a long day of negotiating contracts to build something with my hands.”

Once Sawaya began posting photos of his work online, it didn’t take long for the self-taught artist to gain a significant following. 

“I realized it was time to leave the law firm and pursue my passion,” Sawaya said. “I quit my job as a lawyer, opened an art studio and took the leap of faith.” 

That leap of faith has paid off. Since building his first creations as early as 2002, Sawaya has found enormous success. “The Art of the Brick” has toured in museums around the globe, from the Songshan Cultural and Creative Park in Taipei, Taiwan to the John F. Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. Sawaya also founded The Art Revolution Foundation, an organization dedicated to supporting arts education.

(Courtesy of OMSI)

The combination of art and science at the heart of “The Art of the Brick” reflects the museum’s mission to “ignite an education transformation at the intersection of science, technology and design,” according to OMSI’s official website. 

In order to take advantage of the predicted popular interest, OMSI will host a variety of activities and labs designed around education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) within the exhibit. The activities and challenges are intended for all ages and celebrate the versatility that LEGO bricks give to audiences. In one lab, visitors are tasked with building a boat out of bricks that can float on water.

In addition, OMSI will offer a variety of classes for all ages that feature LEGOs in the summer of 2017. According to Brian Berry, director of classes and traveling programs at OMSI, a total of 15 classes will be added to the museum’s already substantial science curriculum.

For Sawaya, the ideas inherent in the exhibit make it a great fit for the museum. “Inspiration comes from all sorts of places,” he said. “It all starts with an idea. And finding that idea can be the most difficult part.”

“The Art of the Brick” will remain at OMSI through May 29. Tickets start at $19.75 for adults and $13.50 for children 13 or younger and can be purchased at OMSI’s website.

Lego artist Nathan Sawaya at work in his office. (Courtesy of OMSI)

Follow Dana on Twitter: @alstondalston

The post OMSI showcases both art and science with new LEGO-based exhibit appeared first on Emerald Media.

When John Wick was released in 2014, it was a welcome surprise. In a cinematic era dominated by over-cut, poorly conceived blockbusters, Wick delivered slick, beautifully choreographed action sequences that took critics and the independent film world by storm. Keanu Reeves starred as the titular retired hitman, a welcome return for an actor whose past decade of work has been thoroughly middling. With Reeves’ stuntman Chad Stahelski co-directing, John Wick grossed over $85 million on a $20 million budget and welcomed quality back to the genre. Providing just enough story to justify ridiculous fight scenes proved to be a winning formula.

Stahelski takes sole directing credit in Chapter 2, and the budget has been doubled. But the core qualities of the first film remain intact. Like most sequels, the difference lies in the scale. Whereas the first chapter felt distinctly small and seemed content with existing on its own terms, Chapter 2 is bigger in every sense of the word. Wick travels around the globe, demolishes an absurd number of vehicles and venues and threatens the world’s supply of ammunition — all while dressed in a series of tight-fitting suits.

Reeves is the perfect leading man for this sort of picture. He spends a majority of the film bruised and speaks in robotic tones one line at a time, but like all great action heroes, he shows rather than tells. The 52-year-old actor has a long history of performing his own stunts, and he reportedly prepared for the role by training in judo, jiu-jitsu and marksmanship. The onscreen result is a protagonist who looks, sounds and acts like he is completely invincible. Reeves has never been more badass. 

The plot expands on the original film’s backstory, but really only acts as an excuse to put Wick in the middle of highly stylized set pieces. After taking revenge on a mobster who stole his car in a heart-pounding opening sequence, the hitman returns home to find the villainous Santino D’Antonio (Riccardo Scamarcio) demanding Wick’s services.

D’Antonio’s sister (Claudia Gerini) holds a seat at the High Table, the governing body of an international league of assassins. In order for Santino to gain power, Claudia needs to be assassinated. When Wick refuses, D’Antonio promptly destroys Wick’s house and forces him into action.

What follows is a two-hour adrenaline fest as Wick kicks, shoots and stabs his way through a ludicrous number of henchmen. This may sound like a brainless series of cliches, but what makes John Wick: Chapter 2 remarkable are the environments in which the fights occur. One notable sequence involving mirrors and an art exhibit is particularly mind-bending, and a showcase for Stahelski’s skill behind the camera. 

But the world that Stahelski and screenwriter Derek Kolstad build around Wick and his adversaries is the true star. Wick regularly employs the services of outwardly normal people (a homeless man, a seamstress, a sommelier) who are all aligned with the criminal underworld. Stahelski slowly reveals this wide-reaching league of assassins with a tongue planted firmly in his cheek. What would normally appear ridiculous is portrayed as absolutely normal to the characters. The result is a vaguely surreal universe, populated by a stunningly original gallery of allies and enemies, at which it is easy to both laugh and marvel. 

Plenty of complaints can be leveled against this film. The plot is thin, the characters are parodies, and the entire ordeal acts more or less as a trailer for the inevitable third film, but when a movie accomplishes what it sets out to do with such style and heart-pounding skill, it’s easy to ignore the flaws and just have fun. John Wick: Chapter 2 is one of those movies. It’s dark, ferocious, and the most perfect action film in years. 

The post Review: ‘John Wick: Chapter 2’ doubles down on over-the-top action appeared first on Emerald Media.

“Black. All important movies begin with a black screen.”

This line, grumbled by Batman (Will Arnett, doing his best Christian Bale impression) over an appropriately black frame, encapsulates The LEGO Batman Movie: jokes regularly smash through the fourth wall between moments of madcap, overly-caffeinated silliness. Coupled with absolutely gorgeous animation and a genuinely sweet story, the referential humor is a welcome breath of fresh air for an animated film that will leave both children and adults in stitches. 

The plot follows the titular Caped Crusader as he struggles to face his fear of family. Years of self-imposed solitude have left Bruce Wayne feeling lonely, and his loyal butler Alfred (Ralph Fiennes) has started to notice. Through a hilarious series of mishaps, Wayne finds himself the foster father of Dick Grayson, a.k.a. Robin (a perfectly cast Michael Cera) who quickly becomes an annoyance to the vain billionaire playboy. Other members of the Justice League, including the muscle-brained Superman (Channing Tatum), avoid any interaction with the Bat and instead throw superhero parties without him.

Meanwhile, The Joker (Zach Galifianakis) is hurt by Batman’s indifference to their relationship. “You don’t mean anything to me,” Batman growls in the opening sequence. “Nobody does.” This sends Joker into a deep depression. What is his purpose if not to be Batman’s eternal foil?

To prove his evilness, the Clown Prince of Crime travels to an intergalactic prison filled with the baddest bad guys of all time — Voldemort, Sauron and the shark from Jaws are all present — and unleashes them onto the world. In order to defeat them all, Batman will need to trust the friends and family around him. For once, he can’t do it all alone.

Past Batman films have focused on the hero’s internal strife (Batman Begins) and near-mythical relationship with The Joker (The Dark Knight), but none of them have featured such an energetic sense of humor. The dialogue moves at a breakneck pace, delivering laugh after laugh that continues the level of craziness set by the original LEGO Movie. That film succeeded primarily thanks to its visual extravagance and boundless energy.

This time, the plot is based less on the novelty of the toys themselves. Instead, the characters take center stage, and first-time director Christopher McKay strikes a delicate balance between emotional material and purely comedic beats. The chemistry between Arnett, Cera, Fiennes and Rosario Dawson (as newly appointed police commissioner Barbara Gordon) generates a rat-a-tat rhythm to the film that doesn’t let up.

But it’s remarkable that The LEGO Batman Movie’s best quality is its writing, given that the screenplay went through six different writers before making it onscreen. Oddly enough, this may have unexpectedly helped the film maintain its scattershot comedic tone. The numerous gags, one-liners and ridiculous set pieces recall the great fast-break comedies like Airplane! or The Naked Gun.

What sets LEGO Batman apart from standard comedy and animation fare is its commitment to its theme and moral. By sticking to a positive, family-friendly message while deftly including enough references and jokes to entertain an adult audience, The LEGO Batman Movie (and its creators) have delivered a must-see film that will leave kids and their parents in stitches. 

Watch the trailer for The LEGO Batman Movie here:

The post Review: ‘The LEGO Batman Movie’ delivers laughs that both kids and adults will love appeared first on Emerald Media.

The Good Place, a new series from Parks and Recreation creator Michael Schur, is full of dialogue concerning morality and ethics. It makes sense, given the show’s concept. Eleanor Shellstrop (Kristen Bell) was an Arizonan saleswoman who cared only for herself — at least, that was true when she was alive. In the pilot’s opening scene, she finds herself in the afterlife, a new resident of heaven. The “Good Place,” as explained by resident angel Michael (Ted Danson), chooses its inhabitants via a point system– every person’s actions on Earth are assigned a positive or negative value, and only the “best” people (or those with a high enough score at their deaths) avoid the “Bad Place.”

The flaws in the system are evident from the start, especially once it’s revealed that Bell’s Eleanor doesn’t belong in the Good Place at all. Through some sort of heavenly clerical error, she has been confused with a different, much more deserving Eleanor Shellstrop. When she confides this to her assigned “soulmate” Chidi (an ethics professor played by William Jackson Harper), he decides to teach her how to be good. Maybe Eleanor can earn her place in heaven while still in heaven itself.

This is all very philosophical stuff. On the surface, it sounds like it belongs on a bastion for “quality television” like HBO or Netflix. What makes The Good Place remarkable is the way it has found an audience on NBC, in a network era dominated by middling fare like The Big Bang Theory. The concept of a serialized show about morality succeeding on a network that usually shuns complex entertainment is unexpected, to say the least.

In recent years, cable and subscription-based streaming became the destination for “high-end” entertainment. Kevin Spacey, star of Netflix’s hit series House of Cards, accused network executives in 2013 of “second guessing” audiences and not taking risks. Some of his criticism is rooted in the critical success of cable television, with Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones dominating most critic’s “best-of” lists. It makes sense. AMC and HBO aren’t beholden to advertisers as much as NBC, ABC or CBS, which allows for less constricted storytelling.

The Good Place is an enigma, presenting moral challenges and dynamic characters on a platform usually reserved for inoffensive programming. Eleanor and Chidi constantly argue about what it means to be good. Eleanor points out the personality flaws in her heavenly neighbors, questioning whether it’s alright to be vain or smug in a place intended for the least sinful people humanity has to offer. And flashbacks to different character’s earthly lives reveal depths to each of their personalities. Chidi tried his best to be perfect, but overthought each decision in his life to the point of alienating his friends and family. Eleanor is a hurricane of poor decision-making, which makes for hilarious (but immoral) entertainment.

Whether The Good Place opens the floodgate for “riskier” programming remains to be seen. But there is already a bit of a precedent. Schur reportedly consulted the showrunner of Lost (also a huge risk for a network at the time) for story guidance. And with NBC renewing The Good Place following a critically acclaimed season finale (warning: spoilers abound), perhaps network shows can become groundbreaking once again.

For an in-depth discussion of television from the Daily Emerald, check out this podcast:

The post Have complex narratives returned to network TV with ‘The Good Place’? appeared first on Emerald Media.

In Mike Mills’ 20th Century Women, doubt casts a long shadow. Each of the four main characters struggle to overcome insecurities over the film’s two hours. What is remarkable about Mills’ writing and directing is its ability to connect these inner demons to a time and place.

The 15-year-old Jamie (Lucas Jade Zumann) struggles to feel comfortable in his own skin, stuck in adolescence. His mother, Dorthea (a superb Annette Bening), has been divorced and alone since Jamie’s youth and filters her unfulfilled desires through countless cigarettes. Julie (Elle Fanning) rebels against her suffocating home life with sex and weed, but only finds comfort in Jamie’s friendship. And Abbie (Greta Gerwig) uses punk rock and her love of photography to support her fight against cervical cancer. Around them all, 1979 (and the progressive tendencies of the era) drifts through Santa Barbara like a haze.

Dorthea gave birth to Jamie when she was 40. “People told my mom she was too young to have me,” he says. Now 55, she begins to feel the same way. She doesn’t keep up with him enough anymore, a reality that rears its ugly head when Jamie is hospitalized for hyperventilating too fast and nearly suffering brain damage. All the other kids were doing it. “So you just went along with them?” she asks. He shrugs and sneaks back to his room.

And so Dorthea enlists the help of both Julie and Abbie to help raise him. As far as she’s concerned, you don’t need a man to raise a man. “I think you’re what’s going to work for him,” Dorthea tells them.

From this point, the film moves along episodically. Mills regularly interrupts scenes with large headings, superimposed on screen like chapter titles. The structure constantly threatens to derail the film’s rhythm. But writer-director Mills’ is deft at juggling the story’s humor and drama. Moments draw consistent laughs and occasional tears. Julie confides secrets in Jamie and shows him how to hold and strut with a cigarette “like a guy,” while Abbie shows him how to flirt, rages with him at a punk show and gifts him a heavy tome of feminist literature. In one of the film’s most hilarious moments, both women interrupt a crowded dinner to talk about menstruation. “It’s just a word, Jamie,” Abbie insists. Dorthea covers her ears.

Unsurprisingly, the film’s most interesting themes emerge from Jamie’s relationship with his mother. Dorthea’s insecurities become impossible to ignore as the film progresses. She feels detached from what is popular, unfamiliar with the isolation that comes from her son getting older. Bening’s performance in Dorthea’s quieter moments (sitting alone on her bed, pausing to gather her words) is unbelievable, and a showcase for one of Hollywood’s finest actresses. Zumann, Fanning and Gerwig form an excellent supporting cast, with help from Billy Crudup as William, a free-spirited contractor living with them. 

If 20th Century Women has a weakness, it lies in Mills’ adherence to a semi-autobiographical narrative. Mills, who grew up in Berkeley and describes the film as a “love letter” to the women who raised him, doesn’t fully explore the depth of the mother-son relationship at the heart of the story. As a result, the film includes a wrap-up that describes the character’s ultimate fates and then just ends. Despite a few touching moments surrounding an emotional climax, the film feels constricted by Mills’ refusal to look beyond his immediate experiences. 

But 20th Century Women is so touching, hilarious and tender in its spirit that it’s easy to forgive its flaws. Rarely has a coming-of-age film felt so progressive and genuine. “Mom, I’m not all men,” Jamie states. “I’m just me.” Dorthea smiles knowingly. “Well, yes and no.”

Watch the trailer for 20th Century Women here:

The post Review: ‘20th Century Women’ balances heartfelt honesty with genuine laughs appeared first on Emerald Media.

Snowboarding has always had a place in the digital world. Beginning as early as 1990 with Heavy Shreddin’ and popularized with the SSX series in the 2000s, the genre entertained audiences mountain after mountain. For the most part, none of these games (even the thoroughly average Shawn White Snowboarding) lost the thrill of careening down a run at breakneck speeds. Even after two decades, maneuvering a skier or snowboarder with a controller and exploring a snowy wilderness from the comfort of the indoors is still fun.

Perhaps because of the genre’s general lack of newness, Ubisoft, a publisher best known for the Assassin’s Creed franchise, made Steep a vehicle for innovation. Developer Ubisoft Annecy named the game a “passion project” for the studio, designed to be accessible to fans of both skiing and snowboarding while still carrying enough depth and features to appeal to hardcore gamers. The passion shows. Steep is a vast open-world game that takes place on a gigantic mountain range, and the level of detail worked into every square foot of the landscape is impressive from the get-go. 

The game revolves around four major extreme sports (skiing, snowboarding, wingsuit flying and paragliding), all of which the player can freely switch between at any time. After a lengthy opening cinematic that features the unnamed protagonist hiking up a mountain and a short tutorial sequence, players are free to tackle challenges around the map. Freestyle courses and complex flight paths are available in any order the player chooses. Venturing off the beaten path allows players to discover new mountaintops and starting points using a pair of binoculars. As players complete runs and discovers new paths, they earn experience and level up. Each level grants the player access to more difficult and hard-to-find areas.

All of this should be familiar to anyone who’s played a snowboarding game. But Steep stands apart thanks to the sheer size of the world and a series of innovative online features. As mentioned before, players are free to explore the mountain at their will. The degree of exploration the game offers simultaneously allows for fast-paced runs and slower treks through a wintery wonderland.

Discovering new environments, like forests with snow-topped trees and empty villages, is a meditative experience and unique in a genre normally built upon thrills. Disruptions only appear when navigating the most treacherous passes, where it becomes easy to get stuck on objects in the environment.

Ubisoft took great care factoring online play into the game. Players can carve out new runs and save their paths down an unexplored mountain for other players to follow. Steep also includes a “collide” feature, allowing skiers and snowboarders to cross paths with one another at random.

Finally, the game features a trick system. While it’s fun to use, it lacks any sort of depth. The maneuvers are exciting to pull off, but mastering a difficult flip or grab takes less than five minutes.

Unfortunately, the shallowness of the trick system reflects back onto the rest of the game. The flaws are traceable back to the game’s core design. The scale on display is impressive, and the task Ubisoft Annecy laid out for itself is certainly ambitious. But Steep falls into a trap that seems unavoidable for many open-world games. The list of possible activities on a given mountain is inherently limited. 

Make no mistake: Steep was created for extreme sports lovers, and it caters to that audience exceedingly well. But because it reveals its complete bag of tricks so early, there are virtually no surprises in store after about an hour of play. Nevertheless, it accomplishes its goals with enough pizazz to make it a must-have for fans of the genre.

The post Review: ‘Steep’ brings ambition and an open world to mountain sports gaming appeared first on Emerald Media.

The Academy Award nominations were announced on Tuesday morning, narrowing down the list of potential winners for the season’s most-watched award show. 

This year, the Academy distanced itself from the #OscarsSoWhite controversy and nominated a diverse list of creators and actors in the film industry. In fact, with nominations for Denzel Washington, Viola Davis (both co-star in Fences), Naomie Harris (Moonlight) and others, the Academy nominated six black actors, the largest number in history. The shift in diversity reflects changes made last year following an all-white ballot of acting nominations.

Damien Chazelle’s La La Land led the pack with a record-tying 14 nominations, while Manchester by the Sea earned six. As usual, there were plenty of snubs and some especially surprising picks. Here are a few:

Surprises:

Hidden Figures

Hidden Figures capped off few weeks at the top of the box-office with three Oscar nominations, a surprise given its relatively late Christmas Day release. The nods for best picture, best adapted screenplay and best supporting actress (for Octavia Spencer) cemented its position as a serious contender. It is also the first time a streaming service (Amazon) has been nominated.

Hacksaw Ridge

Mel Gibson’s semi-religious war film follows the real-life pacifist Desmond Doss during World War II’s Pacific Campaign. It earned a surprising six nominations, including best picture, best director, and best actor (for Andrew Garfield). The nominations come as a surprise given the film’s somewhat lukewarm reception and the past controversies surrounding Gibson himself. The actor, writer and director spent ten years blacklisted and shunned from Hollywood following the leaked recording of a drunken tirade.

Meryl Streep

The heavily lauded actress was nominated for the 20th time for Florence Foster Jenkins, a well-received dramedy that nonetheless fell under the award show radar prior to the Golden Globes in January. That ceremony saw Streep delivering a stirring speech against President Donald Trump, a move that, given the Academy’s penchant for playing politics, may have cemented the nomination this morning.

Snubs:

Aaron Taylor-Johnson

Tom Ford’s Nocturnal Animals was critically acclaimed upon release, in no small part thanks to Taylor-Johnson’s electrifying performance. The actor earned a Golden Globe a few weeks ago, leading many to believe he had secured an Academy Award nomination. Instead, co-star Michael Shannon took Taylor-Johnson’s place on the ballot in a head-scratching omission.

Amy Adams

Amy Adams has already proven to be an Oscar favorite. She has been nominated five times, but has yet to win the award. Her incredible role in Denis Villenuve’s Arrival appeared to be an inevitable lock — until she was completely left off of the Oscar ballot. The move is unexpected, but may signal a shift in the Academy’s usually predictable tastes surrounding actors.

Silence

Martin Scorsese, already a living legend in the film world, finally completed his passion project, a violent yet contemplative period piece set in 17th century Japan. The filmmaker has found awards success before, particularly for The Departed, which won him his first best director Oscar. Yet the director (and his film) earned only one nomination, for best cinematography. Silence’s grim material, as well as its slow-paced, cerebral approach to internal conflict, may have played against its chances with Academy members, who tend to favor uplifting stories.

The post Oscar nominations: snubs and surprises appeared first on Emerald Media.

Silence, an adaptation of Shusaku Endo’s controversial 1966 novel of the same name, deals directly with the contradictions of devout religious belief. The story follows a pair of Portuguese Jesuit missionaries, Sebastiao Rodrigues (Andrew Garfield) and Francisco Garrupe (Adam Driver) who travel to Japan in the 17th century. They have heard their mentor and fellow Jesuit, Fr. Ferreira (Liam Neeson) has renounced his faith publicly amid violent persecution and torture.

This cannot be, they decide. Ferreira, widely revered for his devotion to God, must have found the strength to resist. They believe it is their duty to find him and spread the gospel, in a country whose government views Christianity as a direct threat to their culture. They stow away on a trade ship and sneak into Japan, emboldened by their faith but unaware of the misery that awaits them.

What follows is a contemplative, brutal journey, fraught with troubling questions. It is a perfect fit for Martin Scorsese, a director whose greatest films focus on the morality of sinners. Raging Bull, long considered his masterpiece, followed boxer Jake LaMotta, who subjected himself to horrific violence in the ring as a method of punishment for his regrets. The Wolf of Wall Street, Scorsese’s most recent film, put the depravity of Wall Street mogul Jordan Belfort on display and wondered whether his evilness was in all of us.

On the surface, it seems odd that Scorsese would choose Silence to follow a black comedy like Wolf. But the filmmaker has been trying to adapt Endo’s novel for more than two decades, finally committing to its completion in 2013. He would not make another film, he declared, until Silence was finished. 

His devotion to the project is evident in the care with which it is shot. Cinematographer Rodrigo Prieto delivers consistently breathtaking moments over the film’s three hours; it is the most visually arresting film of Scorsese’s career.

The performances, while impressive for the actors’ commitment (Garfield immersed himself in a series of “spiritual direction” exercises for weeks, and Driver lost almost fifty pounds), exist at the service of the film. Garfield is asked to carry most of the dramatic weight, an exceedingly difficult task considering Rodrigues’ conflict in the novel is largely internal. Garfield is aided by a healthy amount of narration, usually delivered in quiet, steady tones. The result is a performance that feels more a part of the narrative than a major achievement for the actor.

Silence’s strength comes from the difficult challenges it presents to both Rodrigues and Garrupe regarding their willingness for martyrdom. Tortured and imprisoned for weeks while Japanese Christians die around them, both missionaries are asked to trample a fumi-e, a crude likeness of Jesus, and renounce their faith. Doing so will free the others from suffering.

Is it immoral to choose death over apostasy? Is Rodrigues truly protecting his faith, or his pride? And most vitally, is an act that is considered sinful, but committed for the greater good, ultimately forgivable in the eyes of God? 

A subtler film would have left these questions unanswered. Silence leaves little to the imagination, thanks mostly to a clunky and forceful epilogue. In the final twenty minutes, the film loses restraint and begins making judgments for the audience. It is an uncomfortably forceful note upon which to end. 

But there is great power in this story, even to the non-religious. Scorsese delivers the film with such artful mastery that its emotional pull is difficult to ignore. The filmmaker has completed his 23-year-old journey and given the world the movie he has always wanted to make. That in itself is a miracle. 

The post Review: Martin Scorsese brings his passion project to life with the profound and deeply religious ‘Silence’ appeared first on Emerald Media.