drakula2005

It probably goes without saying, but in my opinion "Still Alice" is right up there among this year's best pictures.

And what ultimately makes author Lisa Genova's debut bestselling novel so personal, yet so universal and identifiable in it's messages, are the performances. Alec Baldwin and Kristen Stewart are a part of a strong supporting cast, that will leave a lasting impression in your mind and it will be more than deserved. Both of their characters were so real - warm, supportive and earthly. And while both Baldwin and Stewart have taken the occasional misstep in their respective pasts, both of them once again showed without a doubt their acting abilities and scope, a word linguistics professor Dr. Alice Howland used, albeit with great difficulties, to describe her daughter Lydia (played by Stewart) in one point of the film.

And what a performance by Julianne Moore that was! She essentially made an already rich character in Alice, a frankly too young Alzheimer's disease patient, who also happens to be a renown linguistics professor, even more dimensional and rich. Moore's Alice is a strong, intelligent woman when we first meet her at her birthday at the beginning of the film. At that moment, Moore is confident and full of purpose. As she gets diagnosed with a rare form of Alzheimer's disease, that her children might have inherited from her, and time goes by, Alice becomes a shadow of herself, whose mental health deteriorates at an alarmingly fast rate. And that is the part that Moore portrayed with such skill and graceful pain, that the viewer can't help but get irreversibly emotionally involved with her character. We feel for her, we cry with her, we wish she would get better, although it is clear that is sadly not going to happen. And Moore's Alice knows it as well. And that makes the journey through her story even more challenging, difficult and painful for the viewer. Or as Beverly Beckham of The Boston Globe put it "This is Alice Howland's story, for as long as she can tell it".

The film was directed and adapted by Richard Glatzer and Wash Westmoreland, who share both the writing and directing duties on almost all of their projects to date. The two somehow complete each other and find the balance, that is needed to tell such a delicate story in a manner, which can do it proper justice.

I will probably be the only one saying this, but I thought the score was tremendous as well. Kudos goes to composer Ilan Eshkeri, who did an amazing job on the film. The music is often intense and minimalistic, it feels like it is just an addition to the already rich environment the characters find themselves in and I would love to see at least a nomination at the Oscars for Eshkeri, although I highly doubt it.

So, to wrap it up in a nutshell: Still Alice is a wonderful film, an intimate and fascinating study in the field of family drama, and one of the year's best. I definitely hope to see some awards buzz mainly around the cast - both Alec Baldwin and Kristen Stewart deserve it for their delicate and supportive portrayal of husband John and youngest daughter Lydia, respectively, who never gave up on Moore's Alice. And Julianne Moore - well, what can I say - her brutally sad and honest portrayal of Alice deserves to go down in the books of top-notch acting and she will reap the fruits of her work a long time from now (well, mostly, at the end of February, I hope).

So it is a nine out of ten stars from me, only because I felt there could have been more screen time for the other children in the Howland family, and therefore the film could have been at least 10-15 minutes longer.

But solely on Julianne Moore, Alec Baldwin and Kristen Stewart's impeccable acting, I say this film is among the very best in the subject and also among the best titles this year.

My grade: 9/10

After seeing Damien Chazelle's Whiplash - a film the young up-and- coming director wished to do for some time now - being so beautifully realized and brought to life by everyone involved in the project, I was glad and relieved, mainly because I have seen the short film, which was pretty incredible.

I believe that among the most telling facts about a film's fortunes and qualities, is the ability to broaden it's public, but in the same time not forgetting that cinema is not all about commercial success and mass audiences.Or with other words - a film that is not just eye candy and booms and explosions, but also craft, soul, dedication and wits.

Those are some of the things not only the film itself possesses, but the people behind it have in abundance as well.

The upcoming Miles Teller plays the young and dedicated student Andrew Nieman, who has the drive, the ambition to succeed and to be great, which is fine, as long as it doesn't derail your personal life.A lesson the young drummer learns the hard way.

Blind ambition is the thing, that can describe our anti-hero of sorts, Terrence Fletcher a.k.a the brilliant J.K. Simmons, who has a thing for mindeffin' his students to the point of total physical and mental exhaustion and even depression.But he does it for a reason, for the sole purpose of finding the next big, even great, thing in jazz and in music as a whole.The next prodigy, the next "Yardbird" Charlie Parker that will be otherwise lost, if not being pushed to the very limit.

And boy, does J.K. Simmons nails it.Chazelle has done a masterful job in casting the two leads in Teller and Simmons.Their respective acts are full of purpose, full of tension and ultimately terrific.

Expect some awards going in the way of "Whiplash" and look out for Simmons in the Oscars shortlist, that's how good he is in it.And in his own words: "What a shame we wrapped it up in only 19 days".It must have been really fun playing a part like Terrence Fletcher and Simmons completely sold it.

As I said, the best movies are those, that reach out to the most diverse and wide spectrum of audiences, not those, who can connect to a massive number of people, who are representatives of only one specific audience type.And Chazelle has achieved just that with "Whiplash" - a precise, tension-building film, full of beautifully staged pieces and above all else, a love towards music and the challenges it often represents if you want to get to the very top.

The film ended in a big round of applause from the packed theater and I am sure that will be the case a long time from now!

My grade: 9/10

As a non Star Trek fan, i might say i found the film staying as far as possible from that universe, without spoiling all the joy to the followers.J.J. Abrams has a way of doing this and i'm sure he'll do it again with Star Wars, although it is a little strange for one person to be doing probably the most iconic sci-fi movies for two of the most devoted fractions of fan groups, despite the fact they don't like each other-the hardcore fans especially-not one bit.

So, on with the film-i must confess i found the first film to be nothing special.Yes, some special effects thrown into it were indeed, spectacular, but the story itself was quite linear and straightforward.No intensity, no tension, only technicalities and quite the strange unit to be honest.It definitely had more for the fans, since it was basically an origins story, and that bugged me as well, because all i wanted was action, clever twists, some wit in the mix, and last, but not least-a great villain (which, albeit an A-lister, Eric Bana sadly isn't).

But for god's sake-Benedict Cumberbatch is!

The story was quite interesting, more than the first time for sure, some clever writing was involved and finally we get to see Kirk (Pine) and Spock (Quinto) actually act, you know-with real emotions and tears in their eyes.This time the action was more and even more impressive, some of the scenes were real space opera, a poetry of Kubrickan proportions.The tie-ins, as one friend, who's quite the Trekkie said, were quite a few, but this time around more delicately added and that also put a smile on my face.I recommend it to everyone and anyone who loves a good space adventure, even if he/she is not a fan of the series-because of that sole reason alone.

Now, the script is more elaborate, more twists are involved and, ahem, John Harrison (Cumberbatch) is probably the best written villain of recent memory.Worthy of a mention are his scene-stealing appearances on the Enterprise as he was locked on the ship.Sherlock just makes acting look a child's play.

The film itself is darker as promised, and i will see it again, because so much is happening at once, because it has it's flaws (everyone are superhuman, for instance, jumping back and forth through outer space looks like i can do it tied-handed and blindfolded).But it's moral dilemmas are overwhelming, and some moments are, in that respect, quite unforgettable and special.And for a film who wants to achieve much, greatness even, i believe this is the most important part indeed.It is a)-special, b)- harder to forget and c)just look at Cumberbatch, seriously, look at him.They say good actors are those, who can stay stone cold in one scene, and weep in the next-but he does both things.At once.In a single shot.And also i cannot say i remember anything from Kirk and Spock's first outing back in 2009.Only the technicalities on their ship pre-flight, the multinational flight squad, Anton Yelchin speaking weird (he does it again, but not as irritating) and some scene with a giant fire ray coming over from a planet (which i think , no disrespect, was destroyed- it even might've been Spock's planet, but it made no difference whatsoever, because i was not feeling it, because they were not feeling it).That's all can remember.

But now they do, it all looks better emotional-wise and i'm grateful to all of the cast for that.

Because of that, this time around, i won't be having the trouble remembering at all!

An almost great, independent (from the old-school Star Trek universe) and original film.

My rate 8.2/10