A strong frontrunner for the worst film of 2017.

I saw this on the Greatest Actress Ever (ahem)'s Instagram:

A sci-fi featuring Dane DeYawn (so called because of those prominent bags under his eyes and his yawn-inducing acting performances) and Upstart Delevingne, to me, just screams Razzie. I can't think of a more sexless couple than DeHaan and Delevingne (other than Dane DeHaan and Felicia Vikander, or Cara Delevingne and Joel Kinnaman).

I can't wait to hate-watch it and tear it to pieces on my blog. 🎬

In the theme of throwing shade at films I've not yet seen, I believe The Big Short is about to have its title stripped as the Most Smug Film of All-Time:

The trailer for Ben Wheatley (director of my pick for the worst film of last year, High-Rise)'s insufferable-looking crime caper was the most wannabe Tarantino thing ever. Just a lot of shooting in a warehouse, Sharlto Copley being incomprehensible and lame banter between caricatures.

Hard pass.

Ben Wheatley and Amy Jump: the most inauspicious matrimony in film since Zack and Deborah Snyder (I went there).

From the BBFC's extended information for Raw. What's a woman's 'public hair', just wondering?

---

I write about pretty much anything on this blog. If you would like to advertise your product in a sponsored post, check out my policy on sponsored posts.

Two Guns (the Sequel).

The last time I waxed lyrical about Gary Cahill's insane biceps, Chelsea had beaten Manchester City at the Etihad. Well, this weekend, we beat Manchester City at the Etihad (ironically enough, the man with the golden guns scored an own-goal, but we'll just chalk that down to him kindly giving Agüero a masterclass in finishing), so it's time for another appreciatory post  for Gazatron's arms!

The best arms in football, bar none. Appreciate his commitment to constantly making them even bigger, too.

------

I shan't be watching Passengers. It stars a certain actress who's acting prowess I don't exactly hold in the highest regard,  and I don't like sci-fi much (Arrival was an exception to this rule). Plus I don't see the point in hate-watching a movie when I barely have time to view the many films I actually want to see.

However, whilst I'm still staunchly 'you'd have to drag me to the cinema to see this', I have to admit the BBFC have trolled me slightly, in that by using 'sexual activity' rather than 'sex' in the short insight, my interest is piqued as to what the 'sexual activity' is.

I've noticed an increase in the prevalence of this curio turn of phrase recently. It seems to be employed for situations rather than intercourse, e.g. describing the masturbation scene in The Survivalist. In Childhood of a Leader (a shining example of a film I'd love to see but sadly didn't because the Odeon didn't screen it), a film rated 12A for moderate sexual activity, the activity in question is a husband running his hand along his wife's leg in a horny manner.

Which is fair enough, it's good to be prescriptive and delineate the lines between a shag and sexual behaviour to the audience. But I'm intrigued as to why it's been used in Passengers' case, given that in interviews about this film, Lawrence has been bleating on and on about her sex scene with Chris Pratt, and even falsely claiming this love scene is her first. (I've seen Serena, Jennifer. You might like to pretend that film never happened, but I saw it).  She also had a sex scene with the late Anton Yelchin (RIP) in Like Crazy, so I don't know why she's pushing selling the fallacious narrative that this is her, quote, 'first sex scene'. To sell more tickets for the film, perhaps? 

So I would have thought Passengers would feature an out-and-out love scene. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they start having Cesc, then J-law's character starts reading her whiny essay about how underpaid she was for American Hustle instead and Pratt's character loses his wood.

Just speculating.

Learning French via film posters.

The French don't seem to be a fan of American movies' original titles. They've sexed up Mel Gibson's film, Hacksaw Ridge, starring Andrew Garfield in what should be part of an Andy Garfield one-two-punch, along with Silence also being released. 

Google translate tells me that the title here is French for You Will Not Kill. That definitely entices me more than the rather pedestrian American title. Still better than The Accountant, mind.

Your Misname.

Another one of these 'times the Irish rated a film lower than the BBFC did' posts (on average when the two awards bodies disagree, the IFCO tend to rate higher).

Your Name, which has a cracking trailer and almost universal acclaim from everyone who's seen it, is bizarrely getting a very limited release in the UK. I have my ticket to see it on the 24th November, but had to settle for a slightly out-of-my-way Odeon venue, as all the central London ones were all booked up. Hopefully it will be worth it tho; I bloody love me some Anime.

Needless to say, I read the BBFC long insight as preparation for the film. That's a bit of a gamble as the long insights are laden with spoilers, but there you go. It's rated 12A over here for 'moderate language, sex references', in a classic case of a BBFC misnomer. 

The plot revolves around a small town girl living in a lonely world and a city boy exchanging bodies, Freaky Friday-style. From the report, it sounds like the main reason the film's a 12A is because the boy, in discovering he's in the body of a woman, touches his boobs.

Bit harsh to rate a film a 12A for that, given that would be a pretty natural response! I also don't think lingering on a girls' chest counts as a 'moderate sex reference', either, so major inaccuracy in its short insight, there. 

Glad to see that the Irish saw sense, and gave the film the PG it (sounds like it) deserves. Note how they also accurately classed the focus on a girls' chest as 'suggestive scenes'. That is pretty much all it is, not a sex reference. No need to make it sound seedier than it is.

Why are the BBFC so affronted by a bit of cleavage???

----

I'm somewhat of a BBFC obsessive. All my other BBFC pieces are listed here.

Cooking Stuff that Looks Bad But Tastes Delicious #1: The Nemo.

I've been making the most of my mum being in China and having the kitchen to myself recently (I don't like cooking when surrounded by people, haha). 

My concoctions don't look too appetising, but as I bung in ingredients I like and ingredients I like only, I'm usually very pleased with the end product!

So in this haphazard invention, which I will call 'The Nemo' (because there's fish fingers in it), I put:
- 4 baby potatoes
- one red onion
- one tomato
- cheddar cheese
- oil
- 4 fish fingers

And after it was all cooked, I dipped the fish fingers in tomato ketchup.

Next time I cook it, I would increase the number of baby potatoes to about 6 or 7, as they reduce in size when fried due to it being on the pan for the longest period of time. But apart from that, I really liked The Nemo!

--

In other, completely unrelated-to-cooking news, I saw that Damien Chazelle's upcoming La La Land, hotly tipped to rack up multiple Oscar nominations, got a PG in Ireland despite getting a 12A over here.

I find this very interesting because I think it illustrates the Irish are a bit more flexible about single uses of the f-word depending on context, whereas for the BBFC (and the MPAA), it leads to an automatic 12A/PG-13.

A subtle point, but illustrates the nuances in different countries' attitudes towards swearing!

I wonder who hollers the solitary f-bomb in the movie, Emma or Ryan? (Or maybe, given his character's colourful language in Whiplash, J.K. Simmons gets that honour...)

Dual roles blogathon: Paul Dano in THERE WILL BE BLOOD (2007)

Slight spoilers for TWBB ahead, so, I would recommend you don’t read this piece if you haven’t seen the movie!

--

Paul Thomas Anderson's modern masterpiece, There Will Be Blood, is a fascinating tale of Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis)'s journey as an oil tycoon, and the strategic moves he make during his ascent to the top. His rise to power is both facilitated and impeded by two characters, both played by Paul Dano: twins Paul and Eli Sunday.

The decision to cast Dano as both the Sunday brothers (and ergo, making them twins) wasn't originally in director P.T. Anderson's plans. Kel O'Neill was initially pencilled in to play the mild-mannered brother Paul. But the actor was too intimidated by the director, and pulled out at the last minute, causing some creative problem-solving in the form of casting Dano as both the characters, and making them twins.

Dano's role as Paul Sunday consists of a brief appearance, but is crucial to the plot. At the start of the film, he seeks out Plainview to alert him about a lucrative area to drill for oil in. Dano plays Paul Sunday with a meek, child-like quality. It helps that Paul Dano has one of those ageless faces. He is 32 but could pass for a teenager, a helpful trait to have in the ageist world of Hollywood casting, but one Dano capitalises on only to embark on projects that fulfil him, rather than chase the next money train, which he could easily do.

(Incidentally, for the movie nerds out there, Dano playing a character called Paul in this film means that both Daniel Day-Lewis and Dano play characters with the same Christian names as themselves). #Symmetry

With Paul Sunday's tip, Daniel Plainview makes his way to Little Boston, California to scout out this piece of land. It requires buying acres from the Sunday family, where Eli Sunday, an ambitious preacher, drives a hard bargain for his father's land. He wants whatever Daniel’s offering, and $5,000 for Eli's church. 

Plainview takes an instant dislike to Eli Sunday and his sanctimonious ways, finding the way Eli constantly badgers him about his debt to the church infuriating. Eli's compelling sermons also draw workers away from working on Plainview's ranch and towards his church.

But the thing about Eli that Daniel Plainview loathes the most is that he can read Eli like a magazine, and he sees himself in him. Both men are con artists, who will do and say whatever the audience wants to hear to get what they want. They just go about it in different ways. Plainview sees Eli as a low-rent version of himself, and Eli knows that. Eli isn’t buying what Plainview is selling, and vice versa.

There Will Be Blood undoubtedly belongs to Daniel Day-Lewis, who won a well-deserved Best Actor Oscar for his mesmeric, unforgettable performance. It truly is a spectacular, charismatic piece of acting, and what impressed me most about it is that DDL, like other actors who I admire (Saoirse Ronan, Rooney Mara), does 95% of his emoting with his pupils.

But it his scenes with Dano which linger the memory the most, the way the men interact and play off each other, being spurred on by their mutual dislike, makes the power struggle between them in There Will Be Blood so gripping. The fact that the Dano was pretty much ignored come Awards Season 2008, with only BAFTA acknowledging his excellence in TWBB with a nomination, makes me sad.

The baptism scene, where Eli makes a spectacle of exorcising the past from Daniel, humiliating him, shouting at and even slapping at Plainview to exorcise the bad spirits from him. It's a hypnotic and darkly comic scene, and I definitely noticed a rise in Dano's character's spirits, like he was mirroring the mannerisms of the man he was preaching at. The way he goads Plainview about his Achilles Heel - his son - illustrated that, in that scene at least, Eli had the control over him, and he was going to make the most of it.

Because Dano plays both the Sunday brothers, some film-goers have wondered if they were supposed to be the same character pretending to be two people, particularly as you never see both of them on screen at the same time. But I read Paul and Eli Sunday as unambiguously, two different people. Eli's rant at his father about his 'stupid son Paul', as well as the final scene, where Daniel lauds over Eli how he paid Paul off and how is brother is a winner, and he, a loser, pretty much put that to bed.

Nonetheless, having the same actor play two different roles does have an inherent element of confusion and trickery. The kind of odd cinematic game you wouldn’t put past Paul Thomas Anderson, who’s offbeat Punch-Drunk Love teased out a fine serious turn from Adam Sandler, of all people. If anyone can turn the tables and pull the rug from underneath you, it’s P.T. Anderson.

I've got a lot of time for Paul Dano, who constantly surprises me with his off-kilter acting choices. I squeed with delight when I spotted him playing the fictional embodiment of the Tolstoy in the BBC’s War and Peace this year (my brother was watching).

The fact that he's not a conventional Hollywood heartthrob yet has still done very well for himself in a predominantly superficial industry is a testament to his talent (incidentally, this is precisely the reason why I idolise Jonah Hill, even if the two men’s acting styles are quite different), and I like how Dano pursues film roles for the art, rather than the money. I also dig that he doesn’t thirst for awards like some (tho, seriously. Just because he doesn't strive for recognition doesn't excuse him being passed over by the Award bodies for his work in this movie).

There Will Be Blood ranks as one of his finest performances, and certainly the best film he's appeared in. Of Dano’s upcoming projects, I'm most psyched for his writing & directorial debut, where he will direct his Prisoners co-star Jake Gyllenhaal in a tale of a relationship falling apart. I will be first in the queue to see it at the cinemas.

Godspeed, Mr. Dano. Cinema needs more auteurs like you.

--

This post is my entry in Christina Wehner's blogathon about Dual Roles in movies. Head on over to read other fabulous articles from bloggers on actors who have played more than one role in a film!

The Girl on the Bus

I’m a huge Emmy Blunt fan. She’s gorgeous, talented, and that West London accent does funny things to me. I even stood outside in the rain last year during the Sicario premiere just to get a glimpse of her, which resulted in me having a cold for a week just as I was beginning my thesis, so that was a bit foolish. (To add to the nonsensicalness of that exercise, I still haven’t gotten round to seeing Sicario . It’s just not my genre).

Anyway, I was really excited by The Girl on the Train trailer when I first saw it. The content looked extremely intriguing and dark, invariably evoking memories of Gone Girl. After all, both are big-screen adaptations of best-selling thrillers with a beautiful British actress playing the lead, unreliable narrators and the word ‘Girl’ in the title.

Furthermore, the employment of a remix of Kanye West’s Heartless was dope; it rivalled War Dogs’ using a cover of No Church in the Wild in terms of ‘using a Kanye song to entice the audience’ stakes (although the best use of Kanye West in a film trailer is still, IMO, Power in The Social Network trailer. The conflation of the lyrics [‘No one man should have all that power’] and the plot of that film, especially Jesse Eisenberg’s superb performance as a hubristic megalomaniac, is just so astute).

However, my interest in The Girl on the Train dwindled slightly when I saw it only got rated 15. I was hoping it was going to be the second 2016 film that I’d seen that was 18-rated, the other being the rather unremarkable The Neon Demon. I saw 5 2015 releases that were an 18 (Diary of a Teenage Girl, Fifty Shades of Grey, The Hateful Eight, Legend, Knock Knock), so I’d really be hoping to match that amount of 18s watched this year. But nah, The Girl on the Train is only a 15.

Not only that, it got a 15A in Ireland, who unlike the BBFC, have the 16 rating that they slap on movies that sit in that awkward 15/18 hinterland. But the fact that the Irish film board didn’t even need to get a 16 out tells me it’s not even gonna be a hard 15!

Boring.

So there goes my hopes of this film being 2016’s Gone Girl.

How could they be so heartless?

The Shade Between BBFC Insight.

Derek Cianfrance, the director of the sobering romantic drama Blue Valentine as well as the ambitious but ultimately disappointing The Place Beyond the Pines, both starring Ryan Gosling, has another film out this year, not starring Ryan Gosling. The film in question has a clunky title to rival its predecessor: The Light Between Oceans.

This film is already out in the States but is not released here until November, although it has been given a BBFC rating. It is rated 12A, unsurprisingly, given it got a PG-13 in the States (and as you should know by now, ~90% of PG-13s align to 12As here, and if they don’t, I usually write a blog discussing/questioning why).

The short insight made me cackle, as, if I didn’t know better, I would think the BBFC were throwing shade at the movie’s male and female leads:

The film revolves around a lighthouse keeper and his wife, who discover a baby washed up on the shore. Having grappled with conception and several heartbreaking miscarriages, they decide to raise the baby as their own. The protagonists are played by Michael Fassbender and stealer of Rooney Mara’s Oscar this year Alicia Vikander, who are a couple in real life.

However, the more cynical of moviegoers don’t buy this, and think that their relationship is a Weinstein Company-manufactured showmance, created for the PR of The Light Between Oceans; a belief given further fuel during the BAFTA ceremony this year, when the Kiss Cam centred on them and they refused to smooch. One person believes this showmance theory so much they even have a Tumblr account about it.

I’m undecided about the veracity of the claims on that Tumblr account, and frankly, celebrities’ love lives are none of my goddamn business anyway. But I was tickled by the BBFC insight, and immediately wondered if the BBFC were in their own way, giving a veiled message about how much they bought into the Fassbender/Vikander relationship. 

As if describing their sex life as ‘infrequent’ wasn’t bad enough… ‘moderate’, too. Dayum.

(Or, you know, they were just genuinely describing the content of the film and I could be reading too much into three words and need to stop assuming everyone is as Shady McGrady as I am.)

-- 

In other sort of BBFC-related news, when my brother turned 18 this year, I couldn’t resist using it as an excuse to a) give a shoutout to my favourite film certification board and b) plug three excellent films that I'm always hollering at him to watch in order to enrich our level of repartee and inside jokes at others' expense.

Channel 4 pulled a blinder on Sunday night, screening The Wolf of Wall Street, so I forced Tom to watch it, which is good because for the sake of completeness, we’ve watched practically all the Jonah Hill movies together now (minus True Story, but I have zero interest in that film; it looks like a prolonged, failed, Oscar beg on his and James Franco’s part and no one got any time for that. It was gruelling enough having to sit through Jonah’s WoWS co-star beg for his Oscar).

Tom, being the good man that he is, said he enjoyed it a lot, especially given that he’d caught an outdoor screening The Big Short in London last week and found it dry A F. I’m glad his mathematical prowess translates to being able to determine the wheat from the chaff in terms of films about finance, too.

As I’ve said before, several of the clown dude-bros who I’ve had the serious misfortune of going on dates with fancy themselves a kind of Leo in WoWS-type character, so it was funny to watch the film with Tom and delve into the psyche of these clowns (or so they wish).

Next up from that Facebook status, I’ll be bullying my brother into watching Gone Girl, so he can understand the psyche of the woman these clowns have chosen to go on a date with. 

(or so I wish).

Juliet-huh?

Here's a nerdy spot that I couldn't not flag. 

Julieta, Pedro Almodóvar's upcoming movie, is rated 15 by the BBFC for strong sex. This in itself is nothing special; several of Almodóvar's movies are a 15 for strong sex (amongst other classification issues), for example Broken Embraces and The Skin I Live In.

In fact, it's because I'm so familiar with BBFC classification issues (particularly at 15), and the rubric for them in a short insight, that when I walked past this at my local train station, I was a little surprised:

'Strong sexual content', as opposed to 'strong sex', is a distinctly American wording, one that the MPAA occasionally adopt (although they didn't for Julieta, which was an R for 'sexuality/nudity'.) So that was confusing - I thought perhaps, when constructing the film poster, the BBFC had given a 15 but no specific reason yet, so the poster designers pulled the wording from the MPAA. But apparently not.

I'm sure this phenomena - of the short insight on the poster and that given by the BBFC on their website being disparate - has occurred a few times before, but it has only come to my attention one other time, for last year's embarrassingly poorly written Tom Hardy vehicle, Legend.

Legend is an 18 for 'very strong language, strong violence'. The poster I saw for it, in Picturehouse Central, said 'strong language, violence and sex references'. I know the general gist is correct, but there's a big difference between strong ('f_ck', 'motherf_cker' and 'c_cksucker') and very strong language (cnut [with the n and the u rearranged]). So that was kind of bad they didn't get that precisely right. 

Plus, at 18, you're only supposed to list the stuff that contributed towards the 18 certificate. So the fact that there were strong sex references in Legend is correct. But the dialogue was no more crude than that in many a 15-rated film, including a recent watch of mine, Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates, or the Bad Neighbours series. 

The actual BBFC short insight only flags the language and the violence as the classification issues at 18. Whoever did a haphazard job constructing the Legend poster placed in Picturehouse Central may well have had a mate who saw the film, and then just wrote down the three things they thought would be an issue - the swearing, the violence and the sexual dialogue. But the latter wasn't why it was 18, the former two were. 

And the swearing was very strong, not just strong.

So if the dude was gonna make up his own BBFC short insight for Legend, he should have known the guidelines better.

Just being a pedant.

Two can keep a secret, if one of them is dead.

“Pretty Little Liars” is the latest American teenage drama to captivate me and give me something to look forward to on a Tuesday morning. Based on Sara Shepard's unflinching teen novels of the same title, It revolves around four girls: former fatty-turned-it-girl Hannah Marin (Ashley Benson), a swimmer who’s harbouring her feelings for her friend Maya due to her strict conservative parents Emily Mitchell (Shay Mitchell), competitive Spencer Hastings who feels the need to compete with her catty elder sister for everything (Troian Bellisario), and Aria Montgomery (Lucy Hale), who has spent a year abroad in Iceland and on getting back, is carrying on with the dishy Ezra Fitz, who is soon revealed to be her English teacher. From the intro alone, there’s more than enough spice and suspense to eclipse a whole season of The O.C., but to complicate matters, the thing that binds the girls together is their having used to be friends with the school’s ultimate Queen Bee, Alison diLaurentis, a charismatic, beautiful, but very, very cruel-minded girl who enjoys putting others down, playing games and treating people like puppets. Said Alison went missing a year ago, and her body has only just now been found. But Alison’s legacy still lives on when each of the four girls start receiving texts and e-mails taunting each of them with their secrets.

Essentially, “Pretty Little Liars” can be described as a sort of Heathers-meets-gossip girl-meets-Desperate Housewives. And, considering how I like all thereof those things, it’s no surprise that “Pretty Little Liars” proved a highly engaging and entertaining watch. The performances are accomplished, Bellisario is the only one who truly stands out for me but all the girls do their jobs capably, the plotline has enough twists to constantly keep you guessing, and the opening credits, god lord. It took me a good give minutes to fully realise how creepy the opening credits truly were, but they’re creepy in a genius way. In between trying to track down Alison’s killer and who the identity of the mystery “A” is, the girls have plenty of love problems, family woes and other troubles, so there’s tonnes to keep you entertaining. Oh, and the outfits are to die for, unsurprisingly. Yet despite each of the four leads looking gorgeous throughout, I still found

myself rooting for and caring about their characters, despite the mistakes they made, a mark of good/interesting characters. What I love about “Pretty Little Liars” is that as each episode goes on, more secrets are revealed, and we find that Alison is far from the pretty sweet little girl she would have everyone believe she is, and how the secret about her is darker and a lot more disturbing. So I highly recommend “Pretty Little Liars”, get on it!

And, as it's Monday, I want to show you two pieces of real mmmm. Ladies and gents, check out your Spider Man leading man and lady, Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield. I lovelovelove Emma's white dress isome girl. Aaaargh.ul, swaggerous, talented, awesome girl. Aaaargh.

Standard.

The bbfc warning for Sex and the City 2 is exactly the same as for Sex and the City the first movie:


Now, I know the first movie wasn't all that compared to the (remarkably high) standards set by the TV show, but I enjoyed it massively nonetheless. And the second installment promises more fabulous costumes, more jokes, and most of all, more of the fab four! Personally, I can't wait. Here's the trailer:

Moar Disney.

Awesome concept art from this year's Rupenzel, recently renamed "Tangled".

The Jonas Brothers are Hardcore.

Hehehe.

Anyone seen this movie?

I haven't seen it yet, will do so soon. What did you think of it?

A Look Back at Tess of the D’Urbervilles.

Thomas Hardy’s famous novel Tess of the D’Urbervilles was not a universal hit when it was first published in 1891, and met more than its fair share of controversy. Society at that time, it seemed, were not particularly receptive a novel that sympathised with women, that sympathised with the lower class, or was willing to challenge the social and sexual codes of the time. Over 100 years on, society is a lot more accepting to the ideas raised in his novel, and, just before the release of the next Bond film, the BBC have found the perfect time to re-invigorate Hardy’s novel onto the small screen.

22-year-old Kent-born English rose Gemma Aterton, who appears in three 2008 releases – RocknRolla, Three and Out, and Quantum of Solace, plays the low-born but beautiful country girl Tess who catches the eye of the immoral Alec D'Urberville, who, after persist and failed attempts to win her heart, takes advantage of her tired state one night, leaving her wounded and broken, but also leaving her a mother, to a stillborn baby. Things get better for Tess when she meets her supposed soulmate in Angel Clare, who falls for her too (and this time, the love is requited), but her shady past (to no fault of her own) continues to catch up with her, and finally, her honest soul lets her down when she admits to her newfound husband about her past endeavours, and he hypocritically rejects her.

Having had read the novel, I knew how the story went, but that didn’t stop me from feeling for Tess as strongly as I did the first time I read the novel. In their adaptation, the BBC choose not to blur the line between whether or not it was seduction or rape – they depict the event as rape (which is also how I interpret it). Tess’ subsequent downfall is heartbreaking, not least because of the raw, gut-wrenching performance from Gemma Aterton, who, accent aside, captures all the qualities of Tess Durbyfield – kind-hearted, sincere, loyal, naïve, and prokects them into a brilliant performance. Her final scenes with Alec, in particular, broke my heart.

Overall, despite a few drawbacks, I found Tess and beautiful and moving adaptation of Hardy’s novel, and I look forward to seeing more of Miss Aterton!

So, for those of you who watched this, what did you make of it?

01. What are your thoughts on the upcoming Blindness?
02. If you could bring only three things with you to University, what would they be?
03. The line “Why so serious?” – scary, or funny?
04. What’s the most money you’ve blown on a DVD?
05. When did you first discover old Hollywood?

Concept Vs. 3D?

I present you with some stills from the upcoming Disney Pixar movie, Up.


Which pictures do you prefer, the 3D, or the concept art?

3D











Concept Art:



Either way, I am REALLY looking forward to it.

The Duchess poster.

Miss Knightley's in an awful lot of period pieces out this year. Dominic Cooper = win!

I am mesmerized by this image

First thing to do when I've finished exams - see Priceless!