When we are tired of all the unfortunate events in life, we say we are fed up. It's a word to express annoyance and obstinacy and it's the perfect title for the story of this film.

A few weeks ago I had seen reviews of Harta in the community that I avoided reading to avoid making me spoiler, I had it on my list, but a message from @mamaemigrante where she told me how hard it was to see that movie, that made her cry a lot was the push I needed to put aside my activities and watch it at that moment, and it's not that I wanted to feel bad, but curiosity was killing me plus I wanted to see it before commenting the post to my friend.

There are several movies with this title, but it is not a remake, starring Taraji P. Henson and released this 2025. It begins with a mother who starts her day exhausted, wakes up tired and sore from a bad night with her little girl, running because she has to take the girl to school and go to work, they show the apartment where they live and the atmosphere is depressing, dirty, and uncomfortable from there the direction prepares you for what is coming a few minutes of great tension and discomfort.

Janiyah the main character is under a lot of pressure, she owes months of rent, her girl needs money to eat lunch at her school and stop being harassed for eating the subsidy food and no matter how hard she tries she doesn't solve her problems, she is alone and without any support, she has two jobs although they show only the one at the supermarket where she is exploited and mistreated by the supervisor, when I saw this situation and the place where she worked it was impossible not to think of Marluy (@mamaemigrante) 🥲.

As I watched Janiyah arrive at work being cordial and polite, despite her mental state of stress and physical exhaustion, I thought about how much pressure she can take. While at work she receives a call from the child's school and requests a leave of absence which she almost didn't get, she begged for that favor in addition to asking for her salary she was owed and only got two hours of leave, upon arrival more painful and inexplicable things began to happen, social security takes away her daughter, she returns to her job where she is fired and this is the beginning of a series of events one worse than the other.

Without a job, without her daughter and without a place to live because they took away her things what else could happen to her, but many worse things happened, she crashed into a policeman who swore revenge and everything went dark for her. This movie reminded me of "A Day of Rage" because even the calmest people who can withstand pressure can explode.

Throughout the movie there was tension, suspense, and drama even though I didn't cry I felt a lot of feeling for Janiyah, I wanted the universe to reward her for being a good woman, for her pain to end and somehow it did.

There were a lot of things I liked and some things I didn't, but overall it is good and I recommend it.

Positive remarks

The makeup was very congruent with the story, from the beginning to the end its protagonist was disheveled, sweaty and disheveled, in keeping with what the character was going through.

Taraji P. Henson and co-star Sherri Shepherd's performances were excellent, conveying genuine emotions and connection. Their characters exemplified empathy and sincerity, necessary values in difficult times.

Negative comments

I feel that they damaged the beautiful message of empathy that this drama had with a lot of racism, let me explain. A large percentage of all the actors in this movie are black, and they show that all of them are good, they have strong, traumatic life stories and on the contrary the few actors with white skin, their characters were the bad guys who wanted to hurt black people. From the beginning they gave a message of confrontation between races, and not all black people are good and have a life of suffering and not all white people are bad. I disliked watching this, I didn't see any sense in it and on the contrary it detracted from the plot of the movie.

If you decide to watch Fed Up, be aware that it is not a movie to relax, it has a shocking ending and is likely to make you cry. It is not a movie I want to repeat, I don't consider it bad, it has a final message that made me think about my reality and I raised a prayer to God to give me comfort and strength for when I have to live that same experience.

Set in the peaceful (but fictional) city of Colorado (in the United States), South Park is a sitcom aimed primarily at an adult audience. In the plot (which is fueled by diverse events, since it focuses on the lives of the inhabitants who live in a community in this place and how they relate to each other in the face of the most diverse everyday situations), four children (Stan Marsh, Kyle Broflovski, Eric Cartman and Kenny McCormick) lead an excellent animated cast, and in each episode, the audience follows them on their adventures full of absurd and very comical moments.

Den of Geek

Without a doubt, the idea behind this project has remarkable creative potential, and immeasurable reach. It is no coincidence that the work done by the duo Trey Parker and Matt Stone (the minds behind this TV series developed by Brian Garden, especially for the Comedy Central channel) has been on the small screen since 1997, the year it was launched, with an enviable narrative consistency, because it keeps up to date with the most relevant things happening in the world. Any and all types of real-life situations take on anarchic overtones here, and that is the “magic” of the project.

Esquire

The dynamics established within each episode mix a range of elements, which have as their main foundation the adventures in which each character is inserted, and at the same time, using acidity, dark humor, wit and a small list of swear words that have already become a kind of “identity” in this sitcom. In addition, the project bets on surreal approaches (some far beyond the trivial) to talk about routine topics, and with that, it manages to break (although not completely) social taboos that are normally not discussed so easily or frequently.

IGN

The protagonists have distinct personalities, and this favors the growth of conflicts between them. Just like other characters (in this case, the supporting characters) are also very different from each other, fostering a diversity of concepts and ideas that only makes this series grow even more in its narrative quality. Even characters that only appear in a single episode (special appearances, which are usually a good satire of famous personalities in real life in different types of segments) are usually very well worked within this “madness”.

Billboard

Even though it has a purposefully “sloppy” technical production and very simple lines, this is a very intelligent animated sitcom (although it is not visually beautiful), and it relies on a much more “peculiar” type of humor to create its space and win fans around the world, having as its main asset making jokes (which oscillate in their approaches) with sharp timing and captivating characters. This is definitely a sitcom that needs to be more prominent because the essence of what it brings is not something easy to replicate (especially in the world of television).

This post is my entry for the CineTV Contest #138, which is being promoted by the CineTV community.

---

Concurso CineTV: “South Park”, rompiendo los tabúes sociales de la vida real.

Ambientada en la tranquila (pero ficticia) ciudad de Colorado (Estados Unidos), South Park es una comedia dirigida principalmente a un público adulto. En la trama (impulsada por diversos acontecimientos, ya que se centra en la vida de los habitantes de una comunidad de este lugar y en cómo se relacionan entre sí ante las más diversas situaciones cotidianas), cuatro niños (Stan Marsh, Kyle Broflovski, Eric Cartman y Kenny McCormick) lideran un excelente elenco animado, y en cada episodio, el público los sigue en sus aventuras llenas de momentos absurdos y muy cómicos.

Sin duda, la idea detrás de este proyecto posee un potencial creativo notable y un alcance inconmensurable. No es casualidad que el trabajo del dúo Trey Parker y Matt Stone (los cerebros detrás de esta serie de televisión desarrollada por Brian Garden, especialmente para el canal Comedy Central) haya estado en la pantalla chica desde 1997, año de su lanzamiento, con una consistencia narrativa envidiable, ya que se mantiene al día con los acontecimientos más relevantes del mundo. Cualquier tipo de situación de la vida real adquiere aquí connotaciones anárquicas, y esa es la “magia” del proyecto.

La dinámica de cada episodio combina diversos elementos, basados en las aventuras de cada personaje, y a la vez, recurre a la acidez, el humor negro, el ingenio y una pequeña lista de palabrotas que ya se han convertido en una especie de "identidad" en esta comedia. Además, el proyecto apuesta por enfoques surrealistas (algunos que van mucho más allá de lo trivial) para abordar temas cotidianos, rompiendo así (aunque no del todo) tabúes sociales que normalmente no se discuten con tanta facilidad ni frecuencia.

Los protagonistas tienen personalidades distintas, lo que favorece el desarrollo de conflictos entre ellos. Al igual que otros personajes (en este caso, los secundarios), también son muy diferentes entre sí, lo que fomenta una diversidad de conceptos e ideas que impulsa aún más la narrativa de la serie. Incluso personajes que solo aparecen en un episodio (apariciones especiales, que suelen ser una buena sátira de personajes famosos de la vida real en diferentes segmentos) suelen estar muy bien trabajados dentro de esta "locura".

A pesar de su producción técnica deliberadamente descuidada y diálogos muy simples, esta comedia animada es muy inteligente (aunque no visualmente atractiva), y se apoya en un humor mucho más peculiar para crear su espacio y ganar seguidores en todo el mundo, teniendo como principal atractivo sus chistes (con enfoques variables), una sincronización ingeniosa y personajes cautivadores. Sin duda, esta comedia necesita mayor protagonismo, ya que su esencia no es fácil de replicar (especialmente en el mundo de la televisión).

Esta publicación es mi entrada para el Concurso CineTV #138, que está siendo promovido por la comunidad CineTV.

---

Concurso CineTV: “South Park”, quebrando os tabus sociais da vida real.

Ambientada na tranquila (porém fictícia) cidade do Colorado (nos Estados Unidos), South Park é uma sitcom voltada principalmente para o público adulto. Na trama (que é alimentada por eventos diversos, uma vez que é focada na vida dos habitantes que vivem em comunidade nesse lugar e como eles se relacionam diante das mais diferentes situações rotineiras), quatro crianças (Stan Marsh, Kyle Broflovski, Eric Cartman e Kenny McCormick) lideram um elenco animado de excelência, e a cada episódio, o público os segue em suas aventuras repletas de momentos absurdos e bem cômicos.

Sem dúvidas, a ideia por trás desse projeto tem um potencial criativo notável, e de alcance imensurável. Não por acaso, o trabalho feito pela dupla Trey Parker e Matt Stone (a mente por trás dessa série de TV desenvolvida por Brian Garden, especialmente para o canal Comedy Central) já perdura nas telas pequenas desde 1997, ano em que foi lançada, com uma consistência narrativa invejável, porque se mantém atualizada com o que há de mais relevante acontecendo pelo mundo. Todo e qualquer tipo de situação da vida real ganha contornos de anarquia aqui, e essa é a “mágica” do projeto.

A dinâmica estabelecida dentro de cada episódio mistura uma gama de elementos, que tem como alicerce principal as aventuras nas quais cada personagem é inserido, e ao mesmo tempo, usando acidez, humor negro, sagacidade e uma pequena lista de palavrões que já se tornaram uma espécie de “identidade” nessa sitcom. Além disso, o projeto aposta em abordagens surreais (algumas muito além do trivial) para falar sobre temas rotineiros, e com isso, consegue quebrar (ainda que não completamente) tabus sociais que normalmente não são discutidos com tanta facilidade ou frequência.

Os protagonistas tem personalidades distintas, e isso favorece o crescimento de conflitos entre eles. Assim como outros personagens (neste caso, os coadjuvantes) também são bem diferentes uns dos outros, fomentando uma diversidade de conceitos e ideias que só faz essa série crescer ainda mais na sua qualidade narrativa. Até mesmo personagens que aparecem apenas em um único episódio (participações especiais, que costumam ser uma boa sátira as personalidades famosas na vida real em diferentes tipos de segmentos) costumam ser muito bem trabalhados dentro dessa “loucura”.

Mesmo tendo uma produção técnica propositalmente “desleixada” e traços muito simples, essa é uma sitcom animada muito inteligente (apesar de não ser visualmente bonita), e que aposta num tipo de humor muito mais “peculiar” para criar o seu espaço e conquista fãs ao redor do mundo, tendo como o seu principal trunfo fazer piadas (que oscilam nas suas abordagens) com um timing afiado e personagens cativantes. Definitivamente, essa é uma sitcom que precisa ter mais destaque porque a essência do que ela traz não é algo fácil de ser replicado (em especial, no mundo da televisão).

Este post é a minha participação para o Concurso CineTV #138, que está sendo promovido pela comunidade CineTV.

The beginning of the new DC Comics cinematic universe (DCU) is attracting the attention of thousands of people around the world. In July of this year, the latest version of Superman (starring David Corenswet and directed by James Gunn) for the big screen will hit the big screen, and this project has been causing a lot of anxiety among the public for a long time, especially among comic book fans who consider this hero as “iconic”.

It was more than expected that a project of this magnitude within pop culture (something that transcends the big screen) would be something highly anticipated by the public, but being increasingly pressured by this public, Gunn has shown that he has good discernment about what he did with this movie. One of the great examples is the fact that he recently mentioned that Superman is just another movie, and should be watched that way.

Gunn really won't save DC Comics from failure, he won't control the company's entire new cinematic universe, and he won't revolutionize cinema either. However, many people have trouble noticing something that is more than obvious: he is a filmmaker who is trying his best to deliver a good product to the public. Emphatically mentioning that Superman is just a movie makes it clear how well he sees this situation.

Rolling Stone

According to Gunn himself, this new version is just one part of the puzzle of something much bigger and more complex, and people need to understand that the legacy of DC Comics does not depend exclusively on the existence of the resident of the planet Krypton. This seems so obvious to me that I am even "scared" to see how people put so much pressure on a director to do something original and innovative within a formula that is already so well known within the genre.

The general public (especially fans) need to understand that all this hype around a film (whatever it may be) is a very bad thing, because it ends up frustrating their own interests... After all, filmmakers may even feel the weight of a possible failure (which in fact ends up being something very particular because the quality of films is never measured by what they achieve in terms of financial profits), but they always move forward with new ideas.

Personally speaking, I'm not a fan of superhero movies, but I confess that I'm getting more and more curious to watch this new version of Superman in theaters just because of the apparently eloquent work that Gunn has done so far. Within a visceral industry that increasingly breathes only money, having a "controversial" opinion like this demonstrates the professional stability of a filmmaker who really knows what he's doing.

_{Cover made in Canva. Image}

¡Hola amigos! Hoy en un nuevo día de reseñas pochocleras, o no tanto, les traigo mi opinión acerca de la última entrega de la película Destino final: lazos de sangre. Una película que estaba esperando ver sin muchas expectativas, pero que me termino sorprendiendo.

Hello friends! Today in a new day of pochocleras reviews, or not so much, I bring you my opinion about the latest installment of the movie Final Destination: Bloodlines. A movie that I was waiting to see without many expectations, but that ended up surprising me.

Trama - Plot

_Source

La historia gira en torno a Stefani, una joven universitaria que hace dos meses tiene la misma pesadilla donde ve a sus abuelos de jóvenes morir junto a un montón de otras personas al derrumbarse un restaurante en las alturas. Esto está perjudicando sus estudios porque no puedo dormir y no entiende qué le pasa. Por lo que decide volver a su casa para averiguar dónde está su abuela y desenterrar la verdad sobre este suceso. Allí se va a enterar que está soñando con la premonición que tuvo su abuela cuando era joven y logró esquivar a la muerte, pero esta volverá más implacable qué nunca a por ella y por sus descendientes que no tendrían que haber nacido si ellos hubieran muerto en ese entonces.

The story revolves around Stefani, a young college student who two months ago has the same nightmare where she sees her grandparents when they were young die along with a bunch of other people when a restaurant collapsed at high altitude. This is hurting her studies because she can't sleep and doesn't understand what is happening to her. So he decides to go back home to find out where his grandmother is and unearth the truth about this event. There she finds out that she is dreaming about the premonition her grandmother had when she was young and managed to dodge death, but it will return more relentless than ever for her and for her descendants who should not have been born if they had died back then.

Reseña - Review

_Source

Una película que me generaba cierta curiosidad, pero no tenía prisa por verla porque las últimas entregas habían dejado mucho que desear, o al menos a mí no me habían convencido. Me alegra haberla visto, repuntó bastante a mi parecer, estuvo muy entretenida y más afín a sus primeras entregas. 

A film that generated some curiosity in me, but I was not in a hurry to see it because the last installments had left much to be desired, or at least I was not convinced. I'm glad I saw it, it rebounded quite a lot in my opinion, it was very entertaining and more akin to its first installments.

Es la primera vez que me horrorizo y me divierto tanto al mismo tiempo, es increíble. Tuve esos momentos de tensión y sustos inminentes que me mantuvieron anclada al sillón, pero también me reí un montón porque tuvo escenas bastantes graciosas, eso fue una novedad para mí. Que una de estas peliculas me hagan morirme de la risa es para analizar, supongo que era parte del objetivo, sino la hubieran hecho más seria.

It's the first time I've ever been horrified and had so much fun at the same time, it's amazing. I had those moments of tension and impending scares that kept me anchored to the couch, but I also laughed a lot because it had some pretty funny scenes, that was a novelty for me. For one of these movies to make me die laughing is something to analyze, I guess that was part of the goal, otherwise they would have made it more serious.

_Source

Pude lograr conectar con los personajes, aunque hubiera preferido que no fuera el caso, ya que se imaginaran como termina todo. Eso sí, me parece que les faltó cierta emotividad al asunto, sentí que algunos se tomaban demasiado bien la muerte de sus seres queridos, estaban más preocupados por ser los siguientes en la lista que por perder a sus padres y sus hermanos, pero bueno. En ese sentido estuvo bastante desalmada.

I was able to connect with the characters, although I would have preferred it not to be the case, since they could imagine how everything ends. I felt that some of them took the death of their loved ones too well, they were more worried about being next on the list than about losing their parents and siblings, but ok. In that sense it was pretty heartless.

También creo que abusaron mucho del recurso de la sangre y las muertes fueron todas grotescas y poco creíbles, es como si las hubieran sacado del programa 1000 maneras de morir, sino no se explica. Por lo demás estuvo okey, la verdad que mejor de lo esperado. Salvo por estos detalles es una película que se deja ver.

I also think that they abused too much the use of blood and the deaths were all grotesque and not very credible, it's as if they had taken them from the program 1000 ways to die, otherwise it's hard to explain. For the rest it was ok, actually better than expected. Except for these details, it is a movie that you can watch.

_Source

Me gustó como se fue conectando toda la historia, la parte de la premonición me encantó y también que no dejará ningún cabo suelto, eso es genial. Por otro lado, tuvo sus momentos emotivos, como las palabras de cierto actor y las referencias a entregas anteriores. También me generó un nuevo trauma con las máquinas para hacerte resonancias magnéticas jajaja. 

I liked how the whole story was connected, I loved the premonition part and also that it didn't leave any loose ends, that's great. On the other hand, it had its emotional moments, like the words of a certain actor and the references to previous installments. It also generated me a new trauma with the MRI machines hahaha.

En fin, fue una buena entrega, me gustó muchísimo más que las dos últimas, aunque se abusan un poco con los efectos especiales, pero estuvo bastante tensa y divertida. Así que le doy el visto bueno por si quieren mirarla.

Anyway, it was a good installment, I liked it a lot more than the last two, although it was a bit overdone with the special effects, but it was quite tense and fun. So I give it a thumbs up if you want to watch it.

_Source

Bueno amigos, hasta acá mi opinión sobre la película. Espero que les haya gustado y los animo a verla si les llama la atención. Si ya la vieron me encantaría saber qué les pareció. Gracias por llegar hasta acá y apoyar mi contenido. ¡Hasta la próxima! 

Well friends, this is my opinion about the movie. I hope you liked it and I encourage you to watch it if it catches your attention. If you've already seen it, I'd love to know what you thought of it. Thanks for making it this far and supporting my content. See you next time!

There are several films with the title Anatomy, some of which are a little more original and add another word to distinguish themselves. Almost all of the ones I've seen have young doctors who have fun with corpses in common, and this one is no exception; however, this film from 2000, which I saw recently, is different. There is a lot of suspense and twists in the story that surprise you, keeping the viewer hooked until the end.

The main character is a medical student who traveled for a summer course at a university where her father and grandfather graduated in the same field, so she wanted to keep that information anonymous so as not to be the target of harassment or have an advantage over other students. While traveling on the train, she saved the life of a young man who had a heart attack, a scene that hooks you from the beginning and is the thread of almost the entire story. I had a minor anxiety attack because of this scene. Returning to the film, the next day she encounters the young man she helped, but on an autopsy table during a course practical. He had died of unknown causes, and the group of students were there to determine the cause of death.

The protagonist, who was an excellent student, couldn't believe that this boy had died of heart failure, as he was sick, but there were signs on his body that didn't match the supposed cause, which made her suspicious, and she began to secretly investigate on her own why he had died. Her classmates insisted that it had been heart failure, and so other cases of bodies available for practice began to appear.

Within the faculty, there was a secret sect made up of faculty authorities, professors, and some students who had a certain unethical code and dark practices. They called themselves the anti-Hippocratics, after the oath taken by doctors. Of course, in this sect, there was a psychopathic student who became obsessed with a classmate, and students began to disappear.

Anatomy is a thriller, horror, and slasher horror film, the latter being a subgenre of horror characterized by a psychopathic serial killer character. This film has the genres that I like, and perhaps that is why I thought it was good, although it should be noted that it is an old film from 25 years ago, and at that time it was easier to scare people. It has good special effects, and the makeup stands out in creating horror.

I could feel the protagonist's fear from the beginning, I empathized with her curiosity, since I am the same, and I was kept in suspense for her. Anatomy is very good at suspense and takes it to the max when they do scenes where the victims cannot move. I liked that sometimes the camera angles made you feel like you were the victims or the killer when looking through their eyes; that change of perspective is very interesting. This movie is totally different from others with the same title. Here, there isn't a group of friends playing with people's lives or each other's. Here, it all ends with a single psychopath who had his assistants and the backing of the cult's power. It's a good movie that I recommend. If you've already seen it and remember it, tell me what you thought. And if not, would you like to see it?

The early bets regarding next year's Oscars nominations have already begun, and while I was reading some articles on this subject, one name caught my attention because it was being repeated in some lists: Jennifer Lopez. The supposed nomination for Best Actress would be for her role as Aurora (in the remake of a movie adaptation of the book Kiss of the Spider Woman, written by Manuel Puig, which has also been adapted as a Broadway musical), a sexy and quite enigmatic character, who appears repeatedly in the dreams of Molina, a prisoner.

This is not the first time that Lopez has made a film aiming for at least one long-awaited nomination (whether for lead or supporting actress) for an Oscars statuette, and to this day this has never happened. However, according to some of the initial reviews (which are not reviews per se, but rather impressions of the film as a whole... highlighting what she was able to do playing this role), Lopez's performance has been highly praised, as if the film had fit her like a glove. I confess that I was curious, I decided to watch the trailer and I was surprised.

The movie is directed by Bill Condon (experienced in directing musical films, although he doesn't always get it right in this type of genre) and seems to bring a very theatrical atmosphere plasticized by a beautiful scenographic quality of quite sharp technical quality. Musicals are definitely not my favorite film genre, but I think that this time Lopez can get her long-awaited Oscars nomination (in the category she wants), because the project seems to have all the cinematic elements that Academy voters like to see during this awards season.

For now, it's just speculation, but I really think that the film has the potential for many more technical nominations, and looking specifically at the main categories, Lopez could be part of a possible shortlist for best actresses. Until then, it's very likely that her name will continue to be "aired" in other articles, because it seems that this time, she really delivered the best work of her career. Acting, dancing and singing is a "triple threat" that Oscars voters love to see, and in a way, it carries the essence of this ceremony.

---

En busca de um Academy Awards.

Las primeras apuestas sobre las nominaciones al Oscar del próximo año ya han comenzado, y mientras leía algunos artículos sobre este tema, un nombre me llamó la atención porque se repetía en algunas listas: Jennifer Lopez. La supuesta nominación a Mejor Actriz sería por su papel de Aurora (en la nueva versión de la adaptación cinematográfica del libro El beso de la mujer araña, escrito por Manuel Puig, que también ha sido adaptado a un musical de Broadway), un personaje sexy y bastante enigmático que aparece repetidamente en los sueños de Molina, un prisionero.

Esta no es la primera vez que Lopez realiza una película con la esperanza de obtener al menos una ansiada nominación (ya sea a mejor actriz principal o de reparto) al Oscar, y hasta la fecha esto nunca ha sucedido. Sin embargo, según algunas de las primeras críticas (que no son críticas en sí, sino impresiones de la película en su conjunto... destacando lo que logró interpretando este papel), la actuación de Lopez ha sido muy elogiada, como si la película le hubiera venido como anillo al dedo. Confieso que tenía curiosidad, decidí ver el tráiler y me sorprendí.

La película está dirigida por Bill Condon (experimentado en la dirección de musicales, aunque no siempre acierta en este género) y parece ofrecer una atmósfera muy teatral, plastificada por una hermosa calidad escenográfica y una técnica impecable. Los musicales no son mi género favorito, pero creo que esta vez Lopez puede conseguir su tan ansiada nominación al Oscar (en la categoría que desea), ya que el proyecto parece tener todos los elementos cinematográficos que los votantes de la Academia buscan en esta temporada de premios.

Por ahora, es solo especulación, pero creo que la película tiene potencial para muchas más nominaciones técnicas, y si nos fijamos en las categorías principales, Lopez podría formar parte de una posible lista de finalistas a mejor actriz. Hasta entonces, es muy probable que su nombre siga sonando en otros artículos, porque parece que esta vez realmente ha realizado el mejor trabajo de su carrera. Actuar, bailar y cantar es una "triple amenaza" que a los votantes del Oscar les encanta ver y, en cierto modo, transmite la esencia de esta ceremonia.

---

Correndo atrás de um Academy Awards.

As apostas prévias em relação as indicações ao Oscar do próximo ano já começaram, e enquanto eu estava lendo alguns artigos sobre esse assunto, um nome me chamou a atenção por estar sendo repetido em algumas listas: Jennifer Lopez. A suposta indicação a Melhor Atriz seria pelo seu papel de Aurora (no remake de uma adaptação cinematográfica do livro O Beijo da Mulher-Aranha, escrito por Manuel Puig, que também já foi adaptado como um musical da Broadway), uma personagem sexy e bastante enigmática, que surge de maneira recorrente nos sonhos de Molina, um prisioneiro.

Essa não é a primeira vez que Lopez faz um filme mirando ao menos uma tão esperada indicação (seja de atriz principal ou coadjuvante) a estatueta do Oscar, e até hoje isso nunca aconteceu. No entanto, de acordo com algumas das críticas iniciais (que não são críticas propriamente ditas, mas sim impressões sobre o filme como um todo... destacando o que ela foi capaz de fazer interpretando esse papel), a interpretação de Lopez vem sendo muito elogiada, como se o filme tivesse caído como uma luva nas mãos dela. Eu confesso que fiquei curioso, decidi assistir ao trailer e fui surpreendido.

O filme é dirigido por Bill Condon (experiente em dirigir filmes musicais, embora nem sempre acerte dentro desse tipo de gênero) e parece trazer uma atmosfera muito teatral plastificada por uma beleza cenográfica de qualidade técnica bastante afiada. Musicais definitivamente não são o meu gênero cinematográfico favorito, mas eu acho que dessa vez Lopez pode conseguir à sua tão espera indicação ao Oscar (na categoria que ela deseja), porque o projeto parece ter todos os elementos cinematográficos que os votantes da academia gostam de ver durante essa época de premiações.

Por enquanto, são apenas especulações, mas eu realmente acho que o filme tem potencial para muitas indicações um pouco mais técnicas, e olhando especificamente para categorias principais, Lopez pode fazer parte de uma possível lista final de melhores atrizes. Até lá, é muito provável que o nome dela continue sendo “ventilado” em outros artigos, porque parece que dessa vez ela realmente entregou o melhor trabalho da carreira dela. Atuar, dançar e cantar é uma “ameaça tripla” que os votantes do Oscar adoram assistir, e de certa maneira, isso carrega a essência dessa cerimônia.

Today I was reading some news talking about the success of advance ticket sales for the new DC Comics version of Superman, and I wasn't particularly surprised to see this happening. From the moment James Gunn was announced as the "big boss" of this "new shared universe" of the company, all the fans elected him as a "savior" who brings with him the potential to reshape the reality of the company, and nothing is more natural than seeing an audience eager to consume the material that was produced with so much commotion throughout its process.

Starring David Corenswet (and a considerably competent supporting cast), the new version of Superman will hit theaters next month, almost directly competing (because the release dates are close) with the new version of the Fantastic Four, which is a product of the competing company: Marvel. So far, the search for tickets for the two movies, when compared, gives a wide advantage to the citizen of the planet Krypton. The tendency is that in this fight, Marvel will be left “eating dust” because Superman’s success seems to be consolidated.

In fact, no one can say for sure whether the movie can already be considered an anticipated success or not. However, it is clear that there is a latent curiosity among the public regarding how James Gunn “revamped” this hero on the big screen. Personally speaking, I believe that there will be no middle ground here: either this movie will be excellent, or it will be a total failure. The “polarization” of my thinking is fueled precisely by the fame of the character throughout his movie adaptations, and the scenario is not good because there has never been anything so faithful to the comics.

Very soon we will know if this result of so many tickets selling out in advance was something really justifiable or just the curiosity of a thirst that needed to be quenched by material that truly resembles this origin story in the comics. Until we have that answer, the movie’s marketing campaigns continue at full force, spreading the idea that something iconic is coming, even with information pointing to a more negative side (which so far seems to me to be just rumors). Do you plan on watching this movie in the cinema or at home?

---

Superman: ¿Éxito inicial o simple curiosidad?

Hoy leía noticias sobre el éxito de la venta anticipada de entradas para la nueva versión de Superman de DC Comics, y no me sorprendió especialmente. Desde el momento en que James Gunn fue anunciado como el "jefe" de este "nuevo universo compartido" de la compañía, todos los fans lo eligieron como un "salvador" con el potencial de transformar la realidad de la compañía, y nada es más natural que ver a un público ansioso por consumir el material que se produjo con tanta conmoción durante todo su proceso.

Protagonizada por David Corenswet (y un elenco de apoyo bastante competente), la nueva versión de Superman llegará a los cines el próximo mes, compitiendo casi directamente (ya que las fechas de estreno están cerca) con la nueva versión de Los 4 Fantásticos, producto de la compañía competidora: Marvel. Hasta ahora, la búsqueda de entradas para ambas películas, en comparación, le da una amplia ventaja al ciudadano del planeta Kriptón. La tendencia es que en esta pelea Marvel quede “comiendo polvo” porque el éxito de Superman parece consolidado.

De hecho, nadie puede afirmar con certeza si la película ya puede considerarse un éxito anticipado. Sin embargo, es evidente que existe una curiosidad latente entre el público sobre cómo James Gunn "renovó" a este héroe en la gran pantalla. Personalmente, creo que no habrá término medio: o esta película será excelente o será un fracaso rotundo. Esta "polarización" de mi pensamiento se debe precisamente a la fama del personaje a lo largo de sus adaptaciones cinematográficas, y el panorama no es alentador porque nunca se ha visto nada tan fiel a los cómics.

Muy pronto sabremos si esta venta anticipada de entradas fue algo realmente justificable o simplemente la curiosidad de una sed que necesitaba ser saciada con material que realmente se asemejara a esta historia de origen en los cómics. Hasta que tengamos esa respuesta, las campañas de marketing de la película continúan a toda máquina, difundiendo la idea de que se avecina algo icónico, incluso con información que apunta a un lado más negativo (que hasta ahora me parecen solo rumores). ¿Planeas ver esta película en el cine o en casa?

---

Superman: Sucesso antecipado ou apenas curiosidade?

Hoje eu estava lendo algumas notícias falando sobre o sucesso nas vendas de ingressos antecipados para a nova versão da DC Comics do Superman, e particularmente falando não fiquei surpreso em ver isso acontecendo. Desde o momento em que James Gunn foi anunciado como o “grande chefe” desse “novo universo compartilhado” da empresa, todos os fãs o elegeram como “salvador” que traz consigo o potencial de remodelar a realidade da empresa, e nada mais natural do que ver um público ávido para consumir o material que foi produzido sob tanta comoção ao longo do seu processo.

Estrelado por David Corenswet (e um elenco de apoio consideravelmente competente), a nova versão do Superman chegará aos cinemas no próximo mês, enfrentando quase que diretamente (porque as datas de estreia são próximas) a nova versão do Quarteto Fantástico, que é um produto da empresa concorrente: Marvel. Até o momento, a busca de ingressos dos dois filmes, quando comparadas, entregam uma ampla vantagem para o cidadão do planeta Krypton. A tendência é que nessa briga, a Marvel fiquei “comendo poeira” porque o sucesso de Superman parece ser consolidado.

De fato, se o filme já pode ser considerado como um sucesso antecipado ou não, ninguém pode afirmar. No entanto, é visível que há uma curiosidade latente do público em relação a ver como James Gunn “reformulou” esse herói nas telas do cinema. Particularmente falando, eu acredito que não haverá meio termos aqui: ou esse filme será excelente, ou será um fracasso total. A “polarização” do meu pensamento é alimentada justamente pela fama do personagem ao longo de suas adaptações cinematográficas, e o cenário não é bom porque nunca houve nada tão fiel aos quadrinhos.

Muito em breve saberemos se esse resultado de tantos ingressos esgotados de maneira antecipada foi algo realmente justificável ou apenas a curiosidade de uma sede que precisava ser sanada por um material que realmente lembre essa origem das histórias em quadrinhos. Enquanto não temos essa resposta, as ações de marketing do filme seguem com força máxima, propagando a ideia de que algo icônico está por vir, mesmo com informações apontando para um lado mais negativo (o que até então me parecem ser apenas boatos). Você planeja assistir esse filme no cinema ou em casa?

If there are films that leave me with mixed feelings, it's those that deal with the subject of slavery. I've seen several, and there's always something that surprises me: Amazing Grace was no exception. There are no images of slavery here, but there are descriptions of events that were enough to make me reflect and think about how cruel we humans are and what we are capable of doing for money.

This film is a story based on real events about the life of British parliamentarian William Wilberforce (Ioan Gruffudd), a pioneer in the fight against slavery in the 18th century and leader of the anti-slavery movement whose ideals brought him into conflict with some of the most powerful men of the time, putting his life and health at risk.

Ioan Gruffudd had the financial means to live comfortably and without worries. He attended university and obtained a law degree, but shortly afterwards he felt a calling to faith and devoted himself to studying the sacred scriptures. From there, he developed an internal struggle over what was happening with the slave trade, bringing proposals for abolition to parliament that were continually rejected. He became the object of ridicule, He spent years doing this, and little by little, other wealthy people began to wake up and see that it was not humane to trade humans.

Years passed, and as an older man with both physical and mental health problems because he felt disturbed, he almost gave up until a group of friends encouraged him to try again, but in a different way. He also fell in love, which gave his life more meaning. Ioan Gruffudd had first-hand information about the slave trade from a personal friend who worked as a captain on the ships that transported slaves from Europe to America, and from a former slave who had obtained his freedom, I don't remember how, but he gave details of the process of kidnapping black people from Africa, their transport by ship, and how those who survived arrived in America. I was referring to his stories when I mentioned that there were no images of slave trade but there was factual information.

Amazing Grace is a period film, set in centuries past, and the costumes are necessary to fit in with the time of the story. The suits, wigs, and dresses are beautiful and add a touch of elegance. The dialogues are simple and use cultured words that make you think. There is also a bit of romance that adds dynamism to the film. It is a somewhat slow film, as it feels like years pass in the plot and the main characters undergo physical changes. In addition, the political theme may cause viewers who are not interested in this topic to feel a little bored. I liked that it had a happy ending. I recommend it if you want to learn some history and find out about the real William Wilberforce.