"Doubt" Looks Strong in Round 6 With 5 SAG Nominations

This morning, the first of the major guilds to vote, the Screen Actors Guild, announced their nominations for 2008. It's difficult to know what the film community is leaning towards until they actually start voting, and today is that day. This year, the actors went, not too surprisingly, for the actors showcase of the year- Doubt. The film got five nominations, including Best Ensemble, which is the big prize at the SAG awards, since for them it's all about the actors. What does this mean? It means that Doubt is looking even stronger as a Best Picture nominee at the Oscars considering the fact that more academy members are in the actor's branch than any other branch. It's obvious that this one is an actor's favorite, and it will probably do quite well on nomination day. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Milk, Slumdog Millionaire, and Frost/Nixon all continue to look strong after today. In fact, I think I'm ready to go out on a limb and say those four film plus Doubt will be your Best Picture nominees at the Oscars for 2008. The Wrestler, The Dark Knight, and The Reader remain dark horses (but if Christopher Nolan doesn't get a DGA nomination, The Dark Knight is done). I think that Revolutionary Road still has a shot, but it just hasn't been as well received as expected, and Wall-E would have had a much better chance in the pre-2001 world when there wasn't a separate Animated Feature category. Finally, Langella, Penn, Rourke, Streep, Hathaway, Downey Jr, Ledger, Cruz, and Davis all seem to be virtual locks at this point for Oscar nods. Congratulations too to Richard Jenkins for his nominated performance in a wonderful film that I really thought was too small for people to notice, namely The Visitor. This film is fantastic, and it's on DVD right now actually, so check it out! At any rate, here are this morning's nominees...

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role
RICHARD JENKINS / Walter Vale - “THE VISITOR” (Overture Films)

FRANK LANGELLA / Richard Nixon - “FROST/NIXON” (Universal Pictures)

SEAN PENN / Harvey Milk - “MILK” (Focus Features)

BRAD PITT / Benjamin Button - “THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON” (Paramount Pictures)

MICKEY ROURKE / Randy - “THE WRESTLER” (Fox Searchlight Pictures)

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role

ANNE HATHAWAY / Kym - “RACHEL GETTING MARRIED” (Sony Pictures Classics)

ANGELINA JOLIE / Christine Collins - “CHANGELING” (Universal Pictures)

MELISSA LEO / Ray Eddy - “FROZEN RIVER” (Sony Pictures Classics)

MERYL STREEP / Sister Aloysius Beauvier - “DOUBT” (Miramax Films)

KATE WINSLET / April Wheeler - “REVOLUTIONARY ROAD” (Paramount Vantage)

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Supporting Role

JOSH BROLIN / Dan White - “MILK” (Focus Features)

ROBERT DOWNEY, JR. / Kirk Lazarus - “TROPIC THUNDER” (Paramount Pictures)

PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN / Father Brendan Flynn - “DOUBT” (Miramax Films)

HEATH LEDGER / Joker - “THE DARK KNIGHT” (Warner Bros. Pictures)

DEV PATEL / Older Jamal - “SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE” (Fox Searchlight Pictures)

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Supporting Role

AMY ADAMS / Sister James - “DOUBT” (Miramax Flms)

PENÉLOPE CRUZ / Maria Elena - “VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA” (The Weinstein Company)

VIOLA DAVIS / Mrs. Miller - “DOUBT” (Miramax Films)

TARAJI P. HENSON / Queenie - “THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON” (Paramount Pictures)

KATE WINSLET / Hanna Schmitz - “THE READER” (The Weinstein Company)

Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture

DOUBT (Miramax)

FROST/NIXON (Universal Pictures)

MILK (Focus Features)

SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE (Fox Searchlight Pictures)

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON (Paramount Pictures)

So there it is folks. Next weeks awards giving groups are off for the holidays. Next up: the National Society of Film Critics announces their winners on Saturday, January 3rd. They tend to be rather unique in their voting trends, so I always look forward to their choices.

The Year 2008 in Review-- Through Film

Yesterday, the American Film Institute announced their top 10 films of the year 2008 in alphabetical order. As I have said before, the Oscar race for Best Picture does not necessarily reflect the year’s best films, it never has (although sometimes they get it right). It reflects the current mood of the country and of the voters. Although the AFI's choices rarely have a profound effect on the direction of the awards race, they do provide a wonderful look at who we are as a people at the moment, and what ultimately is on our minds as a society. One thing I look always look forward to at the end of any year is watching the year-in-review programs that come on various news networks during the last week of December. This year's should be especially interesting, with the financial crisis and the election of Barack Obama likely being two of the major areas of focus. I like to also use film lists like the one the AFI puts out every year as a reflection on the year gone by. What were their picks this year? Below are their selections...




THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON


THE DARK KNIGHT


FROST/NIXON


FROZEN RIVER


GRAN TORINO


IRON MAN


MILK


WALL*E


WENDY AND LUCY


THE WRESTLER

So what does this list ultimately mean? First, it's been another great year of film. In my opinion, this has been the best decade since the 1970s. But what does this list say about our current mindset? There are certainly some interesting choices here that bounce between populist favorites and indie gems. One thing that immediately pops up is our thoughts on the financial crisis. All of a sudden so many middle-class Americans are truly struggling to get by. Frozen River certainly hits on such themes when a would-be middle class woman is involved in a smuggling operation across the U.S.-Canadian border for the hope of fast and easy money. Wendy and Lucy takes on a similar theme with a story about a 20-something woman from Indiana driving to Alaska to pursue a "lucrative" summer job in a cannery. In both cases, the law will make such pursuits problematic, putting a different twist on "the American dream," calling into question what kind of a dream this really is. Clearly, our minds are on the current financial state of America with such films that portray such struggles facing the middle class in the early 21st century.

Politics also is a continual thing on the minds of Americans, and films like Frost/Nixon and Milk certainly hit such political notes. Distrust of the establishment was indeed an issue during and after the Richard Nixon presidency. Then enter David Frost, a BBC reporter with the job of pinning down the former president Nixon who alternatively sees the interview as a chance to save face. Three decades later the same feelings of disillusionment with the establishment abound with the general public (any approval rating percentage would prove that). Additionally, as Prop 8 in California continues to generate controversy, the themes of Milk appear to be just as timely as when Harvey Milk first took office.

Of course romance is a theme that is worthy of exploring in any given year, but this year's big romances are quite a bit more reflective than your average "date movie." Perhaps one would not consider Wall-E to be a romantic film, but who of us cannot help but fall in love with the idea of love when watching the whirlwind relationship of Wall-E and EVE? In some ways the film proves that the basic human feeling of love can exist even as the world itself is crumbling, and even between robots that are built to mimic human actions, and perhaps human feelings as well. Perhaps a film like Wall-E does provide a shred of optimism in this pessimistic and uncertain system of things. At the same time, it is also a stern warning as well as a sobering tale. It truly does reflect a society that wants to hope, yet is very realistic about current challenges that could result in disaster if mishandled. While Wall-E forces us to reflect on our existence as a society, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button forces us to think about our personal existence. Is the day of one's death more fulfilling than the day of his birth, or vise-versa, or is there any difference at all? Are the bookends of one's life both tragic and difficult for the same reasons of helplessness? What if the person that you love continues to grow older as you grow younger? Can love survive such a trial? The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, while offering audiences a fascinating look at the process of aging, also forces us to reflect on the meaning of our very existence. Interestingly, both Wall-E and Benjamin Button demand audiences to reflect on the same themes, while delivering a world of fantasy that is close enough to reality to be meditated on.

Above all however, the films above reflect a society that is down on its luck and that is in need of hope and in need of a hero. The Wrestler may in fact be a reflection of society as a whole. Mickey Rourke plays a wrestler that is past his prime, that is in need of redemption, and that needs to prove that he still is what made him a star. At the same time, his fans that long for the days of his greatness truly do long for his return. It seems like a simple enough story, but one that truly reflects the challenges that we all face as a society, a society that wants to be redeemed. Iron Man was perhaps a surprising choice, but with the themes of the war in Afghanistan tied into society's desire for a hero, this surprisingly very well-acted film that didn't talk down to audiences is very telling. Sometimes though, society looks around at the current state of affairs and desires a "Dirty Harry"-type character to clean up the mess, not waiting on the law to do so. Enter Dirty Harry himself, Clint Eastwood, who directs and stars in Gran Torino. As a disgruntled retired auto worker, Eastwood's character sets out to reform a neighborhood, while at the same time being forced to confront his own prejudices toward an immigrant population, which perhaps may result in his own personal reform. Maybe this is the hero that America desires. Or perhaps our desired hero is the man himself that put more Americans in movie theater seats than any other in the year 2008, the caped crusader himself who returned to the big screen this year in The Dark Knight. Themes of vigilante justice in a dark and uncertain world continue to resonate with audiences. Interestingly though, it was Heath Ledger's portrayal of The Joker that tended to fascinate us more. How could someone so despicable be so captivating? Is there any more good in the Bat than there is in the Joker? Are they really one in the same? Does just one personal event push two similar men in opposite directions though they perhaps desire the same ends? Is the Joker ultimately our hero? What is a hero exactly, and who are we really looking for? It is interesting that four of the top 10 films selected by the AFI reflect a society that, in any case, desires change, a hero, redemption, a society that elected a man on just that platform in that same year. Where do we go from here? What do you feel these films reflect about us as a people in 2008? Your thoughts...

Slavery is STILL Widespread Globally

Ladies and gentlemen, as we conclude this semester, I want to make you all aware of a painful global reality. Although so many are convinced that slavery has been abolished and ends in the world during the middle to late 19th century, the fact is that slavery and slave trade is not dead, and in fact, in some parts of the world it's actually on the rise. In fact, in the month of October, the news of West African slave trade re-surged because of a key court case in Niger that led to the emancipation of a slave woman. The BBC has done an excellent job of covering the realities of slave trade in Africa. Please click here to read a thorough article of the widespread nature of West African slavery from the month of October.

If you are just hearing about this for the first time, then you need to take the time to research the global realities of slave trade. The BBC has an EXCELLENT special report called "Modern Slavery" that gives the real story behind global slavery. Please click here to see this shocking report. Additionally, there is an excellent interactive map (that you can pull up by clicking here) that proves the global nature of 21st century slavery and shows the forms of slavery being conducted in individual world regions. Again, this report is shocking and I hope that it will open your eyes to the real world and compel you to be a force for change. The key to solving global issues is realizing the problems that exist.

The Economics of the Slave Trade on Africa’s Coast

As Olaudah Equiano’s memoirs reveal, the road to slavery in the Americas for millions of Africans began in thousands of inland villages where, as a result of military defeat, slave raids, or the decision of a chieftain or king, they were wrenched from their homes and marched to a slave market on the coast. There, while they were herded together in closely guarded holding pens or prison-like structures, complex and sometimes lengthy business negotiations took place between European merchants whose ships lay anchored off the coast and African slave merchants, many of whom were kings or major chieftains. Many European merchants recorded their experiences in such negotiations in memoirs or journals, and their recollections provide a wealth of information about the economics of the slave trade. They also offer many insights into how African and European slave traders viewed each other and their profession. They reveal that for millions of Africans the transatlantic slave trade was a nightmare, but for many others—Europeans, Americans, Africans, and indirectly even Asians—it was one more way to make a profit in an increasingly commercialized world.

Thomas Phillips, the author of the document I would like you to read (you can do so by clicking here; for whatever reason there are two blank pages before the last page, just scroll down, and sorry about the formatting) about a slave voyage from England to Africa to the Barbados Islands in the Caribbean in 1693 and 1694, was an English merchant. In 1693, he purchased the slave ship Hannibal in partnership with a number of London merchants who were members of the Royal African Company, a trading company chartered by King Charles II in 1672. The Hannibal, along with five other ships, departed England late in 1693 for Whydah, a kingdom on the Guinea Coast, which is located in the modern nation of Benin some 200 miles east of the city of Lagos, Nigeria. Whydah, the coastal village where the king resided, was rapidly developing into a major slave market and had been the site of an English trading station, or “factory,” since 1682. The events Phillips describes took place in May 1694.

After reading the document, I would like you all to consider and discuss the following: What evidence does the document provide about the attitudes of the Whydah king and nobility toward Europeans? Did they consider themselves equal, inferior, or superior to Europeans? What do Phillips’ words and actions reveal a bout his views of Africans? What does the source reveal about Africans as businessmen? What did they hope to gain from trading with Europeans? How would you describe their business methods? What can you infer from Phillips’ account about the impact of the Whydah slave trade on Africa’s interior? What individuals or groups of individuals benefited economically from the slave trade? Did Asians in fact benefit? Finally, compare the attitude toward slavery of the king of Whydah and his nobility with those of King Afonso of Kongo some 200 years earlier. How might one account for these differences?

The Path to Enslavement in America

In 1789, no fewer than 100 abolitionist books and pamphlets were published in England, but none was more widely read than the autobiography of the former slave Olaudah Equiano. In his memoir, Equiano relates that he was born in 1745 in Iboland, an area east of the Niger River delta that today is part of Nigeria. He also describes how he was captured and sold into slavery when he was about eleven years old, and having survived the harrowing Atlantic crossing, served three masters, including Michael Henry Pascal, an officer in the British navy; an English sea captain who took him to the West Indian island of Montserrat; and finally Robert King, a Quaker merchant from Philadelphia.

In many ways Equiano’s experiences as a slave were exceptional. He never served as a plantation slave, and while owned by Pascal he learned to read and write. Under his three masters he made numerous trips back and forth across the Atlantic and in the process learned skills relating to navigation, bookkeeping, and commerce. Having purchased his freedom from King in 1766, he took up residence in England, where he supported himself as a barber, servant, and crew member on sea voyages to the Mediterranean and around the Atlantic. In the 1770s, he joined the English abolitionist movement, and as a result of the contacts he made with the movement’s leader, in the late 1780s he was given a government post with the responsibility of arranging the transfer of food and other provisions to Sierra Leone, a newly founded colony that abolitionists hoped would serve as an African homeland for freed slaves. Dismissed after a year, Equiano turned to writing his autobiography, which with the financial support of leading abolitionists, was published in 1789. Heavily promoted by Equiano on a lecture tour that took him to dozens of British towns and cities, his book went through eight editions in the 1790s. It is generally acknowledged that it strengthened the abolitionist cause, and must be given at least some of the credit for the act of Parliament in 1807 that abolished the British slave trade.

How factual is Equiano’s narrative? Historians must ask this question of any historical source, especially autobiographies, whose authors cannot be expected to be totally objective when writing about themselves or to be totally accurate in recalling childhood events. Equiano’s memoirs, furthermore, were written with a specific purpose, namely to discredit slavery and garner support for the abolitionist cause. One scholar, Vincent Carretta from the University of Maryland, has recently suggested that Equiano fabricated the account of his kidnapping in Africa and his voyage across the Atlantic on the slave ship. A baptismal certificate and a Royal Navy document, he argues, show that Equiano was actually born in South Carolina, not Africa.

Other scholars reject Carretta’s evidence as inconclusive and continue to believe that Equiano’s memoir is generally accurate. Certainly a comparison of Equiano’s description of his slave experience with what we know from other sources suggests that his work is free of exaggeration and distortion. This includes the excerpt from his autobiography that I would like you to read (you can do so by clicking here) in which he describes his harsh introduction to slavery.

After reading the document, I would like you to think about and discuss the following: On the basis of Equiano’s account, describe the role of Africans in the slave trade. What does Equiano’s account reveal about the effect of slavery and the slave trade on African society? What were the characteristics of slavery that Equiano encountered? Once aboard the slave ship, what in the slaves’ experiences contributed to their despair and demoralization, according to Equiano? What factors might have contributed to the brutal treatment of the slaves by the ship’s crew? Your thoughts…

"Benjamin Button," "Frost/Nixon," and "Doubt" All Come Out of Round Five With Five Globe Nominations

Well the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (the organization that awards the Golden Globe) announced its nominees this morning, and while a few films got a new life (like Revolutionary Road, which got four desperately needed nominations to stay alive in this race), some films lost a little steam it seems (like Milk and The Dark Knight which each only got one nomination). Out the Globe nominations, the films that came out the best were definitely David Fincher's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Ron Howard's Frost/Nixon. Both at the moment are looking pretty strong for Best Picture nominations at the Oscars. John Patrick Shanley's Doubt also did very well, but it didn't get a picture or director nomination, so this film seems to be at its strongest in terms of its powerful acting (and with a cast of Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Amy Adams, this comes as no surprise). I'm very excited about Frost/Nixon because, as I've mentioned before, I'm there for anything of quality that takes place during the Cold War era. In fact, for those of you that don't know much about it, here's a brief synopsis of the film...

"For three years after being forced from office, Nixon remained silent. But in summer 1977, the steely, cunning former commander-in-chief agreed to sit for one all-inclusive interview to confront the questions of his time in office and the Watergate scandal that ended his presidency. Nixon surprised everyone in selecting Frost as his televised confessor, intending to easily outfox the breezy British showman and secure a place in the hearts and minds of Americans. Likewise, Frost's team harbored doubts about their boss's ability to hold his own. But as cameras rolled, a charged battle of wits resulted. Would Nixon evade questions of his role in one of the nation's greatest disgraces? Or would Frost confound critics and bravely demand accountability from the man who'd built a career out of stonewalling? Over the course of their encounter, each man would reveal his own insecurities, ego and reserves of dignity--ultimately setting aside posturing in a stunning display of unvarnished truth."

My kind of film. I can't wait! At any rate, without any further delay, here are the nominees as they were announced this morning...

Best Picture, Drama

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Frost/Nixon

The Reader

Revolutionary Road

Slumdog Millionaire

Best Picture Comedy/Musical

Burn After Reading

Happy Go Lucky

In Bruges

Mamma Mia

Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Director

Danny Boyle, Slumdog Millionaire

Stephen Daldry, The Reader

David Fincher, Benjamin Button

Ron Howard, Frost/Nixon

Sam Mendes, Revolutionary Road

Actor, Drama

Leo DiCaprio, Revolutionary Road

Frank Langella, Frost/Nixon

Sean Penn, Milk

Brad Pitt, Benjamin Button

Mickey Rourke, The Wrestler

Actress, Drama

Anne Hathaway, Rachel Getting Married

Angelina Jolie, Changeling

Meryl Streep, Doubt

Kristin Scott Thomas, I’ve Loved you So Long

Kate Winslet, Revolutionary Road

Supporting Actor

Tom Cruise, Tropic Thunder

Robert Downey Jr. Tropic Tunder

Ralph Fiennes, The Duchess

Philip Seymour Hoffman, Doubt

Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight

Supporting Actress

Amy Adams, Doubt

Penelope Cruz, Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Viola Davis, Doubt

Marisa Tomei, The Wrestler

Kate Winslet, The Reader

Actor, Comedy

Javier Bardem, Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Colin Farrel, In Bruges

James Franco, Pineapple Express

Brendan Gleason, In Bruges

Dustin Hoffman Last Chance Harvey

Actress, Comedy

Rebecca Hall, Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Sally Hawkins, Happy-Go-Lucky

Frances McDormand, Burn After Reading

Meryl Streep, Mamma Mia

Emma Thompson, Last Chance Harvey

Foreign Language Film

The Baader Meinhof Complex (Germany)

Everlasting Moments (Sweden)

Gomorrah (Italy)

I’ve Loved You So Long (France)

Waltz with Bashir (Israel)

Animated Feature

Bolt

Kung Fu Panda

Wall-E

Screenplay

Slumdog Millionaire

The Reader

Frost/Nixon

Benjamin Button

Doubt

Score

Benjamin Button

Changeling

Defiance

Slumdog Millionaire

Frost/Nixon

Song

Down to Earth, Wall-E

Gran Torino

I Thought I Lost You, Bolt

Once in a Lifetime, Cadillac Records

The Wrestler, The Wrestler

So there it is, we seriously have a race. The Golden Globes are so strange for me though. They're the only organization that splits comedies and dramas. The voters tend to be a strange group too. At any rate, these to tend to have an effect on Oscar nominations later, but Oscar still has a mind of its own, so there will be some variations. A better indicator would be the guilds, and they're actually up next. Next up: Screen Actors Guild nominations on Thursday, December 18th. The American Film Institute also announces it's top 10 films of the year on Sunday, and while they have little to no effect on Oscar, I'm always interested in their selections.

Political Breakdown in the Kingdom of Kongo

The largest state in central West Africa around 1500 was the Kingdom of Kongo, stretching along the estuary of the Congo River in territory that today lies within Angola and the Democratic Republic of Congo. In 1483, the Portuguese navigator Diogo Cão made contact with Kongo and several years later visited its inland capital. When he sailed home he was accompanied by Kongo emissaries, who King Nzinga a Kuwu dispatched to Lisbon to learn European ways. They returned in 1491, along with Portuguese priests, artisans, and soldiers who brought numerous European goods, including a printing press. In the same year, the king and his son, Nzinga Mbemba, were baptized as Catholics.

Around 1506, Nzinga Mbemba, who took the name Afonso after his baptism, succeeded his father and ruled until about 1543. Afonso promoted the introduction of European culture in his kingdom by proclaiming Christianity the state religion (a step that affected few of his subjects), imitating the etiquette of Portuguese royalty, and using the Portuguese language in state business. His son Henrique was educated in Portugal and returned to serve as the region's Roman Catholic bishop. European firearms, horses, and cattle were introduced, and Afonso dreamed of achieving a powerful and prosperous state through cooperation with the Europeans. By the time of his death, however, his kingdom verged on disintegration, in no small measure because of the Portuguese. As many later African rulers were to discover, the introduction of European products and customs caused dissension and social instability. Worse, Portuguese involvement in the slave trade undermined Afonso's authority and made his subjects restive. In 1526, the king wrote the following letters that I would like you to read (you can read them by clicking here) to King John III of Portugal, urging him to control his rapacious subjects. The documents are part of a collection of twenty-four letters that Afonso and his Portuguese-educated, native secretaries dispatched to the kings of Portugal on a variety of issues.

After you have read a sampling of these letters, I would like for you to consider and discuss the following: According to Afonso, what have been the detrimental effects of the Portuguese presence in his kingdom? What do the letters reveal about the workings of the slave trade in the kingdom? Who participated in it? What do the letters reveal about Afonso's attitude toward slavery? Does he oppose the practice as such or only certain aspects of it? What steps had the kings taken to deal with the problems caused by the Portuguese? What do the letters suggest about the effectiveness of these steps? How would you characterize Afonso's attitude toward the power and authority of the king of Portugal? Does he consider himself inferior to the Portuguese king or his equal? How would you characterize King Afonso's conception of the ideal relationship between the Portuguese and his kingdom? Your thoughts...

"Milk" Receives More Attention in Round Four of Awards Season

Well it's official folks, the New York Film Critics Circle have now chimed in with their awards this afternoon, and their Best Picture is Gus Van Sant's Milk. At this point, Milk is looking like a stronger and stronger contender, perhaps even a lock at this point for a Best Picture nomination at the Oscars. There is no doubt about it, Milk has a stellar cast--Sean Penn, Josh Brolin, Emile Hirsch, and James Franco are three of the best working actors in the industry. As I've said so many times too, film is simply a reflection of societal realities at any given time. If gives you a clear indication on what is on the mind of society. If you don't know anything about Milk, essentially it is the story of California's first openly gay elected official, Harvey Milk (played by Sean Penn), a San Francisco supervisor who was assassinated along with Mayor George Moscone by San Francisco Supervisor Dan White. It is an interesting piece of American history and the American civil rights struggle that is perpetually ignored. I actually was expecting this film to win Best Picture with the LA Film Critics yesterday as the passage of the highly controversial Proposition 8 back in November is a hot-button issue right now nation-wide, but especially in California where Prop 8 was voted through, which essentially changed the state Constitution to restrict the definition of marriage to a union between a man and a woman and eliminated the right of same-sex couples to marry. At any rate, I guarantee you that you'll likely be hearing more about this film in the weeks and months ahead. I would say that Sean Penn has an excellent chance of taking home the Best Actor as well this year, but the reality is that he already won it in 2003 for his work in Mystic River, and in reality both Frank Langella and Mickey Rourke have extremely impressive performances in their films this year, Frost/Nixon and The Wrestler respectively, and neither has won the coveted Oscar in the past. At any rate, below are the highlights of the New York Film Critics Awards Choices for 2008...

Best Picture - Milk
Best Director - Mike Leigh (Happy-Go-Lucky)
Best Actor - Sean Penn (Milk)
Best Actress - Sally Hawkins (Happy-Go-Lucky)
Best Supporting Actor - Josh Brolin (Milk)
Best Supporting Actress - Penelope Cruz (Vicky Cristina Barcelona)
Best Screenplay - Jenny Lumet (Rachel Getting Married)
Best Cinematographer - Anthony Dod Mantle (Slumdog Millionaire)
Best Foreign Film - 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (Romania)
Best Animated Film - WALL-E
Best Documentary - Man on Wire

So there you have it folks, Round Four of awards season is officially complete, and things are really beginning to come into focus. Or are they? There are still several announcements to be made. Up next is a biggie: Golden Globe Nominations will be announced tomorrow morning!

Africa and the European Slave Trade

Many developments took place in sub-Saharan Africa from the 15th through the 18th centuries. Major regional kingdoms were established in several sectors. Bantu immigration to the south persisted, spreading agriculture. Conversions to Islam increased in the area below the Sahara, particularly in the 18th century, and European adventurers and traders made their first contacts with the vast African subcontinent.

Because many African societies lacked writing and instead expressed their values and history through art and oral traditions, during this period many key political and cultural developments were not recorded using conventional historical records. Documentation focuses on the European impact, which was not the only major current of the period; and it focuses on European, not African, perceptions. This poses unusual dangers for the student of early modern African history in terms of incompleteness and distortion.

The European arrival, however, was a major new ingredient in African history. Because most Europeans worked through local traders and set up only small outposts of their own, their cultural impact before 1800 was limited. Even their political impact was highly localized, except in a few regions such as the Dutch-held Cape region in the south. African rulers used European funds and armaments in their own political rivalries, and while Westerners were often on the stage, they did not yet write the script. Direct penetration into the interior was rare. However, Europe's vast appetite for slaves, intended for use in the Americas, did have huge consequences for many regions, reducing population and economic vitality despite the collaboration of many African rulers and traders in the process.

The three documents I would like you to read (you can read them by clicking here) range from the 15th to the 18th century and suggest aspects of European-African interaction. They are taken from the east coast, where European activity was less intense than in parts of the west. Coastal settlements along the Indian Ocean already participated in an extensive trading network dominated by Arabs. The Islamic religion had won many adherents, and Swahili, a written language, had developed well before the 18th century.

The first document, written around 1520 in Arabic, offers an unusual opportunity to glimpse directly into African reactions to the first Portuguese explorers, colored of course by the Muslim author's hostility to Christianity. The second document, drawn from the same region on the coast around the port city of Kilwa Kisiwani, is a characteristic slave-trade treaty drawn up between a French adventurer and the Sultan of Kilwa. Around the same period a French ship's captain in the slave trade offered a businessman's approach to human trade, in which the view of slaves as profit-and-loss commodities comes through clearly.


While the documents sketch European activities in the period, they also allow some evaluation of diverse African reactions and the reasons why some Africans believed they profited from Western ventures. When you have finished reading the documents, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: Why might African reactions to Europeans vary? What probable causes differentiated the 1520 Arabic account from the King of Kilwa's response to European demands? What were the dominant motives of the French slave trader? What problems did he report and how did he suggest they be resolved? Based on this account, what were the main features of early European colonialism in Africa? What do the documents suggest about the impact of the slave trade on Africa and Africans in the early modern period? Your thoughts...

Wow! In Round Three of Awards Season "Wall-E" Emerges

I find that the Los Angeles Film Critics Association is truly one of my favorites because they tend to dare to be daring. Their choice for best picture of 2008? Wall-E! I can't emphasize it enough ladies and gentlemen, Wall-E is truly an important film. I remember seeing it on opening day over the summer and thinking to myself how different what I was watching truly was. I remember not hearing any dialogue at all for the first 40 minutes or so of the film and yet being utterly captivated. I remember receiving a clear warning message from Andrew Stanton, the director, about our irresponsible mass consumerism and our disrespect for ourselves and our environment. At that point I realized, like most Pixar films, that this is not a kids movie at all, but an important film for all ages. I wondered to myself if the children in the audience were getting the point. Even more so, I wondered if the adults were getting the point. As I left the theater that afternoon, I knew I had seen film history made. So many issues that are addressed in the series finale of this class are also addressed in Andrew Stanton's masterpiece Wall-E. It's rare that an animated film would be a pivotal reference in AP World History, but this one is. I must also say that the love story between Wall-E and EVE is absolutely beautiful in every way. Hollywood so often feels the need to be crude and dirty and condescending to the intelligence of both sexes in its love stories sadly. Wall-E actually never falls into that trap. I personally feel that so much of the relationship between Wall-E and EVE in the film is something that all of us can relate too. In fact, the scene in outer space with our two characters and the fire extinguisher is truly one of the most beautiful love scenes you'll ever see on film. I think the bond that develops between the two of them is something that we all desire to have with someone. The fact that we're seriously talking about animated robots here is evidence that Wall-E is a truly remarkable film. I salute the Los Angeles Film Critics Association for this daring choice. Keep in mind that the LAFCA has never awarded an animated film in its history, therefore proving this is not simply a cartoon. The rest of their awards can be seen below...

Picture: “Wall-E”

Runner-up: “The Dark Knight”

Director: Danny Boyle, “Slumdog Millionaire”

Runner-up: Christopher Nolan, “The Dark Knight”

Actor: Sean Penn, “Milk”

Runner-up: Mickey Rourke, “The Wrestler”

Actress: Sally Hawkins, “Happy-Go-Lucky”

Runner-up: Melissa Leo, “Frozen River”

Supporting actor: Heath Ledger, “The Dark Knight”

Runner-up: Eddie Marsan, “Happy-Go-Lucky”

Supporting actress: Penelope Cruz, “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” and “Elegy”

Runner-up: Viola Davis, “Doubt”

Screenplay: Mike Leigh, “Happy-Go-Lucky”

Runner-up: Charlie Kaufman, “Synecdoche, New York”

Foreign-language film: “Still Life”

Runner-up: “The Class”

Documentary: “Man on Wire”

Runner-up: “Waltz With Bashir”

Animation: “Waltz With Bashir”

Cinematography: Yu Lik Wai, “Still Life”

Runner-up: Anthony Dod Mantle, “Slumdog Millionaire”

Production design: Mark Friedberg, “Synecdoche, New York”

Runner-up: Nathan Crowley, “The Dark Knight”

Music/score: A.R. Rahman, “Slumdog Millionaire”

Runner-up: Alexandre Desplat, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”

So there you have it. Now we seriously have a race! Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Milk, The Dark Knight, Frost/Nixon, Doubt, and now Wall-E all seem to be strong contenders in the Best Picture race. And where the heck is Reservation Road? I wouldn't be surprised if that film experiences a surge later, but it looks pretty flat at the moment. The appearance of Wall-E makes things very interesting all of a sudden. Could an animated film actually get nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars? This has only happened once in the history of the award, and that was in 1991 when Beauty and the Beast was nominated. Since the animated feature category was added in 2001 though, it has appeared nearly impossible for an animated feature to get a Best Picture nod. Could Wall-E break the mold? Up next: the New York Film Critics Circle announces their awards tomorrow. They tend to vote a bit different from LA usually, so I'm interested to see what they chime in with.

Round Two of Awards Season Results in "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" and "Milk" Emerging as Frontrunners

This morning the second major critics organization of awards season, the Broadcast Film Critics Association chimed in with their nominations for 2008. While Slumdog Millionaire made a good showing of 6 total nominations, David Fincher's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Gus Van Sant's Milk both came out of the nominations process with 8 nominations each. I'm a huge fan of the original short story of Benjamin Button by F. Scott Fitzgerald, so I am very excited by the film's recent success. I have been hyping this one up since last April, just ask any of my students from last year. I can't wait to see it when it is released here in Atlanta in a couple of weeks. 2008 has indeed been yet another year of quality film making and as a result we have a wide open awards race. The Dark Knight and Frost/Nixon both also appear to be strong contenders early on in this race. At any rate, here are some of the highlights of this morning's nominations... Oh, and congrats to Mongol yet another Best Foreign Film nomination, yet again righting the wrongs of last season's Whapey Awards...

BEST PICTURE

Changeling

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

The Dark Knight

Doubt

Frost/Nixon

Milk

The Reader

Slumdog Millionaire

Wall-E

The Wrestler

BEST ACTOR

Clint Eastwood - Gran Torino

Richard Jenkins - The Visitor

Frank Langella - Frost/Nixon

Sean Penn - Milk

Brad Pitt - The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Mickey Rourke - The Wrestler

BEST ACTRESS
Kate Beckinsale - Nothing But the Truth

Cate Blanchett - The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Anne Hathaway - Rachel Getting Married

Angelina Jolie - Changeling

Melissa Leo - Frozen River

Meryl Streep - Doubt

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Josh Brolin - Milk

Robert Downey, Jr. - Tropic Thunder

Philip Seymour Hoffman - Doubt

Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight

James Franco - Milk

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Penelope Cruz - Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Viola Davis - Doubt

Vera Farmiga - Nothing But the Truth

Taraji P. Henson - The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Marisa Tomei - The Wrestler

Kate Winslet - The Reader

BEST ACTING ENSEMBLE

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

The Dark Knight

Doubt

Milk

Rachel Getting Married

BEST DIRECTOR

Danny Boyle - Slumdog Millionaire

David Fincher - The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Ron Howard - Frost/Nixon

Christopher Nolan - The Dark Knight

Gus Van Sant - Milk

BEST WRITER (Original or Adapted Screenplay)

Simon Beaufoy - Slumdog Millionaire

Dustin Lance Black - Milk

Peter Morgan - Frost/Nixon

Eric Roth - The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

John Patrick Shanley - Doubt

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

Bolt

Kung Fu Panda

Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa

Wall-E

Waltz With Bashir

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM

A Christmas Tale

Gomorrah

I’ve Loved You So Long

Let the Right One In

Mongol

Waltz With Bashir

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE

I.O.U.S.A.
Man On Wire

Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired

Standard Operating Procedure

Young At Heart

So there you have it folks. Up next: the Los Angeles Film Critics Association announces their winners later this evening.

Where Have All the Pirates Gone?

The answer to the above question is simple: NOWHERE! In reality, pirates really seem to be making a comeback. In talking about how the Spanish convoy system protected silver being transported across the Atlantic from pirates in an age of a global flow of silver, my mind took me to ships in need of protection from pirates in this age of a global flow of oil. In fact, pirates in today's world are more effective and more dangerous than ever before. If you look closely at the map on the left, you will notice the surge in pirate activity just in the past 11 months in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden. For some reason, pirates merely exist in people's minds as these jolly characters from the old days that they see in Disney movies. Nothing could be more of a complete misrepresentation of the truth! The pirates in the news currently are based in Somalia and pose quite a threat to industry (especially oil) and security. In fact, just today, the top story in African news is, you guessed it, Somali pirates. Click here to read the latest on a Somali hostage situation with a Ukrainian cargo ship. In reality, the situation in Somalia as a whole is the current crisis that the world is largely IGNORING. If you have not been following closely the dire situation there, I strongly encourage you to do so by exploring the BBC's special report-- "Somalia in Crisis" (you can do so by clicking here).

Baroque Culture in Spanish America: The Incorporation of Native Americans in Colonial Life

Baroque culture in Spanish America not only replicated Iberian forms of ornate architecture and intricate scholarly debate, it also incorporated Native Americans into an overall popular culture. Spanish colonial policy officially sought preservation of Indian social units. By establishing “two republics,” one Indian and one Spaniard, colonial authorities attempted to regulate the contact between the two in order to prevent excessive exploitation and thus preserve Indian communities that provided labor and tribute. At the same time Spanish priests introduced Christianity. From the standpoint of the state, Christianization became the vehicle by which the Spaniards incorporated the Indians into colonial cultural life. I would like you to read two views of Indian contact with the Catholic Church, one written by a native Andean lord and the other by a Mexican creole (American born descendant of Spaniards) scholar (you can read both documents by clicking here).

Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala, author of the first document, claimed descent from native Andean lords. Because of his high status, he acquired a Spanish education and served Spanish priests as an interpreter of Quechua, the native language of the Central and Southern Andes of Peru. By the 1560s, he had become a Christian and aided priests in the attempted extirpation of Andean religious practices. Around 1615, after a long career of service to the Church, he wrote a treatise called New Chronicle and Good Government, which surveyed Incan rule, the Spanish conquest and colonial government. In it Guaman Poma de Ayala distinguished between priests who protected the Indian population (particularly friars of various orders) and those parish priests who took advantage of them. In a scathing attack on their venality and sexual misconduct, he rebuked parish priests who abused their positions. His portrait of priestly behavior became a common theme of political literature critical of Spanish colonial rule and part of a long-term intellectual indictment of the Catholic Church in Spanish America.

Writing in 1680, Carlos de Siguenza y Góngara, a Mexican creole university professor, depicted a “creole” view of the Indians’ place in Church and community life. Public religious celebrations offered opportunities for Indians’ place in Church and community life. Public religious celebrations offered opportunities for Indians to participate in colonial popular culture. On this occasion, the Indians of Querétaro, a grain producing area north of Mexico City, organized a costume parade, or máscara, in honor of the Virgin of Guadalupe for whom they had recently built a new church that was officially opened on the day of the parade. The description shows that the natives remembered they separate heritage, which, in this view, formed an integral part of local life.

After reading the two documents, I would like you all to consider and discuss the following: As a native Andean lord, Guaman Poma recognized inequalities in society as natural. But the traditional relationship between Andean lords and their servants was supposed to be reciprocal. In this description, what practice (apart from sexual misconduct) violated reciprocity when the priest employed Indian workers? Based on the principle of reciprocity, what should have constituted proper behavior? Why is sexual misconduct such a potent form of criticism? Referring to the parade for the Virgin of Guadalupe, indicate the ways Indians remembered their pre-Columbian past. In what ways did the natives incorporate Spanish beliefs and practices? What cultural and political values are implied by this “creole” description? How would such parades and the celebrations of popular Christianity likely influence the rural and urban workers such as peasants on haciendas, mine workers, and textile laborers? Finally, given the various cultural currents in Latin America, discuss the relationship between Latin America and the Western European intellectual and religious life. In what ways is a new Latin American civilization being born? Your thoughts…

Economy and Society in Latin America

On settling in the Americas, Spanish and Portuguese colonists created new economic systems that tied the New World to European capitalism. By the middle of the 16th century, Spaniards discovered large veins of silver north of Mexico City at Zacatecas and in the southern Andes at Potosí. As the great wealth of these discoveries became apparent, Spaniards shaped the other sectors of the American economy to support silver. Colonists formed large estates (haciendas) and textile mills (obrajes) to supply animals, food, and clothing to mining centers and to growing cities that served as administrative centers as well as commercial and transportation hubs. Although most of the silver was exported to Europe and Asia, either going into the king’s treasury or paying for luxury goods, enough minted money stayed in the New World to monetize the economy. In this process, money exchange replaced tribute as the means by which producers transferred goods to consumers. In Portuguese America, a similar process took place, except that the product was sugar, not silver. Sugar plantations, particularly in northeastern Brazil, forged a direct economic link to Europe, spurred the development of ranges and farms, and monetized the economy. Despite boom and bust periods, the economic ties between Europe and America became stronger, and the monetary economy spread ever more widely.

The formation of haciendas, plantations, mills, and mines had dramatic social consequences. To solve their labor needs, Spaniards and Portuguese recruited Native Americans and African blacks. The unequal exploitative relationship between European owner and worker of color, whether “Indian,” black, or mixed, became the chief characteristic of society. The first two documents I would like you to read, describing work in the silver mine at Potosí and in a textile mill in Puebla, Mexico, were written by a Carmelite monk who traveled throughout Spanish America between 1612 and 1620. The third document I would like you to read, describing social conditions on a Brazilian sugar plantation, was written by a French cotton merchant who resided in Brazil between 1816 and 1818. You can read all three documents by clicking here.

After you have read the documents, I would like you to think about and discuss the following: How were mita laborers recruited? Describe the difference between a mingado laborer and a mita laborer. What does this difference suggest about the formation of a new society in Peru? How were workers for obrajes recruited? What was the result of government intervention to improve workers’ conditions? Identify the various social groups on the sugar plantation and describe how they relate to one another. What do these social relationships suggest about the type of society being formed in Brazil? What was the French merchant’s view of the Brazilian sugar mill owner’s lifestyle? How does the French merchant view the living conditions of the slaves? What was his reference point? How did conditions of mita laborers in Peru, textile workers in Puebla, Mexico, and workers on the sugar plantation of Brazil compare with other labor systems we have studied this year? What are the advantages and disadvantages of traveler’s accounts in getting at Latin American social conditions? Your thoughts…

Political Styles in Latin America: Colonial Bureaucracy

After the overthrow of Native American states, the first governments in Latin America were colonial administrations set up by Spain and Portugal. The document that I would like you to read deals with important aspects of their political style. Many historians argue that the nature of colonial administration helped shape later political values and institutions in Latin America—even when colonial controls themselves were thrown off.

In theory, Spanish and Portuguese governmental systems concentrated power in the hands of their monarchs. Once a decision was made, it was supposedly executed by a hierarchy of officials descending from the king and his advisers in Europe to a vice-king, or viceroy, in the New World to local officials, or corregidores. Since local officials often lived far from centers of administration, they had the opportunity to exercise much freedom in the application of the law. But more than distance, the social and economic positions of local officials influenced the execution of their duties. Being often poor relatives of high churchmen or top government officials, they came to the New World to gain wealth and elevate their status. Furthermore, since the few lucrative jobs in mining and merchant activity were long ago occupied, and since manual labor, whether agricultural or artisan, was performed by the “mixed” majority, Spanish newcomers sought government positions as a way of entering the economy in a favorable capacity. Few alternatives for upward mobility existed, a condition that remained endemic and persists today. Local officeholding became a means of enrichment.

Just as the owners of haciendas and mines exploited the labor of natives and Africans, so the corregidores extorted money from native communities. They manipulated the tribute tax, which since 1650 was a head tax on adult male “Indians” paid in money. The document that I would like you to read describes the activities of a Corregidor in the viceroyalty of Peru in the 1740s (you can read it by clicking here). The account was written by two agents of the king sent specifically to find corruption. Potential exaggeration on the part of the king’s “spies” is lessened by the structure of the system. Since corregidores had to pay a “surety bond” before collecting the money, they were forced to make up what they already had pledged. The system invited extortion.

After reading the document, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: By what mechanisms did the corregidor profit from his office? What device did the king institute to detect fraud? How did the corregidor avoid censure and punishment? What kind of political heritage is suggested by this report on Peru for later Latin American rulers and also for the ruled? How does this political structure compare with other early modern states, like European national monarchies for example? Your thoughts…

The Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment: New Intellectual Standards in the West

From the 15th through the 18th centuries, intellectual life in the West went through a dizzying series of changes, some contradictory. Renaissance thinkers and artists challenged medieval styles and standards, urging a great focus on humanity and things of this world. The Reformation, shortly on the heels of the Renaissance, argued for a return to religious authority but also shattered the unity of Western Christendom. Ultimately--as became clear by the later 17th century--the cutting edge of Western intellectual life was redefined away from religion and toward the growing authority of science. By science, in turn, Western intellectuals meant a set of rational operations, including both deductive reasoning and experiment, by which scientists could discover the clear-cut laws of nature. Religious authority was not directly attacked, but it was sidestepped in favor of a belief that humans could know what they needed to know by unaided reason. Knowledge itself could progress, rather than referring constantly to faith or tradition.

The documents that I would like you to read, written by leading figures in the Scientific Revolution in the 17th century and its aftermath, the 18th-century Enlightenment, describe the new intellectual framework. Isaac Newton, whose great discoveries in physics and mathematics brought together more than a century of work on planetary motion and the laws of gravity, shows how science and religion could be combined--but obviously on the terms of science (you can read an excerpt from his "View of the World" by clicking here). John Locke, also a 17th-century Englishman, sketches new principles of knowledge wherein reason has the crucial role (you can read read Locke's thoughts on "The Power of Reason by clicking here; please read pg. 12 paragraph 1, pg. 18 part 16, pg. 59 part 2, pg. 567 part 2, pg. 582 part 23, pg. 583 part 1 and 2, pg. 585 part 5, and pg. 588 part 10).

Locke and Enlightenment figures after him intended to apply rational principles and the idea of a harmonious, knowable nature to human society. Obviously, education had to change in order to develop the rational spark inherent in each child. Human institutions, such as criminal punishments, long based on outmoded religion and tradition, could be rethought, again to make the best of the fundamental reason and goodness in each person. Cesare Beccaria, an Italian Enlightenment writer, took the lead here (You can read excerpts from him on "Crimes and Punishments" by clicking here; please read from the very last sentence of pg. 119 through the end of the chapter on pg. 121. You can read excerpts from him on "Torture" by clicking here; please read the first 2 paragraphs of chapter XVI pgs. 58-59).

Science and the Enlightenment were not unchallenged in the Western world, but they did reshape previously dominant belief. Western intellectual life came to rest on assumptions radically different from those of a few centuries before. And there was more. The intellectual revolution reverberated in the wider culture of the West, as ordinary people picked up some of the same assumptions and began to challenge many traditions of popular culture. Finally, as the West spread its influence in the wider world, the baggage of the Age of Reason accompanied its journeys, challenging traditional culture in Asia and Africa. Here, too, the intellectual revolution that started in the West is still working in the world, though with varied results.

After you have read from the above documents, I would like for you all to think about and discuss the following: How did Newton seek to reconcile the idea of a scientifically discoverable nature with Christianity? What was new about his approach? How did Locke alter common Christian thinking about human nature? How would his ideas lead to growing emphasis on the importance of education? Would Locke and Newton have agreed about the importance of religion? How did Beccaria suggest a new approach to the punishment of criminals? Did his approach suggest the scientific and philosophical ideas pioneered earlier by people like Newton and Locke? Were the Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment, in fact, revolutionary compared with earlier Western culture? Would their implications be radical in the context of most other major cultures in the early modern world? Why, and to what extent, did European science begin to differ from science in other parts of the world from the 17th century onward? Your thoughts...

Film Awards Season Kicks Off Today and Slumdog Millionaire Takes an Early Lead

Ladies and gentlemen you will soon find that I am a film nut. I am especially fascinated with the idea of film awards, and I always have been as long as I can remember. I remember the first Oscar ceremony I ever watched was in 1991 when Silence of the Lambs won best picture, and ever since then I was intrigued by what constituted "best picture" and why awards giving bodies like the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (the organization that awards the Oscar) prefer certain films over others. I truly believe that film is one of the most powerful art mediums. In so many ways, I look at film as looking into a mirror and seeing a reflection of our society at any given time. Take for example the popular films of this year, films like Wall-E, that is really in so many ways is an attack on mass consumerism, and to those that could care less about mankind's continuing destruction of our beautiful earthly home, it indeed is a stern warning. I also think of what was probably the most popular year so far, The Dark Knight, perhaps the darkest film yet from the bat franchise. It is a film that is a call for justice in dark and uncertain times and that explores conflicting emotions inside us all. Awards, especially the Oscars, in my opinion, really give the viewer a look into what the public psyche is at any given time. As you observe the films that are nominated for awards and that win awards, it gives you a sense of what concerns society and what society values at that particular point in history. Take for example the films of the 1940s that took home the big prize, especially during the early-40s, films like Casablanca, Mrs. Miniver, and The Best Years of Our Lives. All of these films were dark indeed, really capturing the feeling of the World War II era in America and around the world. At any rate, this year looks like it will be offering up challenging and thought provoking films down to the very final week of the year. Awards season actually officially kicks off when the National Board of Review announces their winners, and that day is today. This year's winner, and now front runner, is Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire. This is a film that I have actually been anticipating for a while, and I am very happy to see the enthusiastic reviews it has already been getting. The following is Fox Searchlight's summary of what the film is about, for those of you that are hearing about it for the first time...

"The story of Jamal Malik (Patel), an 18 year-old orphan from the slums of Mumbai, who is about to experience the biggest day of his life. With the whole nation watching, he is just one question away from winning a staggering 20 million rupees on India's "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?" But when the show breaks for the night, police arrest him on suspicion of cheating; how could a street kid know so much? Desperate to prove his innocence, Jamal tells the story of his life in the slum where he and his brother grew up, of their adventures together on the road, of vicious encounters with local gangs, and of Latika (Pinto), the girl he loved and lost. Each chapter of his story reveals the key to the answer to one of the game show's questions. Each chapter of Jamal's increasingly layered story reveals where he learned the answers to the show's seemingly impossible quizzes. But one question remains a mystery: what is this young man with no apparent desire for riches really doing on the game show? When the new day dawns and Jamal returns to answer the final question, the Inspector and sixty million viewers are about to find out. At the heart of its exuberant storytelling lies the intriguing question of how anyone comes to know the things they know about life and love."

Ladies and gentlemen, the story sounds like one for the ages, and I'm so excited to see a non-Bollywood, serious, thoughtful film taking place in Mumbai, which incidentally is the scene of the latest heinous act of terrorism. The film actually opens in Midtown Atlanta tomorrow at the Tara. Along with Slumdog Millionaire, some other films that I am eagerly anticipating are The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Doubt, and I would say that Frost/Nixon is my most anticipated film of the year because (1) Frank Langella is one of my favorite actors, and unfortunately so few people are familiar with his masterful work on-screen, and (2) I am ready to see any quality film that takes place during the Cold War era, and this one has been getting stunning reviews from those that have seen it pre-release. Below are the other winners from today's announcement...

• Best Film: SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE

• Best Director: DAVID FINCHER, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

• Best Actor: CLINT EASTWOOD, Gran Torino

• Best Actress: ANNE HATHAWAY, Rachel Getting Married

• Best Supporting Actor: JOSH BROLIN, Milk

• Best Supporting Actress: PENELOPE CRUZ, Vicky Cristina Barcelona

• Best Foreign Language Film: MONGOL

• Best Documentary: MAN ON WIRE

• Best Animated Feature: WALL-E

• Best Ensemble Cast: DOUBT
• Breakthrough Performance by an Actor: DEV PATEL, Slumdog Millionaire

• Breakthrough Performance by an Actress: VIOLA DAVIS, Doubt

• Best Directorial Debut: COURTNEY HUNT, Frozen River

• Best Original Screenplay: NICK SCHENK, Gran Torino

• Best Adapted Screenplay: SIMON BEAUFOY, Slumdog Millionaire and ERIC ROTH, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

• Spotlight Award: MELISSA LEO, Frozen River and RICHARD JENKINS, The Visitor

• The BVLGARI Award for NBR Freedom of Expression: TRUMBO

• Top Ten Films (aside from the winner):(In alphabetical order)

BURN AFTER READING

CHANGELING

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON

THE DARK KNIGHT

DEFIANCE

FROST/NIXON

GRAN TORINO

MILK

WALL-E

THE WRESTLER

• Top Five Foreign Language Films :(In alphabetical order)

EDGE OF HEAVEN

LET THE RIGHT ONE IN

ROMAN DE GUERREA

SECRET

WALTZ WITH BASHIR

• Top Five Documentary Films(In alphabetical order)

AMERICAN TEEN

THE BETRAYAL (NERAKHOON)

DEAR ZACHARY

ENCOUNTERS AT THE END OF THE WORLD

ROMAN POLANSKI: WANTED AND DESIRED

Top 10 Independent Films of 2008:(In alphabetical order)
FROZEN RIVER
IN BRUGES
IN SEARCH OF A MIDNIGHT KISS
MR. FOE
RACHEL GETTING MARRIED
SNOW ANGELS
SON OF RAMBOW
WENDY AND LUCY
VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA
THE VISITOR

Just for the record, I am very happy to see that the National Board of Review awarded Mongol Best Foreign Language Film, even if the Whappeys did not this year (meh!). Be sure that I will be following the awards race very closely on the blog through the Oscars, and I look forward to following it with all of you. Next up: Los Angeles Film Critics Association Awards on Tuesday, December 9!

Versailles!

The picture to the left shows Louis XIV's grand 17th-century palace at Versailles. It displays the sheer opulence of this absolute monarchy, in what was Europe's richest and most populous and influential nation. It also shows the renewed hold of a classical style, seen to be most prestigious for public beatings. What else did it suggest?

Architecture is sometimes thought to be the most socially and historically revealing of all the arts because it depends most heavily on public support; it is harder for architects, particularly dealing with public buildings, to be as idiosyncratic as painters or poets may be.

You can click on the artist depiction of Versailles to make it larger. As you look at it closely, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: What kinds of intentions on the part of Louis and his advisers does this building represent? How can Versailles be interpreted as a statement of absolute monarchy in addition to its obvious showiness? What are the relationships to nature and to spatial arrangement? What would the palace represent to an ordinary French person? To an aristocrat? Your thoughts...

New Tensions in the Western Political Tradition: Absolutism and Parliament

A leading historian-sociologist, Charles Tilly, has argued that one of the few great changes in early modern Western history was the strengthening of the state under national monarchs. Without question, many European governments in the 17th century completed tasks of seizing basic political powers from the feudal nobility, developing a strong bureaucracy, and expanding the functions of the central government. New or revived ideals of government power accompanied this shift. In the first document I would like you to read, Bishop Bossuet expounds the doctrine of a strong king--essential to keep order among unruly subjects, father to his people, owed respect and obedience by everyone. The result, Bossuet argued, would be far from arbitrary rule and would work to the greater benefit of the subjects--but there was no question about who was in command. Bossuet was writing in the period of Louis XIV, the model for the absolute monarch not only in France but across Europe.

Older ideals of limited government did not die, however. They revived in 17th-century England at the same time that France was constructing its new absolute monarchy. English civil war led to the execution of one king. In 1688, renewed unrest brought a strong statement of the rights of the parliament and of individual liberties, as King James II was forced to flee, replaced by Dutch ruler William of Orange. The so-called "Glorious Revolution" brought an unprecedented statement on the limits of royal power, as England moved from feudal practices toward parliamentary monarchy.

The diverse changes in the Western political tradition proved durable. Government functions expanded, though less in England than elsewhere until the 20th century. Even when kings were toppled, the state continued to wield new powers--as in revolutionary France after 1789. But the idea of limiting government through individual rights and controlling it through elected bodies remained an important Western emphasis, later copied in some other parts of the world. Some historians have argued that it was the flexibility of the Western political tradition, in contrast, say, to the purer Russian or Chinese emphasis on the state, that has fostered the development and, at times, the distinctive vigor of Western society.

The two documents I would like you to read (you can read both of them by clicking here) invite comparison. Were those who sought to limit the state in times of unrest--as in 17th century England--talking the same language, or did goals and methods shift? How did the constitutional parliamentary ideal differ from the absolutist standards of Bossuet? Has the West managed successfully to reconcile its two modern political traditions? After reading the two documents, I would also like you to consider and discuss the following: How does Bossuet define the powers of monarchy? How does he argue that these powers are essential? Why did this kind of monarchy become known as "absolute"? What were the key features of the parliamentary monarchy" established in principle in Great Britain during 1688 and 1689? What general rights were accorded to all Englishmen by the Bill of Rights? What freedoms were not granted at all? What were the key differences between absolute and parliamentary monarchies? What caused two such different patterns to emerge? In world history terms, which form of monarchy was more unusual? Your thoughts...

Protestantism and Women

The rise of Protestantism inevitably affected discussion of women's roles. By arguing against the special sanctity of celibacy and religious orders, Protestant leaders, beginning with Luther, focused new attention on marriage. At the same time, Protestantism also encouraged a belief in the capacity of individuals to nurture their own contacts with God and the Bible, without elaborate intermediate apparatus from church and priests. This belief might apply to women as well as men. In sum: New debate about women's roles emerged as part of religious ferment, and this extended well into the 17th century.

There were other factors involved. Throughout Western Europe, new arguments were developing about economic roles. The rise of commerce was accompanied by greater gender differentiations, and women who had once held positions in trade and craft manufacture were now often attacked. Women's labor remained essential, but their range of activities narrowed. At the same time, growing prosperity led to more complex household activities, such as more formal evening meals, in which women could take a lead role. Here was another situation in which complex trade-offs occurred.

The following documents that I would like you to read relate directly to the implications of Protestantism, coming from 16th and 17th century England. Protestantism generated ringing reassertions of male authority, derived among other things from close reading of parts of the Bible. But it also generated more radical sects that took quite a different view, and individual women built on this religious ferment to venture some political claims as well.

In recent decades, historians have paid increasing attention to the impact of Protestantism on the family and on women. They have come to realize that some important new issues were emerging, particularly in terms of the imagery and actual roles of women in the family.

The implications of this debate were varied. In many Protestant families, men assumed new moral authority, responsible among other things for guiding family Bible reading. But there was also new attention to the importance of happiness in marriage, which could lead to greater appreciation of women's roles at least domestically. The idea of some political claims, though it led to no immediate change, set the context for renewed discussion of political rights beginning in the late 18th century.

The first two documents that I would like you to read show the gender-conservative side of Protestantism, with a statement by the Scottish Calvinist leader, John Knox (you can read it by clicking here; the last paragraph of pg. 13 all the way through the end of the first paragraph on page 15), and a 17th century marriage text by a Protestant minister, William Gouge (you can read it by clicking here; just read part 5, pgs. 192-193). The more radical side is expressed by George Fox, an English Quaker leader (you can read it by clicking here, just read part CCXCI, pgs 39-41). Quakers argued that women could be priests, and organized women's meetings widely in 1671. The last document I'd like you to read shows how Protestantism could lead to political claims, as 17th century women asserted their rights to a voice before the English parliament in seeking the release of husbands who had been arrested for their participation in the Levelers, a radical religious/political group (you can read it by clicking here).

Once you have read the documents, I would like for you to think about and discuss the following: Why was there a tension in Protestantism over women's position and religious role? How did conservatives base their claims? How did radicals base theirs? What was the relationship between the "humble petition" to parliament and Protestant ideas? What kind of rights were the petitioners claiming, and were they revolutionary? What were the implications of this running debate over women's status? How might it affect relations between men and women in early modern England? How might Protestant leaders and ordinary Protestants work out some compromise between conservative and radical views about women? Were ideas about women and gender relations changing faster at this point in Western Europe than in other parts of the world? Why did Protestants promote a new debate about women and gender relations? Your thoughts...

The Protestant Reformation

In 1517, a German monk, Martin Luther, posted 95 theses, or propositions, on a church door in Wittenberg. These theses condemned many practices of the Catholic Church. Luther particularly objected to the Church's practice of selling indulgences, or spiritual credits, by which people might gain credit toward salvation in heaven. In Luther's eyes, this practice reflected a corrupt church, headed by a venal papacy, but also a totally mistaken belief that people could gain salvation by specific practices, rather than faith and divine predestination.

Luther's attacks were met by Catholic rejection, but Luther continued his efforts, appealing to many groups in Germany for a variety of reasons. Some sincerely agreed with Luther and thought he was pointing toward a true version of Christianity. Others also saw political or social advantages in a new religion. Because Luther and his followers were protesting Catholicism, they were soon called Protestants. A permanent split had opened in Western Christendom.

Lutheranism spread widely in Germany and also in Scandinavia. Other versions of Protestantism, which picked up Lutheran elements but added other doctrines, spread in parts of France, Switzerland, the Netherlands, England, and Scotland, and from these centers spread to North America. Protestantism, and the Catholic response, which included some key reforms within the Church, proved vital in European history not only because of the religious division and ensuing wars, but also because of the role of religious change in spurring new developments in areas as diverse as the economy and family life.

Early in his reformist career, in 1520, Luther wrote (in German, rather than Latin) a "Letter to the German Nobility," which sought to rouse their support.

In it he explained many of his objections to Catholic practices and his growing opposition to the pope. He also implied the need for major changes in church government, in family life, in leisure, and in the economy that foreshadowed important developments in Protestant regions in the decades to come.

The document that I would like you to read is an important statement in the early Reformation, but also a challenge to analysis, in figuring out some of the wider implications of Protestantism. Luther's letter also explains some of the diverse appeals offered through this new religious movement. Finally, the letter offers insight into Luther's own motivation, in what proved to be a determined but very difficult personal crusade. You can click here to read excerpts from this letter, but look carefully first at what I need you to read: section 9 (pgs. 108-110), section 11 (just what is on pg. 111), pg. 114 paragraph 1-pg. 115 paragraph 1, the bottom half of pg. 119, the first paragraph of section 18 (pg. 127), the last paragraph of section 19 (pg. 129), the first two paragraphs of section 21 (pgs. 134-135), and the last paragraph of pg. 163 through the rest of pg. 164. Although this may seem like a lot, it's actually a fairly quick read.

When you have finished reading those excerpts, I would like you all to think about and discuss the following: What are the main objections Luther had to Catholic practice? What kinds of change does Luther seek in the clergy, and why? What aspects of the existing church-state relationship does Luther attack? What kinds of church-state relations might follow from his views? Why does Luther attack pilgrimages? What are more appropriate duties of the good Christian in his opinion? What kinds of economic change does Luther imply? Would the spread of Protestantism affect the European economy? What kinds of changes in family life does Luther imply? What kinds of appeals does Luther offer, explicitly or implicitly, to the various groups in German society? What might motivate various groups to become Protestant? How does Luther relate to a sense of German identity? How would you interpret Luther's own motivation? What caused him to take on one of the most powerful institutions in Western Europe? Did the Reformation cause similar changes in Europe compared to those prompted by the Renaissance or were the two movements very different? How, if at all, did they combine? Your thoughts...