"Prometheus" marks end of arrival for Michael Fassbender

I always feel robbed when an indie film star finally hits a stride of mainstream hits, and very quickly ceases to be mine. Michael Fassbender wasn't a cinder of non-existence at the start of last year, having had plenty more than memorable roles in the few years prior. His winning single-chapter stint in "Inglourious Basterds" was my first brush with the transformative actor, playing a charismatic connoisseur of cinema. Indeed he has taken in cinema of a rather wide branch, from his less known, but far more devastating work on films like "Hunger" and "Fish Tank", Fassbender is now one of the latest exciting commodities in mainstream film.

"Prometheus", which released recently to high buzz followed by declining critical and box office returns, does mark a certain climax in terms of this massive arrival party for Fassbender. It seems all too appropriate, given he's playing a corporate robot of massive intellectual properties who defies rational behavior to achieve his goals. The fact that Fassbender has had such a dynamite reception as of recent is some kind of oddity, though he has honestly been silently paving the way for a boom of activity that rushes him into the public interest. His work in mainstream cinema actually goes all the way back to 2007.

2 Years of 'High on Celluloid'!

It's kind of hard to think that I've only been working on this site for two years, but at a point it seems like time becomes a less solid thing. I map things out by experience, and I am still very dissatisfied with my work in my entire first year. It was mostly based on these minimalist and isolationist ramblings of somebody who hadn't lived, and therefore didn't have an opinion. I think that the film that really begged me to be more individual and self-assured in my dissent from the popular opinion was "Black Swan", which was oddly absorbed by the popular opinion. Society's sensual obsession with it seemed to minimalize the accomplishment.

If you brought it up to any average person who liked it, they'll say that Natalie Portman's performance is the film. Those who disliked it will narrow it down to being an average thriller. Both miss the point of the film entirely, and I kept reaching these emotional roadblocks in others' responses, and I simply balked at it. It suddenly became so apparent how flawed the public opinion is, which was further compounded by "The King's Speech" winning Best Picture at this year's Oscar race. I thought of the film's true merits, which were few, and it got me to scrutinize the other players in the race, and finding I wasn't as taken with "Toy Story 3", "The Social Network", or "True Grit" as I thought.

I owe some of that sudden change to my film professors, who've done an absolutely brilliant job of broadening my horizon, if feeding my ego a tad too much inadvertently. I owe a great deal more to "Black Swan", as those central themes of railing against your owners in defense of what you believe just ignited inside me. Realize that I gave 17 A-range reviews last year, and only four so far this year, two of which in the past two weeks. I raised my standards to what they should be, rather than settling for less. If I operated this year the way I did in 2010, I think I'd have lost more readers than I'd have gained. The readers I have now are at least more specific.

Carpet-Bagging: On the Eve of Venice

Things are about to get really interesting very quickly. The 2011 awards season is basically less than one day from being set into motion, with Venice kicking off their festivities with the premiere of "The Ides of March". This is one that many will be talking about, although I must admit that I'm still unconvinced. Some of the moments in the trailer didn't seem to quite congeal, and the intense thriller push from the marketing team seems to be working counter-productively. It ultimately gets me to the point of wondering exactly what the point is in this film. What are the stakes, if any? Nothing seems clear, which may just be the marketing. We'll have to wait until reviews surface, but I get the feeling I won't get what everyone loves about it.

What "The Ides of March" has on its side is that it's right up the Academy's alley. I haven't a doubt that they'll embrace this one, at least as far as a nomination. There are several films this year, however excellent they may be, that just don't fall in line with the Academy bias. I expect others to debate this claim, but I think "Carnage" is one of those films. Roman Polanski has had a prosperous history with the Academy, but his bad press in recent years has probably dispelled any possibilities of future Oscar success. I'd say Kate Winslet and Christoph Waltz are both potent acting nominees, at least from the trailer. I still get the sense that this film was largely miscast, and by that I mean by 50%. That's a sizable problem.