Golden Globe Predictions

Below, I've gone through the film-related Golden Globe categories and picked what I feel should win and what I think will win.

Drama - Should: Foxcatcher | Will: Boyhood

Drama Actress - Should: Felicity Jones| Will: Julianne Moore

Drama Actor - Should: Steve Carrell | Will: Eddie Redmayne

Musical/Comedy - Should: The Grand Budapest Hotel | Will: Birdman

Musical/Comedy Actress - Should: Amy Adams | Will: Amy Adams

Musical/Comedy Actor - Should: Christoph Waltz | Will: Michael Keaton

Animated - Should: The Lego Movie | Will: The Lego Movie

 

 

Foreign Language - Should: No Opinion | Will: Ida

Supporting Actress - Should: Keira Knightley | Will: Patricia Arquette 

Supporting Actor - Should: Mark Ruffalo | Will: J.K. Simmons

Director - Should: Richard Linklater | Will: Richard Linklater

Screenplay - Should: Wes Anderson | Will: Alejandro González Iñarritu

Score - Should: Hans Zimmer | Will: Hans Zimmer

 

 

Song - Should: Big Eyes | Will: The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Part 1

The Difference is in the Lightroom

A teacher once told me that Lightroom was a cheaper, easier to use, simpler version of Photoshop. I said, then why do I own both? Why does Adobe sell both of them together? And why would half of the raw-shooting*, professional photography community recommend the software? Because it serves a different purpose. The people over at Adobe took a misstep in naming Lightroom "Adobe Photoshop Lightroom." This gives it the appearance of being some other version of Photoshop Elements (which is actually a cheaper, easier to use, simpler version of Photoshop). The whole reason for Lightroom's existence is because of raw. Back when the capability to shoot raw emerged, photographers didn't have a way to fully utilize the data that they had.

*Raw is a type of file format. Raw pictures capture more data than a compressed file would, so you have more power over the final image in post. JPG is compressed. DNG is raw.

Every photo I take is raw, and I always edit in Lightroom. To see what amazing changes can be accomplished with Lightroom, look below.

Fargo: Mike Yanagita

He's the man and the legend that you probably don't remember. If you've seen the (spectacular) movie, Fargo, watch the clip below to jog your memory. If you haven't seen Fargo, watch anyways because it is completely spoiler-free.

The following has SPOILERS, so go watch Fargo first!

What a pathetic man. Possibly the most pathetic character to ever grace the big screen. And most people don't understand why he is even in the movie.

 

Who is Mike Yanagita?

From what we can tell, he is an old friend of Marge's from high school.

 

Why is he so pathetic?

A few things throughout the scene characterize him as such:

1. Hugged Marge for an awkward amount of time.

2. Goes to sit next to Marge but is asked not to.

3. Tries to apologize.

4. "I always liked you so much!" followed by a creepy smile.

5. Practically starts to cry in front of Marge.

6. "You are such a super lady! I'm so lonely."

7. Lied about his wife dying to get sympathy from Marge.

 

What's the big deal about this scene?

Most people who see Fargo wonder why this scene was included. It doesn't seem to advance the plot in any way, so, therefore, doesn't have a purpose.

 

Is there a point to this scene?

There are two explanations. One is that when Marge learned that Mike had lied to her, it reminded her other people's ability to deceive. She thought back to her case and how she had just believed Jerry without any thought otherwise. Next thing you know, she goes back to Jerry and catches him in a lie. In this way, the Mike Yanagita scene did advance the plot. The other explanation is that the scene was created for the sole purpose of character development. Through Joel and Ethan Coen's brilliant writing, Marge's personality is further revealed. If you think like I do, then you might think that both of these explanation are too similar to be separated. The theory that I like the most and feel works the best is that this experience shows the viewer and Marge her personality in that she is too trusting. This helps characterize Marge and further illustrate the overall point of the movie (more on that in next question) to the viewer, and it gets Marge to reanalyze her past decisions in her case. So yes, there is a point to the scene.

What is the "overall point" of Fargo, and how does Marge's conversation with Mike further this point?

Fargo is about Marge's understanding of humanity. At first, she was slightly naive as to what people would do to get what they want. She lived in quiet Minnesota with her supportive husband, and even though she was a cop, she hadn't had experience with evil people. After finding the bodies near the beginning, she went along with the case as if it were an everyday case. Halfway through the movie, Mike and Marge had their talk. This was a pivotal scene because she started to understand how crooked some people could be. Then, at the end of the movie, she expressed her disbelief to Gaear (the guy who introduced Carl to the woodchipper) of how terrible the criminals were. Such violence and greed wouldn't have occurred to her. The last line of the movie sums it up:

Marge: "Well, I just don't understand it."

The final scene.

Note: A "Mike Yanagita" is a term I might use in the future to mean a character or scene that helps characterize someone but doesn't advance the plot. For example: John Doe really just serves the purpose of being a "Mike Yanagita" for Wendy Smith. After that, Wendy really makes sense to the viewer.

Note: I first saw this movie on T.V., and since they have to edit films to fit the time allotted, Mike Yanagita got cut. After seeing the T.V. cut, I gave Fargo 9 out of 10 stars and the 22nd spot on my all time movies list. While browsing the inter-webs, I discovered Mike Yanagita. Since then, I've changed my rating to a 10 out of 10 and the 11th all time movie spot. Apparently I love this scene.