Sublime Scintillating Spaniard

‘…I traced the general points of middle height, and considerable breadth of chest. He had a dark face, with stern features and a heavy brow…’[i]

‘…A ray fell on his features … the eyes deep set and singular…a tall, athletic, well-formed man…’[ii]

All great beings fall; none are infallible. The mighty Achilles at the artful hands of Paris, the ‘Infernal Serpent’ Satan in his rebellion against Milton's 'Awful Monarch', and the heroic Fall of Adam and Eve. Classical and epic allusions aplenty, this 'fall' was one of graciousness: on the eve of his defense of Wimbledon, Rafael Nadal, calmly, though sadly, withdrew from the most remarkable and cherished event on the tennis calendar. This occurred only three weeks after his attempt to win the clay court title of the year for the fifth straight time. Chasing this record, Rafael Nadal lost out. But, it is on the occasion of this loss that it seems about time to acknowledge the achievement of this young tennis player and the incredible impact he has had upon the sport.

The annual ATP tennis awards given out in March, culminated a fantastic year of men's tennis. The man who led the year 2008 was none other than Nadal. One of the most respected players on the ATP tour, Andy Roddick, spoke out about how underrated he is as a tennis player. He specified the fact that the complete quality of his game goes unrecognised due to his being predominantly known for his heavy, powerful groundstrokes. It is his forehand which perhaps marked him out when he first made an impact on the tour in 2005, but any player who has the task of gaining the top spot in men's tennis from one Roger Federer has to have improved his game immensely. This was the task to be undertaken by the young Majorcan native.

Firstly, I would like to account for the remarkable achievements of Roger Federer, a man who rose to the top of the tennis world to dominate men's tennis after the likes of Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi. At the final Grand Slam of 2008 Federer captured his thirteenth major trophy, in doing so, he accomplished a huge feat, leaving himself only one Grand Slam title behind Pete Sampras. Federer successfully equaled the feat, winning the French Open, and completed his quest for a Grand Slam and a win on every surface. On the course of his tennis journey Federer has gained tremendous amounts of praise for the high quality of his play, and has been likened to the great Bjorn Borg - especially having equaled his record of five Wimbledon titles in a row. One of the prevailing comments is on the balletic nature of his game. And it is impossible to argue with such a view. His ability to glide across the court with such precise footwork is a spectacle to admire. He has already secured his place as a legend of the sporting world, and the sheer high standard of his game ensured that his position at the top of the world ranking could only be relinquished to someone whose tennis would come close to his at the height of his career: Rafael Nadal.

Nadal’s early successes were signs of what would come in future years. He took part in the Davis Cup final against the USA in 2004 and made a firm mark upon the spectators and critics alike: he won against the world number two Andy Roddick. During that year, he had been unable to participate in the French Open and Wimbledon, but this would only add to his desire to win in his first attempt the following year in 2005. Approaching the French Open, he won in Montecarlo, Barcelona, and Rome. Such victories made success in Paris seem possible. On his French Open debut, the nineteen year old Nadal charged through on his hopeful path to the final. Ferrer and Federer lay in his way along with Gasquet and Grosjean. He beat the Frenchmen, but whether he could beat Federer in the semi-finals was another matter. Federer was not of much concern, and the nineteen year old achieved a place in his first Grand Slam final. Four sets and the trophy was his.

In 2006 the clay court tournaments belonged to Nadal once again. This time he defeated Federer in the French Open final, securing his supremacy on the red brick. This year, though, he would prove to all his critics that he could play well on other surfaces too. Nadal, perhaps unexpectedly, had achieved a place against Federer in the Wimbledon final. He took the only set off the grass court king that he lost throughout the entire tournament. Nadal had shown his ability to be masterful on the hallowed green turf.

The next year would follow in similar suit. Nadal won the French, beating Federer in the final for a second year running. The pair met once again in the Wimbledon final, but this time the match told a different story. Nadal was not to be left behind by the reigning champion. The world number two challenged the world number one to five sets of brilliant tennis. Federer won his remarkable fifth consecutive Wimbledon trophy, but the world knew that Nadal would be back again. Shortly after the final, the great Bjorn Borg made a daring prediction that Wimbledon 2008 would have a new champion in Rafael Nadal.

The semi-finals at the Australian Open 2008 illustrated Nadal’s capabilities on all surfaces. But for the first year in some time neither of the world’s top two tennis players could win a title in the first part of the tennis calendar. Then came the European clay court tournaments, and forward charged the clay court master. Nadal won Montecarlo, Barcelona, and Hamburg, sending warning signs to all the players out there that he was on as good form as ever. At the semi-finals of Hamburg he needed to win against Djokovic or else his world number two ranking would be wrestled from him. But in true style he beat Djokovic and went on to take the title from Federer. The French Open trophy was just waiting to be lifted by the Spaniard for a fourth time. He won with an impressive feat, not losing a single set and demolishing Federer in the final: 61, 63, 60. Borg’s record had been matched. Questions were buzzing around the tennis world: would the two meet again at the next Grand Slam? And could there be a future change at the top of the rankings?

The success story continued. Nadal played at Queens in Britain. And for the first time in history, the winner of the French Open won at Queens too. Nadal impressed all with his rapid change from clay to grass. Only Wimbledon was waiting. He eased through matches, far more easily than in previous years. The British hoped for an exciting clash with Andy Murray in the quarter finals, but the match proved a display for the power and exquisite shot making of Nadal’s game. Nadal won convincingly in three sets. Murray spoke after the match and said he had simply been outplayed. He stated that if Nadal played the way he had during their match, he could go on to win the title.

The semi-final won, all that was left was to face a familiar opponent in the final: Roger Federer, King of Grass. Critics and spectators alike, hoped for a brilliant clash of two phenomenal players. But could Nadal knock Federer off his pedestal? The first two sets surprised everyone. Nadal won them comfortably 64, 64 whilst showing magnificent shot making and stunning the crowd. What had happened to Federer? Would it be a three set win for Nadal? No, it wouldn’t. Federer fought back winning the third and fourth sets. It was in the fourth set tie-break that two shots were played defying all explanation: Nadal’s exquisite forehand, and Federer’s beautiful backhand. They were sublime. Out of this world. Two of the greatest shots in the game. How was it possible to make such beautiful shots? The match had yet to go on. Two sets all, into a deciding set. Neck and neck, the two astounding players battled to 7-7. And then Nadal broke. Could he serve for the match. One match point. Squandered. His fourth match point of the match: Federer hit the ball into the net. After four hours and forty-eight minutes of play, rain breaks and virtual darkness, Nadal lay down on his back, arms stretched out: Wimbledon had a new champion in the twilight. Cameras flashed, the crowd cheered; they had just witnessed a great sporting spectacle. A rare spectacle, when the two giants of the sport perform phenomenally in an epic clash. Nadal was finally able to lift the coveted trophy. And in the dark he did.

To add to a wonderful year of tennis, Rafael Nadal was guaranteed to rise to the top spot. And so he did, the day after he won the Olympic gold medal for Spain. He had also helped the Spanish team to the Davis Cup final, and although unable to participate due to injury, Nadal was able to bask in Spain’s victory over Argentina.

After more problems with his knees, causing him to withdraw from the year end Masters Cup, Nadal returned at the beginning of 2009 with great prospects ahead of him. A Grand Slam on hard court would confirm his being in the presence of the giants of the game. After a five set match with compatriot Verdasco, culminating in a win for Nadal, he returned shortly to face Federer in the final. The match, not as great, but reminiscent of their Wimbledon final took five sets to complete, with the Spaniard victorious. Critics were stunned as to how this twenty-two year old could play two such taxing matches back-to-back and perform supremely in both. Nadal joined the company of the tennis greats.

His great qualities carry beyond the game itself; his attitude both on and off the court make him a figure revered by critics, other players, and fans alike. The anecdote of his uncle and coach Toni warning him not to ever break or smash a racket is well known by all. Tantrums are absent from his on-court game. His loss at the French Open this year showed to all sports fans the admirable nature of Nadal’s character and attitude:

It is not a tragedy since as I say it had to happen one day. It is something I have to live with and that's it. I played really bad, very short, not agressive enough (or not at all) with out any calm and on top of that he played well.

With Nadal’s withdrawl from this year’s Wimbledon it is more than possible that Federer will regain the top spot in the men’s rankings. But Nadal is clearly not phased by this. As he said himself, tennis is a game; there are victories and there are losses. Players must be able to accept all that comes their way, and to accept it graciously. We can only admire Nadal’s attitude. Steffi Graff recently commented in an online German magazine on his immense passion for the game:

If you watch Rafael Nadal play tennis, you can only respond with amazement and great admiration. He is an incredible athlete with so much discipline, so much concentration and someone who likes to put a lot of passion into every point.
Words fail to come out of me to describe his game appropriately. I've rarely seen anyone who approaches a ball with so much attention. With such passion and joy that it makes it great fun to watch him. With him, you can associate everything that makes tennis so beautiful.

We can only hope that Rafael Nadal will always show this passion and respect Graff attributes to him.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Worthwhile reads:

Simon Kinnesley, Rafael Nadal puts success down to home comforts and a quiet life,

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article6455384.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1

The Rafael Nadal Blog, http://timesonline.typepad.com/rafael_nadal/

---

[i] Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre

[ii] Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights

Ravishing Restoration Romp and Tantilising Tennis

I intended to wake up much later this morning. But did that happen? No. I wake up at quarter past six. How ridiculous. The one morning of the week I don't need to get up early. So, having woken up early I attempted to doze for a bit a longer. This didn't really work. I then decided I would check out what happened in the tennis yesterday absolutely convinced that Nalbandian would have beaten Nadal. To my surprise the match was still playing with Nalbandian a set and a break up. So, I've just been making various minor adjustments to my blogs whilst keeping a check on the live score - yes, that is how sad I am, watching live scores on the internet. I don't actually have any means to watch tennis, until it gets round to the British part of the 'season'. Anyway, somehow, Rafa managed to claw back the second set and then go on to win the third 6-0. How does he do it? He really is an amazing sportsman. He's the player I would most love to watch, even more so than Federer I think. His energy is just phenomenal. Actually, I watched the England-France rugby last weekend. It was great to see England look vaguely like a team. I just hope that they can build on that. And, nearly forgot, I watched the Liverpool vs. Man U highlights. It was so satisfying to see Liverpool kick their asses. Torres and Gerrard are awesome. I'd pretty much lost my interest in football until I watched that match, well I've never entirely lost interest in football, but it was greatly irritating me. The match reminded me what I love about football. And this year, I am determined to get a ticket to watch Liverpool play. I've been saying I would like to see them since I was ten. I think it's about time! I would love to see a rugby match too. A cricket match would be pretty good. A tennis match would just be bloody wonderful.

Anyway, moving on from my sports rant, if you're wondering what the hell my title is about then I shall now explain. This week for my Renaissance to Restoration module I've been reading The Frolicks, a small, relatively unknown Restoration play by a woman called Elizabeth Polwhele. AND, this is the best part, I've been reading Wycheley's The Country Wife. I finished them both yesterday and I have to admit that I love these types of plays. The Country Wife especially. There is something so irrestistible about it. I suppose it's slightly odd considering the plot consists of a lot of womanising. But, when you have a main character called Horner, it's so hard not to love. I found myself on the verge of laughing out loud at several points of the play. I think the fact that Horner manages to convince virtually all the men around him that he's a eunuch and then procedes to play around with four women right under their noses is enough to result in a few giggles. And, of course, the classic case of double entendre and sexual innuendo: the china scene. I won't explain what happens, 'cause it's worth having a look at this and I wouldn't want to give the whole scene away. But, I'm pretty sure you have an idea of what goes on with the word china. Aside from the extremely humourous side to the play there are pretty dark elements too. If it's seen as a portrayal and /or critique of Restoration society then it reveals some quite sinister truths. There's the relationship of the country and the city, the role of women within marriage, the role of women within the city, and so on and so forth. Altogether a fantastic play (doesn't beat Shakespeare but who does?).

I have to confess to wanting to see the film The Young Victoria. I just cannot get enough of period dramas. The fact that Emily Blunt is a relatively attractive actress playing a non-attractive queen doesn't really bother me. I saw a trailer for it last weekend when I'd gone to see Benjamin Button. I can't believe Paul Bettany's in it. I didn't even recognise him, just picked up on his voice. He's in the most random range of films.

Anyway, I think I'll leave it there after rabbiting on for a while. I'm going to try and write a letter to one of my friends in the hope it gets to her by Saturday otherwise she will go back to uni next term and find a very outdated letter waiting for her.

Adios, for now...

Just Pondering...

It's been a while since I've written anything on here. In fact, it's been a while since I've written anything at all. I seem to think of things whenever I don't have a pen or paper with me, or my laptop in front of me. And when I do, I have work to do and thus have zilch time to write. However, as of now, that has changed, obviously, as I'm actually sitting here, at home - and I mean home home, not university - with my laptop in front of me, writing. In fact that changed yesterday when I came up with few more ideas for my novel. I say 'my novel' as if there is just one. There are several, all just as incomplete and, ultimately, just as crap as each other. This one, for the time being, is called Emily - no title has been decided upon.

Anyway, after several months of not choreographing anything - well, there were a few dances I started and never finished - I began choreographing a dance a couple of days ago, and it is, amazingly, going somewhere. For the first time in about five years it's a solo dance. It's pretty good to have free reign on what goes into the dance. I chose a Stereophonics song, a bit random, I suppose. But, I love the music and it just seemed right to do it.

I'm absolutely in love with the Stereophonics. Something about the music - I think a combination of Kelly Jones's voice, the lyrics and just generally the style - seems to suit my ear. I keep listening and listening and have not got at all tired with it. Weird. It's rare that it happens. I've only ever been like that with Coldplay. I still am like that with Coldplay. Other bands just don't seem to cut it. Well, some of their music does, but not song after song after song.

As a final thought before I head off to my bed - it's calling for me now - 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button'. I went to see it tonight and I have to admit to being impressed with it. I thought Brad Pitt, despite being damn irritating in real life (not that I know the guy), was pretty good and Cate Blanchett was excellent as per usual. What most grabbed my attention was the story itself. I'm going to have to read Fitzgerald's original short story to satisfy my curiosity - fitting word, I suppose. I enjoyed The Great Gatsby. More than enjoyed it, I think. Although, Tender is the Night didn't have the same effect on me. Lack of sympathy for the characters, I feel. But with Gatsby I actually felt something towards him.

Anyway, I really must go now before I doze off right here.

Au revoir, for now...

Sublime Scintillating Spaniard

‘…I traced the general points of middle height, and considerable breadth of chest. He had a dark face, with stern features and a heavy brow…’[i]

‘…A ray fell on his features … the eyes deep set and singular…a tall, athletic, well-formed man…’[ii]

All great beings fall; none are infallible. The mighty Achilles at the artful hands of Paris, the ‘Infernal Serpent’ Satan in his rebellion against Milton's 'Awful Monarch', and the heroic Fall of Adam and Eve. Classical and epic allusions aplenty, this 'fall' was one of graciousness: on the eve of his defense of Wimbledon, Rafael Nadal, calmly, though sadly, withdrew from the most remarkable and cherished event on the tennis calendar. This occurred only three weeks after his attempt to win the clay court title of the year for the fifth straight time. Chasing this record, Rafael Nadal lost out. But, it is on the occasion of this loss that it seems about time to acknowledge the achievement of this young tennis player and the incredible impact he has had upon the sport.

The annual ATP tennis awards given out in..., culminated a fantastic year of men's tennis. The man who led the year 2008 was none other than Nadal. One of the most respected players on the ATP tour, Andy Roddick, spoke out about how underrated he is as a tennis player. He specified the fact that the complete quality of his game goes unrecognised due to his being predominantly known for his heavy, powerful groundstrokes. It is his forehand which perhaps marked him out when he first made an impact on the tour in 2005, but any player who has the task of gaining the top spot in men's tennis from one Roger Federer has to have improved his game immensely. This was the task to be undertaken by the young Majorcan native.

Firstly, I would like to account for the remarkable achievements of Roger Federer, a man who rose to the top of the tennis world to dominate men's tennis after the likes of Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi. At the final Grand Slam of 2008 Federer captured his thirteenth major trophy, in doing so, he accomplished a huge feat, leaving himself only one Grand Slam title behind Pete Sampras. Federer successfully equaled the feat, winning the French Open, and completed his quest for a Grand Slam and a win on every surface. On the course of his tennis journey Federer has gained tremendous amounts of praise for the high quality of his play, and has been likened to the great Bjorn Borg - especially having equaled his record of five Wimbledon titles in a row. One of the prevailing comments is on the balletic nature of his game. And it is impossible to argue with such a view. His ability to glide across the court with such precise footwork is a spectacle to admire. He has already secured his place as a legend of the sporting world, and the sheer high standard of his game ensured that his position at the top of the world ranking could only be relinquished to someone whose tennis would come close to his at the height of his career: Rafael Nadal.

Nadal’s early successes were signs of what would come in future years. He took part in the Davis Cup final against the USA in 2004 and made a firm mark upon the spectators and critics alike: he won against the world number two Andy Roddick. During that year, he had been unable to participate in the French Open and Wimbledon, but this would only add to his desire to win in his first attempt the following year in 2005. Approaching the French Open, he won in Montecarlo, Barcelona, and Rome. Such victories made success in Paris seem possible. On his French Open debut, the nineteen year old Nadal charged through on his hopeful path to the final. Ferrer and Federer lay in his way along with Gasquet and Grosjean. He beat the Frenchmen, but whether he could beat Federer in the semi-finals was another matter. Federer was not of much concern, and the nineteen year old achieved a place in his first Grand Slam final. Four sets and the trophy was his.

In 2006 the clay court tournaments belonged to Nadal once again. This time he defeated Federer in the French Open final, securing his supremacy on the red brick. This year, though, he would prove to all his critics that he could play well on other surfaces too. Nadal, perhaps unexpectedly, had achieved a place against Federer in the Wimbledon final. He took the only set off the grass court king that he lost throughout the entire tournament. Nadal had shown his ability to be masterful on the hallowed green turf.

The next year would follow in similar suit. Nadal won the French, beating Federer in the final for a second year running. The pair met once again in the Wimbledon final, but this time the match told a different story. Nadal was not to be left behind by the reigning champion. The world number two challenged the world number one to five sets of brilliant tennis. Federer won his remarkable fifth consecutive Wimbledon trophy, but the world knew that Nadal would be back again. Shortly after the final, the great Bjorn Borg made a daring prediction that Wimbledon 2008 would have a new champion in Rafael Nadal.

The semi-finals at the Australian Open 2008 illustrated Nadal’s capabilities on all surfaces. But for the first year in some time neither of the world’s top two tennis players could win a title in the first part of the tennis calendar. Then came the European clay court tournaments, and forward charged the clay court master. Nadal won Montecarlo, Barcelona, and Hamburg, sending warning signs to all the players out there that he was on as good form as ever. At the semi-finals of Hamburg he needed to win against Djokovic or else his world number two ranking would be wrestled from him. But in true style he beat Djokovic and went on to take the title from Federer. The French Open trophy was just waiting to be lifted by the Spaniard for a fourth time. He won with an impressive feat, not losing a single set and demolishing Federer in the final: 61, 63, 60. Borg’s record had been matched. Questions were buzzing around the tennis world: would the two meet again at the next Grand Slam? And could there be a future change at the top of the rankings?

The success story continued. Nadal played at Queens in Britain. And for the first time in history, the winner of the French Open won at Queens too. Nadal impressed all with his rapid change from clay to grass. Only Wimbledon was waiting. He eased through matches, far more easily than in previous years. The British hoped for an exciting clash with Andy Murray in the quarter finals, but the match proved a display for the power and exquisite shot making of Nadal’s game. Nadal won convincingly in three sets. Murray spoke after the match and said he had simply been outplayed. He stated that if Nadal played the way he had during their match, he could go on to win the title.

The semi-final won, all that was left was to face a familiar opponent in the final: Roger Federer, King of Grass. Critics and spectators alike, hoped for a brilliant clash of two phenomenal players. But could Nadal knock Federer off his pedestal? The first two sets surprised everyone. Nadal won them comfortably 64, 64 whilst showing magnificent shot making and stunning the crowd. What had happened to Federer? Would it be a three set win for Nadal? No, it wouldn’t. Federer fought back winning the third and fourth sets. It was in the fourth set tie-break that two shots were played defying all explanation: Nadal’s exquisite forehand, and Federer’s beautiful backhand. They were sublime. Out of this world. Two of the greatest shots in the game. How was it possible to make such beautiful shots? The match had yet to go on. Two sets all, into a deciding set. Neck and neck, the two astounding players battled to 7-7. And then Nadal broke. Could he serve for the match. One match point. Squandered. His fourth match point of the match: Federer hit the ball into the net. After four hours and forty-eight minutes of play, rain breaks and virtual darkness, Nadal lay down on his back, arms stretched out: Wimbledon had a new champion in the twilight. Cameras flashed, the crowd cheered; they had just witnessed a great sporting spectacle. A rare spectacle, when the two giants of the sport perform phenomenally in an epic clash. Nadal was finally able to lift the coveted trophy. And in the dark he did.

To add to a wonderful year of tennis, Rafael Nadal was guaranteed to rise to the top spot. And so he did, the day after he won the Olympic gold medal for Spain. He had also helped the Spanish team to the Davis Cup final, and although unable to participate due to injury, Nadal was able to bask in Spain’s victory over Argentina.

After more problems with his knees, causing him to withdraw from the year end Masters Cup, Nadal returned at the beginning of 2009 with great prospects ahead of him. A Grand Slam on hard court would confirm his being in the presence of the giants of the game. After a five set match with compatriot Verdasco, culminating in a win for Nadal, he returned shortly to face Federer in the final. The match, not as great, but reminiscent of their Wimbledon final took five sets to complete, with the Spaniard victorious. Critics were stunned as to how this twenty-two year old could play two such taxing matches back-to-back and perform supremely in both. Nadal joined the company of the tennis greats.

His great qualities carry beyond the game itself; his attitude both on and off the court make him a figure revered by critics, other players, and fans alike. The anecdote of his uncle and coach Toni warning him not to ever break or smash a racket is well known by all. Tantrums are absent from his on-court game. His loss at the French Open this year showed to all sports fans the admirable nature of Nadal’s character and attitude:

It is not a tragedy since as I say it had to happen one day. It is something I have to live with and that's it. I played really bad, very short, not agressive enough (or not at all) with out any calm and on top of that he played well.

With Nadal’s withdrawl from this year’s Wimbledon it is more than possible that Federer will regain the top spot in the men’s rankings. But Nadal is clearly not phased by this. As he said himself, tennis is a game; there are victories and there are losses. Players must be able to accept all that comes their way, and to accept it graciously. We can only admire Nadal’s attitude. Steffi Graff recently commented in an online German magazine on his immense passion for the game:

If you watch Rafael Nadal play tennis, you can only respond with amazement and great admiration. He is an incredible athlete with so much discipline, so much concentration and someone who likes to put a lot of passion into every point.
Words fail to come out of me to describe his game appropriately. I've rarely seen anyone who approaches a ball with so much attention. With such passion and joy that it makes it great fun to watch him. With him, you can associate everything that makes tennis so beautiful.

We can only hope that Rafael Nadal will always show this passion and respect Graff attributes to him.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Worthwhile reads:

Simon Kinnesley, Rafael Nadal puts success down to home comforts and a quiet life,

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article6455384.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1

The Rafael Nadal Blog, http://timesonline.typepad.com/rafael_nadal/

---

[i] Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre

[ii] Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights

Remembrances of the Deceased

On Thursday night I decided I'd treat myself to watching a film after a few days of a lot of work. I picked 10 Things I Hate About You. It's one of those films I can watch again and again and never tire. Not because it's wonderful - it's not - but because there's something a little bit different about it in comparison to most romantic comedies. Something a little bit quirky - Heath Ledger's character, I suppose. This is the one thing I hadn't thought of, the fact that he is one of the main characters. How I didn't think of it before I put the D.V.D. in, I really don't know. I must have been in one of those dazes after having spent time planning for three different essays. Anyway, as I was watching it, it really hit me that Heath Ledger is no longer around. I don't mean that in a really corny way. It's been over a year since his death and up until now watching him in films seemed pretty normal - even in The Dark Knight. I think it's the thought that there's only one new film left to see: The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus. It's sad to think there will be nothing left to come. Nothing more of a great talent set to become an even greater actor. The man who was leading his generation of actors. It seems only fitting that after missing out on Best Actor at the BAFTAs for his moving role in Brokeback Mountain, that he should sweep up Best Supporting Actor with little to no contest at all...just over a year after his death in the role he will most likely be remembered for: the terrific, terrifying Joker.