Chris the Critic

Popcorn Pick- August 2011

2011-08-06T13:34:00.000-07:00

August at the multiplex is another confusing month- some call it summer, some call it fall. I call it both, as evidenced by the diversity of films coming out this month. Some are clearly leftovers of the big summer films that couldn't quite find a place among the superheroes and fighting robots. And some are the beginning of the fall films, which are middling entertainment at best, squished in between the big movies of summer and Thanksgiving. But I'm a firm believer that there's always something worthwhile playing at the theater, as long as you find one with a lot of screens. In that spirit, here are my picks for the month of August.

Friday, August 5th
The Change-Up

Think if Fready Friday had been made by dudes, and for an R-rated audience. That's exactly what The Change-Up is, an old tired premise given a raunchy facelift. Ryan Reynolds and Jason Bateman play their typical characters- a hunky womanizer and a responsible dad with a career, respectively- until they magically switch bodies and have to live out each other's lives. Allowing both actors to play against-type is sure to be insanely funny, considering it's from the director of Wedding Crashers and the writers of The Hangover. The last big comedy of the summer.

Wednesday, August 10th
The Help

Clearly not my kind of movie. But guys: never underestimate the ladies. The same crowd that made the novel by Kathryn Stockett a massive success will also propel the film adaptation to success. The film stars the lovely Emma Stone, playing a young white journalist in the South who chooses to write about the struggles and bigotry black maids go through on a daily basis. The book has received comparisons to To Kill a Mockingbird. I doubt the movie will be that sensational, but it will certainly be a hit.

Friday, August 19th
Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Despite a slew of new releases this week, there's nothing really worthwhile coming out. (A Conan the Barbarian remake in 3-D? Yawn.) So instead, check out this two-weeks old film, after the crowds have gone away. A prequel to the classic 1968 film charting how primates came to be superintelligent and take over the world, this movie seems mostly unnecessary, but still entertaining, even for people who aren't fans of the franchise. Stars James Franco, Freida Pinto (Slumdog Millionaire), and Andy Serkis (Gollum in The Lord of the Rings) as the ape leader Caesar.

Friday, August 26th
One Day

Okay, so I lied. There is one may-be-good movie opening on the 19th. The horror film Don't Be Afraid of the Dark looks promising, but it may open in limited release, so instead see the one-week-old One Day, another chick flick based on a popular novel. The cliched story is made unique by its premise: two people meet and have a one-night stand, only to decide to become friends, and don't realize their love for each other until years later. The layout is more complicated than that: over twenty years, only one day a year is dramatized, cutting out all the middle stuff and allowing our actors to age two decades. The actors in question are the lovely Anne Hathaway and the appealing Jim Sturgess (Across the Universe). The design is built for a book platform and may not work so well on screen, but it's still worth a look if you're into romance films.

Fall starts in full force in September, so stay tuned for my picks next month!

Popcorn Pick- July 2011

2011-07-01T09:11:00.000-07:00

Greetings, avid moviegoers!
Summer marches on, and with it comes the biggest movies of the season. That's right, more superheroes, fighting robots, aliens, and boy wizards are in our future, and we will be bombarded by all of them before the summer's over. Some will be bad, and some will hopefully be so good they bring a tear to our eye. At any rate, July brings something for everyone to the multiplex, making me not the only person excited for this month.

Wednesday, June 29th*
Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Sigh. Well, at least Megan Fox is gone, right?
It's true, the third installment in the massively popular trilogy brings some of the biggest action, thrills, and visual splendor to the table, with a more grounded, emotional plot and new characters. But the biggest question on everyone's lips isn't about the giant robots, it's, where's Megan Fox? And who's this new girl, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley? Shia LaBeouf returns for more running and screaming, while Michael Bay has fun with his usual 8-year-old director shtick. And of course, this is the first film in the franchise in 3D. Prepare to have your eyes bleed. And what's with that inept title? Is there a word missing?

Friday, July 8th
Horrible Bosses

Haven't heard of this film? I don't blame you. They haven't advertised it much. Since it's a big summer comedy, my hunch is that something is wrong with the film since it's not generating any buzz. But you know what, the trailer looks pretty good, so here it's included in my list. Three mild-mannered working guys (Jason Bateman, Saturday Night Live's Jason Sudeikis, and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia's Charlie Day) conspire to kill their respective bosses, who are ruining their lives. The bosses are each played by actors with tour-de-force performances: Kevin Spacey as a leering slave driver, Colin Farrell as a bald and fat guy, and Jennifer Aniston as a brunette (!) bitch. The dark comedy also stars Jamie Foxx.

Friday, July 15th
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

The last Harry Potter film. I think everyone knows the significance- and the magnitude- of that statement, even if they're not fans of the franchise. Set to be the biggest movie of the summer, the eighth and final film in the highest-grossing film franchise of all time returns to where it all began, Hogwarts Castle, after it being MIA in Part 1. All bets are off as both sides of the wizarding world decide to meet in battle. Everyone is looking forward to the climactic Harry/Voldemort smackdown and wondering what details from the book were changed, but the part I'm most excited for? The reveal of Snape's secret past.
It's also been converted to 3D; not sure how I feel about that.

Friday, July 22nd
Captain America: The First Avenger

The second Avengers movie of the summer (after Thor) is sort of a prequel: set in World War II, a weak Army recruit is given superhuman strength and reflexes in order to fight the Nazis. It's about time the most famous comic-book superhero after Superman got a big-screen adaptation, but sadly, there is not much buzz surrounding this film, and it looks less than stellar. It stars Chris Evans (Fantastic 4) as Cap, with Hugo Weaving as the villain.
Fans, look for the inevitable Iron Man connections scattered throughout.

Friday, July 29th
Cowboys & Aliens

This may just be the worst movie of the year. The title alone is the worst since Snakes on a Plane. But at least you know exactly what it's about: aliens land in the Old West, and a criminal and a lawman have to band together to defeat the invaders. Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford (haven't seen him in much lately) star in this genre-bending actioner.

Some say August is a summer month, but in my mind, summer ends with July. There are many more movies coming out in July (you'll notice I missed several kids' films, including the Winnie the Pooh reboot), so remember that just because I didn't pick them here, doesn't mean they're not worth seeing. So check out at least one movie this month- you'll be glad you did!

*It's true, this movie should have been in last month's post, but in my defense, it was moved up from its original release date of July 1st at the last minute.

Popcorn Pick- June 2011

2011-06-03T11:47:00.000-07:00

Greetings, avid moviegoers!

Popcorn Pick is back! In blog form, at least- the way it began. I'll still be coming to you every month bringing you my expertise on the current cinema.
And, it's officially summer! Which means all the big franchise movies are appearing. Some will suck, some will rock your socks, some will be utterly forgettable. Maybe I can help sort them out for you.

Friday, June 3rd
X-Men: First Class

The fifth X-Men movie is yet another prequel, but early reviews say it's much better than the disappointing Wolverine. Clearly they're trying to replicate the success of the stellar first two films, by examining the backstory of Xavier (before he's a professor) and Magneto (before he's evil). Several familiar faces show up, and it wouldn't be X-Men if they didn't have a whole bunch of new colorful characters as well. My biggest question: how the heck does Xavier wind up in a wheelchair? Our heroes are played by rising young stars James McAvoy (Wanted) and Michael Fassbender (Inglourious Basterds).

Friday, June 10th
Super 8

I know, I know. I've converted to the church of J.J. Abrams and I bow down to all that he does. And I know, I'm pretty much the only person that's super excited to see this. But has anyone seen the trailer? This looks like a mash-up of Abrams' last film Star Trek and producer Steven Spielberg's classic Close Encounters of the Third Kind. The plot involves a bunch of kids in the '70s who accidentally film a train crash and discover the supernatural secret the train was transporting- a secret the government doesn't want you to know. Is it an alien? Details are very hush-hush, which makes me want to see this even more. Stars Kyle Chandler (TV's Friday Night Lights).

Friday, June 17th
Green Lantern

Tis the season for superhero movies. If you're experiencing Marvel fatigue (Thor, X-Men), try the DC universe. Ryan Reynolds plays the obscure comic-book superhero who wears a green suit of light and can create any object he thinks of using a magic ring. This is a massive CGI experience, which could help it or hinder it depending on the amount of action in the film. Worth a look...but skip the 3D version.

Friday, June 24th
Cars 2

Sigh... I'm one of Pixar's biggest fans, so I was very disappointed when I heard this was their film for this year. The sequel to the lulling 2006 hit throws out all connections to the first film and makes it a globe-trotting spy action thriller. (My theory: after star Paul Newman's death, they had to create a plot that wouldn't question why the main characters aren't in Radiator Springs.) It seems even a studio as great as Pixar will sell out eventually and make a movie for money instead of for art. But I'm being unfair- I'm still going to see it, for curiosity if not for anything else, and for my love of the studio.
It's also worth noting that Disney is the only studio that does 3D well, and the film is available in that format. If you're one of the few excited to see this movie, shell out the extra cash for the glasses.

July brings even bigger movies, in fact, the biggest movies of the year, so stick around! I'll see you at the theatre next month!

2011 Oscar Winners Predictions

2011-02-17T16:42:00.000-08:00

Is it that time already?
Well, no, the Oscars aren't until Sunday the 27th, but I can still get excited about them early!
It may be a little too early to make these predictions (officially, the voting polls haven't even closed yet), but I think the race is set and no dramatic changes are going to happen between now and then that will change the outcomes.
The numbers for the nominees go as follows: 12 for The King's Speech (the most this year; it has a shot at breaking the current record of 11 wins), 10 for True Grit, 8 each for The Social Network and Inception, 7 for The Fighter, 6 for 127 Hours, 5 each for Black Swan and Toy Story 3, 4 each for The Kids Are All Right and Winter's Bone, and 3 for Alice in Wonderland. Every other film gets only 1 or 2 nominations.
This is my third annual Oscar winners predictions. As usual, I choose the winners in every category. I divide my picks in two: who I think will end up winning and who I think deserves to win. And as always I value your comments and input!

Best Picture

127 Hours
Black Swan
The Fighter
Inception
The Kids Are All Right
The King's Speech
The Social Network
Toy Story 3
True Grit
Winter's Bone

Who will win: The King's Speech
Who should win: Toy Story 3

These days the Best Picture race is hard to predict. Ten films is a lot! If any animated film could win Best Picture, it's the beloved Pixar sequel Toy Story 3, which has earned instant classic status, universal acclaim, and the unique distinction of being the highest-grossing movie of last year. (And that's a year that included a Harry Potter and a Twilight movie!) And it has the special honor of only being the third animated film to be nominated for this award, especially impressive considering that it's a sequel, and that the first two Toy Story films weren't nominated. Unfortunately, the Academy is still prejudiced against animation. So while I'm convinced it will happen someday, it won't be this year. My other favorite to win is, of course, Inception, the head-trip action/sci-fi that wowed audiences all over. While it's well-represented this year, it really doesn't stand a chance winning any major awards. 127 Hours and The Kids Are All Right are both fantastic films in their own rights, but there is heavy competition this year and they'll likely be forgotten. Despite its ten nominations, there isn't a whole lot of love going on for True Grit or the Coen brothers. The race is really between two films: the early favorite, The Social Network, and the late-show-stopper The King's Speech. While I believe Network to be the superior film, it seems like the table has turned and they will go with the more traditional (and British) choice of Speech. It has more nominations- the most this year, in fact- and the majority of the Academy voters are older folks, who probably don't "get" a lot of the characters in Network.

Best Director

Darren Aronofsky, Black Swan
David O. Russell, The Fighter
Tom Hooper, The King's Speech
David Fincher, The Social Network
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, True Grit

Who will win: David Fincher
Who should win: David Fincher

With the playing field split between The King's Speech and The Social Network, I forsee a unique opportunity: give the more popular film the Director award and the traditional Oscar fare Best Picture, supposedly so everyone's happy. Still, Hooper could upset here. But seriously, Fincher does deserve the award for pulling off one of the most-talked-about movies of the year and actually making it good. Aronofsky also gets kudos for creating a dark and sexual mood in his film, but it's one that the Academy doesn't give big awards to.

Best Actor

Javier Bardem, Biutiful
Jeff Bridges, True Grit
Jesse Eisenberg, The Social Network
Colin Firth, The King's Speech
James Franco, 127 Hours

Who will win: Colin Firth
Who should win: James Franco

This is an interesting category: we have the potential for an extremely rare back-to-back win. Jeff Bridges, of course, won last year and is nominated again for a pretty similar role. (John Wayne won Best Actor for the same role in the original True Grit in 1969.) While people love his performance, he's not the one that's likely to win. It will probably go to Firth (another back-to-back nominee) for his stuttering monarch as support for the film has skyrocketed recently. While Firth was exceptional in the part- in fact I think his scenes with Geoffrey Rush are the best in the movie- he's not my personal choice. I choose Franco for essentially being a one-man movie as real-life hiker Aron Ralston, the guy who got stuck in a canyon by a rock and had to cut off his own arm to survive. Very few actors can have as much screen time alone as he did and pull it off, let alone not being able to move for the majority of that time. Of course, Eisenberg also deserves kudos for his career-changing performance as the founder of Facebook, a rude and forward-thinking genius who commands the screen.

Best Actress

Annette Bening, The Kids Are All Right
Nicole Kidman, Rabbit Hole
Jennifer Lawrence, Winter's Bone
Natalie Portman, Black Swan
Michelle Williams, Blue Valentine

Who will win: Annette Bening
Who should win: Natalie Portman

This one was a head-scratcher. As it is with so many awards this year, the playing field is between two strong contenders: Bening and Portman. At this point it could go either way, but I think they will ultimately choose Bening, the early favorite as a stressed-out lesbian mom trying to keep her family from falling apart. The scene where she realizes her wife has been sleeping with a man is one of the most painful shots in the movie. Portman, on the other hand, plays a ballerina trying to keep her mind from falling apart as she begins hallucinating before a big show. The whole movie follows her on this descent into madness. It was hard for me to choose which one actually deserved the award; I finally came to the conclusion that Portman's role was more difficult to master. Of course, if there is a tie, I would be delighted.

Best Supporting Actor

Christian Bale, The Fighter
John Hawkes, Winter's Bone
Jeremy Renner, The Town
Mark Ruffalo, The Kids Are All Right
Geoffrey Rush, The King's Speech

Who will win: Christian Bale
Who should win: Christian Bale

Bale, the Batman actor, is known for diving into a part completely, and he went all Method on us again for this role as a crack-addicted former boxer. He will deservedly win his first Oscar. Any actor who can control his weight as well as he can deserves some kind of recognition. Rush could still upset as his film is still going strong. Kudos also goes to Renner (the third back-to-back nominee, although he was up for Best Actor last year) for an explosive performance as a bank robber on the edge, and for getting his film's only nomination. (Why no love for The Town?)

Best Supporting Actress

Amy Adams, The Fighter
Helena Bonham Carter, The King's Speech
Melissa Leo, The Fighter
Hailee Steinfeld, True Grit
Jacki Weaver, Animal Kingdom

Who will win: Melissa Leo
Who should win: Hailee Steinfeld

Leo is the favorite to win here as a mama grizzly set on protecting her large family. She was the biggest, and best, surprise of the film. However, my vote goes to the young Steinfeld for holding her own, and then some, in the man's world of the Old West. On paper, one would have to wonder if there was even a girl out there who could play the part. She truly is a revelation. Unfortunately, her age is a big deterrant with the Academy. If there's an upset, it will likely go to Bonham Carter for her buttoned-down performance as the Queen. I'm a big fan of Adams, but her performance is only noteworthy when you compare it to her usual roles. Has anyone in America seen Animal Kingdom?

Best Adapted Screenplay

127 Hours
The Social Network
Toy Story 3
True Grit
Winter's Bone

Who will win: The Social Network
Who should win: 127 Hours

With the writing awards, there is no need to split the field, so both of the Academy's favorite films can win. In the Adapted section, The Social Network will easily snag it for Aaron Sorkin's biting dialogue. While I'm a fan of that film, my vote goes to 127 Hours. How do you write a good movie about a guy who can't move? It's not easy to do, but they constructed the most unique film of the year in the process. It dives into his mind and forces viewers to ask the question, what would you do in the same situation? Kudos also goes to Toy Story 3; it's just too bad it took them this long to come out with the third film in the series.

Best Original Screenplay

Another Year
The Fighter
Inception
The Kids Are All Right
The King's Speech

Who will win: The King's Speech
Who should win: Inception

Again, the Academy's favorite will win here: the very traditional screenplay for the very down-to-earth King's Speech. My vote goes to the most original film of the year, one which blended science fiction, suspense, drama, and exciting action setpieces to produce a genuine hit. If the Academy weren't so averse to blockbusters, they would hand Christopher Nolan his first Oscar for Inception. Kudos also goes to The Kids Are All Right, a brave idea by the writers that totally paid off- a comedy about a family with two moms.

Best Animated Feature

How to Train Your Dragon
The Illusionist
Toy Story 3

Who will win: Toy Story 3
Who should win: Toy Story 3

No contest here. Pixar usually wins these, and with a Best Picture nomination, there's nothing stopping the wonderful Toy Story installment from winning. An upset win here is so unimaginable that I don't even know which movie it would come from.

Best Foreign Language Film

Biutiful
Dogtooth
In a Better World
Incendies
Outside the Law

Who will win: Biutiful
Who should win: ?

There are no popular films in this category this year, which makes it hard to predict, if you even care. In a Better World won the Golden Globe, but with a Best Actor nomination to go along with it and a previous Oscar-nominated director at the helm, I suspect the Spanish-language Biutiful will be the film of choice.

Best Documentary Feature

Exit Through the Gift Shop
Gasland
Inside Job
Restrepo
Wasteland

Who will win: Inside Job
Who should win: ?

The most popular documentary of the year (Waiting For "Superman") naturally wasn't nominated. So the Academy will choose the traditional business/political film Inside Job, about the 2008 financial meltdown. An upset could come from the strange art comedy Exit Through the Gift Shop, popular in some circles.

Best Original Score

127 Hours
How to Train Your Dragon
Inception
The King's Speech
The Social Network

Who will win: The Social Network
Who should win: Inception

Despite its simplistic music, The Social Network seems poised to win here, unless the royal ballads of The King's Speech pulls an upset. Two years ago, A. R. Rahman pulled off a double win for both Original Score and Original Song for Slumdog Millionaire. Unfortunately, his score for 127 Hours isn't nearly as exciting, so even though he's nominated for both, he will not win either. Of course you could guess my preference here. The music for Inception is the only film that people would actually talk about afterwards: the exciting and suspenseful building themes as the dreams are collapsing? That unmistakeable foghorn noise? It may be too loud at times, but it's still the best and most original movie music this year.

Best Original Song

"Coming Home," Country Strong
"I See the Light," Tangled
"If I Rise," 127 Hours
"We Belong Together," Toy Story 3

Who will win: "Coming Home"
Who should win: "Coming Home"

A strange case this year as there are just four nominees. I'm usually not a country fan, but Gwyneth Paltrow's crooner is easily the best of the lot, and the only one I can imagine being performed live. Disney songs do surprisingly well in this category, and there are two Disney films nominated here. Toy Story 3 is by far the more popular of the two, so if an upset will occur, it will be Randy Newman's end-credits song "We Belong Together."

Best Film Editing

127 Hours
Black Swan
The Fighter
The King's Speech
The Social Network

Who will win: The King's Speech
Who should win: The Social Network

One annoying habit the Academy has is to nominate all Best Picture nominees here. There's no way the five best-edited films of the year were also the best dramatic productions! At any rate, 127 Hours and Black Swan are the only ones that show any kind of flair in their editing, each to set specific moods, but since those films don't have the support they need, it will simply be given to The King's Speech to accompany its Best Picture win. My choice goes to the other Picture hopeful, The Social Network. Thanks in part to its snappy editing and brisk pace, there wasn't a single dull moment in the entire film.

Best Cinematography

Black Swan
Inception
The King's Speech
The Social Network
True Grit

Who will win: The Social Network
Who should win: Inception

This award typically goes to the more technically-inclined film, but I suspect it will go to the beautiful camerawork in The Social Network, a film set largely at Harvard University. An upset could come from my personal choice, Inception, which used different styles and filters to differentiate each level of the dream world, which is like shooting four or five different movies. Of course, it could win for one specific sequence: the gravity-defying hotel hallway where Joseph Gordon-Levitt literally bounces off the walls. The trick of how they pulled that off (no, not all with CGI) is truly Oscar-worthy. Kudos also goes to True Grit for its grand scenery of the Old West, which is truly cinematic royalty.

Best Art Direction

Alice in Wonderland
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1
Inception
The King's Speech
True Grit

Who will win: The King's Speech
Who should win: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1

The obvious choice here would be True Grit, but I don't think that will be the case. While they usually choose something more traditional, something the filmmakers actually have to create, last year's award went to Avatar, whose art direction was completely digital. If the Academy is making that kind of switch, it could go to either Inception or Alice in Wonderland, but something tells me those won't win either (they're both blockbusters). Traditional will make a comeback, with the lush visuals of British royalty in the 1930s with The King's Speech. My choice goes to Harry Potter for creating a look totally different from the other films in the series (hard to do with the seventh installment) that is much darker and more personal. We're not in Hogwarts anymore, Toto.

Best Costume Design

Alice in Wonderland
I Am Love
The King's Speech
The Tempest
True Grit

Who will win: Alice in Wonderland
Who should win: True Grit

The Academy opts for the most spectacular costumes here, the ones that are best to look at. In this case the choice is clear: the colorful marvels of Tim Burton's already-colorful film Alice in Wonderland. However, my choice goes to the more real look of True Grit. An upset could come from The King's Speech, but the costumes there don't really dazzle.

Best Makeup

Barney's Version
The Way Back
The Wolfman

Who will win: The Wolfman
Who should win: The Wolfman

With all three films having their only nomination here, they all pretty much have equal chances of winning. Of course, as the only monster movie of the bunch, The Wolfman has a distinct advantage over the other two. Not to mention that it's done by Rick Baker, pretty much the only celebrity in the makeup field these days. The look of Benicio Del Toro's werewolf is modeled after the original film from 1941.

Best Visual Effects

Alice in Wonderland
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1
Hereafter
Inception
Iron Man 2

Who will win: Inception
Who should win: Inception

Arguably the only category the general public cares about. As the only Best Picture nominee of the bunch, Inception should take the win, and deservedly so: Christopher Nolan is a director who abhors special effects, and so uses them only sparingly, and when absolutely necessary. Thus the visual-effects shots in the film are few, but extra effort is put into them. The dream sequence with the upside-down Paris is the hero shot. Alice in Wonderland and Iron Man 2 also have big, dazzling special effects, but they're both blockbusters, which usually steers the Academy away.

Best Sound Editing

Inception
Toy Story 3
Tron: Legacy
True Grit
Unstoppable

Who will win: Inception
Who should win: Tron: Legacy

Some odd choices here this year. (Two Jeff Bridges movies in the same category!) As the only ones nominated for both Sound Editing and Sound Mixing, it'll go to either Inception or True Grit, with the former possessing the more stunning sound effects. However, my choice goes to the Tron sequel, which is nothing if not a visual and auditory treat. This being its only nomination, it doesn't stand a chance.

Best Sound Mixing

Inception
The King's Speech
Salt
The Social Network
True Grit

Who will win: Inception
Who should win: Inception

The only films here that are technically-inclined (meaning that some thought has to actually be put into the sound design) are Inception and Salt. Clearly the former will take it easily.

Best Animated Short

Day & Night
The Gruffalo
Let's Pollute
The Lost Thing
Madagascar, a Journey Diary

Who will win: Day & Night
Who should win: Day & Night

Now I admit, I'm prejudiced here: I've only seen Day & Night, but that's because it's the only one that secured a theatrical release. It's the psychadelic Pixar film that accompanied the also-nominated Toy Story 3. Pixar has won here in the past, and a double win for both films would be beautiful.

Best Live Action Short

The Confession
The Crush
God of Love
Na Wewe
Wish 143

Who will win: The Confession
Who should win: ?

Nobody cares about this award, not even me.

Best Documentary Short

Killing in the Name
Poster Girl
Strangers No More
Sun Come Up
The Warriors of Qiugang

Who will win: The Warriors of Qiugang
Who should win: ?

This award typically goes to a film set in a far-off country, which it sounds like Qiugang is. Did I mention that nobody cares about this award either?

If you've made it to the end of this list, congratulations! You're as big a geek as I am!
Regardless of how correct my predictions are, all questions will be answered soon. The Academy Awards will be broadcast live at 6:30 pm Sunday night, February 27th, on ABC. And the winner is...

2011 Oscar Nominations Predictions

2011-01-16T10:35:00.001-08:00

Greetings, avid moviegoers! Thank you all for being patient in waiting for the inevitable return of Chris the Critic in blog form. I had fun doing the TV segments but I'm back to doing these full-time. (But don't worry, I'm not totally done with TV either. I am in talks to do a monthly segment.)

Well, it's that time of year again, and if you don't know what I mean by that then you're probably reading the wrong blog. It's Oscar season! As usual I follow the films in the running very closely, inspect top-ten lists, study pre-Oscar awards nominees and winners, and look at professionals' nominations predictions. So, I proudly bring you my third annual predictions for the Academy Awards nominations in all the major categories.

One quick note before I begin: I never seem to get any of these predictions right, so I am now allowing myself an alternate film for every category, so I can put in one additional prediction. And Best Picture gets two alternates, because with double the nominees, they're doubly hard to predict.

Best Picture

127 Hours

Black Swan

The Fighter

Inception

The Kids Are All Right

The King's Speech

The Social Network

The Town

Toy Story 3

True Grit

Alternates: Blue Valentine, Winter's Bone

There are four shoo-ins here: The Social Network (and if the Oscars were held today, I think this would win), The King's Speech, The Fighter, and the dramedy The Kids Are All Right. Over the summer, saying Inception would get a nomination would sound like fantasy- a dream, if you will- but it's been doing well in the pre-Oscar awards and seems a pretty good lock for a nomination. There's also the strong argument that The Dark Knight not getting nominated for Best Picture two years ago is one of the reasons we now have ten nominees. Toy Story 3 has an uphill battle to get that nomination, but it looks like their hard work is going to pay off- animated films never get nominated, nor do sequels, but this is undeniably one of the best films of the year, not to mention the highest-grossing of the year. Black Swan is not your typical Oscar fare- too dark, too sexual, too weird- but it's expertly made and thrilling to watch, and has a good shot here. The Town is fairly old and Oscar tends to have a short memory, but the best crime movie of the year should still get recognized, even if director Ben Affleck won't be. A lot of professionals are leaving 127 Hours off their lists, probably with the explanation that the movie is really about James Franco's performance. Well, they clearly didn't see the movie, which is a piece of genius from the guy who won Best Picture two years ago, Danny Boyle for Slumdog Millionaire. If it doesn't get the nomination, it sure as hell deserves it. And I went back and forth over True Grit. Only lukewarm critical reception and okay runnings at the box office suggest the film will be mostly forgotten by the Academy, but it is still racking up nominations from other sources. If my list is incorrect, it will most likely be here.

Winter's Bone is a beloved indie film from the summer. It is a lock for a Best Actress nomination, but the Academy may choose to nominate it here, if it can get out of its short-memory hold. Blue Valentine is also a lock for acting awards, but the movie itself looks so incredibly depressing I can't imagine the general public wanting to see it.

Best Director

Danny Boyle, 127 Hours

Darren Aronofsky, Black Swan

Christopher Nolan, Inception

Tom Hooper, The King's Speech

David Fincher, The Social Network

Alternate: David O. Russell, The Fighter

Fincher and Hooper are locks for their beloved films. Aronofsky and Nolan are the picks for more unusual films. And once again I may be betting too heavily on 127 Hours' chances, but when you stop to think about it, how do you create an engaging movie about a man who can't move? It's almost impossible, but Boyle found a way to do it. The film may be hard to watch at times, but it's still masterfully made. If Boyle doesn't get nominated, then Russell will for his great boxing film. It's just that he's relatively unknown, which hurts his chances at a major nomination here.

Best Actor

Jeff Bridges, True Grit

Jesse Eisenberg, The Social Network

Colin Firth, The King's Speech

James Franco, 127 Hours

Ryan Gosling, Blue Valentine

Alternate: Mark Wahlberg, The Fighter

Firth is the favorite to win at this point playing a proud king with a humiliating stutter. Franco is also a lock as the one-man band for the entire film. Eisenberg is pretty young for this category, but no one can deny his screen presence. I went back and forth over Bridges, but since the Western is getting attention, he may get recognized here. He just won last year, which will hurt his chances. And Gosling is pretty much a lock, although the film may end up getting forgotten altogether. There's been surprisingly little attention given to Wahlberg, the lead in his movie, especially considering the attention given the other cast members, but looking at all the other nominations the film is going to get, a Best Actor nomination would seal the deal.

Best Actress

Annette Bening, The Kids Are All Right

Jennifer Lawrence, Winter's Bone

Julianne Moore, The Kids Are All Right

Natalie Portman, Black Swan

Michelle Williams, Blue Valentine

Alternate: Nicole Kidman, Rabbit Hole

The locks for this category are Bening, Lawrence, and Portman. Williams should get nominated for her heartrending performance as long as the film doesn't get forgotten. And since her costar (and onscreen wife) will surely get a nod, Moore's chances are limited, but she's a previous nominee and her work in the film is solid and emotionally raw. A twofer in a major category like this would be more than all right. And Kidman is definitely in the running as a greiving mother, but strong competition may keep her crying.

There's also been talk that Hailee Steinfeld, who's campaigning for Supporting Actress for True Grit, may get a surprise nomination here. She is the female lead in that movie, but because of her age, she's much more likely to be included in the lower award.

Best Supporting Actor

Christian Bale, The Fighter

Andrew Garfield, The Social Network

Jeremy Renner, The Town

Sam Rockwell, Conviction

Geoffrey Rush, The King's Speech

Alternate: Michael Douglas, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps

Bale is a lock here, and so far is the favorite to win. The Batman actor has an impressive resume reaching back to childhood and he is overdue for his first nomination. Renner is also a good bet as an unstable bank robber. Garfield's age is against him, but his performance as the betrayed Facebook co-founder brings us the film's most memorable scene. And Rush is also a lock as the eccentric speech therapist. Rockwell is the dark horse here, and he's included mostly because I had trouble thinking of who else would fit. He's a strong actor who's also overdue for a nomination, and Conviction is pure Oscar bait material. The Wall Street sequel wasn't very well-received, but Douglas won his Oscar for the original film and is said to be the best part of this one.

Best Supporting Actress

Amy Adams, The Fighter

Helena Bonham Carter, The King's Speech

Melissa Leo, The Fighter

Hailee Steinfeld, True Grit

Jacki Weaver, Animal Kingdom

Alternate: Mila Kunis, Black Swan

Bonham Carter is a lock here, even though her performance isn't exactly Oscar-worthy in my mind. Adams are Leo are also pretty good bets, and believe it or not, two nominations for the same film is not too uncommon for this category. Although if it happens, they will hurt each other's chances of winning. Steinfeld wowed everyone who saw her performance as a little girl in a man's world, and she is a lock, assuming she won't get upgraded to lead Actress status. Animal Kingdom is a foreign indie film, little-seen in the States, and Weaver's popularity stops at the critics' circle. I hope she doesn't get nominated, although signs point to it being so. If it doesn't happen, then Kunis' memorable performance as a young, partying ballerina is the perfect foil for Portman's high-strung character, and allows us to forget her That 70's Show fame.

Best Adapted Screenplay

127 Hours

The Social Network

The Town

Toy Story 3

Winter's Bone

Alternate: True Grit

The Social Network has all but a lock on the win here, for Aaron Sorkin's crackling whiplash of dialogue. Pixar films usually get a writing nomination, and Toy Story 3 is one of their best films. (And I know it's a sequel, but shouldn't it be for Original Screenplay?) The Town is also a pretty good bet, especially considering Ben Affleck already has an Oscar for writing. A nomination here for Winter's Bone will nicely complement the inevitable Actress nomination, while the script for 127 Hours is not what you'd expect after hearing the true story. The previous winner for Slumdog Millionaire should get nominated again. And the Academy are huge fans of the Coen brothers, so their adaptation of True Grit may just earn them a nod here, although I sense people are cooling on the film.

Best Original Screenplay

Black Swan

The Fighter

Inception

The Kids Are All Right

The King's Speech

Alternate: Another Year

This race is difficult to predict the winner, but there are several favorites for the nominations. All five picks here should also get a Best Picture nomination, which will nicely complment it. (I'm particularly excited for Inception. It's being left out of all the acting races, and has a good chance here for one of the most original movies in years.) Another Year is pure Oscar bait, but the film entered the race really late and I think will end up being forgotten.

Best Animated Feature

How to Train Your Dragon

The Illusionist

Toy Story 3

Alternate: Tangled

I usually don't predict this award, but with only three nominees this year I thought I'd give it a try. Obviously Toy Story 3 is a lock to win here- Pixar films usually are- but Dragon was surprisingly well-recieved by critics, despite it being pretty average. The Illusionist is a pleasant little French film that no one saw in the States, so it will naturally be nominated here. But if the Academy comes to their senses, they'll ignore the foreign trash and nominate the old-fashioned Disney-princess musical Tangled. (The Oscars were very much pro-Disney throughout the 80's and 90's.)

Well, that's everything! The nominations for the 83rd annual Academy Awards will be announced in the early morning hours of Tuesday, January 25th, while the show itself will be the night of Sunday, February 27th. Be sure to tune in and not be left out of the loop! After the actual nominations are out I'll be back to see how well I did. See you at the movies!

Popcorn Pick 10-8-10

2010-10-08T20:20:00.000-07:00

Two new releases this week, both look unsatisfying: Life As We Know It, starring Katherine Heigl and Transformers' Josh Duhamel, is a romantic dramedy about a mismatched pair assigned to take care of a baby girl after the parents pass away. Fans of Heigl will surely flock in droves, but the film is utterly predictable. The other new release is Disney's Secretariat, with Diane Lane and John Malkovich, about an underdog racehorse who won the Triple Crown. Unique in that racehorse movies are rare these days, but they're rare because no one cares.

So I'm gonna choose an old movie that you may have missed these last few weeks. If you saw Gone Baby Gone, you know Ben Affleck is a competent director, even if you're not a fan of his acting. He follows up that brilliant crime drama with what appears to be another one: The Town, set in his native Boston about a band of bank robbers, one of whom falls in love with a young teller they kidnapped and wants to go straight. The glittery, awards-friendly cast includes Affleck himself, Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker), Jon Hamm (Mad Men), and Rebecca Hall (Vicky Cristina Barcelona). Affleck also co-wrote, making it his brainchild.

Popcorn Pick 10-1-10

2010-09-30T20:38:00.000-07:00

It's the Facebook movie! By that, of course, I mean The Social Network, the highly-anticipated film about Mark Zuckerberg, the kid who created the hugely popular website Facebook and ended up entangled in a legal battle after his friends claim he stole their ideas. People will tell you over and over again that the movie isn't actually about Facebook, but the average viewer won't listen or care: the movie looks awesome anyway. And surprisingly enough, it's also generating a lot of Oscar buzz, surely the first Facebook-themed movie to do so. It's directed by David Fincher (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) and written by Aaron Sorkin (The West Wing). The cast includes Jesse Eisenberg (Zombieland), Andrew Garfield (the guy set to be the next Spider-Man), and Justin Timberlake.

Popcorn Pick 9-24-10

2010-09-24T23:10:00.000-07:00

Anyone tired of zombie movies or dumb actioners looking for a good financial drama, your saving grace has arrived. The long-awaited sequel Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is finally in theaters, 23 years (!) after the original. Michael Douglas returns to the role that won him an Oscar, Gordon Gekko, fresh out of prison and eager to get back into the trading game. Shia LaBeouf plays against-type as a young hotshot stockbroker engaged to Gekko's estranged daughter. Making a follow-up to such a classic is a daunting task and I find it difficult to think it will be as good, but it may at least be worthy. Oliver Stone is also back in the director's chair; the cast also includes Carey Mulligan (An Education), Josh Brolin (No Country For Old Men), Susan Sarandon, and Frank Langella.

Popcorn Pick 9-17-10

2010-09-17T15:13:00.000-07:00

Is the devil among us? Apparently, as evidenced by the new horror movie being released today, called... Devil. Evidently the king of all evil likes to reside in crowded elevators, playing on people's fears and suspicions and driving them to terrible acts. It's even worse than when someone farts. The story follows five strangers stuck in an elevator as weird things start happening and they come to the conclusion that one of them must be the devil himself. It's being advertised as an M. Night Shyamalan film, but the famous director really just writes and produces this piece. The director is a no-name, as is most of the cast, which is smart- it allows the viewers to focus on the story, which promises suspense and mind-bending intrigue. Whether or not it delivers has yet to be seen.

(Also out this week, check out The Town, an Oscar hopeful directed by and starring Ben Affleck [Gone Baby Gone], about a Bostonian bank robber trying to change his ways after he falls in love. The film also stars Jeremy Renner [The Hurt Locker], Jon Hamm [Mad Men], and Rebecca Hall [Vicky Cristina Barcelona]. Looks to be one of the better dramas out this season.)

Popcorn Pick 9-10-10

2010-09-09T11:39:00.001-07:00

Still waiting for those good fall movies to come out. While you wait, enjoy Resident Evil: Afterlife, the fourth film in the franchise based on the popular video games. Milla Jovovich returns to kick some more zombie ass and jump off of really tall buildings and other cool stunts. But this time it's in 3-D, so it's different. For fans of the series only, for everyone else it's just another zombie movie with hot chicks. Speaking of, the cast also includes Ali Larter (Heroes).

Popcorn Pick 9-3-10

2010-09-02T21:29:00.000-07:00

Nothing really exciting this week, but this Pick will probably be worth a good laugh or two. The last-minute summer comedy Going the Distance stars real-life couple Drew Barrymore and Justin Long as a couple who decide to start a long-distance relationship. This theme of love and trust is very common in real-life but strangely rare in the movies, so I'm excited to see if this offers a fresh take on the romantic comedy genre. The PG-13 concept is surprisingly, rated R, due mainly to the promising supporting cast, which includes Christina Applegate, Jason Sudeikis (Saturday Night Live), Charlie Day (It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia), and comedian Jim Gaffigan.

Popcorn Pick 8-27-10

2010-08-26T13:00:00.001-07:00

This time of year is so awkward for movies. We're right between summer and fall, all the big blockbusters have already come out, and all the big fall movies are being kept for Thanksgiving. Now all we're getting are the seasonal rejects that just needed a release date. I can't bring myself to recommend any of the new releases coming out, be it the lame heist thriller Takers or the no-buzz horror The Last Exorcism. However, there is one film coming out that I can suggest because it's not a new release, but actually a re-release.

Avatar: Special Edition features 9 additional minutes of never-before-seen footage that add on to the story and of course the lush visual imagery of this already-impressive film. That's right: the Oscar-winning sci-fi epic that went on to become the biggest movie of all time is being re-released exclusively in 3-D and IMAX 3-D with new scenes. The project was personally overseen by James Cameron and is only out for a limited time. This will be released on DVD, except that version will have 16 additional minutes, which means that by the end there will actually be three different versions of the film. Obviously this won't make a big mark on the box office, being that the film originally came out less than a year ago, but if you were a big fan, and you didn't mind its very long running time, this is a chance to see it on the big screen one more time.

Popcorn Pick 8-20-10

2010-08-20T15:13:00.000-07:00

How can you possibly describe Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World? If it's not impossible, it's at least very difficult. Michael Cera plays a geeky kid (surprise, surprise) who falls for a punk girl. As soon as their romance starts up, he discovers she has seven evil ex-boyfriends with superpowers, who all want to kill him for touching the love of their lives. In order to stay with her, he must face them in battle and defeat them. This action-comedy spoofs- and is done in the style of- old pixelly video games from the '90s. If that doesn't make any sense, just watch the trailer, or better yet, go see the movie; it's one that must be experienced. The youthful and enthusiastic cast includes Mary Elizabeth Winstead (Live Free or Die Hard), Kieran Culkin (Macaulay's brother), Anna Kendrick (Up in the Air), and Chris Evans (Fantastic Four).

Popcorn Pick 8-13-10

2010-08-13T16:24:00.001-07:00

This week, given the choices of new movies, I couldn't help but do a double Pick. Hitting cinemas this week are two movies that couldn't be more different from one another. One is a testosterone-infused action romp strictly for men, and a sweet romantic dramedy for the ladies. So if you are your significant other are looking for a movie to see together, maybe you two can compromise and make it a double feature!

For the ladies, comes the much-anticipated Eat Pray Love, the adaptation of the hugely popular true-story book, starring one of the biggest movie stars in the world, Julia Roberts. She plays a depressed divorcee who travels around the world for a year to discover herself and have the adventure she always wanted. Along the way she indulges in food and tries to stay away from men. The film co-stars Billy Crudup (Watchmen), James Franco, Richard Jenkins (The Visitor), and Javier Bardem (No Country For Old Men).

For the guys, there's an old-school action movie set in the jungle and filled with huge muscley guys and big guns. This, of course, is The Expendables. Any semblance of a plot is thrown out the window to make way for explosions and cool stunts. Sylvester Stallone directs and leads an impressive ensemble cast that includes Mickey Rourke (Iron Man 2), Jet Li, "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, Jason Statham, and Randy Couture (The Scorpion King 2). One scene featuring cameos from action-movie legends Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger should make the whole thing worth it.

Popcorn Pick 8-6-10

2010-08-07T23:05:00.000-07:00

Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg team up for the first time ever for this late-summer buddy-cop action comedy, which looks to be the funniest film of the season. The plot is exactly as you'd imagine it to be: the two are mismatched police partners that go out on patrol to take down a large financial embezzler. The awesome cast also includes Eva Mendes, Michael Keaton, Samuel L. Jackson, and Dwayne Johnson. Watch the trailer online to see why this movie looks so promising.

Popcorn Pick 7-30-10

2010-07-30T10:44:00.000-07:00

No summer movie season is complete without one big comedy. That honor (or dishonor) for this summer goes to Dinner For Schmucks, a remake of a French film with our favorite funny-man duo, Steve Carell and Paul Rudd. Rudd is trying to advance in his company when he learns of a ritual the higher-up people do in order to secure a promotion: they host a fancy dinner and everyone brings a guest. The person with the dumbest and/or funniest guest secures a promotion. He's uncomfortable with this seemingly cruel process, until he finds Carell, a weirdo who collects dead mice and is socially retarded on all levels. Rudd is sure this guy will get him his promotion, but an unexpected friendship will complicate matters. The plot is strangely complex for a summer comedy, but once people get through that, they may find a sweet and funny story with a message. (I'm reserving judgment until I see it; I can't tell if it's good or not.) In a smart move, the film co-stars Zach Galifianakis (The Hangover). It's also directed by Jay Roach (Austin Powers trilogy, Meet the Parents).

Popcorn Pick 7-23-10

2010-07-24T21:19:00.000-07:00

Angelina Jolie returns to action films, a la Wanted-style, in the unfortunately titled Salt. She plays a CIA agent who is named as a Russian spy and goes on the run from the people she works for to rescue her kidnapped husband. One can expect lots of logicless action and sexy shots of the leggy female star. The story attempts to be a psychological thriller (is she a spy? Or is she being set up?), but looks like it's more of just a slam-bang summer action flick. The film co-stars Liev Schreiber (X-Men Origins: Wolverine) and Chiwetel Ejiofor (Serenity). And in case you get confused, just remember that Angelina Jolie probably wouldn't star in a movie about sodium.

Popcorn Pick 7-16-10

2010-07-15T15:09:00.001-07:00

Christopher Nolan's follow-up to the massive hit The Dark Knight is also the most anticipated movie of the summer. Specific plot details of Inception are being kept very hush-hush, but we do know that it's about a group of theives using technology to enter people's dreams in order to steal their ideas. Huge special effects and intricate action scenes meet with mind-fuck storytelling to create what is sure to be a dazzling experience. Leonardo DiCaprio (in his first summer blockbuster!) headlines an impressive ensemble cast that includes Joseph Gordon-Levitt (500 Days of Summer), Ellen Page (Juno), Ken Watanabe (The Last Samurai), Cillian Murphy (Red Eye), Tom Berenger (Platoon), Marion Cotillard (Public Enemies), and Michael Caine.

(Also, I would be remiss if I didn't mention the other big summer movie opening this week, The Sorcerer's Apprentice, starring Nicolas Cage and rising young star Jay Baruchel. The fantasy actioner- produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, no less- is about a college kid who learns he has magical powers and comes under the tutelage of a mad sorcerer to hone his skills. Might not be that good of a film, but it's definitely a great popcorn flick.)

Popcorn Pick 7-9-10

2010-07-08T14:43:00.000-07:00

No summer is complete without a popular animated movie strictly for kids. Since Toy Story 3 is really for adults just as much as the little ones, Despicable Me is the kid-friendly pick of the summer. Steve Carell lends his voice to the main character of Gru, a short, pointy-nosed villain who likes to steal major monuments. Once he puts his plan in motion to steal the moon, he inherits three orphan girls who give him a new perspective on life. The target audience's favorite part will be the little yellow minions scattered throughout, speaking gibberish and giggling the whole way through. An assortment of colorful characters and an agressive marketing campaign will make this a hit. Hopefully has some stuff for the adults as well. The all-star cast also includes Jason Segel (I Love You, Man) , Russell Brand (Get Him to the Greek), Julie Andrews, Will Arnett, Kristen Wiig, and Jack McBrayer (30 Rock).

Popcorn Pick 7-2-10

2010-07-02T15:39:00.000-07:00

If you were planning on seeing this movie, odds are you've seen it already. And if you're not planning on seeing it, you're probably running away from your computer screen right now. The Twilight Saga: Eclipse is set to be not only the biggest film in the uber-popular vampire/werewolf/romance franchise, but possibly the biggest film of the year. Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, and Taylor Lautner are back a third time for another installment of teen angst and trying to construct a vampire-related plot around it. This time around the fighting clans of vampires and werewolves have to band together to fight a new threat. And Bella is once again torn between the two hotties- but let's face it, even if you're unfamiliar with the story, it's obvious who's she's gonna pick. Sure to make many little girls squeal, and fork over their money for tickets. Shockingly, buzz surrounding this movie says that it's actually halfway decent, probably due to them turning up the action a notch or two, and the fact that the film is also available in IMAX doesn't hurt either.

Also, Twilight has cemented its status as the new Harry Potter-wannabe by splitting its last book in the series, Breaking Dawn, into two movies- just like Deathly Hallows.

Toy Story 3 ****

2010-06-27T15:02:00.000-07:00

What was your favorite toy as a kid? Where is it now? When was the last time you played with it?

These are questions one is almost forced to ask themselves upon exiting the theatre after you see Toy Story 3, a fantastic achievement in an already-legendary series of animated films. The film delves into the very existential nature of toys as they are- objects, not living things. Of course, in these films, it's not just children's imaginations- they really do come to life when the little tykes aren't around. But while at least a couple of scenes are very emotional and have reduced many a full-grown man to tears, the film brings Pixar's usual wit and humor to the mix to make this one of the best the studio has produced.

This film is set many years after the first two, when owner Andy is 17 and going off to college in a matter of days. He still clings to a few old toys despite never playing with them anymore. The only ones left are our heroes: Woody, Buzz, Jessie, Bullseye, Rex, Hamm, Slinky, Mr. and Mrs. Potato Head, and three little green aliens. (His younger sister's old Barbie doll also comes along.) He cleans out his room and the toys get thrown in a trash bag bound for the attic. A misunderstanding sends them to Sunnyside Daycare center, which at first seems like a haven for unloved toys where they can be played with every day, but as they soon discover, the toddlers like to play rough and the other toys have their own rules about how the place runs. Woody gets separated from the rest of the group and has his own adventure involving a little girl bringing him home. Once they're reunited, the film turns into a brilliant child's version of a prison-escape adventure where the toys attempt to break out to get back to Andy's house. New characters are all over the place, but the highlight is Ken, Barbie's other half, who's obsessed with clothes and good looks. The theme of what happens to toys once their owners grow up was explored at some length in the second film, but it permeates every scene here and seriously asks the question, if they were to all just disappear, would anyone notice or really care?

Adults can listen for stars lending their voices to the many roles, including Michael Keaton as Ken, Whoopi Goldberg as an octopus, and Timothy Dalton as a porcupine doll who loves classical theatre.

The genius of the Pixar team never ceases to amaze me. Every frame is filled with detail so that you have to watch the movie several times to catch the many pop culture references, the ways that ordinary objects are used in unusual ways, and the simple beauty of the characters and the scenery. Everything looks great (In fact, I'd say the toys look too good. Shouldn't they be a little more beat up and rusty after not being played with for so long?), but it's the story and the characters that pull you in. The only real complaint I have is that Pixar is following suit in the 3-D craze. The three-dimensional effects are pretty subtle and only serve to add depth to a style of animation that already shows depth pretty well. Otherwise, it's perfect entertainment for children and adults alike. It may not be the best of the series, but I think it is just on par with the first two films. I'm glad to say that the most anticipated movie of the year is not only the best of the summer, but the best of the year by far. (Pixar's last film Up was nominated for the Best Picture Oscar. Could the toys be next?)

I would recommend this film to any and all kids and anyone else who is familiar with- and likes- the first two films.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c3K7LhA9Yc

Also, arrive early and catch Pixar's newest short film, Day and Night. It's a weird, almost indescribable piece of art that's all about the differences between daytime and nighttime in the world. This proves that you don't need dialogue or even real characters to make a good movie.

Popcorn Pick 6-25-10

2010-06-25T21:14:00.000-07:00

Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz reunite for the action comedy Knight and Day, a rare original film in a summer filled with sequels and remakes. Cruise plays a secret agent (what else?) who becomes involved with an innocent woman when he separates from the CIA and they try to kill him. His character may very well be psychotic, based on his crazy stunts and inane babblings seen in the trailer. ("Nobody follow us or I kill myself and then her!") The more Diaz tries to escape, the deeper in she gets and the more she comes to trust him. It's no Mission: Impossible, sure, but it's sure to be funnier and with enough action to satisfy Cruise fans, who's been MIA for a while at the multiplex. The film co-stars Peter Sarsgaard (Orphan), Paul Dano (Little Miss Sunshine) and Marc Blucas (Buffy the Vampire Slayer).

Popcorn Pick 6-18-10

2010-06-19T13:05:00.000-07:00

The wait is over. After eleven long years of agonizing waiting and listening for often-false rumors, Toy Story 3 has finally arrived in theaters. The third film in arguably the greatest animated movie franchise of all time seeks to bring back old fans who were kids when the first two came out (myself among them) and new fans who are still young enough to play with toys themselves. This film opens with the toys' owner Andy about to leave for college and deciding what to do with all his old playthings. The toys end up being donated to a daycare center where they are torn apart by toddlers on a daily basis. But they also meet several new toys as well who have a dark secret. The adventure comedy returns all of the toys we've come to know and love (yes, Tom Hanks and Tim Allen are back as Woody and Buzz) and introduces many new colorful characters. As can be expected from Pixar, there are sure to be many exciting action scenes, jokes for both kids and adults, and surprise plot twists the whole way through. This film is set to be the biggest film of the summer. Here's hoping it stands up to its legendary first two films.

Popcorn Pick 6-11-10

2010-06-11T16:54:00.000-07:00

This week, two new movies come out, and strangely enough (or perhaps not so strangely), they're both remakes of stuff from the 80's. With this probably-planned coincidence, I thought this a good time to do my first-ever double Popcorn Pick.

First up (alphabetically, anyway) is The A-Team, a big, loud action movie based on the classic TV show. Four soldiers are wrongly accused of a crime, break out of jail, and proceed to blow stuff up. The thin plot is structured around the four main characters and allows them to do crazy stuff with visual effects and guns. Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper, Sharlto Copley (District 9) and UFC fighter 'Rampage' Jackson are the testosterone-filled good guys; the film co-stars Jessica Biel and Patrick Wilson (Watchmen). Sure to be, if nothing else, an adrenaline-charged thrill ride.

The other, slightly more promising film this week is The Karate Kid. The 1984 film is well-loved all around the world, so remaking it is a very risky move for everyone involved. They seem to be doing the right thing by taking only the basic concept of the original and putting it in a whole new location with younger stars. A young boy moves to China with his mother and gets bullied mercilessly by the local kids. A mysterious maintenance man takes him under his wing and teaches him how to defend himself. Jackie Chan plays against type as the grandfatherly master to the kid, young Jaden Smith (The Pursuit of Happyness; yes, he's Will Smith's son). They replace "wax on, wax off" with "take off the jacket, put on the jacket," but the scenery is beautiful and the karate is all real. If anything, it probably improves on the cheese factor of the original, but honestly they're trying to stay as far away from comparisons as possible by creating an original film and not a remake per se.

Popcorn Pick 6-4-10

2010-06-05T12:47:00.000-07:00

Give it a chance! Amidst four new releases, it looks like the weeks-old Shrek Forever After will still reign supreme at the box office. (The only new release of any caliber is Get Him to the Greek, which targets a very specific audience and probably won't be a big hit.) This, the last film in the Shrek franchise has the big green guy going through a midlife crisis. He's unsatisifed with his patriarchal role and signs a magical contract with the nefarious Rumpelstiltskin. This transports him to an alternate universe where Shrek was never born, Fiona is the head of an ogre resistance, and power-hungry Rumpelstiltskin is king. All the old favorites return (Donkey, Puss in Boots, Pinocchio, et al.) but there are many new characters as well. This may not bring back the spirit of the rude-n-crude first film, but is a definite improvement over the dismal third act. It's also the first film in the series to be in 3-D, so if you haven't hopped on that craze yet like the rest of the world, check it out.

Popcorn Pick 5-28-10

2010-05-27T16:03:00.000-07:00

No movie based on a video game ever went on to become a classic. Most are just big, dumb action movies with no plot and lots of overblown special effects. Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time carries on this grand tradition of Hollywood pumping out crap movies from popular video games, starring the strapping Jake Gyllenhaal as the brainless action hero. Said hero has found a dagger with the power to turn back time. The film follows him and a random hot girl (newcomer Gemma Arterton) on their epic quest through the Arabian desert to destroy it. The plot is meaningless and sure to be abandoned halfway through; all that matters is the big action and even bigger special effects. This looks like The Mummy with slo-mo shots. Ben Kingsley also stars as the villain, which may be the film's one smart move.

Iron Man 2 **1/2

2010-05-25T21:14:00.000-07:00

One of the most anticipated films of the year is, alas, not one of the best, and to be perfectly honest, a bit of a disappointment.

Not that Iron Man 2 is bad. Far from it. The entire cast is terrific, the action scenes are big and often exciting, the special effects are dazzling, and the direction is spot-on. The film simply suffers from an ailment I call sequelitis. It's very common and easy to catch. The symptoms are a rushed production started immediately after a specific film becomes a big hit, trying to copy whatever worked best on the original, and having one too many plots. An especially ugly symptom is re-casting a main character for the sequel. While Iron Man was thrillingly original and followed no rules, Iron Man 2 can't help but be the lesser film because it tries far too hard to be a sequel and not its own film.

This one opens where the first film left off, with Tony Stark (the pitch-perfect Robert Downey, Jr.) revealing to the world that he is in fact the superhero Iron Man, propelling his fame through the roof. From there, the film splits itself in several different directions. On one side, the government wants Stark to hand over the suit, believing it to be dangerous. In Russia, a dead scientist's son is proving them right by using Stark's designs to build his own version of the suit, with electromagnetic whips. On another side, Stark promotes his assistant Pepper Potts to CEO of his company so he can focus on other things. He hires another hot young thing to be his new assistant, in the form of Scarlett Johansson as ass-kicking Natalie, who has a secret. On yet another side, his business rival Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell, in a splendidly enthusiastic performance) is trying to build Iron Man suits of his own. After a failed assassination attempt on Stark, Hammer enlists Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke, The Wrestler) to show him the secret. Rourke's comic book villain is very dark and often silent, which is supposed to show intensity but comes across as him just looking bored in all of his scenes. Oh, and Stark's power source is giving him a rare blood disorder that is slowly killing him.

As was foreshadowed in the first movie, Stark's buddy Rhodey gets his own Iron Man suit, but beyond this plot point, his presence in the movie seems pointless, especially since they recasted Terrence Howard for the older and less hip Don Cheadle. Samuel L. Jackson also appears, acting very Samuel L. Jackson-y as the eyepatch-strutting Nick Fury, still trying to recruit Stark into the Avengers.

The best part of the movie is the humor, most of which still comes from the fast-talking Downey. Director Jon Favreau expands on his own cameo as Stark's lackey Hogan. It's a self-serving mood, but at least we get a few laughs out of it. For all its faults, the movie delivers on all its promises, by offering several good action scenes, my favorite of which is the Stark vs. Rhodey smackdown in his mansion. The finale sequence is tight and exciting, and there's even a great in-joke about Captain America. Fans of the comic books will want to stay for a short but great here's-what's-next scene at the end of the credits.

Iron Man 2 is not a great film, or even a great sequel, but it is good solid summer entertainment that demands very little from its viewer and gives a lot back in return. It's exactly what you'd expect from it, nothing more and nothing less.

I would recommend this film to fans of comic-book movies and of Robert Downey, Jr.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNQowwwwYa0

Popcorn Pick 5-21-10

2010-05-20T19:41:00.000-07:00

It's always tricky adapting a movie from something that doesn't have a complete story to it. Examples: a short story. A pirate ride from Disneyland. A series of sketches from Saturday Night Live. It's especially difficult when the lead is a risky goofball who's never headlined a hit movie before. But if it's worked for movies that weren't even that good, why couldn't it work for something that looks at least halfway decent, like this week's MacGruber? Will Forte and Kristen Wiig upgrade their popular SNL sketch characters to the big screen in this action-comedy that looks less MacGyver (which the sketches spoof) and more Lethal Weapon. The plot (retired hero gets called back into action to stop a powerful terrorist) is simple, but is still more complicated than each of the sketches (MacGruber and sidekick are stuck in a bunker with a bomb, get distracted, and die). This film has promised to push the R rating to the limit, with coarse language, crude humor, and gratuitous sex in every scene. I'm hoping for a laugh-a-minute pace, a new star in Forte, and the comedy event of the year. Co-stars Ryan Phillippe (Crash) and Val Kilmer.

(I feel I have to put a postscript on this week's Pick. While I'm excited to see MacGruber, it was difficult for me to put it as my pick when Shrek Forever After opens on the same day. Unfortunately, buzz for this animated sequel isn't good and seems likely to disappoint fans of the series. Forte's film appears to be impressing audiences and it seems we might have a surprise hit on our hands there. Regardless of its quality, Shrek is opening in 3-D and will probably open at number 1 this weekend.)

Popcorn Pick 5-14-10

2010-05-13T09:53:00.001-07:00

Popcorn Pick

5-14-10

The newest Robin Hood interpretation stars Russell Crowe as the legendary archer, with, as always, Ridley Scott directing. It takes a more "realistic" approach to the age-old story, with Robin rallying armies to fight against the tyrannical Prince John. This version seems to focus more on epic battle scenes than anything else; any character development and romance will probably be inconsequential to the film. I admit that it doesn't look all that good, but you probably can expect some great action from the makers of Gladiator. The film also stars the always-brilliant Cate Blanchett as Marion. In this movie age where audiences prefer giant talking robots and superheroes as opposed to old-fashioned bows and arrows, this probably won't make that big a splash after its opening weekend.

Popcorn Pick 5-7-10

2010-05-06T09:55:00.000-07:00

Popcorn Pick

5-7-10

This week's pick is easy- a certain superhero movie starring one of the kookiest actors currently in Hollywood. Two years ago, Iron Man started off the summer with a bang, wowing audiences and leaving them panting for more. No one expected it to be as big as it was, but this time around, expectations are very high. Iron Man 2 finds Tony Stark dealing with the newfound celebrity he has with the whole world knowing his double life and facing down the badass Russian villain Whiplash. Robert Downey, Jr. is back as the iron-clad stud with a performance that's sure to impress. Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler) looks like he puts everything he has into Whiplash to create a complex and real-seeming villain. The glittery cast is rounded out by Gwyneth Paltrow, once again playing Stark's tireless babysitter Pepper Potts (a comic book name if ever I heard one); Don Cheadle, sadly replacing Terrence Howard to play Rhodey and suit up in his own Iron Man uniform; Scarlett Johansson, clad in tight leather as Black Widow (hero or villain? See it to find out!), Samuel L. Jackson as the one-eyed Nick Fury, expanding on his cameo from the first film, and Sam Rockwell as a businessman interested in building more Iron Man suits. Expect lots of slam-bang action, awesome special effects, and witty banter. Sure to be one of the biggest films of the summer.

Popcorn Pick 4-30-10

2010-04-29T11:48:00.000-07:00

Popcorn Pick

4-30-10

A Nightmare on Elm Street is not a typical horror remake: Freddy Krueger is one of the most famous- and at one point in time, one of the most terrifying- screen villains in the world. The knifed glove, the striped shirt, that hat, and the third-degree burns are all iconic. Horror fans everywhere are looking closely to see if this will impress or disappoint. This version seems to be pretty faithful to the 1984 original: a dead serial killer haunts teenagers in their dreams and somehow manages to kill them off in real life. They attempt to stay awake for as long as possible, which naturally fails, until one brave girl attempts to confront him. The casting of Jackie Earle Haley (Watchmen) as Freddy is inspired and is sure to thrill. The young cast also includes Thomas Dekker (Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles).

Popcorn Pick 4-23-10

2010-04-22T15:51:00.000-07:00

Popcorn Pick

4-23-10

No movies of any real quality opening this week (with the possible exception of the nature documentary Oceans, if you're into that kind of thing), so I'll choose a film you might have missed that came out a couple of weeks ago. How to Train Your Dragon is the latest 3-D animated film to come out of DreamWorks (the makers of the Shrek films), clearly aimed at kids and young adults who are looking for escapist entertainment. The story of a young boy who befriends a not-so-ferocious dragon and changes the way his Viking-esque people looks at their scaly enemies is sure to satisfy the cute factor many times over. The film looked pretty average, but its consistent box office performance suggests otherwise. Features the voices of rising star Jay Baruchel and Gerard Butler.

Popcorn Pick 4-16-10

2010-04-15T15:06:00.000-07:00

Popcorn Pick

4-16-10

Watchmen meets Superbad. If that sounds intriguing to you, then Kick-Ass is probably right up your alley. This movie takes a popular movie concept- the comic book superhero film- and turns it on its head. The action comedy explores what happens in the real world when ordinary people don superhero costumes and start fighting for justice. It's raunchy, crude, and gory- R-rated territory where superheroes rarely tread. Nicolas Cage and Christopher Mintz-Plasse (forever McLovin) are second bananas to unknowns in the lead roles. But it's not the actors or the story that matter here (although the story, based on a real comic book, is very unique), it's the colorful costumes, the fight scenes, and the comedy. Here's hoping that it lives up to its hype.

Popcorn Pick 4-9-10

2010-04-08T12:00:00.000-07:00

Popcorn Pick

4-9-10

Thanks for reading Popcorn Pick, a new feature I've decided to add to my blog! Hundreds of movies are released into American theatres every year. Keeping up with all of them is not only difficult, but very annoying. I can help on that front, because I don't think it's annoying. I keep track of all the major movies that come out every week, and I'll let you know which ones are worth the price of a ticket.

The basic question surrounding this feature is, if you are going to see one movie this weekend, which one should you see? Popcorn Pick will give you my opinion on which movie to see. For this feature, I will try to take my opinion out of it as much as possible and recommend the film that is driving the most buzz or that looks the best. Ninety percent of the time, I'll choose a new release, but if nothing good is coming out that week, I'll pick a film that's been out for a while that you might have missed. But I'll always choose a new film every week- no going back for seconds here. Look for a new Popcorn Pick every Thursday or Friday. Since I'm updating weekly, these should be very brief posts.

For my first Pick, I choose a film I've been excitedly waiting for: Date Night. For the first time ever, The Office's Steve Carell and 30 Rock's Tina Fey- in my mind, basically the king and queen of current comedy- are finally doing a movie together. The action comedy stars Carell and Fey as a married couple who decide to have a date night that doesn't go quite as planned. They are mistaken for another couple who has stolen from the mob and have to go on the run. The film also stars Mark Wahlberg, James Franco, and Mila Kunis, and is sure to be if not a great movie, then at least a great night out at the movies.

Alice in Wonderland **

2010-03-18T16:56:00.000-07:00

Alice in Wonderland
** out of ****

The long-awaited adaptation of Lewis Carroll's famous books, directed by Tim Burton, no less, has finally arrived, although it would seem that it was more fitting for a Christmas release rather than in the spring. This film certainly stands apart from other films and TV movies, but sadly, it is not the best film of the bunch.
You'd think that Burton, the master of the weird, was born to make this movie. After all, it's the most famous- and most beloved- nonsense novel of all time, and Burton has created some of the craziest- and yes, most beloved- characters and films of the last couple decades. The fact that he recruited his star pupil Johnny Depp to play the Mad Hatter should have made it even better. Unfortunately, Burton threw everything he had at this film, and the result is something of a mess.
The plot itself is a red flag that something is off: Alice is nineteen and dreams of Wonderland every night. After receiving a marriage proposal from a man she despises, she chases a rabbit and falls down the rabbit hole, where she has trouble getting through the little door using drinks and cakes that can shrink her down or make her grow bigger. Apparently this is her second trip down the rabbit hole. She first came when she was six, but doesn't remember the experience. Also, the place is called Underland, for no real reason. She quickly meets up with several weird creatures who wonder if she's "the right Alice" and tell her she is supposed to slay the evil Jabberwocky. She resists, but the Red Queen is aware that she's back and wants to kill her, so Alice goes on the run. She interacts with weirdo after weirdo, all spouting gibberish, and the whole time she is convinced it is all a dream. She also has a knack for losing her clothes, over and over and over again, although a new dress always seems to magically appear for her. The plot also involves Alice rescuing the Mad Hatter from the Red Queen's castle, and finding an ancient sword with which to slay the Jabberwocky, a lanky dragon. None of it makes any real sense, but that's ok because the movie centers around its many colorful characters and relies heavily on its active special effects.
First of all, newcomer Mia Wasikowska is horribly miscast as Alice. She plays her as a big bore of a girl, even though she is supposed to defy conventions. Wasikowska shows no real emotions and distances the audience when she is supposed to embrace them as they follow her on this adventure. Luckily, all the other actors and voice actors are entirely devoted to their roles. Burton capitalizes on Depp's Jack Sparrow fame by making his Mad Hatter very similar to that famous pirate. Helena Bonham Carter is fun as the Red Queen, a one-note villain who has a giant head and likes to watch people get decapitated. Crispin Glover (Back to the Future) and Anne Hathaway add nothing to their interpretations of the Knave of Hearts and the White Queen, respectively. Among the voice actors are Alan Rickman, Michael Sheen, and Christopher Lee (who is wasted with just two lines of dialogue).
Luckily the visual effects are so good because that is really the film's focal point, in making this land a place we can believe exists. The 3-D is kind of clunky; after all, the film wasn't made for the format, it was converted to it, but it does offer some nice wow-did-you-see-that moments. Humor throughout, mostly in the inane babblings of all the characters, and a rocking closing-credits song from Avril Lavigne help. I would have given the film a harsher rating except that the film is clearly aimed towards children, who don't need their films to make sense, as long as it's entertaining.
I would recommend this film to fans of the books, of Tim Burton, people who like fantastical quirky films, and any kids who might be interested in fantasy.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMiCJefpn9Q

2010 Oscar Winners

2010-03-15T20:01:00.000-07:00

2010 Oscar Winners

First of all, my apologies for getting this out so late, but I am kind of busy. Second of all, I would call that a successful Oscar ceremony. Last Sunday, I was watching avidly (alone! Why doesn't anyone I know watch the Oscars???) as the best in Hollywood were awarded, and I think most of the choices were fair, if not what I had predicted. (Fifteen out of twenty-four categories correct. Details below.) Also, I would have liked more surprises. The Best Picture race seemed close at the beginning of the night, but by the end, it was clear The Hurt Locker would triumph over Avatar. And all of the acting awards were decided a long time ago. Everyone was deserving (even though the films for which they won may not have been), but I like my Oscars with some suspense.
The show opened with a surprise musical number led by Neil Patrick Harris, which was essentially one big joke; he sang about the hosts and what the show was gonna be like. Any Harris fans (which would include anyone who watched the Emmys last year, which he himself hosted) are surely thrilled. Then out came the hosts themselves, Steve Martin (third time hosting) and Alec Baldwin (first time hosting and previous Oscar nominee). Their opening dialogue was like something out of 30 Rock, quick and playing off each other's strengths masterfully. They singled out many nominees- my favorite bit, when they simply glared at George Clooney. They popped up throughout the night, but other stars got some laughs. Ben Stiller's appearance as a Na'vi- one of the blue creatures from Avatar- was definitely exciting, but my favorite part of the night was Tina Fey and Robert Downey, Jr. presenting Best Original Screenplay. ("What does a screenwriter look for in an actor? Memorization.") There were some exciting speeches, including the Kanye-like interruption of one speech for the Best Documentary Short winner, and the censored speech for Best Documentary Feature winner when one guy on stage held up a sign asking people to donate to a cause. (It was to save dolphins, but the Academy does not allow stuff like that at all. The cameras switched away, the orchestra started playing and cut them off, and they were all ushered offstage.) Some history was also made: the first African American man won Best Original Screenplay for Precious, but of course, the showiest win was the first woman ever to be named Best Director.
All in all, a great show and some impressive winners. I still think the switch to ten Best Picture nominees was a good idea, and I think (or at least hope) they will continue to do this in the future, if it will increase viewership and get more deserving films nominations. Here is the rundown of the individual winners.

Best Picture

( ) Avatar
( ) The Blind Side
( ) District 9
( ) An Education
(x) The Hurt Locker
( ) Inglourious Basterds
( ) Precious
( ) A Serious Man
( ) Up
( ) Up in the Air

My guess: Avatar

James Cameron will just have to hug his Titanic Oscars closer, because he didn't get any new ones for himself this year. Instead of honoring a sci-fi epic (that many have claimed has a poorly conceived storyline) and went on to become the biggest box-office hit of all time, the Academy honored a small Iraq war film that ignored conventional storytelling and delivered suspense and sincere character drama. I believe The Hurt Locker is one of the top ten greatest war movies ever made (strangely enough, I think Inglourious Basterds also fits in that category, but for totally different reasons) and probably deserved this win. I still wish more people had seen it- according to a few sources, it's now the lowest-grossing Best Picture winner in history. If Avatar had won, it would have of course fallen on the opposite end of that spectrum. Is this further proof that the Academy is truly out of touch with the people? Or just evidence that it actually honors films that are really deserving of the award? You decide.
P.S. I'm still thrilled that Up found its way into this race. I will now officially predict that an animated film will win the Best Picture Oscar sometime this decade. When does Toy Story 3 come out?

Best Director

( ) James Cameron, Avatar
(x) Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
( ) Quentin Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds
( ) Lee Daniels, Precious
( ) Jason Reitman, Up in the Air

My guess: Kathryn Bigelow

"Well, the time has come." Barbara Streisand (who was herself famously snubbed for a Best Director nomination) presented the award to a stunned Bigelow, the first woman to ever win this award in the Oscars' 82-year history. Aside from the ecstatic Streisand, her gender was never mentioned. She won this award for creating one of the most suspenseful films of the year that sticks in your mind, a war movie that ignores all politics and focuses on the soldiers and the horrific things happening around them. In all, The Hurt Locker picked up six wins, becoming the biggest winner of the night.

Best Actor

(x) Jeff Bridges, Crazy Heart
( ) George Clooney, Up in the Air
( ) Colin Firth, A Single Man
( ) Morgan Freeman, Invictus
( ) Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker

My guess: Jeff Bridges

The Hurt Locker sweep couldn't extend to this corner. Five-time nominee Bridges finally picked up his first Oscar for his raw portrayal as an alcoholic country singer and celebrity-has-been. Bridges may very well have been high during his acceptance speech, but he was also honest and appreciative. My personal view of the win: he was extremely good, probably Oscar-good, but the movie was only so-so. Crazy Heart ended up with two Oscars, proving it wasn't just a vehicle for Bridges.

Best Actress

(x) Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side
( ) Helen Mirren, The Last Station
( ) Carey Mulligan, An Education
( ) Gabourey Sidibe, Precious
( ) Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

My guess: Sandra Bullock

Bullock gets the popularity vote, not necessarily the Best Actress vote. Bullock's a great actress, and she was extremely good in The Blind Side, but that movie was simply a crowd-pleaser that wasn't anything extraordinary and should have been quickly forgotten. It's good that she's been recognized for her work and for the best performance of her career, but I don't think she deserved the Oscar. Regardless, hers was probably the best acceptance speech of the evening, hilariously thanking each of her fellow nominees and almost breaking down talking about her late mother. (Also, was Sean Penn drunk when he presented this award? He looked like someone had just beaten him up.)

Best Supporting Actor

( ) Matt Damon, Invictus
( ) Woody Harrelson, The Messenger
( ) Christopher Plummer, The Last Station
( ) Stanley Tucci, The Lovely Bones
(x) Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

My guess: Christoph Waltz

This was a sure thing. Waltz's scenery-chewing, multilingual performance as an insane Nazi deservedly earned him a Golden Boy. The fact that it was his first American movie (he hails from Austria) makes it that much more impressive. His speech was kind of strange, though; I preferred his Golden Globe acceptance speech. Despite its eight nominations, Tarantino's black-comedy war film ended up mostly forgotten, with just this sole win.

Best Supporting Actress

( ) Penelope Cruz, Nine
( ) Vera Farmiga, Up in the Air
( ) Maggie Gyllenhaal, Crazy Heart
( ) Anna Kendrick, Up in the Air
(x) Mo'Nique, Precious

My guess: Mo'Nique

Who could have seen this coming a year or so ago? Mo'Nique's resume is filled with terrible comedies and lame stand-up routines. Her transformative performance as an abusive mother changed everyone's perspective on what this woman could do, and became the most memorable part of that movie. Precious ended up with two Oscars, not bad for a film that looked like it was made for straight-to-DVD.

Best Adapted Screenplay

( ) District 9
( ) An Education
( ) In the Loop
(x) Precious
( ) Up in the Air

My guess: Up in the Air

Precious picked up this semi-surprise win, the first ever to go to an African American man, for adapting a popular novel. The script smoothly transitioned between the gritty real world and Precious' fantasy escape world, and really brought us inside this girl's mind, a unique concept for a movie that's never really been explored before.

Best Original Screenplay

(x) The Hurt Locker
( ) Inglourious Basterds
( ) The Messenger
( ) A Serious Man
( ) Up

My guess: The Hurt Locker

Recently, controversy has arose as to whether the story is actually original or based on real people, but regardless of whether or not you believe that, the movie has created some very real-seeming people that you end up caring about, even if you don't want to. This award nicely complements the movie's other major wins.

Best Original Score

( ) Avatar
( ) Fantastic Mr. Fox
( ) The Hurt Locker
( ) Sherlock Holmes
(x) Up

My guess: Avatar

The Academy did something different and very unusual this year: to present each nominee, they had a group of break dancers performing onstage to a piece of each nominated score. The dances really didn't seem to match the music, and definitely didn't match the story of the movies. It was a good try, but ultimately a fail in my mind. Luckily, it produced a worthy winner in the animated Up, which produced far more than just cartoon music. Michael Giacchino's score was beautiful and heartbreaking, and actually managed to be somewhat memorable. Pixar's latest gem deservedly picked up two Oscars, racking up an already impressive count for this studio.

Best Original Song

( ) "Almost There," The Princess and the Frog
( ) "Down in New Orleans," The Princess and the Frog
( ) "Loin de Paname," Paris 36
( ) "Take It All," Nine
(x) "The Weary Kind," Crazy Heart

My guess: "The Weary Kind"

The Academy made a good decision and saved us from watching performances of these five songs. At least someone recognizes how terrible they all are. Well, then again, the winner is a fairly decent song that accents the film very nicely and brings a close to the story. Let's hope this category is better next year.

Best Film Editing

( ) Avatar
( ) District 9
(x) The Hurt Locker
( ) Inglourious Basterds
( ) Precious

My guess: The Hurt Locker

The Best Picture winner usually wins here as well. The Hurt Locker brought the viewer almost unbearable tension and despite some scenes being very long, no one really seemed to notice because it put the viewers in the desert with the characters, in the middle of the war. Tyler Perry presented this award with a big laugh, when he had the producers "cut" backstage to see Martin and Baldwin watching TV and wearing Snuggies.

Best Cinematography

(x) Avatar
( ) Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
( ) The Hurt Locker
( ) Inglourious Basterds
( ) The White Ribbon

My guess: The Hurt Locker

Avatar wasn't completely forgotten on Oscar night; the epic film with its epic production values picked up three Oscars, including this one for its sweeping camerawork. Watch this film and get a sense of what it's like to walk on Pandora. This is epic filmmaking at its best, and the Academy recognizes that, at least to a certain extent.

Best Makeup

( ) Il Divo
(x) Star Trek
( ) The Young Victoria

My guess: Star Trek

With this win, Star Trek has gone where no other film in its franchise has gone before: to the Oscar stage. That's right, while previous films have been nominated for various technical awards, no Trek film has ever won an Oscar, until now. It definitely deserved it for its intricate work on the alien faces, most notably an unrecognizable Eric Bana as the Romulan villain Nero. I also find it a little funny that this team also made Leonard Nimoy into Spock again, a role he's played for decades. Everyone knows what that Spock looks like, but they still won an Oscar for it. Well, they still deserved it. Frankly, this extraordinary film deserved more attention than it's been getting, but at least it's got this for consolation.

Best Costume Design

( ) Bright Star
( ) Coco Before Chanel
( ) The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
( ) Nine
(x) The Young Victoria

My guess: The Young Victoria

This kind of movie typically wins here: it allows the costume designer to really push their boundaries and create showy costumes without upstaging the actors wearing them, because they fit into the story and demand to be there. The costumes are in every scene, and are as authentic as possible. I just wish the rest of the film were as good. (No, I haven't seen it, but it doesn't look very interesting!)

Best Art Direction

(x) Avatar
( ) The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
( ) Nine
( ) Sherlock Holmes
( ) The Young Victoria

My guess: Avatar

Take a look at any still frame from this movie and you'll see why it won here: every detail is planned out, every pixel is Pandora through-and-through. Yeah, it's mostly computer-generated, but it's still incredibly intricate and sucks you in. You believe this world could actually exist with the way it's presented.

Best Visual Effects

(x) Avatar
( ) District 9
( ) Star Trek

My guess: Avatar

The other nominees never even stood a chance. Avatar pushed current technology to its limit, and when it could go no farther, it invented some new technologies to get the vision perfect. Several performances are fully motion-captured- and look authentic and very un-stiff, and there are some kind of visual effects in every shot. The 3-D effects are just a plus, it only redefined what the medium could do.

Best Sound Editing

( ) Avatar
(x) The Hurt Locker
( ) Inglourious Basterds
( ) Star Trek
( ) Up

My guess: Avatar

The Hurt Locker proved its sweep of the awards early in the night with its surprise win here. The best sound effects are for the explosions and the occasional slow-motion shot where sounds must be inserted in. I can understand the Academy being excited about a film, but this category definitely had some more deserving films in it.

Best Sound Mixing

( ) Avatar
(x) The Hurt Locker
( ) Inglourious Basterds
( ) Star Trek
( ) Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

My guess: Avatar

Now this is just ridiculous. The sound mixing for The Hurt Locker refers to believably placing the film in Iraq when it was filmed in Jordan; the atmosphere has to sound authentic. Again, there are definitely other films in this category that were showier and put more work in to make the film's sound effects or overall sound quality.

Best Animated Feature

( ) Coraline
( ) Fantastic Mr. Fox
( ) The Princess and the Frog
( ) The Secret of Kells
(x) Up

My guess: Up

This award was preceded by a short film with characters from each of the nominated films being asked about how they feel about being nominated. The attempt was to bring in some comedy, but the Up clip was really the only one worth watching. (I'll admit, the Princess and the Frog one wasn't so bad.) Up deservedly and easily picked up this win for proving once again that Pixar is the only way to go for computer-animated movies. It's the best in the world not only in terms of animation quality, but for storytelling ability and comedic timing. Luckily, this film also has a whopping dose of heart attached. Nothing else really comes close.

Best Foreign Language Film

( ) Ajami
(x) El Secreto de Sus Ojos
( ) The Milk of Sorrow
( ) Un Prophete
( ) The White Ribbon

My guess: The White Ribbon

There is sometimes a popular film snuck into this category, but this year, it's kind of a dud, with no films that anybody has heard of. The winner, El Secreto de Sus Ojos, (The Secret of Their Eyes), is from Argentina and isn't even available in the U.S. yet. How do these films win if no one has seen them?

Best Documentary Feature

( ) Burma VJ
(x) The Cove
( ) Food, Inc.
( ) The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers
( ) Which Way Home

My guess: The Cove

Food, Inc. may have been more popular, but The Cove beats it on importance, as it brings to light the slaughtering of thousands of dolphins in Taiji, Japan. The footage itself is truly disturbing, and the film is at times suspenseful, a word rarely used to describe documentaries. It may not be the best-made film of the bunch, but it's probably the most interesting.

Best Live Action Short

( ) The Door
( ) Instead of Abracadabra
( ) Kavi
( ) Miracle Fish
(x) The New Tenants

My guess: Kavi

Sorry, I have no real information on the winning film. No one really watches short films anymore.

Best Animated Short

( ) French Roast
( ) Granny O'Grimm's Sleeping Beauty
( ) The Lady and the Reaper
(x) Logorama
( ) A Matter of Loaf and Death

My guess: A Matter of Loaf and Death

It seems the Academy's love affair with Wallace and Gromit has ended. The under-the-radar Logorama beat it out. This film is a computer-animated curiosity filled with foul-mouthed characters set in a world populated by and covered with corporate logos- real ones- from all over the world and all kinds of products. The film is watchable on its 'Where's Waldo?' quality; every viewing will yield new discoveries.

Best Documentary Short

( ) China's Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province
( ) The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner
( ) The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant
(x) Music by Prudence
( ) Rabbit a la Berlin

My guess: Music by Prudence

Nothing much to be said for the winning film. The real story here is the interrupted acceptance speech- and the story behind it. Look it up on YouTube, it certainly is strange.

Well friends, another year, another Oscar race, has come and gone, and faded away into history. This year's telecast had much higher ratings than it's had in years, and I think that trend will only increase if the Academy gets wise and not only makes the telecast more fun to watch, but starts giving away the awards to films that people actually liked and want to see get awarded. If you haven't seen The Hurt Locker, check it out. I promise you won't be disappointed.
Did you watch this year? What did you think? I know everyone wasn't as thrilled about the double hosts as I was. Do you plan on watching next year? I love seeing comments on these posts!
Peace out until next year.

2010 Oscar Winners Predictions

2010-02-28T19:59:00.000-08:00

This year's Academy Awards are shaping up to be one of the most memorable in recent years. With many unusual nominees will come several unusual winners, and so with that comes my slightly bold winners predictions. I'm very excited for this year, what with two hosts, ten Best Picture nominees, and countless stars slated to attend. It will surely live up to its name of Hollywood's biggest night.
Below is listed every category, who I think will win, and my personal opinion on who I think deserves to win. As always, I would love to see comments on this post, both before and after the ceremony. I will be doing a follow-up post in the week following the big night.
Now, without any further ado...

Best Picture

Avatar
The Blind Side
District 9
An Education
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Precious
A Serious Man
Up
Up in the Air

What will win: Avatar
What should win: Up in the Air

This race is large and features many good films, but it's really down to just two: Avatar and The Hurt Locker. Even at this late hour, I can see the pendulum swinging in either direction, but I will have to side with the big ol' sci-fi film with all the blue creatures. It's certainly got the box office on its side (in case you've been living in a cave for the last few months, Avatar has replaced James Cameron's own Titanic as the highest-grossing film of all time) and boasts simply the best technical acheivements ever put on celluloid. It wasn't universally loved by critics, but the Academy loves it enough to let it follow in Titanic's footsteps and bestow it with the biggest prize in cinema. The Hurt Locker is definitely deserving of the award- I do believe, after all, that it is one of the best war films ever made- but its failure at the box office and its very difficult competition will ultimately be its undoing. After reviewing the options very closely, I have decided Up in the Air, the dramedy starring George Clooney is my favorite of the bunch. It's the single most enjoyable film to watch, with equal parts laughs and tears. Unfortunately, the film has lost a lot of steam over the past few weeks and may end up being forgotten altogether come Oscar night. Films with long shots like Up, District 9, and The Blind Side will have to settle with just being nominated, which in this case truly is an honor. Inglourious Basterds and Precious could have been front-runners in other years, but have a better chance in the acting categories. An Education? A Serious Man? Seriously? These films really weren't even good enough to make the ballot. They better be grateful for the new 10-film system, otherwise they wouldn't be in the dugout with films like these. Whether or not the Academy continues with the 10-film system remains to be seen, depending on whether or not they consider this year to be a success.

Best Director

James Cameron, Avatar
Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
Quentin Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds
Lee Daniels, Precious
Jason Reitman, Up in the Air

Who will win: Kathryn Bigelow
Who should win: Kathryn Bigelow

Once again, it's a contest between ex-spouses Cameron and Bigelow for the win. The Academy simply won't be able to resist giving it to a well-deserving woman for the first time in history. Her gender aside, she truly deserves it for crafting an intimate, intense, and terrifying portrait of war that actually mimics what war feels like in real life. Sure, Cameron had to invent a few new technologies in order to get his epic made, but he already has one of these. Tarantino is also deserving of a Golden Boy, but while his characters are addictingly watchable, they're also very emotionally distant. Reitman is talented, but the film has a better shot in the writing category. Daniels is only the second African American to be nominated here, and while his leadership made Precious something special, his impressive competition will keep him from winning this year.

Best Actor

Jeff Bridges, Crazy Heart
George Clooney, Up in the Air
Colin Firth, A Single Man
Morgan Freeman, Invictus
Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker

Who will win: Jeff Bridges
Who should win: Jeremy Renner

This being his fifth nomination, Bridges will win more for a stellar career than for a stellar performance (even though he was very good and fearless as an alcoholic washed-up country singer). The movie itself is simply so-so, and as such, I can't generate much support for it. Freeman is the only one here to play a real person, but his nomination is really only here to round out the category. I loved Clooney in Up in the Air, he was very genuine and you were really rooting for him, but my vote goes to Renner, whose career-making performance as a solider addicted to the adrenaline of near-death experiences makes him the perfect antihero for this fantastic war film.

Best Actress

Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side
Helen Mirren, The Last Station
Carey Mulligan, An Education
Gabourey Sidibe, Precious
Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

Who will win: Sandra Bullock
Who should win: Gabourey Sidibe

This race is really between the Oscar freshman Bullock and the Oscar senior Streep. Streep was good as Julia Child, but I felt her performance was more caricature than true-life, even though she does manage some good emotional moments. Bullock is good as a tough matriarch, but definitely not Oscar-worthy. She'll win for making The Blind Side a huge hit and for finally doing something different with her career. Mulligan might be the best part of An Education, a film full of great performances, but my vote goes to the newcomer Sidibe, whose role as Precious was tragic and empowering, and made you think twice about how you treat people.

Best Supporting Actor

Matt Damon, Invictus
Woody Harrelson, The Messenger
Christopher Plummer, The Last Station
Stanley Tucci, The Lovely Bones
Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

Who will win: Christoph Waltz
Who should win: Christoph Waltz

Everyone going in to see Inglourious Basterds expected Brad Pitt to be the biggest star and the best part of the movie. And everyone coming out of that movie was talking not about Pitt's low-wattage commando, but Waltz's incredible turn as a Nazi Jew-hunter. His performance really turned the movie around, and has proved he can take on virtually any role. In another year, I would be rooting for Tucci's very bold performance as a serial killer or Harrelson's emotionally withdrawn soldier. But Waltz has won every pre-Oscar award so far, and he will easily win come Sunday.

Best Supporting Actress

Penelope Cruz, Nine
Vera Farmiga, Up in the Air
Maggie Gyllenhaal, Crazy Heart
Anna Kendrick, Up in the Air
Mo'Nique, Precious

Who will win: Mo'Nique
Who should win: Anna Kendrick

At this point, nothing can stop the power train that is Mo'Nique. Her alarming turn as an abusive mother is completely transformative and haunting. While I recognize the power of her performance, I can't vote for such an unpleasant part of the film, and will instead turn to the year's biggest surprise performance, from the young Kendrick, who more than held her own against George Clooney. She provides the film with its best moments. Cruz, Farmiga, and Gyllenhaal, while all good (Gyllenhaal was particularly good; she was that film's emotional center) don't stand much of a chance here and are mostly just filler nominations.

Best Adapted Screenplay

District 9
An Education
In the Loop
Precious
Up in the Air

What will win: Up in the Air
What should win: District 9

This award should go to Jason Reitman for the funny-sad script for Up in the Air. While the story is very good- and Oscar-worthy- it's really going to win just because it is the film's only real shot at success. It'll get shut out in the acting, directing, and producing categories, and will thus be rewarded for writing. My personal vote goes to the alien allegory District 9. Even though it's adapted- based on director Neill Blomkamp's own short film- it's one of the most original films of the year and really had people talking. Precious might pull an upset for its incredibly moving script.

Best Original Screenplay

The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
The Messenger
A Serious Man
Up

What will win: The Hurt Locker
What should win: Inglourious Basterds

The Hurt Locker may very well sweep the Oscars this year, and so even if it doesn't win Best Picture, it will win here for its suspenseful take on the Iraq war. Personally, I think much of the film's success is due not to the script, but to the actors and director. No one writes anything quite like Quentin Tarantino, and so he gets my vote for weaving together several diverse storylines and many characters to create a cohesive picture that never feels long or slow, despite many long scenes of just dialogue. I love Pixar's stuff, but some parts of Up's storyline feel cliche. The Messenger is a very unique story, and seems very moving. (I haven't seen it yet.) A Serious Man is really just standard Coen brothers fare, which means it's bizarre, confusing, and ultimately pointless.

Best Original Score

Avatar
Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Hurt Locker
Sherlock Holmes
Up

What will win: Avatar
What should win: Avatar

Avatar had a lot to prove to all of its haters when it came out: people thought the film would rely solely on its amazing special effects to get by, but the film surpassed almost all expectations, including in this category. The score is sweeping, epic, emotional, and exciting. Up could pull an upset here, and I would be happy to see that win, too: take another look at the wordless montage at the beginning of the film that uses only visuals and music to tell the heartbreaking story of Carl and his beloved wife Ellie.

Best Original Song

"Almost There," The Princess and the Frog
"Down in New Orleans," The Princess and the Frog
"Loin de Paname," Paris 36
"Take It All," Nine
"The Weary Kind," Crazy Heart

What will win: "The Weary Kind"
What should win: "The Weary Kind"

Crazy Heart's theme song is the only listenable song in this selection. The quiet country tune will easily win this sorry excuse for an Academy Award category this year.

Best Film Editing

Avatar
District 9
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Precious

What will win: The Hurt Locker
What should win: Avatar

Avatar may win Best Picture, but I think The Hurt Locker will pick this one up for upping the suspense and for adding in a few very cinematic slo-mo shots amidst all the realistic action. My vote, however, goes to Cameron's own editing for Avatar, since the film was put together in a way that makes sure it's remembered for years to come.

Best Cinematography

Avatar
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
The White Ribbon

What will win: The Hurt Locker
What should win: The Hurt Locker

Hurt Locker used handheld cameras that gave the film a vague documentary feel that put the viewer in the Iraqi desert with the soldiers, so that we could feel the intensity right along with them. You could almost feel the hot sun on your eyes. It gets my vote, as well as it surely will the Academy's.

Best Makeup

Il Divo
Star Trek
The Young Victoria

What will win: Star Trek
What should win: Star Trek

Victoria has royalty and legendary sideburns, and Il Divo has Italian guys, but Star Trek has bald Romulans with tattoos, pointy-eared Vulcans, and lots of post-fight injury wounds. It's definitely the most showy makeup of the three, and will boldy go where no Trek film has gone before- to the stage at the Academy Awards.

Best Costume Design

Bright Star
Coco Before Chanel
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Nine
The Young Victoria

What will win: The Young Victoria
What should win: The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

Royalty always wins here. (Witness past winners Marie Antoinette and The Duchess.) Victoria follows in that tradition by showing off glamorous dresses the whole film through. My vote, however, goes to the wacky contraptions of Terry Gilliam's Doctor Parnassus. This world was hard to recreate from someone's imagination, but it all looks real, and the costumes ground the characters in reality.

Best Art Direction

Avatar
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Nine
Sherlock Holmes
The Young Victoria

What will win: Avatar
What should win: Avatar

Give Avatar one last peek and you'll see why it deserves this award: every frame is so intricate, so detailed, it seriously looks like a living, breathing world full of blue creatures and bioluminescent plants. The Academy may not like how almost all of its art direction is tied directly with visual effects, and in that case, Nine will probably pull an upset for setting the mood of the '50s quite nicely.

Best Visual Effects

Avatar
District 9
Star Trek

What will win: Avatar
What should win: Avatar

This one's been decided for months now. District 9 and Star Trek both have very impressive special effects, but Avatar invented a new method of motion-capture and immersed the viewer in a purely digital world. Everything looks incredibly real, and there's no stopping this trophy from landing in blue hands.

Best Sound Editing

Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Star Trek
Up

What will win: Avatar
What should win: Avatar

Star Trek and Up had extremely good sound effects, but nothing can compete with Avatar's reign over the computer world. The film's visuals were amazing, yes, but it needed believable sound in order to complete the picture.

Best Sound Mixing

Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Star Trek
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

What will win: Avatar
What should win: Avatar

I'm learning gradually about the difference between the two sound Oscars. This one covers the film's overall sound, as opposed to individual effects, but Avatar is still the most impressive in that area. Possible upsets could come from The Hurt Locker, which painted a perfect picture of Baghdad, or from Inglourious Basterds, which effectively used silence to highten suspense in pivotal moments.

Best Animated Feature

Coraline
Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Princess and the Frog
The Secret of Kells
Up

What will win: Up
What should win: Up

Pixar's gem Up not only has the most nominations of the bunch (including an extremely rare Best Picture nom), but it's the best-made, the most watchable, and the most original of any of these films. No other film comes close. An upset could come in the form of Mr. Fox, but this is very unlikely.

Best Foreign Language Film

Ajami
El Secreto de Sus Ojos
The Milk of Sorrow
Un Prophete
The White Ribbon

What will win: The White Ribbon
What should win: ?

None of these films are very popular with American audiences, making this race hard to predict this year. The White Ribbon won the Palme d'Or at Cannes and is the most artsy of the bunch, so that's my guess.

Best Documentary Feature

Burmja VJ
The Cove
Food, Inc.
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers
Which Way Home

What will win: The Cove
What should win: ?

An upset by the popular Food, Inc. is possible, but the obvious winner here is The Cove, which has wowed critics and audiences alike. Plus, it's a documentary that plays out like a thriller- exactly what the people want.

Best Live Action Short

The Door
Instead of Abracadabra
Kavi
Miracle Fish
The New Tenants

What will win: Kavi
What should win: ?

I really don't know anything about these films. I choose Kavi simply because it was the most easily accessible film; if I can find it, other people can watch it.

Best Animated Short

French Roast
Granny O'Grimm's Sleeping Beauty
The Lady and the Reaper
Logorama
A Matter of Loaf and Death

What will win: A Matter of Loaf and Death
What should win: ?

There are lots of good choices here with some impressive animation, but the award will go once again to Wallace and Gromit for charming kids and adults alike across the globe.

Best Documentary Short

China's Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province
The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner
The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant
Music by Prudence
Rabbit a la Berlin

What will win: Music by Prudence
What should win: ?

Honestly, I don't really care about this category. If they pre-tape this award being given out, I will declare the producers of the show geniuses.

That's all of 'em. Are you as excited as I am? Probably not. But you should watch the Oscars anyway because love 'em or hate 'em, they're always interesting, funny, and always manage to generate conversation. Once again, the 82nd annual Academy Awards will air on Sunday, March 7th, at 6:00 pm. on ABC. See who goes home with the gold along with the rest of the country at this already-historic show.

2010 Oscar Nominations, Part Two

2010-02-21T21:39:00.000-08:00

2010 Oscar Nominations
Part Two

Continuing down the list of this year's Academy Awards nominations, we see some odd choices in the technical categories. The Academy indeed has a mind of its own, separate from the moviegoing public.

Best Original Score

Avatar
Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Hurt Locker
Sherlock Holmes
Up

For some viewers, this is their favorite category. The musical score often has a life of its own that can enhance the mood or even change the entire meaning of a scene. Fantastic's and Up's scores are upbeat and whimsical, Sherlock's is actiony classical, and Avatar's is epic and emotional. I was actually surprised The Hurt Locker was nominated here, as I remember that film not having much of a score, just tone-setters and screeching suspense-builders. My money's on Avatar, or maybe Up.

Best Original Song

"Almost There," The Princess and the Frog
"Down in New Orleans," The Princess and the Frog
"Loin de Paname," Paris 36
"Take It All," Nine
"The Weary Kind," Crazy Heart

This category is a major disappointment this year. Not a single song here is featured on the radio, or is even very well-known. One is from an obscure French musical- and is in French, naturally; one is Marion Cotillard's number from a musical flop; not one but two are from the dreary Disney revamp of traditional animated musicals; and one is a slow country drawl from a little-seen indie. "The Weary Kind" is the only song that isn't cringe-inducing while you listen to it, so it will easily win here. (It also kinda sounds like Bruce Springsteen's "The Wrestler," whose snub last year is already legendary.)

Best Film Editing

Avatar
District 9
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Precious

This race can sometimes be difficult to predict, as good editing requires that no one notice it. Basterds' nomination is curious, as the film has several long scenes of dialogue that make editing minimal and almost invisible. This award usually squares up with Best Picture (as editing is the way one views the overall film; editing has to be good in order for the film to be good), so it'll either be Avatar or The Hurt Locker, the two current front-runners.

Best Cinematography

Avatar
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
The White Ribbon

Some interesting choices here too. Avatar drips of epic camera work, The Hurt Locker's handheld cameras put the viewer in the Iraqi desert with our heroes, Harry Potter has an ashen look to the piece that reflects the dark times these characters now live in, and the foreign film The White Ribbon is in crisp black and white. I'm not sure why Basterds is here either, but I'm glad it is; the more nominations, the glouriouser.

Best Makeup

Il Divo
Star Trek
The Young Victoria

Star Trek is the only one here that makes sense: it features dozens of aliens whose faces all look totally real. (Witness Eric Bana as villainous Nero.) Victoria, I'm guessing is for aging its characters, or possibly just for putting lots of facial hair on all its male actors. The foreign film Il Divo is based on a true story, so it's either for getting its actors to look like real people or for aging them realistically. I think Star Trek will take it. (I really hope it does. This film deserved more Oscar love than it's gotten.)

Best Costume Design

Bright Star
Coco Before Chanel
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Nine
The Young Victoria

They've got the glamorous period pieces in Bright Star, Coco, and Victoria. Nine is all about the glamour of Hollywood and the movies, and Parnassus is unique fantasy. This award always goes to the costumes which are the most noticable, so it should be either Bright Star or Victoria.

Best Art Direction

Avatar
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Nine
Sherlock Holmes
The Young Victoria

These films all benefit from their look, be it establishing a certain time period (Sherlock, Victoria) or creating fantasy worlds in a computer (Avatar, Parnassus). As the film that took the longest to make and thus, is the most detailed, I'm betting on the sci-fi epic Avatar.

Best Visual Effects

Avatar
District 9
Star Trek

Only three nominees here despite there being copious amounts of visual-effects films come out this year. Luckily, all three have extremely impressive special effects: Star Trek brought forth a whole new kind of Trek with different looks for aliens, spacecraft, and, yes, planet Vulcan; and District 9, despite largely being made to look like a faux documentary, has incredibly vivid and detailed- not to mention disgusting- visual effects of the aliens. Look at any scene where they interact with humans and you'll think that they're real. Sadly, while these two films are worthy, they will both fall to the mighty Avatar for the creation of a brand-new motion capture technique and totally immersive CGI worlds. The film gets plusses for revitalizing 3-D technology, and making it a true experience separate from the 2-D version.

Best Sound Editing

Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Star Trek
Up

Mix of different stuff here. It will probably go to one of the sci-fi films, Avatar or Star Trek (I naturally give the edge to Avatar) or the animated Up, where all the sounds have to be made from scratch.

Best Sound Mixing

Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Star Trek
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Still not entirely sure why there are two sound Oscars. Once again, this will probably go to one of the sci-fi films, probably Avatar, although Transformers has some very impressive sound.

Best Foreign Language Film

Ajami
El Secreto de Sus Ojos
The Milk of Sorrow
Un Prophete
The White Ribbon

I don't know much about these films, only how much buzz they've conjured up. As the only film here nominated in any other category (Cinematography), The White Ribbon will probably take it. It also won the extremely prestigious Palme d'Or award at Cannes. Un Prophete may pull an upset; it's popular with some American audiences.

Best Documentary Feature

Burma VJ
The Cove
Food, Inc.
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers
Which Way Home

Some very interesting-looking stuff here offering new perspectives on old subjects. While I'm sure any film is worthy, The Cove is by far the most popular and will win it easily. It's about the slaughtering of dolphins in Japan and how the documentary crew had to break several laws and risk their lives to get the footage of it.

Best Live Action Short

The Door
Instead of Abracadabra
Kavi
Miracle Fish
The New Tenants

I don't know much about these films. Kavi looks very dramatic; it's a film about a young slave boy trying to escape.

Best Animated Short

French Roast
Granny O'Grimm's Sleeping Beauty
The Lady and the Reaper
Logorama
A Matter of Loaf and Death

Most notable snub here: Pixar's Partly Cloudy, which ran theatrically in front of Up. Shame on you, Oscar. All of these have impressive animation and unique (if not always funny) storylines. Loaf and Death should win, as the Academy has a love affair with the claymation Wallace and Gromit films. (Two previous shorts and the feature, The Curse of the Were-Rabbit, have won Oscars.)

Best Documentary Short

China's Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province
The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner
The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant
Music by Prudence
Rabbit a la Berlin

Sorry, I really don't know anything about these films apart from their titles. The Last Truck sounds relevant enough for the win. If the Academy wants to attract viewers, upgrading to ten Best Picture nominees is a good start, but I would recommend just getting rid of this category altogether.

Well, that's all of them. Look out for more postings concerning Oscar before the ceremony, including my much-anticipated winners predictions. Once again, the ceremony will be at 6:30 pm Sunday, March 7th on ABC, with dual hosts Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin. Be sure to watch!

2010 Oscar Nominations, Part One

2010-02-08T21:08:00.000-08:00

2010 Oscar Nominations

Part One

The nominations for this year's Academy Awards were announced bright and early Tuesday morning, and if you had a shred of sanity in you, you were sleeping through it and waited to hear the results from online when you woke up. Well, I'm not sane; I was up before the sun rose with a smile on my face watching the press conference, jumping up and down at all the good news.

Yeah, Star Trek didn't get nominated for Best Picture, but I guess I didn't really expect it to be. It wasn't totally forgotten, though: it got four technical nominations, including Best Visual Effects. Other notable snubs in all categories: Where the Wild Things Are, Public Enemies, It's Complicated, The Informant!, Angels & Demons, The Hangover, Terminator: Salvation, Michael Jackson's This Is It, etc.

The jump to ten Best Picture nominees wasn't the only new thing this year: I got two categories correct in my predictions! So now that you know what an expert I am on the subject, let's jump right in to this year's nominations, complete with my witty commentary.

Best Picture

Avatar

The Blind Side

District 9

An Education

The Hurt Locker

Inglourious Basterds

Precious

A Serious Man

Up in the Air

Guessed correctly: 7

Incorrect guesses: Invictus, A Single Man, Star Trek

Instead of: The Blind Side, District 9, A Serious Man

So lots of surprises in this category. Just the way I like it. Yeah, Star Trek failed to get nominated here. (In fact, it failed to get any major nominations.) But there's still plenty to like here. I see this category split neatly in half. Five movies- Avatar, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, Precious, and Up in the Air- are serious contenders and have at least a fighting chance at the prize. These five were also nominated for Best Director. Each of these movies has won some best-film prize at some festival or awards show before now. All received multiple nominations, with Avatar and Hurt Locker leading the pack with a whopping nine noms each. (Basterds got eight.) The other five movies- The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, A Serious Man, and Up- only got nominated due to the new ten-film system. The most obvious dark horses here are the gory sci-fi thriller District 9 and the whimsical computer-animated film Up. These are definitely not Oscar's favorites, but they are critically acclaimed and loved by the Academy. The Blind Side is a simple little film, but it was a big hit and a crowd-pleaser, and thus won over the experts for this race. I'm also really glad that the low-key indie films are considered dark horses this year, as opposed to front-runners. It's also clear when you tally it up that these movies are just kind of thrown in: both Blind Side and Serious Man got only two nominations apiece, including Best Picture. That hasn't happened since the 1930's. (Education got three.) Up got a pretty decent five nominations total, but one of them is Best Animated Feature, which it will win there so it won't feel too bad about losing here. It also has the distinction of being the second animated film to ever be nominated for Best Picture.

At this point, Avatar and Hurt Locker are pretty much neck-in-neck. This may change in the coming weeks; I'll let you know a more precise winner's prediction as we get closer to the date.

Best Director

James Cameron, Avatar

Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker

Quentin Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds

Lee Daniels, Precious

Jason Reitman, Up in the Air

Guessed correctly: 5

The first time I have ever correctly guessed all the nominees in any category. I am excited about this award; some very talented directors have made the list. I'm psyched Tarantino has another shot at it, and if you haven't heard already, Cameron and Bigelow used to be married. I'd say either of them could win it, but I give the edge to Bigelow, who has now become the fourth woman in history to be nominated for this award, and would be the first to win it. Of course, her gender is the last reason she deserves it: The Hurt Locker is incredibly suspenseful, funny, and feels very real the whole way through.

Best Actor

Jeff Bridges, Crazy Heart

George Clooney, Up in the Air

Colin Firth, A Single Man

Morgan Freeman, Invictus

Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker

Guessed correctly: 5

Another category guessed completely correctly. Yay me! I haven't seen all these movies, so I can't be sure which one truly deserves it. If it was up to me, I'd say either Clooney for mixing whip-smart comedy and true emotion or Renner for letting us peer into the mind of this deranged solider addicted to war. However, it seems that Bridges is set to win after four previous nominations. Freeman's the only person here who plays a real person, but strangely, he's barely a blip on the radar, as is Clint Eastwood's rugby film.

Best Actress

Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side

Helen Mirren, The Last Station

Carey Mulligan, An Education

Gabourey Sidibe, Precious

Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

Guessed correctly: 4

Incorrect guess: Emily Blunt, The Young Victoria

Instead of: Helen Mirren, The Last Station

I was aware of The Last Station and its Oscar potential, but I left it off my predictions altogether because it has failed to get a wide release and was being ignored by many other organizations. Three of these women play real people- Bullock, Mirren, and Streep- and the race is definitely between Bullock and Streep. I would say the latter deserves it (actually, I would say the complete unknown Sidibe deserves it), but the former seems set to win her first award. (Streep already has two Oscars.) Bullock is a talented actress best known for her so-so comedies who is finally getting recognized for her dramatic work. She also holds the unusual distinction of being nominated for an Oscar and a Razzie in the same year. (The latter is for Worst Actress for the flop All About Steve.)

Best Supporting Actor

Matt Damon, Invictus

Woody Harrelson, The Messenger

Christopher Plummer, The Last Station

Stanley Tucci, The Lovely Bones

Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

Guessed correctly: 3 + alternate

Incorrect guesses: Alec Baldwin, It's Complicated; Alfred Molina, An Education

Instead of: Christopher Plummer, The Last Station

Two actors here play real people, Damon and Plummer. (The latter plays Leo Tolstoy.) But it's Waltz that seems set to take the award for a role in which he had to speak four languages and had to act charming and insane, often in the same scene. He really has created one of the most memorable villains in screen history. That distinction also goes to Tucci's serial killer, but this is Lovely Bones' only nomination, making it very difficult to win. His nomination is his victory.

Best Supporting Actress

Penelope Cruz, Nine

Vera Farmiga, Up in the Air

Maggie Gyllenhaal, Crazy Heart

Anna Kendrick, Up in the Air

Mo'Nique, Precious

Guessed correctly: 4

Incorrect guess: Julianne Moore, A Single Man

Instead of: Maggie Gyllenhaal, Crazy Heart

Crazy Heart proved it wasn't just a vehicle for Jeff Bridges by getting three nominations, including one for Gyllenhaal that surprised everybody. Cruz won this award last year, so she's just in for show. Farmiga's performance was sexy and genuine, but she doesn't have much of a shot. Kendrick has the support of the critics- and Oscar does like to award unknowns- but Mo'Nique will probably take it home for her completely transformative performance as an abusive mother.

Best Adapted Screenplay

District 9

An Education

In the Loop

Precious

Up in the Air

Guessed correctly: 3 + alternate

Incorrect guesses: Fantastic Mr. Fox, A Single Man

Instead of: In the Loop

In the Loop being nominated here was a surprise to everybody. This was a British political satire that was critically acclaimed but was ignored by audiences and didn't make it to theaters. This race is hard to predict, but I think Up in the Air will follow in Reitman's last film Juno's footsteps by just winning the screenplay award and getting shut out everywhere else.

Best Original Screenplay

The Hurt Locker

Inglourious Basterds

The Messenger

A Serious Man

Guessed correctly: 3 + alternate

Incorrect guesses: (500) Days of Summer, It's Complicated

Instead of: The Messenger

This category is an interesting mix of drama, comedy, and even animation. I would say The Hurt Locker would get it since it's such a serious Best Picture contender, but it may go to Quentin Tarantino's crazy script for Inglourious Basterds. Anyone notice Avatar isn't nominated here?

Best Animated Feature

Coraline

Fantastic Mr. Fox

The Princess and the Frog

The Secret of Kells

Guessed correctly: 3 + 1 alternate

Incorrect alternate: Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs

Instead of: The Secret of Kells

I know what you're thinking: what the hell is Kells? I didn't know, either. It's a strange-looking film from Belgium based on an ancient folk tale. It's currently set to open in the U.S. in March. How did the Academy get enough people to see this film that no one's heard of to garner a nomination? I guess it doesn't matter, since Pixar's Best Picture-nominated Up will easily take the prize. An upset by Fantastic Mr. Fox is possible, but very unlikely. Hooray to Disney for having two of the five nominated films here.

All right, that's it for now. This post is split into two parts because, you know, I'm busy with other stuff. Part two will consist of the technical nominations (which I did not predict) and the other awards that no one really cares about, like Best Documentary Short.

In case you haven't heard, there are two hosts for the show this year: Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin. That is sure to be a hilarious show with those two faux-rivals at the helm, and I personally can't wait. (Check out the two of them together in It's Complicated and an episode of 30 Rock, and you'll see why I'm excited.) The show will be the night of Sunday, March 7th. Mark your calendars!

The Blind Side **1/2

2010-02-07T11:03:00.000-08:00

The Blind Side

**1/2 out of ****

What was supposed to be simply one of the many forgettable feel-good movies of the year has become one of the biggest hits of the year, thanks to the star power of Sandra Bullock and its moving story.

The Blind Side is the story of Michael Oher, a large black teenager with a violent past whom society has forgotten. He doesn't talk much, he has no home, no real education, and no true family. He wears the same shirt everyday and depends on the kindness of others to get by. After getting accepted to a nice private Christian school thanks to the pleadings of a desperate football coach, Michael is picked up off the street and brought to the home of the Tuohy (pronounced TOO-ee) family. The matriarch, Leigh Anne, is a tough, no-nonsense religious woman who never swears but is always fierce and demands respect from everyone around her. Michael is quickly accepted into this family. The image of a large black kid next to these small rich white folks inspires many laughs. Along the way, Michael improves his grades, goes out for the football team, and attempts to choose a college to go to on a football scholarship.

Since the story is so predictable, the film relies on strong performances from its lovable cast. Sandra Bullock leads the pack as Leigh Anne, taking on a slightly deglamorized part (and a convincing Southern accent) in order to play a real person. Newcomer Quinton Aaron plays Michael as a gentle giant, a very polite young man who despite his size, doesn't even know how to play football correctly. A nearly unrecognizable Tim McGraw also turns in a solid performance as the family patriarch Sean. Their two kids also win over the audience's hearts, especially the mischievous little tyke, S.J. Kathy Bates also shows up late in the film as Michael's tutor, and gives us one of the funniest scenes in the movie.

All in all, The Blind Side is just another inspirational sports drama. It's all about the love of family and football, and its emotional parts are about as subtle as a sledgehammer. While it's a very entertaining film, it's shallow and predictable, and most of its conflict is weighted towards the end. But, it's a big crowd-pleaser, which is all that really needs to be said for a movie that doesn't ask for you to think twice about it.

I would recommend this film to people who like football movies, Sandra Bullock, and people who like to go awwwww.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poKvUy0xYuE

2010 Oscar Nominations Predictions

2010-01-18T10:40:00.001-08:00

2010 Oscar Nominations Predictions

Ladies and gentlemen, it is now officially Oscar season. Love 'em or hate 'em, the Oscars will be the height of conversation for the next month or so, and is historically one of the highest-rated shows on television every year. It's one of my favorite times of the year because it allows me to feed my obsession endlessly.
And in that spirit, I give you my predictions for the nominations in all the major categories this year. These are based on other professional critics' predictions, various awards given out, and several top 10 lists. But, these are not copycat lists- these are my own informed predictions of what I think will- and will not- be nominated based on what I've observed. (No, I have not seen all of these movies I'm putting down. Some of them haven't even been wide-released yet.) There is also an emphasis on Best Picture (remember there's ten nominees this year) because, let's face it, that's the only award that really matters.
Last year, I didn't get any category completely correct, so this year, I have added an alternate nominee for every category in case something I pick is wrong.
After the nominations are announced, I'll do a follow-up post with the complete nominations and grading how close my predictions were. The nominations will be announced at 6:30 am Tuesday, February 2nd. The press conference should air on any channel showing the news at that time, but ABC is your best bet.

Best Picture

Avatar
An Education
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Invictus
Precious
A Single Man
Star Trek
Up
Up in the Air

Alternate: It's Complicated

All right, where to start? I think the shoo-ins here are Hurt Locker, Precious, and Up in the Air. The latter also seems currently poised to win. They all have been universally applauded for their bold storylines and audience-pleasing techniques. It's hard to explain why Inglourious Basterds is so well-loved: it's a slow, talky, crude, and very violent movie from Quentin Tarantino, a guy who hasn't been nominated for any award for over a decade. But, everyone loves it (I do too), and Oscar won't ignore it. Avatar's massive box office performance and mostly-good reviews will also land it a spot, and while some think it's a front-runner, I think an epic sci-fi film will have trouble winning. Some say Invictus is also a shoo-in, but that movie seemed to me more like just another inspirational sports drama. But the presence of Clint Eastwood behind the camera and Morgan Freeman in front of it will propel it into this supersize race. The little indie films that no one has seen will be represented this year by An Education and A Single Man, as both have been universally acclaimed and have made it on many top-ten lists. With so many other good movies, these will both have trouble finding traction to be taken seriously.
Now to my two unusual nominees. Only one animated movie in history has ever been nominated for Best Picture (Beauty and the Beast, in case you were wondering), and it seems it would stay that way if it wasn't for the new policy of ten Best Picture nominees. I think another Disney film, Up, will get a shot this year, although I find it very unlikely it could win. My other dark-horse nominee is Star Trek, which you probably won't find on many critics' prediction lists. Maybe this is just wishful thinking, but take a look at the facts- critics loved the film for its revival of the dead franchise, its hip style and fast-paced action, and pitch-perfect cast. It made a helluva lot of money this summer, has showed up on many top-10 lists, and was even nominated for Best Picture by the Producers Guild of America. I think that the expansion to ten nominees was made for movies like Trek, which wouldn't have a chance in hell otherwise. Plus, with this system, it's possible for this to get a Best Picture nomination without getting very many other nominations. (You may note I'm not putting it down for any other major categories, directing, writing, or acting; not to say that it's not worthy, just that it's not the type of movie the Academy nominates for those things.)
I put It's Complicated down as an alternate because it's the kind of old-fashioned, star-studded romantic comedy that Oscar likes, but it opened to mixed reviews, which will probably ultimately hold it back from this race.
Whatever the nominees are, I'm sure it'll be an exciting race, as it's already proved to be historic.

Best Director

Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
James Cameron, Avatar
Lee Daniels, Precious
Quentin Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds
Jason Reitman, Up in the Air

Alternate: Clint Eastwood, Invictus

This category consists of what I consider to be the front-runners for the Best Picture race: Bigelow, Cameron, or Reitman could win at this point. Precious wouldn't be what it is without Daniels' vision, and the Academy should be prepared to give Tarantino (a winner for writing, but not for directing) another shot at this award.
I still don't think Invictus is a relevant enough movie to garner a nomination here, but the Academy may find that nominating Eastwood again to be simply irresistable.

Best Actor

Jeff Bridges, Crazy Heart
George Clooney, Up in the Air
Colin Firth, A Single Man
Morgan Freeman, Invictus
Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker

Alternate: Viggo Mortensen, The Road

Clooney's a shoo-in here, and currently on track to win it. Freeman plays a real person (South African president Nelson Mandela), so he'll also be included. Firth, normally a good actor you just overlook, is getting the best reviews of his career. The entire film Crazy Heart seems like just one big campaign to get four-time nominee Bridges his first win, which immediately makes me skeptical, but he has the support of the all-powerful critics, and thus will be included. Renner's performance in The Hurt Locker is amazing and one of the highlights of this already-great movie, but the fact that he's an almost complete unknown- and that the movie opened in the summer- will slow him down. But the film's recent release on DVD will earn him the nomination last-minute.
The long-awaited film The Road opened to only lukewarm reviews, but critics everywhere seemed to agree that Mortensen was the best part of the whole thing. He might get a dark-horse nomination last-minute.

Best Actress

Emily Blunt, The Young Victoria
Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side
Carey Mulligan, An Education
Gabourey Sidibe, Precious
Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

Alternate: Meryl Streep, It's Complicated

Mulligan and Sidibe are the shoo-ins here; I'm picturing a win for the latter. Bullock has the biggest hit and the best reviews of her career for The Blind Side, and the Academy will finally notice this talented actress- playing a real person is what will really do it, though. The Young Victoria is really structured around Blunt's performance, so it'd be a waste if she wasn't nominated. And Streep just can't stop racking up nominations. She was nominated last year, and currently holds the record for the most nominations for an actress. This year, she will break her own record with her delightful performance as Julia Child in the Julia half of the film.
Of course, Julie & Julia opened in August, and Streep's other shiny performance in It's Complicated came out just last month. The Academy is known to have a short memory, so Streep might upset herself in the nominations this year. (The rules say you can't be nominated twice in the same category.)

Best Supporting Actor

Alec Baldwin, It's Complicated
Matt Damon, Invictus
Alfred Molina, An Education
Stanley Tucci, The Lovely Bones
Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

Alternate: Woody Harrelson, The Messenger

This race is difficult to predict. Waltz's scene-chewing performance in Basterds is the only sure thing, and the little-known foreign actor seems poised to get a well-deserved win. Damon plays a real person and proves his worth as an actor, and will recieve another nomination for Invictus, rounding out that film's major awards chances. Molina has lost some steam lately, but his tender performance in the little-seen indie should go along nicely with costar Carey Mulligan's sure-thing nomination. Tucci should also get nominated for his intensely creepy turn as a serial killer in The Lovely Bones, desite the film itself not getting much love. (That is, of course, unless the Academy gets confused and nominates him for his other good performance in Julie & Julia.) Baldwin's funny and brave performance in It's Complicated should provide this category with its only comedic role, which it usually does award.
The Messenger is unmistakeable Oscar bait, as is Harrelson's unsympathetic performance, but the film has lost a lot of steam lately and will probably be forgotten.

Best Supporting Actress

Penelope Cruz, Nine
Vera Farmiga, Up in the Air
Anna Kendrick, Up in the Air
Mo'Nique, Precious
Julianne Moore, A Single Man

Alternate: Samantha Morton, The Messenger

Mo'Nique and Kendrick are the best bets here; both performances elevated the movies to a new level and provided them with their most memorable scenes. I can imagine either winning at this point. (And for those of you who think Mo'Nique's arrogance in having just one name will shut her out, may I remind you that Cher has an Oscar.) Farmiga's nomination will go along nicely with Kendrick's, and she deserves it for giving a performance even sexier than George Clooney's. Moore will also get nominated for her small but memorable part in A Single Man. Poor reviews have ruined Nine's chances in most categories, but Cruz- last year's winner- should still get recognized for her steamy role as a mistress.
Again, The Messenger will probably end up getting forgotten this year, but if it isn't, Samantha Morton should also get nominated.

Best Adapted Screenplay

District 9
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Precious
A Single Man
Up in the Air

Alternate: An Education

Mixed bag of stuff here, including three Best Picture nominees-to-be. I imagine a win for the hilarious Up in the Air, but an upset from the highly dramatic Precious is possible. A writing nomination for A Single Man will go well with its other nominations, while the sci-fi actioner District 9 was widely applauded for its originality. Fantastic Mr. Fox doesn't have nearly enough lift to get it in the Best Picture race, but Oscar does occasionally recognize animated films here.
The campaigns for An Education seem to be focusing mostly on its acting, not writing, and besides, the film may be too mellow even for Oscar. But, if not, it will go nicely with its other nominations.

Best Original Screenplay

(500) Days of Summer
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
It's Complicated
Up

Alternate: A Serious Man

The amazingly tense script for The Hurt Locker should make it a front-runner, as will Quentin Tarantino's irresistable script for Basterds. Pixar films do tend to be nominated here, although they are always long-shots for the win. Up was one of the most original films of the year. It's Complicated was also praised for its very funny romantic comedy directed at adults, and Summer's surprisingly funny script was also something unique.
The film is losing a lot of steam, but the Coen brothers' film A Serious Man may get a last-minute nomination for writing.

Best Animated Feature

Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Princess and the Frog
Up

Alternates: Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, Coraline

The fact that it's even being considered for Best Picture should make it an easy win for Pixar's wonderful Up. The other nominees should be Fantastic Mr. Fox, loved by critics and hated by audiences for its inventive use of stop-motion, and Disney's Princess and the Frog for its revival of traditional hand-drawn animation.
There are usually three nominees here, but if there are five, they will probably be the moneymaker Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs and the critic's darling Coraline. The latter opened in January, so it's going to be very difficult to get nominated since the Academy always has such a short memory.

If you've made it this far, you're probably going to be up at the wee hours of the morning watching the nominations with me, so more power to ya! Once again, the nominations will be announced live during a press conference at 6:30 am (Colorado time) Tuesday, February 2nd. The Academy Awards themselves will be on Sunday, March 7th.
And, as usual, I want to see comments on this post! Chime in with your opinions and let me know what I missed. Movies are things to be celebrated, and the Oscars are a perfect opportunity to get people talking about the movies of the past year, so start talking.

The Lovely Bones ***

2010-01-17T14:58:00.000-08:00

The Lovely Bones

*** out of ****

Peter Jackson's highly-anticipated film The Lovely Bones, based on the bestselling book (which, yes, I have read) is finally out. Once again, he shows his wonderful skills as a director: his compassion, his attention to detail, and his ability to craft an incredible story.

The plot of the book and film may alienate some people immediately, but for those who can handle heavy subjects, here it is: Susie Salmon is a young, happy teenager in 1973 who aspires to be a photographer and is on the cusp of her first kiss. Her next-door neighbor, Mr. Harvey, is a grade-A creepo who obsesses over Susie, and after lots of plotting and building an underground hangout, lures her down there alone and kills her. (We witness the events leading up to the murder, but not the event itself.) From this point, the movie splits its story: on one side, we see Susie rising to a beautiful, magical perfect world described as the "in-between." She makes friends with a fellow dead girl, who tells her she must let go of Earth to ascend to heaven. Susie decides to be loyal to her family and stay to watch over them. And as she does, so do we: the film dramatizes her family- father, mother, little sister and brother, and alcoholic grandma- coping over her disappearance and later acceptance that she was killed. Her father tries to aide the police in catching her murderer, while her mother wants to move on, eventually prompting her to move out. The sister and brother slowly grow up and learn to live with the pain, but the sister has a nagging feeling about her creepy next-door neighbor. Meanwhile, Mr. Harvey destroys all the evidence, is questioned once by the police but is never suspected of anything. He lives in solitude revelling in his genius.

For those of you who aren't scared away yet, let me assure you that the film is really a work of art. All of the acting is superb, especially Saoirse Ronan (Atonement) as Susie, narrating the film with an innocent gentleness, and Stanley Tucci as Harvey, who makes the viewer want to laugh at his geeky, chirpy loner- if they weren't so terrified by him. Mark Wahlberg also turns in a solid emotional performance as the father determined to keep his daughter's memory alive and catch her killer. The film is also unusually beautiful: Susie's heaven is a gorgeous mix of the landscapes of New Zealand- where director Jackson hails from- and glittery CGI. On the Earth side, the film perfectly evokes the look and feel of the 70's. Although the tale is timeless, it's difficult to picture the story taking place at any other time period. The music is also hauntingly beautiful and appropriate. And in a film that's so rich with dramatic emotion, it's surprising to find a couple of truly suspenseful scenes, most notably when Susie's sister breaks into Mr. Harvey's house looking for evidence.

This film is getting a lot of negative reviews, which I attribute to the dark storyline which may make a lot of people uncomfortable. But luckily, by taking out all of the graphic details and avoiding discussing religion, the story is able to focus on the characters. I also believe it's an improvement from the book: while the book lost itself in sex and went on forever, the film narrows the focus to Susie and her father and expands on what exactly is in Susie's perfect world. If there is a big flaw, it's that the focus is divided between heaven and earth, and the viewer has to decide which one they like better.

Also, keep your eyes open for a cameo from Peter Jackson in the photo store and a large bookcase showcasing The Lord of the Rings novels.

I've been waiting for this movie for at least a couple of years, and I can honestly say I am satisfied with this adaptation from one of the biggest names in film. It's more than beautiful, it's lovely.

I would recommend this film to fans of dramas, fantasies, and of the book.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikUWKi0W5_g

It's Complicated ***

2010-01-09T15:59:00.000-08:00

It's Complicated

*** out of ****

Meryl Streep returns to the screen and once again proves she's the queen of the movie world in this new romantic comedy that actually delivers on both the romance, the comedy, and the heart.

Streep plays Jane, a middle-aged woman divorced from Jake, played by the excellent Alec Baldwin (TV's 30 Rock). They have three grown children, and while Jake is married to the much younger woman he cheated on Jane with, Jane is hopelessly single. The two keep bumping into each other and so inevitably end up sleeping together the night before their son's graduation, after many drinks and dancing. Jake is ecstatic at this turn of events, but Jane is horrified at herself. Things get- you guessed it- complicated when another man enters the picture and is extremely interested in Jane. Adam, played by the legend himself, Steve Martin, is Jane's architect, and while she at first all but ignores him, she slowly warms up to him and they start a gentle courtship. Jake finds out they're dating and gets jealous.

The plot revolves around this love triangle and the effects it has on everyone involved. The film offers many funny moments involving plastic surgery, infertility, marijuana, indiscretion, and a hilarious video-conference gag. John Krasinski channels Jim Halpert, except much livelier, as Harley, the man engaged to Jane's oldest daughter. Harley is the first to find out about the affair between the older couple, and seeing him struggle with the truth is one of the high points of the movie.

The three leads are all terrific and all totally believable. By the end of the movie, the audience has formed different opinions on all of these characters because they feel like very real people. Writer/director Nancy Meyers has succeeded in creating a very good romantic comedy for adults, which are rare these days; so many silly juvenile movies are released that the adults often get forgotten. While It's Complicated isn't entirely an original or inventive film, it's great entertainment that features at least a couple Oscar-worthy performances. And no, the plot is not as complicated as the title suggests.

I would recommend this film to mature viewers who enjoy romantic comedies, and fans of the stars.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE2CItUaAcA

Best and Worst Films of 2009

2010-01-01T12:56:00.000-08:00

Best and Worst Films of 2009

As you all know, I am a pretty avid moviegoer, heading to the theatre as often as I can afford to. I saw lots of movies this year, and I couldn't help but notice a theme: there seemed to be a lack of quality films this year. I would often find there would be a month or even more before a film came out that I actually wanted to see. The thing was, the few good films that came out, were very good. As in, shape the decade, change the course of film history good.

So, I bring to you my second annual best and worst films list. I've compiled the top 10 best films and the top 5 worst films, because I tend to stay away from films that I think will be bad. As an added bonus, I have added an honorable mention to each category, because it's hard to narrow it down to so few! I must explain that this is not a true top 10 list because I did not see the majority of films that were released, I simply saw the movies I wanted to see. This is the best and worst films of the ones I saw in theatres. This also disqualifies any films I would have seen later on DVD- if it wasn't good enough to see originally in theatres, it isn't good enough to make this list.

Please note that some of these movies technically were released in December 2008, but were wide-released in January 2009- when I saw them- thus making them eligible for this list.

As usual, I would love to see comments on this post. Do you agree or disagree? Any glaring omissions? I want to know what my readers think.

"Top 10"

10. Inglourious Basterds

An unusual film even for Quentin Tarantino, this crazy WWII flick is extremely long and talky, but manages to suck you in anyway and there is never a dull moment. At some parts, the suspense is almost unbearable. Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, and Melanie Laurent are all extremely good, and the film builds to an unbelievable climax where all hell breaks loose. Actually more accessible than Tarantino's earlier films, although still doesn't appeal to every taste. A rare dark comedy from the master of current grindhouse cinema. My favorite scene? The opening with Colonel Landa questioning a farmer. Watch with a glass of milk.

9. Bruno

Just as funny as its predecessor Borat, Sacha Baron Cohen proves he's one of a kind with the most hilarious movie of the year. Sure to infuriate and disgust anyone who doesn't know what they're getting into, this movie tried to be relevant but instead was just incredibly side-splitting with its frantic five-jokes-a-second pace. The world needs more entertainers like Baron Cohen, who are willing to give themselves entirely to a role, even for comedy. My personal favorite gag- when Bruno rushes into the focus group who have just condemned his show and dances for them.

8. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

This could have easily just been part 6 of a long-running franchise, but instead was a chilling, funny, and emotionally driven film that focuses on the characters, not the special effects. Secrets come out, romances start up, and one of the most famous betrayals in modern literature make this one of the best installments in the series. Leaves the viewer thirsty for the Deathly Hallows.

7. Up

Pixar's latest gem appeals more to the younger crowd than usual, but there is still plenty to love for the adults. The animation is the best in the world, but that's only where the praise starts. It has humor, heart, thrills, and is oh-so-cute. The dimwitted talking dog Dug is my favorite character. Keep up the good work, fellas.

6. Avatar

James Cameron roars back to the screen with this amazing sci-fi epic. The story itself may be old news (Dances With Wolves, anyone?) but it's still unusually strong for a movie that has such amazing special effects- simply the biggest and best ever put on celluloid. The neon colors of the alien planet and the creatures look just as real as the humans they interact with. The movie event of the year is luckily, one of the best of the year, and made 3-D a must-see format.

5. Gran Torino

Clint Eastwood merges his old badass persona with his new sentimental side in this extraordinary film about a racist old man surrounded by Hmong people. After the teenager next door unsuccessfully tries to steal his car, he works for the old man and he eventually comes to respect these people. Like the best formula films, you forget you're watching a formula film and go with it, because it's all plausible. Also, the humor is surprisingly sharp and biting, elevating the film above simply your typical feel-good movie.

4. Paranormal Activity

A tiny movie with only a handful of actors and no crew- just the director- filmed entirely in the guy's house for just $11,000 became a national phenomenon, and one of the scariest movies ever made. What else is there to say? Only that it leaves you physically shaken. Don't see this one alone!

3. Up in the Air

A fairly new release, but this is the time when some of the best movies of the year come out. George Clooney leads an outstanding cast in a film about our sad economic times. It's depressing, relevant, and incredibly funny. Anna Kendrick shines as a young co-worker who goes on the road with Clooney. Jason Reitman's best film yet, this is a front-runner to win the Best Picture Oscar, and deservedly so.

2. The Hurt Locker

It pains me that more people haven't seen this movie. Despite being one of the best-reviewed movies of the year, this failed to get a wide release this summer, despite it being a big crowd pleaser. The story of an adrenaline junkie defusing bombs in Iraq is seriously one of the best war movies ever made, because it actually imitates war. The film is mostly waiting around for something to happen, with the battle scenes coming at you quickly and without warning. Injected with a very welcome sense of humor, the relatively unknown cast should become stars soon. This is the kind of film that benefits from positive word of mouth, so tell people about it!

1. Star Trek

An unusual choice for the best film of the year, I know, but have you seen this thing? The reboot completely redefines what Star Trek can be, with a fast-paced, non-stop thrill ride with eye-popping special effects, breathless action sequences, and real emotion in a complex storyline. The legendary characters are all redefined for a new generation of fans, and the entire cast is perfect. J.J. Abrams was the best possible choice for this reboot, and it's not just his future that looks bright after this movie. Kudos also goes to getting Leonard Nimoy to play Spock again, which united the old and young fans of the world. This got people who had never given the franchise a second thought to go back and look at the old TV episodes and movies, and look forward to the future of this epic franchise. Abrams has finally succeeded in making Trek cool.

Honorable Mention- Zombieland

The year's only zombie comedy- can you believe it?- succeeds at making you look at this genre from a new angle, and making you realize how silly it all is. The cast is hilarious, but Woody Harrelson shines as the gung-ho hick on the hunt not just for the undead, but for the world's last Twinkie. Succeeds at not only making you laugh, but also has some legitimate scares embedded within.

"Worst 5"

5. Year One

Jack Black continues to hog the screen in this inept film about stoner guys placed in caveman times. Black is so loud and proud that Michael Cera seems more like an afterthought than the other lead. Offers a few laughs here and there, but the trailer gives most of them away. The typical raunchiness doesn't help.

4. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

The most expensive movie made by children this year. Michael Bay simply rearranges the first film to make this sequel, which is all over the place. Far too often resorts to silliness and bad jokes, in an attempt to ignore the way-too-damn-complicated plot. Luckily the action sequences are good, because little else is. Why is Megan Fox back? Other than her porn-star looks, she offers nothing to the film.

3. X-Men Origins: Wolverine

A completely pointless prequel that's dull, even during its exciting parts. Full of colorful characters from the comic books, but the film makes it abundantly clear that the only characters that matter are Wolverine and his brother Victor, the two most boring characters in the whole thing. This film started the summer off with a whimper instead of a bang, and if you ask me, never should have been made.

2. Observe and Report

Seth Rogen as a mall security guard trying to catch a flasher. Sounds like a good enough premise for a comedy. This film disappointed in every regard, making the jokes repetitive and just unfunny. Rogen, usually such a likeable guy, is just a brute here, and insane at that. He's the film's hero that no one is rooting for. Who read the script and thought this was funny?

1. Adventureland*

The only movie this year that I paid for and walked out of. This film promised a nostalgic- and slightly crude- comedy about first jobs and first loves from the director of Superbad. Instead we got a huge downer of a movie that is just unpleasant to watch. Jesse Eisenberg plays the typical insecure, geeky virgin, so naturally, all the girls are all over him. Kristen Stewart is a bore, and Ryan Reynolds has no apparent reason for being in this movie. Eventually breaks down and lets the characters' lives all fall apart, and makes them all miserable. The jokes, of which there are not many, are all unfunny. Oh, and it's set in the 80's for no other reason than to be able to say it's set in the 80's. Absolutely the worst movie of the year, without question.

(Dis)Honorable Mention- Defiance

Last winter brought an unusual amount of Holocaust movies, some good, some not so good. This one looked good, but was ultimately disappointing. What it had in it were good- a real-seeming performance from Daniel Craig, some good action sequences- but it lacked a lot of stuff, including background information on the main characters, and anything new about the time period. Mildly entertaining, but the whole movie seemed to lack a point.

Well, those are my thoughts on the films of 2009. Thanks for reading all this year. Don't forget to comment!

*Full disclosure: Because I walked out of the movie before it ended, I never wrote an actual review of it. I felt it would be unfair to review a film I had not seen in its entirety. But, I believe that since I spent money on it- money which I did not get back, it's more than eligible for this list.

Precious ***

2009-12-31T12:14:00.000-08:00

Precious
*** out of ****

The trailers for Precious make the film look like a cliche-ridden inner-city fable. Just goes to show you can't judge a movie based on its trailer. Precious is something unique. It's not the feel-good movie of the year, although you do walk away feeling a little better. It's also not a big downer of a movie like I was expecting it to be.
The title character Precious is an overweight teenager in Harlem in 1987. Her mother hates her and beats her at every opportunity, while her father sexually abuses her. She's pregnant with her second child- both from her father, she's almost illerate, and is so poor she has to steal fast food to survive. She uses her imagination to escape from her horrible existence, imagining herself as a celebrity with a hunky boyfriend, fans screaming for her autograph. After the school discovers she's pregnant, she is kicked out and transferred to an alternative school to help her get her GED. Her teacher is the lovely Ms. Rain, who makes her class keep a journal and write in it every day, forcing Precious to learn to read and write better. We see her slowly make progress in school and even make friends with the quirky girls in her class, even as things get worse and worse at home with her mother, a welfare whore. Eventually she gives birth to her baby, causing many things to change in her life and for the first time, she starts to think for herself.
Praise has to be given for the outstanding, almost-all-black cast, of which there are no slackers. Newcomer Gabourey Sidibe as Precious (not only her first film role, her first professional acting role!) is completely convincing and heartrending. When we first meet her, she doesn't have much of a personality; she mostly just sits quietly and then talks tough when forced to talk. She gradually learns it's ok for her to be herself. Comedienne Mo'Nique makes a complete transformation for her role as Mary, Precious' mother, dirtying up her usual glamorous looks and letting loose endless diatribes towards her daughter about how stupid and worthless she is. Mariah Carey also makes herself memorable with just a few scenes. She plays a social worker Precious talks to occasionally. She also de-glamorizes herself; the scratchy voice is a nice touch, but seeing her character try to remain neutral and not get emotionally involved is where she establishes herself as a talented actress. Kudos also goes to the director Lee Daniels, who was willing to make very unusual casting decisions (it also includes The View host Sherri Shepherd and singer Lenny Kravitz), and for casting someone like Sidibe in a lead role, especially one that's gotten this much attention. Both Sidibe and Mo'Nique are Oscar-worthy; they force you to keep your eyes on the screen when you might want to look away.
Even though the film is very good, I find it hard to recommend it very strongly. It's one of those indie films that offers little entertainment value to the average moviegoer, one of those indie films that no one would see if it wasn't for the strong Oscar buzz, or the Oprah Winfrey seal of approval. At times the film is extremely unpleasant- which it needs to be in order for the viewer to understand the story. While everything is shown onscreen, luckily, nothing is explicit. There is also a gentle sense of humor beneath all the ugliness.For those who can stomach it, this is a grand story of a girl becoming a woman in a cruel world that has forgotten about her.
I would recommend this film to people who like gritty dramas, or whoever listens to Oscar buzz.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xeo3IRaDeXI

Up in the Air ***1/2

2009-12-28T11:08:00.000-08:00

Up in the Air
***1/2 out of ****

Finally, the movie we've been waiting for the whole season long: a purely enjoyable film about modern life, without any clear message shoved down your throat. Up in the Air (not to be confused with Pixar's Up) centers on Ryan Bingham, played to perfection by the marvelous George Clooney. Ryan is a compulsive traveler, on the road way more often than he is at home. His job is to go to companies and fire people when their bosses don't want to do it themselves. He's also a motivational speaker, using the metaphor of a backpack to illustrate how people need to avoid relationships and commitments. His job causes him to fly from one end of the country to another on a daily basis, rarely going home to Omaha. Despite his lack of friends, he loves his life and secretly hopes to reach ten million miles. The masterfully edited beginning sequences shows him going through the routines of checking in at the airport like one might wake up and prepare for work in the morning.
But his nomad existence is threatened by a young female up-and-comer at his company, Natalie, who proposes that they fire people via web conferences instead of traveling all the time. Ryan reluctantly takes Natalie on the road with him to show her that face-to-face downsizing is necessary because it allows the injured parties some dignity. Natalie is played by Anna Kendrick (Twilight) as an educated do-gooder who doesn't understand the way Ryan's world works.
A subplot involves Ryan meeting a sexy fellow traveler Alex, played by Vera Farmiga (The Departed) with a sparkle in her eye. The two begin a feisty yet gentle romance that neither wants to commit to.
Despite its slightly depressing- yet very relevant- plot, the film is ferociously funny, getting into the characters' minds and exposing how crazy they all are. Natalie provides the most laughs in the film, especially a scene where her boyfriend breaks up with her via text message and she gets very emotional in a hotel lobby. She also provides some of the most heartwrenching scenes in the movie, when she realizes exactly what her business entails- ending the careers of strangers. This film has truly made Kendrick a star. Watching Ryan's character resist change, and then finally accept that maybe he can change, is also a wonder to behold.
The superb cast also includes Jason Bateman as Ryan's boss, J.K. Simmons and Zach Galifianakis as unfortunate souls that Ryan fires, Melanie Lynskey as his soon-to-be-married sister, and Danny McBride as his sister's groom-to-be.
Writer/director Jason Reitman (Juno) has created something wonderful here: an immensely enjoyable film purely for adults, with the humor embedded in the dialogue and in plausible situations, instead of cinematic pies in the face that so many films resort to these days. It's a film that can make you laugh your head off and cry your eyes out, sometimes even in the same scene. It's part comedy, part drama, and ultimately, part tragedy. This is probably the definitive film of our times, with the economy in such bad shape as it is. Up in the Air will certainly plow its way through award season, and with good reason to.
I would recommend this film to fans of Clooney, comedy lovers, and anyone wanting to see a good non-franchise film this holiday season.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRofJIeElcI

Avatar ****

2009-12-21T20:50:00.000-08:00

Avatar

**** out of ****

There are many words that can describe Avatar: Incredible. Sweeping. Exhilarating. Awesome. OMG. I'll choose just one: epic. Once again, James Cameron has redefined what an epic film can truly be. The writer/director of such instant classics as the first two Terminator movies, Aliens, and of course, Titanic, makes yet another sci-fi actioner that makes everyone in the world turn their heads. The story is at once complicated and yet surprisingly simple. The acting is always genuine, and the special effects are quite simply the biggest and best ever put on screen.

The story centers around Jake, played with an everyman charm by Sam Worthington (Terminator: Salvation), a wheelchair-bound paraplegic sent to the distant planet Pandora after his twin brother dies. Pandora has a wide array of animals both small and large, but the people on the planet are only concerned with a precious metal under the surface. It just so happens an intelligent species called the Na'vi- giant blue cat/lizard creatures about twice as big as humans- are living right over a large supply of the metal, so Jake's job is to go in and try to move them out. The catch is: he and several others are able to take over a specially harvested Na'vi body so they can walk among the natives. (They hook up to the bodies in some kind of advanced tanning bed- think The Matrix. They come back to their human bodies when their avatars fall asleep.) This means that Jake is able to walk and run again. He gets in with the tribe and is taught their ways by a fierce warrior princess, played wonderfully by Zoe Saldana. After becoming one of them, Jake realizes how wrong the humans are to try and move them. He has to do battle against the scarred, determined Colonel to save the tribe.

To create a real-looking alien species played by people, Cameron had to invent a new kind of motion-capture technology, similar to what Robert Zemeckis did for The Polar Express and A Christmas Carol, except way better. Not only do the avatars capture the movements and emotions of the characters, they actually look and sound like the actors playing them! Seeing Sigourney Weaver as a tough scientist and a big blue creature is a real treat. The Na'vi and all the other animals, and the candy-colored planet itself for that matter, all looks incredibly real, and the film's intricate camerawork (and 3-D effects) puts the audience right there with the characters. It's easy to see why this film took 15 years to finish: it's so damn intricate.

In addition to the amazing special effects, this is an incredibly well-made film. The editing is masterful, letting you know in the first five minutes this is not just another hokey alien special effects film. The music is grand and aids in the emotions, the futuristic sets and props look authentic (even though it does look like they borrowed more than a couple ideas from Aliens), and the story is everything you'd want from an epic film like this- and everything you'd expect from a talented writer like Cameron. The plot may get predictable, but it's thrilling every step of the way. It offers real comparison to movies like Star Wars and Jurassic Park. The action and battle sequences are outstanding, as are the thrilling scenes earlier where Jake has to learn to fly on a giant winged creature.

Little-known actor Stephen Lang makes a wonderful villain as Colonel Quaritch, who kills with such a matter-of-factness like he's reading a report. The film also co-stars Michelle Rodriguez (TV's Lost) as a sexy pilot, Joel David Moore (Dodgeball) as a technician (he also gets his own avatar), and Giovanni Ribisi as the leader of the humans on the planet.

The film is really pretty flawless. If there's something to gripe about, it's the length. (Two hours and forty minutes.) As an epic film, it is fitting to be that long, but as a 3-D film, it does give one a headache after that long. (And of course I have only good things to say about the IMAX format. The giant screens, monster sound system, and vibrations under your feet really do elevate the film to an experience. See the film in this format if at all possible.) This naturally won't be as popular as Titanic (what would be?), but it truly is the movie event of the year and will definitely go down as one of the greatest sci-fi films of all time.

I would recommend this film to anyone who likes sci-fi, fantasy, or action films, or anyone who wants to see a kick-ass movie this holiday season.

You can watch the trailer here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PSNL1qE6VY&feature=spotlight

Invictus ***

2009-12-17T21:34:00.000-08:00

Invictus
*** out of ****

Nothing like a Clint Eastwood movie in theatres to let you know awards season is in full swing.
Invictus stars the great Morgan Freeman as South African president Nelson Mandela, soon after he is elected and facing a country divided in two: the black and white people in the country see each other as enemies. Mandela uses the most popular sport in the country, rugby, to try and unite the country. The Springboks are currently a disgrace of a team and the blacks refuse to root for them. Mandela has the team captain Francois over for tea, and inspires him to inspire his own team to go and win the World Cup. Thus they start winning, making public appearances, and eventually go on to capture the country's hearts.
Freeman is utterly convincing as Mandela, getting his accent down pat and coming across as an incredibly decent person trying to do the best thing for the country that put him in jail for thirty years. Mandela works himself to exhaustion, although the film gives the idea that he was more interested in the rugby team than he was in actually leading the country. Matt Damon once again proves his acting chops as Francois, the team captain determined to make Mandela and South Africa proud. The supporting cast- almost all completely unknown- are also very good and faithful to their real-life counterparts. Eastwood's films are usually quiet and slow, but this is something very different. The rugby sequences catch the intensity and rough nature of the sport, and even during the other scenes, the characters keep the plot moving and the film watchable. (The film also follows Mandela's bodyguards, which include blacks and whites, as they try to protect him as he constantly exposes himself to threats. It's an unnecessary subplot but it does make the film more interesting.) While the ending is never in question- it's based on a true story, after all- the final match is frought with suspense so that the finale delivers the emotional goods.
Compared to other real-life sports dramas, this isn't particularly special, but it is meticulously well-made and its star power elevates it above average. The incredible musical score and impressive original songs definitely help. The film is entertaining, but what it really lacks is relevance to an American audience. Who knew Eastwood, the king of Westerns and sad, quiet dramas, would actually be good at making a rugby movie?
I would recommend this film to fans of sports movies, and fans of the stars.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9Ovkye6lac

A Christmas Carol **1/2

2009-11-27T10:54:00.000-08:00

A Christmas Carol
**1/2 out of ****

Yet another adaptation of the classic Charles Dickens story, and yet this is something unlike any other movie that's come before. Yes, it's animated, and yes, it's in 3-D, but that's only half of it. Robert Zemeckis returns to motion-capture animation once again, much improving upon the techniques used in The Polar Express and Beowulf. In Hollywood's current tradition of odd casting choices, he cast Jim Carrey not only as Scrooge at all stages of his life, but as all three ghosts. The motion-capture technique means that it's more than just a voice-over; his performance helped make the character's movements, also allowing for real emotion to appear on their faces. The technology is strange but it does allow more for actors to do in an animated movie. The film also features charming performances from Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Robin Wright Penn, and Bob Hoskins. The characters only look vaguely like their actor counterparts. In most cases, the actors are unrecognizable.
The story is set in Victorian England, exactly as Dickens wrote it. The story is so famous everyone knows it, but it does feel like you're experiencing it for the first time. The camera sweeps through the streets and skies of London, everyone celebrating Christmas. Scrooge is revealed as a lonesome, greedy old man who shuns everybody, even his nephew, thinks only of money, and hates Christmas. His dead friend Marley appears as a ghost in his home, attached to heavy weights and chains, and warns him that he'll be haunted by three spirits. Then the spirits come and show him his life: the Ghost of Christmas Past is in the form of a candle and whispers to him, who takes him by the hand and flies him to places long gone; the Ghost of Christmas Present is a big, laughing Saint-Nick type who makes his living room floor invisible and allows him to see the city beneath it; and the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come appears only as a shadow in the shape of a reaper, who points toward whatever it wants Scrooge to see. A subplot involving Scrooge's hardworking lackey Bob Cratchit and his ill son Tiny Tim also help bring about Scrooge's humanity.
Carrey is charming in all his roles and yet doesn't fall back to his stretchy-faced hissy fits that have defined his career for so long. It is a Disney movie, after all; there's no place for them. He is allowed just a few moments of light humor, but otherwise, he dives into the characters and actually manages a good English accent. The movie itself is extremely faithful to the source material, often using the original Dickens dialogue. This is its strength and ultimate weakness: making it into an epic animated movie and casting Carrey obviously means they're appealing to children, but the film's difficult dialogue means many kids will be confused or bored, until the ghosts show up, at which point they'll be scared. And they have cause to be: at times, the film is intense and definitely scary not only to kids. And it's not so faithful that it's not willing to put in a very awkward thrill sequence where a shrunk Scrooge runs from the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come and his horses through the dark London streets.
The film is pure eye candy, and thus thrilling to watch (especially in 3-D), and it's very charming to experience the story like this. What the film really lacks is entertainment value: it's so faithful that it actually moves slowly in the first half and none of the dialogue seems realistic. Carrey is good in his roles (although there's really no point in him playing so many parts, especially the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come, who never speaks and rarely even moves), but I feel like casting him in your movie and then restraining him seems to defeat the purpose. I feel the film would have been better if it had been a bit more of a comedy. Also, this film is the ultimate Christmas story. Why was it released in early November?
I would recommend this film to fans of the original Dickens story, and fans of animated movies.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YAOYs3ObzI

The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day ***

2009-11-26T13:35:00.000-08:00

The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day
*** out of ****

Fans rejoice: the sequel to the cult DVD hit is finally here, ten years after the original first came out. Sean Patrick Flanery and Norman Reedus return as vigilante brothers who believe they're on a mission from God, known to the Boston public as the Saints, as they built up a reputation for killing hardened criminals. They are living in self-exile in Ireland with their father (Billy Connolly) when they hear that a priest has been killed in Boston and the Saints have been framed for the murder. The Saints always cross their victim's arms and place pennies over their eyes, letting everyone know it was them. Thus they are spurred back to action and return to Boston to seek revenge. Along the way they join forces with a crazy Mexican named Romeo (Clifton Collins, Jr. in a wonderfully over-the-top performance) who idolizes the brothers and is desperate to kill somebody.
On the other side of the law, the police are trying to find out if the Saints are actually involved, and they get help from a sexy FBI agent, played by Julie Benz with a polite Southern drawl. In the same fashion as the crazy agent from the first movie, she assesses crime scenes with impeccable clarity and is hiding a secret.
The movie is filled with crude language and humor and lots of violence and blood, which is to be expected. It's pretty similar to the first movie, although builds on the humor in all the violence and tones down the racial slurs, combined with an awesome pounding rock soundtrack, ultimately making this the better film. (I was not a big fan of the first film.) Like the first film, some parts are told out of chronological order to let the viewer guess how some kills went down. Writer/director Troy Duffy manages to reunite almost the complete original cast for the sequel, which greatly helps in the film's success and appeal to fans. Even dearly departed Rocco returns for a funny spirtual cameo. No spoilers here, but there's also a couple surprise cameos at the end from big stars. Fans will notice the many winks to the original, and to other popular films.
I would recommend this film to fans of the original, and to anyone who likes dark comedy and violent cult films.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjMBd9XSLgI

Paranormal Activity ***

2009-10-31T17:42:00.000-07:00

Paranormal Activity
*** out of ****

You've all heard of this movie by now. You've probably heard many things about it. I'm here to tell you that everything you've heard is true.
Now playing nationwide just in time for Halloween, the film was demanded by enough people that it's now becoming a national phenomenon. The story is fairly simple: Katie and Micah are girlfriend and boyfriend that are living together in a nice big house. Their relationship is healthy and they are happy, except that there seems to be something in the house. At first they suspect a ghost, but soon are convinced it's actually a demon that's been following Katie around her whole life. Micah buys a video camera and much to the chagrin of his protesting girlfriend, starts filming themselves as much as possible, including a wide-shot of their bedroom all night while they sleep. Slowly but surely the camera starts to pick up strange unexplainable things happening, usually in the middle of the night. At first they're subtle: strange noises like bumps and footsteps, but then get more and more real, like lights turning on, phantom breezes, shadows, and footprints left in baby powder, until it ultimately stops playing around. While Katie is terrified of it, Micah refuses to be scared and actually eggs it on, hoping to catch more and more happenings on tape. They bring in a physic, who doesn't help them at all. They talk about different ways to get rid of it, but are ultimately powerless against it.
The film is about as indie as it gets: microscopic budget, no-name stars (although both newcomer leads, Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat, are very good), no music score, and practically no special effects. At least they don't look like special effects- I have to wonder how they pulled off some of the more complex tricks that this invisible spirit performs. The film makes every effort to make all the footage look real, including removing the studio logo and even the credits from the finished product. (And it is fake- don't fall for any rumors you may hear. This movie is NOT real or based on true events.) The reason this film has attracted so much attention is that it sucks you in and puts you in the room with these people. The scary events are that much more scarier because it feels so real. Even if you know something scary is coming, it's still enough to make your heart race and maybe to even make you scream. Personally, I left the theatre physically shaken, and I think a lot of other people did, too.
The film is not perfect, though. The handheld camerawork does get annoying and even dizzying at times because the handler is obviously not a professional cameraman. The film is slow to get going, and while some of the scares are worth the wait, a lot of the exposition is pretty boring. The film also gets kind of repetitive since the whole thing takes place in their house and because we never see the thing, we only hear it and see its effects on the real world. It tends to do a lot of the same things repeatedly.
Paranormal Activity will surely go down in history as one of the scariest movies ever made. While there is the obvious inspiration from The Blair Witch Project, the film offers serious comparison to movies like The Exorcist, Jaws, and Psycho. It's scary as hell. Don't watch this one alone!
I would recommend this film to horror junkies, and basically anyone looking for a good scare. Be warned that it may be too intense for the average moviegoer.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSSqxrh5kp8

Zombieland ***

2009-10-18T19:53:00.000-07:00

Zombieland
*** out of ****

Finally, a zombie movie for the whole family. Ha, not really, but it's close.
Zombieland is one of a few movies that shows how funny zombies really are, even in their natural environment- dark, scary places. The world has been overrun by zombies and there are only a few people left. A group of four such people are traveling across the country in hopes of finding something or somebody safe. Jesse Eisenberg plays pretty much the exact same character he played in Adventureland, the insecure virgin. But where his Adventureland character lost credibility and became boring, his Zombieland character prevails and turns these insecurities into strengths. See, he has a running list of strict rules for surviving in the United States of Zombieland: keep your cardio up, always check the backseat, and beware of dead-end bathrooms, a feeding ground for the undead. He hitchhikes with a redneck badass with a shaved head in the form of Woody Harrelson (The People Vs. Larry Flynt). This guy has no rules and kills zombies just for fun. They meet up with two con artist sisters, played by the gorgeous Emma Stone (Superbad) and the spunky Abigail Breslin (Little Miss Sunshine). After being tricked by the girls- twice- they finally join forces with them to survive. A splendid amusement-park finale gives the title its true meaning.
The film is filled with not only gut-wrenching gore and killings, but with plenty of crude physical comedy and pop-culture references. ("What's the best thing about Zombieland?" "No more Facebook status updates!") While the emotional part of the story falls short, it makes up for it with its laugh-a-minute style that never gets old. (Of course, the movie's less than an hour and a half long. It's hard for anything to get old in that time.) Bill Murray has a funny cameo- as himself, of course- but frankly, it could've been funnier. And- wouldn't you believe it- the film actually manages a few real scares.
Zombieland is not wacky enough- and too self-serious- to be a parody. It is exactly what it is, a zombie comedy/horror film that's more concerned with its characters than the flesh-eating villains, and sacrifies suspense for violence and laughs. It's not for every taste, but for anyone with a slightly sick sense of humor, this is definitely your dish.
I would recommend this movie to horror fans and anyone who likes dark comedies.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fW3RHnJzHjY&NR=1

Toy Story/Toy Story 2 3-D **** (Double Feature Rerelease)

2009-10-11T11:46:00.000-07:00

Toy Story 3-D
***1/2 out of ****

Toy Story 2 3-D
**** out of ****

Overall: **** out of ****

What more is there to say about the Toy Story movies? The classic films are getting a limited two-week rerelease exclusively in a 3-D double feature. This is obviously a very expensive publicity stunt to promote the upcoming Toy Story 3 (out in June), but who cares? It means we get to see two of the greatest animated films ever made on the big screen again, and in a new format that makes it feel like you're seeing them for the first time.
The first Toy Story (one of my favorite movies) is practically the definition of instant classic: an idea so universal and wonderful you can't help but think, why didn't anyone think of that before? The boys at Pixar just got there first. The toys in Andy's room come alive whenever he's not there. Woody the cowboy doll is his favorite, until he gets a cool new Buzz Lightyear action figure for his birthday, and Woody gets forgotten. An accident makes Woody and Buzz get separated from Andy and are forced to work together to get back home. The casting of Tom Hanks as Woody and Tim Allen as Buzz are inspired and perfect. This was the first fully computer-animated feature film, so obviously features some amazing animation, but the real wonder lies in its unforgettable characters and humor. Who could forget Mr. Potato Head, Hamm the piggy bank, Rex the wimpy dinosaur, the loyal Slinky dog, or those cute little green aliens? It's also amazing how the film has stuff for both kids and adults: the young ones won't catch the many pop culture references or more subtle adult jokes. (I'm thinking of Potato Head's perfect silent "kissass" joke.)
And as it turns out, Toy Story 2 is even better. This film adds great thrills and emotion to the mix. After Woody's arm is ripped, he is stolen by a greedy toy collector (a splendid voice performance by Wayne Knight) and it's up to Buzz and the gang to get him back. The problem is, it turns out Woody is a valuable collector's item. He meets the rest of his set- the excitable cowgirl Jessie, the adorable horse Bullseye, and the wise Prospector. They're being set to go to a toy museum in Tokyo, and Woody is slowly convinced to go with them. The film has a wonderful emotional high point at Jessie's flashback sequence with the Oscar-nominated song "When She Loved Me." The animation is even better, and the film is even funnier. The pop culture references are staggering: kids will love the A Bug's Life merchandise sprinkled throughout, and adults will see the nods to films like Jurassic Park and Rear Window. (Strangely, the faux bloopers at the end provide some of the biggest laughs in the whole film.)
The 3-D is, for the most part, pretty subtle, giving the viewer a chance to peer into the world rather than for the characters to jump out, although there is the occasional right-in-your-face effect. The effects are wonderful, especially for two films that weren't even originally made for that format. They take the films (dare I say it?) to infinity- and beyond. The big question is, are they worth paying for in the theatre if you've already seen them, which most young people in this country probably have? My answer is, if you love these films for what they really are, then yes. They are absolutely worth your money because seeing them at home cannot compare to the experience of seeing them on the big screen. After all, this is also an opportunity for kids who weren't around when the films first came out to see them for the first time. Plus, they are two movies for the price of one.
I would recommend these films to anyone who likes animated movies, especially Pixar. If you've seen them before, these films do not dull with repeat viewings.

You can watch the double-feature trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKvPry6kJDE
You can also watch the original Toy Story trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYz2wyBy3kc
You can also watch the original Toy Story 2 trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVNO594Kh5o

Surrogates ***

2009-10-07T19:49:00.000-07:00

Surrogates
*** out of ****

Surrogates is your typical summer movie, only released in the fall. The basis for the plot is a bit like The Matrix: in the future, people live out their lives through robots they call surrogates that they control and send out into the real world. Surrogates have become so widespread and so universally used that it is now considered unsafe to go outside in the flesh. Bruce Willis returns to action films as an FBI agent trying to solve the homicide of the son of the man who invented surrogacy. His character dislikes surrogates but uses one anyway. In his investigation, he discovers a new weapon that destroys surrogates and kills the people attached to them. After his own surrogate is destroyed, he is forced to finish the case with his real body.
The movie itself is exactly what you'd expect: a big, dumb sci-fi movie that tries to be relevant but ultimately is just entertaining. However, there is one piece of genius in the film. People can make their surrogates look like whatever they want, and most people choose a younger version of themselves. While the "human" Willis is aging and bald as he is in real life, the "robot" Willis is a much younger version of himself with blonde hair! The fact that part of the movie has him looking better than he has in years is half the fun for fans of the star.
I would recommend this movie to fans of Willis, and of sci-fi/action movies that don't require a lot of thinking.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwTJ7mCcFoY

The Informant! **1/2

2009-10-06T21:40:00.000-07:00

The Informant!
**1/2 out of ****

Another early Oscar contender is kind of a long shot: a mid-budget, non-independent comedy about corporate crime. This is the typical comedy built for intelligent older people (although the advertisements try to market it to younger viewers), which typically falls short on laughs on many occasions.
The Informant! stars the usually buff and good-looking Matt Damon as an office drone in the early 90's who gets sucked into alliance with the FBI after he admits to his bosses conducting price fixing operations with their competitors. The film is filled with his narration, clever random thoughts on everything from TV show ideas to polar bears' noses. These thoughts rarely have anything to do with what's going on onscreen, so they provide the majority of the laughs in the movie. He wears a wire for them and digs up dirt on all his coworkers. Once the FBI move in and make their investigation known, things get complicated. Scott Bakula (TV's Enterprise) and Joel McHale (TV's The Soup) are both good as FBI agents working with Damon, as well as Melanie Lynskey as his ever-supportive wife, but all these good actors feel wasted in roles that are simply unfunny.
Damon is the real jewel here; his transformative performance (complete with extra weight, glasses, and moustache) is completely believable. His character is a complete bonehead, and as we find out, not a reliable narrator. Most of the laughs come from his performance, because sadly, the script cannot generate many by itself.
The Informant! is a strictly OK movie, a comedy that isn't all that funny but does have its endearing moments. While it may be remembered for it's star's wonderful performance, the film itself is simply not exciting enough to earn the exclamation point in its title.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hxi-z3ZZBI&feature=fvst

Inglourious Basterds ***

2009-08-29T20:27:00.000-07:00

Inglourious Basterds
*** out of ****

When you go to see a Quentin Tarantino movie, you know you're in for something unusual. Inglourious Basterds is an unusual film even for him.
Tarantino takes his usual violent dialogue-filled formula- divided into chapters like literature- and sets it during World War II, in Nazi-occupied France. The plot of the film is far too complicated to explain here, but here is a brief overview: There is a vicious Nazi colonel, Hans Landa, looking for Jews in hiding throughout France. There is an 8-man squadron of Jewish-American soldiers who are dropped into France behind enemy lines and brutally kill all the Nazis they find. There is a violent Tennessee hick, Lt. Aldo Raine, who collects scalps leading this squadron. There is a young Jewish woman in Paris who escaped from Col. Landa four years earlier when he killed her entire family. She runs a movie theatre and is being romantically pursued by a young Nazi soldier who just happens to be a war hero to the Third Reich. There is a plan to kill Hitler and all his top officers that involves the American squadron, Landa, a French actress/British double agent, the young Jewish woman, and the theatre she owns. And that's not even half of the whole plot.
The film is extremely talky for a war film, but luckily, it's all patented Tarantino dialogue, which makes it almost addictive to listen to. (The film is heavily subtitled, but even this doesn't dull the words' flavor.) It is, of course, extremely violent, but much of the violence is done in a quick, comical, almost fantastical fashion. Because the film has only select moments of a musical score, Tarantino uses it quite effectively to bring the tension level up to almost unbearable heights at many points in the movie. But the thing that surprised me most was how funny the film was, the fact that all the violence is meant to be hilarious, a kind of guilty pleasure in watching men in Nazi uniforms get the crap beaten out of them. The bloody massacre climax is reminiscent of the prom scene in Carrie, although the rest of the film feels like a bizarre kind of Western.
While promotions for the film would have you believe Brad Pitt (as Raine, in a wonderful Southern drawl) is the lead, the film is truly an ensemble with many leads, several of them unknown foreign actors. Christoph Waltz is already getting Oscar buzz as Landa, full of polite chatter and a wide grin, embedded with the kind of calm that makes people uneasy. French actress Melanie Laurent is impressive as the revenge-driven Jewish woman. Eli Roth and The Office's B. J. Novak are member's of Pitt's battalion (the German army gives them each nicknames, with the group being dubbed the Bastards). In the film's strangest and most superfluous scene, Mike Myers appears as a British general laying out the plan to a soldier he's sending to the Bastards. His outrageous accent makes the whole scene seem like an old Saturday Night Live skit without any jokes. Fans of Tarantino will love the appearance of both Samuel L. Jackson and Harvey Keitel in uncredited voice cameos. As is usual with casts assembled by Tarantino, there are no slackers and everyone is brilliant in their roles, no matter how small. (Why didn't he cast himself in a small role, as usual?)
Ultimately, I could say that the film is too long, but it really isn't. Even though the film is infused with long periods of just people talking, the audience never seems to get bored. And these quiet periods make the violence that erupts all that more shocking and funny. The film- and Tarantino himself- is an odd sort of genius, a sick war thriller/comedy that fully delivers for those who have the stomach for it. It's natural to say that the film is not for every taste- all of his films are that way- but this one actually opens up to skeptics a lot more than his previous films do, making it one of his best works. (Pulp Fiction is the obvious exception.)
I would recommend this film to anyone who likes violent war films, black comedies, and- it goes without saying- fans of Quentin Tarantino. And Brad Pitt.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg47UvMR2v4&feature=PlayList&p=3458F3C7E7F10F41&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=61

2010 Oscars: 10 Best Picture Nominees

2009-08-27T21:43:00.000-07:00

2010 Oscars: 10 Best Picture Nominees

Obviously by now this is old news. For those of you who haven't heard, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced a couple of months ago that for next year's Academy Awards, there will be 10 nominees for Best Picture, instead of the usual five. Ten films was the norm back in the '30s and '40s; one year even had 12 nominees. This is massive news that has sparked a lot of controversy about the Academy's reasons for doing this. I wanted to throw my opinion out there, and some of you may be surprised: I think it's a good idea.
Let me start with my theory as to why the Academy did this. Clearly it was no easy decision to make: the Best Picture Oscar is a massive award that elevates the careers of everyone involved in the production and is remembered for decades afterward. Some would argue that a film with that award will never be forgotten. But viewership for the Academy Awards telecast has been steadily declining in the past few years, and ABC was giving them grief that they had to raise their ratings or they might pull the plug. They decided the best way to get people to watch was if popular films- that the average moviegoer has likely seen- are nominated. The Academy made some profound mistakes in the nominations last year, especially in the Best Picture category. The Dark Knight turned out to be the second-largest film of all time, and was universally hailed as the greatest comic book movie of all time. Despite Heath Ledger's eventual posthumous win for Best Supporting Actor, the film failed to get nominated for any other major award: namely, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Director- Christopher Nolan, and the coveted Best Picture. WALL-E was also hailed as one of the best films of the year, was a huge hit, and is considered an instant classic, and not just among animated movies. But the Academy has a long bias against "cartoons" and naturally did not nominate it for the top prize. (It did win for Best Animated Feature and was nominated for Best Original Screenplay.) I think that if they had implemented the 10-nominee rule last year, both The Dark Knight and WALL-E would have been nominated for Best Picture. Sadly, they got viciously booted out by traditional (and lower-quality) fare like The Reader and Frost/Nixon.
I see the usual 5-nominee list as a basic formula: there are usually four dramas and one comedy, the latter usually an indie. The average moviegoer has heard of two or three of the nominees, and has seen one. Only one or two of the nominees are considered hits at the box office, but all are loved by critics. Doesn't exactly sound exciting, huh? Being nominated for Best Picture will usually boost the box office gross of the films, but not by much. People won't go see a film they don't want to see just because it's nominated.
The new 10-nominee rule will change this formula, and I think for the better. It's possible the old formula will stay true: that eight of the films will be dramas and two will be indie comedies, that the average moviegoer has only heard of four or five of the nominees, and only three or four didn't flop at the box office. I don't think this will happen, and I'll get back to this later. I think that the move to ten nominees is a serious push to get more commercial films nominated. The new formula will be something like this: five will be dramas, two will be indie comedies, two will be action films, and one will be animated. (I do not have an official prediction at this time. Ask me again in January.)
Already two films have come out this summer that I think will take the place of would-be nominees The Dark Knight and WALL-E: Star Trek and Up. Star Trek will surely be an uphill battle: it's an epic sci-fi film directed mainly to teenagers and young adults, but was almost universally hailed by critics as a superb action film with heart and humor in addition to its eye-popping special effects. Big-time director J.J. Abrams will propel the film through awards season, but first it has to jump through a lot of hurdles. Up, as expected, is being hailed as another Pixar masterpiece and will surely be campaigning heavily this awards season. Only one animated film has been nominated for Best Picture before (Beauty and the Beast), and giving another "cartoon" a shot at Hollywood's top prize would surely boost ratings.
Another potential long-shot is Avatar, another sci-fi epic coming out in December that is headlined by James Cameron and is already a shoo-in for the Best Visual Effects Oscar. The prescence of Cameron at the helm and the fact that the film is a surefire hit will help propel the film through awards season, but the Academy has a thing against genre films (basically, anything that's not clear-cut dramas).
Like I said before, I think having ten nominees is a good thing. I think it will give some worthy films a shot at the award that otherwise wouldn't even have been considered and will increase viewership astronomically. Now, I also think that this plan could backfire: that the Academy simply use the five extra slots to nominate more dramatic crap that no one cares about except for the all-powerful critics. This would be very unfortunate, but I think that this is unlikely because it would nullify the whole point of the new rule.
Finally, let me address one of the chief arguments against this move: that it is simply a publicity stunt to nominate movies that have made a lot of money. First of all, so what if it's a publicity stunt? The Academy is kind of dying; it needs a boost. These naysayers also don't seem to understand that hundreds of eligible films are submitted to the Academy every year, and they have to sift through all the muck to get to the best ones. Being in the top 10 is still a great achievement and nothing to be scoffed at. The Academy won't nominate Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen for Best Picture just because it made an obscene amount of money; it still needs to be a quality film.
And, the final argument that they seem to forget is the simple truth that the end result is still exactly the same: as usual, there will be only one winner for Best Picture. Whether that eventual winner is a popular film that many people have seen and love, or whether it's a piece of crap arthouse project is entirely in the Academy's hands and will be decided exactly as it always has been.
Nothing can change that.

District 9 **1/2

2009-08-13T21:03:00.000-07:00

District 9
**1/2 out of ****

District 9 has the distinction of being one of the most unique alien invasion movies in history. It's produced by Lord of the Rings maestro Peter Jackson and jump-starts the career of newbie director Neill Blomkamp, who was supposed to make the Halo movie. The film (not to be confused with 9, the animated postapocalyptic film about rag dolls coming to life, out next month; and definitely not with Nine, the musical with Daniel Day-Lewis, out in December) opens as a sort of very complex, very serious episode of The Office, as a fake documentary chronicling an alien ship coming to Earth and hovering over Johannesburg, South Africa. It combines interviews, amateur-style video from helicopters and on the ground, and even news footage (all fake, of course) to lay out the story of how humans made an inglorious First Contact with the aliens in the ship and were then forced to house and take care of them. The aliens, which humans call Prawns, did not come to destory humanity, but they're not friendly either. They riot, steal, and kill people, causing huge rallies to get them to leave. They are also strangely obsessed with cat food, one of the more inspired parts of the story. They are confined to a ghetto called District 9, which eventually turns into a slum, full of pollution and crime. The public says they're too close to the humans, so a corporation called MNU sets up District 10 and decides to evict all the aliens.
Enter our main character, Wikus Van De Merwe, played by newcomer Sharlto Copley, who looks sort of like a geeky Ethan Hawke. He is promoted in MNU and is in charge of evicting all the aliens. Lucky for him, he speaks their gargled, clicky language fluently. While pillaging the home of one alien, Wikus finds a cylinder with alien fluid inside and accidentally sprays himself with it. This makes him very sick and slowly turns him into a Prawn, making him very valuable to his company and the government. MNU has been studying the Prawns' weapons, which are much more advanced but only work for the Prawns themselves. After they try to kill him, he goes on the run and becomes a fugitive. He hides out in District 9 and befriends the alien that owned the cylinder. Together they hatch a plan to get it back and fix Wikus.
While the film does make good use of the fake-documentary style, it does not last. It switches back and forth between being a mockumentary and being just a sci-fi movie with handheld, shaky camerawork. The format is comparable to Cloverfield. While it all serves to make the story seem more real, you find yourself thinking to the cameraman, Can't you be still for one second? It can make one dizzy watching the film.
The film's big success lies in its visual effects, which are absolutely astounding and look incredibly real. This is specifically referring to the Prawns themselves, which interact with humans to great extent. The omnipresent mothership hovering over the city also looks very real, almost like a plane getting caught in the background of the shot. And the film is very lucky that the special effects are so good, because so many other elements fall short. There are several flaws in the writing. While the original concept of the story is ingenius, several plot points are cheesy and the film ultimately leaves the viewer with many questions. It's also pretty predictable once the conflict is established. The dialogue in particular is very poor in some scenes. The bad guys' lines when they're considering killing Wikus, which convey the film's humanitarian message, are about as subtle as a jackhammer.
The film is also incredibly gory, surprising given the documentary-style footage which dots much of the finished product. It's easy to see why Blomkamp was considered to make Halo; much of the film feels like a very detailed, very violent third-person video game. This will disgust many viewers, especially queasy audience members. (Fans of Jackson's early work know that he loves this kind of stuff.) The film also moves surprisingly slowly, even during its frenetic action scenes, which makes the film seem much longer than it actually is.
For all its faults, District 9 is a good summer film, entertaining and dazzling, and much more original than anything that's come out so far this year. One would only hope for a better story from a film so brilliantly conceived.
I would recommend this film to anyone who likes gory sci-fi and action films, and anyone looking for something unusual.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6PDlMggROA
You can also watch Alive in Joburg, the short film that was expanded into this feature-length production, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNReejO7Zu8

Funny People ***

2009-08-07T22:04:00.000-07:00

Funny People
*** out of ****

Funny People marks the long-awaited return of Judd Apatow to the director's chair, for yet another outrageous and crude comedy for both sexes. For this one, Adam Sandler heads the impressive cast as what must be one of his most difficult and personal characters to date. Sandler plays George Simmons, clearly a fictional version of himself, a stand-up comedian who became very rich and famous doing a string of unfunny movies. In public he is constantly being recognized and having his picture taken. His house is filled with posters of fake films that look eerily real. The film also takes advantage of old home movies of Sandler, using them to represent George's past, blurring the line between reality and fiction. Early in the film he learns from his doctor that he has a rare inoperable blood disease and starts on a large dosage of experimental medications. Apatow regular Seth Rogen plays Ira, a young newly-fit comedian that happens to be performing in the same comedy club that Simmons is at one night. Simmons bombs, and Ira swoops in and steals the crowd by making fun of the defamed star. Simmons contacts Ira and asks him to be his assistant and write jokes for him. Ira says yes and is swept up into the life of stardom almost immediately. At first he is a starstruck yes man doing whatever odd job George tells him to do. But soon he recognizes Simmons as the lost soul he is, a man whose life has been ruined by celebrity, quick to anger and selfish. George tells Ira he is dying, placing this enormous burden on his back. After some pushing from Ira, he decides to tell some friends, including ex-flame Laura, played by Apatow's real-life wife Leslie Mann. Later in the movie, the doctors tell George the medication might have actually worked and he may not be dying after all, and he rekindles his love for Laura. Him and Ira drive up to her family's house for an extended stay, but it becomes complicated when her husband Clarke arrives home early.
The very funny Jonah Hill plays Ira's roommate Leo, a competitive comedian who is making more money than him. Jason Schwartzman (who also contributed to the dull musical score) plays the third roommate Mark who recently found fame by landing the lead in a television sitcom. Eric Bana is fearless as Clarke, bringing his native Australian accent to the role and ending up being one of the most memorable parts of the movie. Apatow's real-life daughters Maude and Iris charm the audience as Clarke and Laura's kids. Several famous people have cameos as themselves, including Andy Dick, Norm McDonald, Sarah Silverman, Eminem, and my personal favorite, Ray Romano.
The film is everything you'd expect from Apatow: filled with crude insights on modern issues, but with a heart underneath it all. And very, very funny. The film does have one near-fatal flaw, though: at two hours and twenty-six minutes, it is way too long, especially for a comedy. It definitely needed a trim. The film also switches tones quickly about midway through, when George and Ira go to Laura's house, and it feels almost like a different film. If it had been shorter, this effect would have been less severe. It's not as good as Apatow's previous hits The 40 Year Old Virgin or Knocked Up, which promotions for the movie would have you think are very similar, but they have the same amount of raunchy jokes and relevance.
I would recommend this film to all fans of comedy, and fans of Adam Sandler and Seth Rogen.

You can watch the trailer here (lots of the jokes in the trailer have changed or were simply dumped for the final film): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24VVnvrjI8w

The Hurt Locker ****

2009-07-25T21:39:00.000-07:00

The Hurt Locker
**** out of ****

Note: This post contains mild spoilers.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you my first four-star review since I started this blog. And I can almost guarantee that no one who reads this has seen this movie yet, and less than half of you have even heard of it. The Hurt Locker is an indie movie that audiences can smell a mile away, the kind that the trailers try to sell to them by using blurbs in the trailer like "a really great movie" and such because the footage can't sell itself. It's the kind of movie that regular moviegoers point their noses up at and professional critics have orgasms for, the kind of movie that gets dozens of four-star reviews but in actuality flops at the box office and is generally considered an artsy piece of crap. Well, this is the indie movie for the general population- one that reaches the critics and the audience. (It should be noted that the film isn't really an indie at all; it's produced by Summit Entertainment, a new company that is currently earning bank by making the Twilight movies; it's just getting an indie release, meaning it's playing nowhere for now.)
The film opens with a quote that says, in so many words, that "war is a drug." We see what it means by that: the main character is nothing if not addicted to the thrill he gets from being in a war, from being an inch from death and having the skills necessary to stop his own death. The place is Baghdad, Iraq. The time is 2004. Anyone who doesn't know what's going on then should smack themselves right now. The film follows three Americans in the Army whose job is to find bombs and disarm them. At the beginning, the group is led by a Sergeant Thompson, played by Guy Pearce. A disarming goes badly and he dies. His replacement is Staff Sergeant James, a forty-year-old Army man with the discipline of a third-grader. He doesn't take his job seriously in the slightest, probably because he's defused hundreds of bombs and is the best at what he does. His partner is Sergeant Sanborn, a black man that isn't used to James' work tactics and who clashes with him from the very first day. The youngest member of their group is Specialist Eldridge, who talks to a counsellor and seems to be suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, especially after Thompson's death. When the three of them get news of a possible IED, as they call it, they strap their leader up in an explosive suit that makes him look like an astronaut and he goes to try and disarm it.
The first half of the film follows them on a few of these expeditions and the storyline seems rather loose, making the audience wonder where the film is going. The guys talk together, swap stories, they drink and beat each other up. It's not until the second half where we see the point of the film is to portray war as it actually is. They say war is 99% waiting around and 1% sheer terror. This film reflects that perfectly (if the percentages are slightly skewed). It has much more suspense than it does actual combat and shoot-outs. You find yourself gripping the chair, expecting something to happen like in a horror film, and nothing does happen. But just as you're sure nothing will happen, something does, scaring the crap out of you. Just like actual war. The characters are just like real soldiers: these guys aren't heroes, they're just guys in the desert with guns.
The casting is strangley perfect: they cast little-known actors in the leads and big names in small parts to reverse the Hollywood perception of war films, and allowing you to focus on the situation at hand. James is played by Jeremy Renner, who you'll recognize from TV's The Unusuals. Renner plays James as a cocky smartass who's constantly cracking jokes, yet turns it off immediately when there's danger around, because that adrenaline rush is his heroine, and he can't miss a single second of it. Through the course of the film, we see him lose his cool for the first time. Sanborn is played with intensity by Anthony Mackie (Million Dollar Baby, Notorious). While he's a person the audience inherently trusts, he drives one of the most uncomfortable scenes, where he contemplates killing James and making it look like an accident. Brian Geraghty (Bobby, The Guardian) plays the scared kid Eldridge, giving the film a sensitive side. He drives the film's most emotional scene. Ralph Fiennes appears briefly as a soldier they meet in the middle of nowhere, right before being caught in a shoot-out. Lost's Evangeline Lilly has a small part as James' ex-wife back in America, at the end of the movie.
As far as war films go, this one's pretty low-key as it concentrates more on suspense than action. The handheld camerawork makes it all seem more real, but there are a few very cinematic slow-mo shots. Honestly though, the movie is so funny, so gripping, and so addicting to watch that I can't find any serious flaws with it. Even people who don't like war films would be sucked in, although the pervasive language of the soldiers might alienate some viewers. It's without a doubt one of the best films of the year, and- I'm serious- definitely in the top 10 best war films ever made. It's an early Oscar contender, and will surely find its way into the Best Picture race.
I would recommend this film to anyone who likes war movies, and suspenseful thrillers.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WlwXAJ_oBs

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince ***1/2

2009-07-18T13:31:00.000-07:00

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
***1/2 out of ****

Surely to be the biggest movie of the summer, the sixth Harry Potter film is finally out, after an eight-month delay that infuriated millions of fans worldwide. Well, now they can finally rest easy because not only has the film been released, it's everything they would hope for and more. Of course, some fans aren't so happy about the way the film turned out, but more on that later.
Everyone planning on seeing this movie has undoubtedly already read the book and is familiar with the plot, but here it is anyway: our favorite characters Harry, Ron, and Hermione return to Hogwarts for their sixth year of magical education, where they encounter difficulties not only with their studies but with Voldemort's dark forces on the move. A new character, Professor Slughorn, comes to Hogwarts to teach Potions and immediately becomes fascinated by Harry. Harry finds an old Potions textbook with the instructions scratched out, rewritten, and with random text scribbled in the margins. With this improved text, Harry moves to the front of the class. The book claims to be the property of the Half-Blood Prince, whoever that may be. (If you ask me, this subplot is not important enough to be part of the title.) Romance brews around every corner. Harry discovers he has feelings for Ron's sister Ginny, while Ron and Hermione realize their feelings for each other. But another girl, Lavender, is crazy for Ron (go figure), complicating things. Another subplot involves- fans rejoice!- the glorious return of Quidditch, which was cruelly cut out of the last film. Ron joins the team as the Keeper (basically the goalie) and there is a very impressive match sequence that lightens the mood. Dumbledore recruits Harry to retrieve a memory from Slughorn that is vital to their quest to defeat the Dark Lord. Draco Malfoy has been ordered by Voldemort himself to do something- and Professor Snape has taken a vow to help and protect him in doing it. The plot is thick, like the book and the rest of the films, but most everyone familiar with the literature can follow it.
The cast is absolutely superb. The three leads- Daniel Radcliffe as Harry, Rupert Grint as Ron, and Emma Watson as Hermione improve on their acting skills as they age, giving their beloved characters depth, humor, and a soul. Tom Felton is surprising as Malfoy; the character has changed, he's more malicious and yet more torn than ever. We actually see him cry in this film. Felton has truly embodied the character. Evanna Lynch returns as the wispy Luna Lovegood, once again providing comic relief. I had my doubts, but now I believe she is perfectly cast. The adult actors, mostly secondary characters, are also pitch perfect. They are led by Dumbledore, grandly played by Michael Gambon in the movie that will define his career. Alan Rickman gets much more screen time as Snape, and Maggie Smith is still grandmotherly yet fierce as Professor McGonagall. Jim Broadbent plays Slughorn as very funny but somewhat creepy, seemingly more interested in fame than education. Sadly, Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid only appears in a couple of scenes. Newcomer Hero Fiennes-Tiffin becomes an instant star with just one scene, where he plays an 11-year-old Tom Riddle in a memory where Dumbledore meets him for the first time in an orphanage. His portrayal of a Damien-esque creepy kid is one of the best parts of the film. (Sadly, Ralph Fiennes does not appear as the adult Lord Voldemort.)
David Yates returns as director, but strangely, this film feels differently than the last one. The film is injected with several awkward pauses, mostly for comedic effect, but I was surprised at the number of unintentional awkward pauses, breaks between dialogue that just seem unnatural. For another thing, its rating has moved back down to PG, when the last two films were PG-13. I was afraid this would mean the film was more tame. Well, it is more tame than the last couple of films, but in many ways, it is much more mature. The rating is due to the fact that the film mostly focuses on the humor of classes and young romance, and leaves the fantasy action stuff for the last quarter of the film. There are simply less exciting moments in this film, but that's the way it was in the book as well. There are probably too many sexual innuendos for a PG film, but it's all in good taste. And of course, the film ends with such a devastating cataclysmic event that it changes Harry's world forever, and leaves the viewer thirsty for the next installment.
While the Half-Blood Prince isn't the best in the series (I give the Order of the Phoenix that honor), it delivers an exceptionally well-made summer film, complete with humor, thrills, and amazing special effects that don't overwhelm the story. Hardcore fans of the books- of which there are many- may be disappointed with the amount of stuff taken out, modified, and added. A good example is the first five minutes, of which I'm pretty sure none of the material originated from the novel. While it's true the book is better- it's nearly impossible to make the movies better- this movie is still very aware of the book and owes it a great deal. Movies and books are two totally different mediums; scenes in literature that aren't very cinematic should be changed for the benefit of the film.
I would recommend this film to all fans of the books and movies, and fans of fantasy in general. If you have not seen all of the previous films, it is unlikely you will understand the plot.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnooUEuyn_M

Bruno ***

2009-07-14T21:21:00.000-07:00

Bruno
*** out of ****

I don't think there's ever been an entertainer quite like Sacha Baron Cohen. Search around the world, look through the history books; has anyone devoted so much to a role before? This man will do anything- literally, anything- for a laugh. I would bet he would be willing to die in a role if it was funny enough.
Sacha Baron Cohen, who most people know from Borat, returns in Bruno, a film very much like its predecessor. The plot is completely unimportant, but here it is in a nutshell: Bruno is the flamboyantly gay host of a popular Austrian fashion TV show, until he screws up big in public and gets fired, and he decides to move to Los Angeles to become a huge star. He takes his assistant Lutz along with him (Swedish actor Gustaf Hammarsten, who is also unusually devoted to his role) and after failing to become an actor, attempts to make a show interviewing celebrities. After many failures, including losing his adopted African baby (named O.J.- not kidding), he decides to convert to heterosexuality. Of course, they probably made this story up as they went along.
Like Borat, this film is very unusual bordering on experimental film: a semi-faux documentary with just a handful of actors interacting with real people, with only the cameras and film crew around to give away that it's all a giant hoax. The film plays out like several episodes of Punk'd, if that show was rated X. Meant to expose homophobia and prejudice in people, it succeeds more at just being very funny, and ultimately isn't very deep or discussion-starting. Most people are very much aware of the cameras in the room and are very polite and accepting. It's the people who are not polite who cause the most jaw-dropping scenes in the film. And yes, the film is very funny, although it does have many cringe-inducing moments and excessive sexual humor. A gay sex montage early on is so cartoonishly offensive that it may inspire some people to leave. Not every joke hits home (his thick Austrian accent is sometimes distracting from what he's actually saying), but Baron Cohen proves he has no fear and will stoop to any level for a laugh.
He does manage to dupe some celebrities, very surprising indeed since he himself has become a celebrity since the success of Borat. He manages to punk Harrison Ford, Paula Abdul, and most notably, Ron Paul, who he tries to seduce into making a sex tape. (It doesn't go so well.) There are some wildly histerical and inspired moments, including Bruno interviewing the head of a known terrorist group begging the man to kidnap him, Bruno and Lutz chained together in leather and dildos crossing paths with a God Hates Fags group holding signs, and running into a focus group meeting that has just condemned his new show pilot and then dancing for them.
Bruno is every bit as funny as Borat, although it goes a lot farther in terms of crude behavior. It's not quite accurate to say the film goes over the top sometimes; the film never goes below the top. For this reason, the film could only be found funny by a select group of people, who are open-minded and have an intense love for comedy. Everyone else will probably not get the humor, and find it disgusting. But regardless of whether you like the movie or not, you have to admire Baron Cohen for losing himself completely in the part, never dropping character for a millisecond, even if he's in danger of being physically hurt. (The camera guys are also brave; they get thrashed more than once.) He definitely deserves an Oscar for acting- try putting Sean Penn, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Daniel Day-Lewis, or any great actor in these situations and see if they keep a straight face, and can produce jokes as outrageous as he does as often as he does. Sacha Baron Cohen is a visionary; it's just he's an extremist, and refuses to make films that appeal to the more mainstream audience.
I would recommend this film to everyone who liked Borat or is familiar with Baron Cohen's comedy, and people who like reality prank shows.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAGpmNb2xfQ

Public Enemies ***

2009-07-11T21:07:00.000-07:00

Public Enemies
*** out of ****

The Oscar race seems to be starting early this year. A summer film rarely gets remembered when it comes time to vote for the best in Hollywood, but something tells me voters will remember this film.
Michael Mann has crafted an intelligent period crime drama that features stellar performances from the entire cast. The year is 1933, in the middle of the Great Depression. (At least that's when the movie opens; it's unclear how much time has passed by the end.) The script focuses on two main characters: John Dillinger, the notorious bank robber; and Melvin Purvis, the famous FBI agent hunting Dillinger. The cat-and-mouse game is seen from both angles and the triumphs and mistakes of these two intelligent men are supremely entertaining. Johnny Depp makes another career-defining performance as Dillinger, a private man that doesn't let people in easily, and so we learn very little about him. We know that he's very suave and loves being a celebrity. He's violent but doesn't kill people unless he feels he has to. Christian Bale (another actor having a very good summer; see: Terminator: Salvation) plays Purvis, a man who seems to have no private life at all: he has devoted his entire life to catching and killing John Dillinger.
The movie opens with Dillinger breaking his gang out of prison and then going on the run. Purvis is promoted to the head of the Chicago police and starts his Dillinger investigation. The gang continues robbing banks and eluding the police. Eventually Dillinger is captured, arrested, and sent to prison, where he escapes after about ten minutes and gets away with as much charisma and cool as James Bond. Purvis seems to take this personally and intensifies the investigation, resulting in multiple deaths. The movie's long ending chronicles Dillinger's death, (spoiler here if you don't know your history) in which he is betrayed by a friend and shot after walking out of a movie. Interestingly, the movie was a Clark Gable gangster flick, which the filmmakers clunkily try to put into the plot and help bring the film to a close. The dialogue is also noteworthy here. All of the 30's jargon makes sense and sounds accurate, and Depp always has the best lines. My personal favorite, used brilliantly in the trailer: "We're too good for 'em. They ain't tough enough, smart enough, or fast enough. I can hit any bank I want, anytime. They got to be at every bank, all the time." Another line destined to be a classic: "What's the score?" See the movie to find out why.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention Billie Frechette, played by the regal Marion Cotillard. Dillinger meets Billie by chance and quickly and easily sweeps her off her feet and makes her his girl. Despite what you'd think, Billie is not stupid or slutty, just a country girl looking for adventure, and finding it in this real-life Robin Hood. All three leads- Depp, Bale, and Cotillard- deserve Oscar nominations for thier portrayals of real-life people in this unsettling time. It's already pretty much guaranteed its win for Best Costume Design.
Other stars appear in smaller parts, and they each serve their purpose. Billy Crudup (of recent Watchmen fame) plays J. Edgar Hoover, who is desperate to catch Dillinger to defend his reputation. David Wenham (Faramir in The Lord of the Rings movies) plays one of Dillinger's gang members who he springs from jail. Channing Tatum has a small but cool role as Pretty Boy Floyd, a criminal on the run who Purvis kills early on. Lost's Emilie de Ravin has a painfully small part as a woman Dillinger kidnaps from a bank heist and uses as cover so the cops won't shoot him.
There seems to be some hate out there for this film, and I think I can pinpoint the reason why: the trailer advertises it as a complex action thriller, and while it does have plenty of shoot-outs, prison escapes, and bank heist sequences, it is predominantly a character-driven drama. The handheld camerawork gives the audience a fly-on-the-wall feeling as if you were riding in the same car with these people. It also rarely uses a musical score to make the action seem more real, and sometimes this backfires: although the film moves along very quickly for its two-and-a-half-hour running time, the lack of music seems to make some scenes drag. Some audience members also seem to be turned off by the fact that we don't get to know these characters very well, but I think that's intentional; these people lived in the public spotlight, and so we see what they showed to the public.
I would recommend this film to anyone who likes crime films, noir films, Johnny Depp, or Michael Mann.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWof6CovHxI

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen **1/2

2009-07-09T21:22:00.000-07:00

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
**1/2 out of ****

Oh, Michael Bay, you crack me up. You make these movies, thinking they're the biggest and most epic things in the world, and they're really just little films that look like they're made by children. The only difference is, your childish films cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make. (And, I'll admit, have Oscar-worthy special effects. Which is hardly a saving grace.)
This sequel to the 2007 smash hit is pretty much the same as the first, just with a slightly different storyline. It starts out with Sam (the still-charming Shia LaBeouf) going off to college away from his hottie girlfriend Mikaela (the still-dull Megan Fox). If that sounds like a slightly interesting story, don't worry. He doesn't stay there long. The film quickly takes him away from college and instead chooses to put him in the middle of big action sequences that are much more interesting than boring ol' classes. The plot involves a robot stalking Sam, naturally in the disguise of a hot girl, and then them all going to Egypt to find some ancient key to stop an invading Decepticon inexplicably named the Fallen. All the important characters return, including the soldiers now fighting alongside the Autobots, Sam's wacky parents, neither of which can get a clue, and in a rare stroke of genius, Agent Simmons, former head of the now-debunked Sector 7. Bringing back John Turturro for the second half of the film is a welcome surprise and brings actual comic relief. A notable new character is Leo, Sam's new roommate, who is a pathetic coward and never opens his mouth without something stupid coming out. (I read the part was originally offered to Jonah Hill. I can easily imagine that.) All the robots are back, including Optimus Prime and Megatron- back from the dead- and even some new Autobot sidekicks. Two such sidekicks are incredibly annoying (and slightly offensive) twins named Wheelie and Skids, constantly fighting Autobots who have way too much screen time and bring nothing whatsoever to the film. They're both voiced by Tom Kenny, who also does Spongebob Squarepants, and you can tell it's him.
The film's main flaw is that it often drifts off into silliness, ignoring the story, the characters, and the running time in favor of sex jokes, drug jokes, and even robot testicle jokes. It's all incredibly childish and unnecessary, especially for an action movie that tries to be as big a deal as this one does. Also, the film goes on way too long, and could've done with a trim. Despite it dragging on way past the point where the audience has lost interest, it ends very suddenly, without wrapping anything up, leaving the audience slightly confused (assuming, of course, they were paying attention, which most people probably were not). LeBeouf's real-life hand injury is poorly written into the film and then just ignored, leaving the audience to wonder where they got the time to put such a big, bulky cast on his wrist.
Rainn Wilson has an amusing cameo as Sam's astronomy professor. (The late Bernie Mac had a similar such cameo in the first film.) Sam has a mental breakdown in his class, the result of touching a shard of the All Spark. Scenes like this remind us of how good an actor LaBeouf really is, and that he belongs in much better movies than these.
Most people see the film just for the giant robot fight scenes, in which the film has plenty of and delivers with pizzazz and headache-inducing camera pans. The film is watchable because of these lengthy fight scenes, which are really the whole point of making a movie like this. The potty jokes are put in between the fight scenes because the filmmakers can't think of anything else to entertain us with. Of course, there is the sweeping musical score and the awesome rock soundtrack, including an original song by Linkin Park. The band also contributed to the score; as an avid fan, I was thrilled.
Revenge of the Fallen is the perfect example of what a summer film has become: a giant mess of a movie with huge action scenes, eye-popping special effects, very little heart, and stupid dialogue with lines like "Let's roll." It also made an obscene amount of money, proving that audiences just don't care. These kinds of movies are said to be critic-proof, which means that whoever reads this review will either see the movie anyway or continue to love it despite my harsh words. Which, frankly, is the way it should be.
I would recommend this film to anyone who liked the first film, and people who like big, dumb action movies.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pcz6yAYDT4g

Year One **

2009-07-09T10:29:00.000-07:00

Year One
** out of ****

The trailer gives away pretty much everything from Year One. As with many comedies nowadays, the previews for the film give away the funniest parts of the movie and leave little else for you to feast on. Despite there being a joke every five seconds or so, the film doesn't rack up many laughs, but honestly, what more did you expect?
The premise of the film is putting characters who act like modern people in prehistoric times. Hence, the presence of Jack Black as loser caveman hunter Zed and Michael Cera as loser caveman gatherer Oh. The opening of the film establishes that these guys are losers who can't get women or even dinner, and are quickly kicked out of the tribe. They go over the mountains, farther than any caveman's ever traveled before, and have many adventures based on stories ripped from the Bible. The inane plot involves Cane murdering his brother Abel (a humorous scene with David Cross as villain and Paul Rudd as victim); trying to save their crushes from slavery; meeting Abraham, played with unfunny gusto by Hank Azaria, who wants to cut off their foreskins; and ultimately trying to dethrone an evil king, played by Xander Berkeley. There's a couple gross-out scenes involving rubbing body oil on a fat man, urine, and- what else- sex. Even the prescence of funny performers Oliver Platt as a High Priest and Christopher Mintz-Plasse (forever McLovin) as Abraham's son Isaac can't liven the mood much, and only add scarce laughs to the proceedings. Worst of all, Black hogs the screen so much that Cera seems kind of an afterthought, too shy and quiet to say very much around Black's rantings and ravings and wild arm-waving.
Year One is typical summer fare, no heart at all, but it does offer minimal entertainment, which is exactly what the people who see the movie demand.
I would recommend this film to fans of Black and anyone who got a kick out of the trailer.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTNBwIAY9Zo

Up ***1/2

2009-06-04T15:19:00.000-07:00

Up
***1/2 out of ****

Pixar is at the top of the world. Still.
Up is Pixar's tenth feature film, a major landmark, and its first feature film in 3-D, which all of the future films from the company are set to be in this format. Up has both the imagination of Toy Story and the touching emotion of Finding Nemo, making this one of their better films.
It opens with a young boy dreaming of adventure and meeting a strange girl that he will later marry. A long, wordless montage sequence chronicling their lives together is probably the most touching thing I've ever seen in an animated movie. After his beloved wife Ellie's death, our hero Carl (voiced by a perfect Ed Asner) is left alone, an old man with nothing to do with his life except stay in his house and bicker at the outside world. After circumstances force him out of his home, he ties thousands of balloons to his house and turns it into a giant blimp of sorts, lifting it off the ground and away from society. However, an annoying little boy named Russell accidentally tags along, forcing Carl to claim responsibility for him. Their destination is South America, specifically a place called Paradise Falls, that Carl and Ellie always wanted to go to but never could because of the daily strain of life. They get there but get separated from the house, forcing them to walk on the ground, towing their floating house by the garden hose. They encounter a strange giant bird and several talking dogs (Dug being the best and the funniest of them), and an old man, Charles Muntz (voiced by a sinister Christopher Plummer), who was Carl's childhood hero. Muntz went to South America in self-exile searching for the rare bird that just happens to be following Carl and Russell around. Muntz is so desperate to get his hands on it that he's willing to kill whoever stands in his way.
The film is filled with harrowing (and at times violent) adventure, and the usual hilarity that marks all of Pixar's work. But there's a heart underneath it all that unifies it and keeps it from going off course. Adult viewers will love to hear the usual cameo appearance of John Ratzenberger, the only actor to have a role in all ten films. Many will want to see the film in 3-D, but honestly, it's probably not worth the extra money. Much of the 3-D effects are subtle, although they do add to the amazing animation that has become standard in Hollywood. Instead of things popping out of the screen, we see depth and peer into the world, like through a window. There is probably little difference between the 2-D and 3-D versions.
I would recommend this film to all but the smallest children, and anyone who likes animated movies.

You can watch the trailer here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USpI6Jzl3No

Also, arrive early and catch Pixar's new short film Partly Cloudy, an ingenious delight about storks delivering babies and the clouds that magically create them, which is just further proof of Pixar's reign over the animated film industry.

Angels & Demons ***

2009-05-28T21:58:00.000-07:00

Angels & Demons
*** out of ****

Who would have thought that a Harvard symbologist would have such a cool life? Robert Langdon returns (with a better haircut) as the next Indiana Jones-wannabe, played to perfection by the brilliant Tom Hanks. Angels & Demons is the sequel to the 2006 smash hit The Da Vinci Code, even though the book was a prequel. (Practically no knowledge of the first movie is needed to understand this movie, although you still may not understand it if you have seen the first one.) Ron Howard is a quality director who has made a summer popcorn movie. The result: a very intelligent dumb movie.
After the Pope's death, four cardinals are kidnapped and will be publicly executed at 8, 9, 10, and 11:00 at various places in the Vatican. At midnight, Vatican City will be destroyed by an antimatter bomb. It appears an ancient scientific cult called the Illuminati is behind the attack, seeking revenge for a centuries-old murder of four of its members. Naturally, the Vatican police call Robert Langdon to help them, you know, because Dr. Jones wasn't available. They also enlist the help of a physicist who helped create the antimatter, the beautiful Dr. Vetra, because there are practically no other women in the movie. Ewan McGregor is dashing as the Camerlengo (the Pope's replacement while they are choosing a new one). Danish actor Nikolaj Lie Kaas has a breakthrough performance as the trigger-happy assassin, as scary as he is deadly. The plot has them all zig-zagging around the Vatican several times, making the film feel slightly restrained despite the epic way Howard shoots the scenery. Hans Zimmer's score is overactive but beautiful and haunting. The plot is kind of predictable, but the end has multiple twists and shocks that will make you re-think the whole movie once it's done.
I would say this film is more exciting than The Da Vinci Code, but not as good a film. It's obviously fictitious, but slightly more relevant, as a main theme of the film is the coexistence of science and religion in this world, made most memorable by a monologue McGregor makes to all the cardinals. The film is all about history, but is a breathless action film that tries to make history look much more exciting. Langdon is always searching for something in history in order to solve a very immediate crisis, a strange formula for a film.
Despite all its obvious flaws, the film is made with grandeur and pizzazz, it's very watchable, and there's just no beating Hanks' acting. But be aware: it is rated PG-13 but really pushes the boundaries. There is lots of blood and violence that would be extreme for children or queasy viewers.
I would recommend this film to everyone who liked The Da Vinci Code, fans of the Dan Brown novels, and people who like intelligent thrillers.

You can watch the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcE8QaKiTGk

Lost: Season 5

2009-05-25T20:34:00.000-07:00

Lost: Season 5

Note: This will NOT be a spoiler-free post.

By now, everyone who watches the TV show Lost has seen the season 5 finale, so I am free to talk about it without anyone telling me I spoiled the show for them. If you haven't seen the finale, please see the opening disclaimer.
In short, season 5 was not their best season. (I give season 1 that honor, the only season to win the Emmy for Best Drama Series.) Turning into territory that will begin to wrap up the show, you'd think that they would answer a lot of questions and bring the whole mystery into perspective. Wrong. This season actually introduced more questions than it answered, making watching it week-to-week very frustrating. The episode where the Oceanic Six got on the plane was particularly frustrating to me because NOTHING was explained, it just all conveniently came together, and explanations just came later. Precious screen time was devoted to answering these questions that we did not care about, ("What lies in the shadow of the statue?" Uhhhh...like we care?) when we would rather see more story and more of our characters.
Last season left off with revealing how the Oceanic Six got off the island, with the boat blowing up with Jin (supposedly) still on board. It also reveals that Locke is the one in the coffin in the future, meaning somehow he will die. Jack is convinced that they must all return to the island. This season starts off only moments later, with Jack teaming up with Ben to find everyone, leading Kate to leave Aaron behind and everyone getting on the plane one way or another. Back on the island, Locke, Sawyer, Juliet, Daniel, Miles, Charlotte, and the rest of the survivors are experiencing flashes that transport them through time at random- forwards and backwards. Sawyer even witnesses Claire giving birth to Aaron. After- surprise!- Jin being found alive, Charlotte's death, and Rousseau's team landing on the island, they are reunited and Locke uses the wheel to leave. After that, they find out they are in the 1970's and they join the Dharma Initiative. Sawyer- who is being referred to more and more as James- takes on the alias LaFleur and leads the security force. Daniel leaves the island in the sub. Flash forward three years, and Locke ends up in the read world (he traveled through both time and space) and finds everyone who left, excluding Sun but including Walt, and unsuccessfully tries to convince them all to come back. Ben finds him and kills him after he gets vital information- the whereabouts of Eloise Hawking, Daniel's mother- and makes it look like suicide. The Oceanic Six return to the island with Locke in a coffin, but Jack, Kate, Sayid, and Hurley vanish and travel back to the 70's to rejoin Sawyer's group. Sun, Ben, and the now-resurrected Locke stay in the present with the new plane crash survivors. Daniel returns to the island and attempts to stop 'the incident,' a legendary Dharma happening that will kill lots of people. He intends to use an H-bomb to do this. He is killed by his younger mother, and Jack takes his place, believing it will change the course of time and reverse everything that's happened. Complications ensue, and Juliet sets off the bomb at ground zero, apparently killing herself instantly. In the present, Locke finds the myserious Jacob, who we see for the first time, and forces Ben to kill him. But, the people outside- in a reveal that copies and mocks the reveal at the end of the fourth season- show everyone Locke's body that was found in the plane, in the coffin. So, either the Locke that's walking around is a phony, or he got a new body. That's where the confusing season ends.
Let's start with the characters, which the producers of the show love to mistreat. Charlotte is killed fairly early on. Not one tear shed. Why? Because no one cared about her. She's one of the very few main characters that never got her own flashback episode. (Libby was another such unfortunate soul.) We never knew anything about her, and the fact that she hadn't been on the show that long made her death just a plot point rather than an emotional moment. Second, where the hell was Claire? Last season, she wandered off into the jungle to follow her dead father and left her baby on a rock. Sounds like something she would do. And she was in maybe one scene this season, just in a flashback. The producers have said they'll bring her back next season and explain what's been going on. Bullshit! They played the same game with Michael, who disappeared for season 3 and reappeared hastily in season 4 only to die a few episodes later. In that instance, his story was not worth the wait of a year, and I don't think Claire's story will be worth that wait either- they needed to explain it immediately, and they didn't. She's an important character and her absense is strongly felt. (Don't even get me started on Walt- the producers practically cut him out of the show after season 1, and he was one of the most interesting characters. Now the actor is too old to go back and film scenes from what happened to him while he was gone.) I like the new side of Sawyer- he did a lot of maturing this season and is a much better leader than Jack ever was- but I hate the Sawyer/Juliet romance. They are complete opposites, and barely interacted before this season. Totally contrived. Also, the one thing most audience members were waiting for never happened: the Sun/Jin reunion. Alas, after the finale, they are no closer to being reunited than they were at the beginning of the season. Even something that was given to the audience turned out to be a disappointment: we finally see Jacob but learn nothing about him, except that like Richard, he doesn't age and has seen the castaways at different points in their lives prior to the island. So, he's the leader and he sought them all out. Why? And why did they cast a young man with blonde hair to play him? He looks like he belongs on a biker gang, not the leader of this magical island. And then he's promptly killed off. How anti-climactic.
The finale was so muddled (and had so little action) that it really doesn't leave much for the final season. I'm a big fan of the show, but honestly, after that, do I really care what happens next? It seems obvious that Daniel was right- whatever happened, happened- and with the dropping of the H-bomb, they just caused the incident instead of preventing it. How did none of the characters see that coming? Most of the audience must have guessed it.
Still, with all its faults and audience-losing techniques, Lost is still great television. Witness: any scene with Hurley is bound to be the best scene in the episode. My personal favorite: when he is caught writing the screenplay to The Empire Strikes Back with improvements. ("Face it, the Ewoks suck, dude.") Its continued use of the cliffhanger ending makes the show addicting, and when it does have an action sequence, it's worth the wait. This season focused more on sci-fi and mythology than it did on characters or action, but the show's strengths still shine through its murky weaknesses.
Season 6- the final season- starts in January. Be sure to tune in, or you'll be lost in the crowd.