August (2008) (SIFF) - B

"August" is a drama about the dot.com bust. Josh Hartnett stars as Tom, the CEO of Landshark. He's the "guy who knows money" behind the business, while his brother Joshua is the technical brains. The movie takes place in August of 2001. Landshark is presented as having an immensely successful IPO, even though the IPO is in early 2001, after the dot.com bubble burst in late 2000. By August, though things have gone sour, and Tom is desperately trying to get the company through their lock up period, so he and his brother can be more than millionaires on paper.

"August" clicks nicely on a couple of levels. The script is fast paced, and features a driving soundtrack that really conveys Tom's desperation as he furiously tries to find some way to keep control of his quickly disintegrating situation. Hartnett (who I've never really been a fan of) is also surprisingly good in this role. At first, it's easy to dismiss Tom as all flash and no substance, but as the movie progresses, you slowly start to see his hidden depths.

Unfortunately, I felt the rest of the cast was fairly uninspiring, and the script had two subplots that were poorly executed. The movie spends a little time exploring Tom's relationship with his parents and his attempt to win an ex-girlfriend back. In both cases, it felt like the movie should have just completely dropped those subplots, or spent more time with them so they could be properly explored.

I'm sure I enjoyed "August" partially because I always see a little bit of my experience at Wizards of the Coast when I see a movie or article about the dot.com craze. If the dot.com bust is a topic that interest you, I think you'll enjoy "August," but if that's not your cup of tea, I'd recommend you skip this one.

Final Grade: B

With a Wink and a Smile (2008) (SIFF) - A

"With a Wink and a Smile" is a documentary about the Seattle burlesque scene. The main story arc of the movie follows ten students taking Burlesque 101, taught by Miss Indigo Blue, one of the foremost Seattle burlesque performers. You get to know the students quite well, understanding their fears and hopes about taking the class, and watching quite a few crises in confidence. It's great fun to see the students slowly develop their performances (the class builds up to a graduation recital where all the students perform a show that is open to the public, not just friends and family.) Interspersed through the various interviews and scenes from the class are clips of burlesque performances by notable Seattle burlesque artists, with Miss Indigo Blue giving commentary about what makes each performance notable artistically and from a historical stand point.

Before I continue with the review, I should disclose two factors that probably bias me in favor of the film. First, as part of Jenny Tynes's bachelorette party, I took a short burlesque class with Miss Indigo Blue, so I have a personal connection with the subject. In addition, the screening I attended was the world premiere of the film, and a lot of people in the audience were involved in Seattle's burlesque scene, which meant that the crowd was raucously enthusiastic about the movie.

That being said, I think almost everyone would enjoy this film. Miss Indigo Blue really makes the film. She's a fount of knowledge about the history of burlesque, especially in Seattle, and her commentary on the experiences of her students and the performances of other artists are filled with insight. Also, I'm frankly amazed how well you get to know the students in this film. The class is really diverse in composition, featuring all types of body types, as well as a wide range of ages (early 20's to early 50's). Each one has come to the class for different reasons, but they all share a common desire for empowerment and expression. I felt awed by how open these women were willing to be about issues as personal as sexuality, body image, and family.

Final Grade: A

They Killed Sister Dorothy (2008) (SIFF) - A

"The Killed Sister Dorothy" is a documentary about the murder of Sister Dorothy Stang, an American nun who spent 37 years working as a missionary in Brazil, helping poor families and promoting sustainable farming. She was one of the chief advocates for the Project for Sustainable Development (PDS) which granted poor families land if they would use the land for sustainable farming. Unfortunately, loggers and ranchers also coveted that land, and there has been an ongoing battle for the land, with numerous murders of poor farmers, and a lot of illegal logging and ranching taking place on land promised to poor families.

"They Killed Sister Dorothy" follows the trial of Sister Dorothy's killers. The big question on everyone's mind is whether or not the ranchers that ordered her killing would be put on trial, or only the actual gunmen. For reasons I can't fathom, the defense team gave the filmmakers immense access to their pretrial efforts. This allows the documentary to paint a clear picture of just how corrupt the Brazilian judicial and penal system is, as well as make it clear that these ranchers are used to being above the law.

The movie ends on a fairly hopeful note. Unfortunately, at the Q&A with the director after the SIFF screening, it was revealed that since the movie wrapped, things have taken a dramatic turn for the worse. One of the men convicted in her death was just freed in early May, and after a couple years where the rate of destruction of the rain forest went down, it has started to go up again in 2008.

I found "They Killed Sister Dorothy" to be highly informative and entertaining. I'd recommend it to anyone with even a remote interest in the subject.

Final Grade: A

Blood Brothers (2007) (SIFF) - B

"Blood Brothers" is a Taiwanese gangster epic set in Shanghai. Feng lives in a small village where his best friends are two brotehrs, Hu and Gang, who treat him like a third brother. He's in love with the lovely Su, but Hu and Gang convince him to go to Shanghai with them to make their fortune by working as waiters in fancy restaurants. When the three arrive in Shanghai, though, the night club they get jobs at turns out to be run by Boss Hong, a gangster, and they soon become enforcers rather than waiters. Feng is fascinated by Boss Hong's mistress, the lovely singer Lulu. Naturally things don't go well for the three and tragedy and drama follow.

While the script for "Blood Brothers" is fairly standard and predictable, the strong cast keep the movie enjoyable. Qi Shu (she was the cargo in "The Transporter") has great chemistry with Feng and the relationship between the three friends is fun to watch. The movie is solid enough that fans of this genre will enjoy it, but there's nothing special enough in it to recommend it to a more general audience.

Final Grade: B

Mongol (2007) (SIFF) - B

"Mongol" is an epic Russian film about the early life of Genghis Khan. It chronicles Temudjin's (Genghis is a title rather than a name) difficult early life, suffering through multiple periods of captivity and slavery, as well as having his wife kidnapped and taken as another man's wife. As with most films of this type, the historical accuracy is fairly questionable, with lots of simplifications, combining of characters, etc. but most of the major incidents are based in reality, and the film is accurate in portraying the idea that Temudjin's life before he became Genghis Khan is a remarkable rags to riches story.

Interestingly enough, the movie is really framed as a love story between Temudjin and his wife Borte. It is historically accurate that Borte was kidnapped soon after they were married and taken as a wife by someone else. Temudjin was able to eventually rescue her, and he accepted the son that she bore in captivity as his own, although questions of whether or not his eldest son was really his would plague Genghis Khan all during his life. The movie portrays Temudjin's primary motivation as protecting Borte and his family. His desire to unite the Mongol clans is driven primarily by the desire to keep them safe and provide stability in their lives.

While I found this conceit that Genghis Khan did it all for love pretty hard to swallow, the movie was still quite enjoyable. The acting is good, and there's a really strong connection between Temudjin and Borte on screen. The movie did feel a bit long, though. I'd recommend "Mongol" to fans of epic war/love stories, but it's not quite good enough to recommend to those not especially interested in that genre.

Final Grade: B

The Greening of Southie (2008) (SIFF) - A

"The Greening of Southie" is an excellent documentary about the construction of The Macallen Building in South Boston. The Macallan Building was the first "green" building project in the Boston area, and sought a Gold rating under the LEED (Leadership in Environmental and Energy Design) standard. The movie does an excellent job of making you understand LEED certification. Essentially, you get points for doing a bunch of things in 5 different areas: Sustainable Sites, Materials and Resources, Water Efficiency, Energy & Atmosphere, and Indoor Air Quality. Depending on how many points you earn you will get a Platinum, Gold, Silver, or Certified rating.

"The Greening of Southie" gives a lot of detail about the strengths and weaknesses of the LEED certification process. For example, using bamboo flooring earns you points because bamboo grows really fast (only about a year to achieve the desired size) and is considered a renewable wood source. As the process went on, though, the builders began to wonder whether it had really been a great decision to go with bamboo flooring because this involved shipping wood from China, and after there were some problems, it involved shipping wood from China three times. One of the claims made in the movie is that in a typical building project, the energy used to ship building materials to the site is greater than all the energy consumed by the building during it's lifetime. The film also doesn't shy away from presenting some of the problems with "green" building. Many of the materials are relatively new and untested, and you see the various hiccups this causes during construction.

Probably the best decision the filmmakers made was to spend a lot of time on the reactions and thoughts of the construction crew at the Macallan building. It was fascinating to see the various reactions of the crew members to the idea of environmentally friendly building. The focus on the crew also allowed for some interesting side explorations into issues such as the impact of gentrification of the Southie area on families living in the area, and the fact that this kind of construction is quite expensive, and none of the construction crew could ever hope to live in a building like that.

Great story telling, fantastic educational value, and some excellent time lapse camera work to show the progress of the building make this a documentary that I highly recommend.

Final Grade: A

Hair, Let the Sun Shine In (2007) (SIFF) - C

"Hair, Let the Sun Shine In" is a documentary about the musical "Hair" and it's influence. The movie is a mixture of clips from performances in the 70's and interviews with surviving cast members and producers. Now I've never seen "Hair" as a whole, although I'm familiar with some famous scenes and music from the musical. This may have contributed to my feeling that the documentary was fairly light. You had lots of people talking about how important and influential they felt "Hair" was, but their reasons seemed fuzzy to me, and they were all people intimately involved in the musical, so that section felt like a puff piece to me. It wasn't until the second half of the documentary that my interest was piqued a little when the movie started exploring the darker side of "Hair." Quite a few people involved with the musical died very young (usually from AIDS,) and there was some nasty incidents with people being given "B-12" shots that turned out to be laced with amphetamines. There was enough interesting stuff that I can't say I though the movie sucked, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, except for a die hard fan of "Hair."

Final Grade: C

The King of Ping Pong (2008) (SIFF) - C

"The King of Ping Pong" is Swedish film about Rille, an overweight outcast who seems to be outdone by his younger brother Erik in every way. Erik is more popular, hanging out with the older kids, while the older kids pick on Rille and mock him. To compensate, Rille becomes fascinated with ping pong, declaring it to be the last egalitarian sport, untainted by drugs or scandal. Doesn't that sound like a pleasant coming of age comedy? That's what I thought when I went to see "The King of Ping Pong" at SIFF. Unfortunately, the movie turned out to be more drama than comedy, and was quite dark at times. The movie is also very slow paced, really dragging at times. Fortunately there are enough genuinely sweet and funny moments between Rille and Erik, and Rille and his friend Anja (who is quite memorable) to keep the movie from sucking, but I can't recommend "The King of Ping Pong" to anyone.

Final Grade: C

The Wrecking Crew (2008) (SIFF) - A

"The Wrecking Crew" is an excellent documentary about a little known group of artists that dominated the rock music scene in the 60's. What if one band performed all of the hit music of the 60's? It turns out that's not as ridiculous as it sounds. A group of studio musicians informally known as The Wrecking Crew played on a huge number of hit albums starting in the late 50's through the early 70's. A shocking number of well known bands didn't play on their own albums. For example, The Beach Boys didn't play any of the instruments on their albums. Very early on, Brian Wilson decided that he wanted the Wrecking Crew to play on their albums because they were simply better than the members of The Beach Boys. There was a scandal when the public found out that The Monkees didn't play any of their instruments, which was confusing to Davy Jones because he was aware that a bunch of other bands were doing the exact same thing. Listening to the songs featured in the movies is like listening to a soundtrack of the 60's. Some of the bands I was surprised to find out didn't play on their own albums included Simon and Garfunkel, The Righteous Brothers, Sony and Cher, and The Mamas and Papas, to name just a few. The Wrecking Crew also worked with Frank Sinatra, Nancy Sinatra, Sam Cook, and Elvis Presley.

The movie is a well done mixture of archival footage showing The Wrecking Crew playing in their primes and interviews with several of the surviving members. A lot of interesting tidbits come out during the movie. For example, the Wrecking Crew was so much in demand that several of the members became multimillionaires purely through being paid scale (or occasionally double scale) with no royalties of any kind. The worked that much! Hearing the musicians describe how in a lot of cases the producers or writers would only come in with an outline of the music and let the individual musicians create riffs to personalize the music was fascinating. It was also interesting to see how different the life was for the studio musicians. They didn't tour at all, so they had much more normal lives.

I want to make it clear that you don't need to be a fan of the music they played to appreciate this documentary. I'm not really a big fan of the music of that period. If you have any appreciation for music at all, you'll enjoy "The Wrecking Crew."

Final Grade: A

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) - B

My review of the latest Indiana Jones movie is going to be a tiny bit spoilerish, so I'll put my overall conclusion up front, rather than at the end. It's probably fairly uncontroversial that a ranking of the first three Indiana Jones movies is quite clear. "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is clearly better than "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" which is clearly better than "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom." I think that "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" is definitely better than "Temple of Doom" and definitely worse than "The Last Crusade." It's good enough that if you are even a moderate Indiana Jones fan you'll enjoy it like I did, but for those not into action movies, you can probably pass it by. From this point on in the review, spoilers are going to start getting dropped, so if you don't want any spoilers, come back and read the rest after you see the movie.

There's a lot to like in "The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull." First and foremost, the movie really felt like an Indiana Jones movie. The atmosphere, humor, cinematography, and style of action all feel like they could easily have been put into the earlier movies. Yes, Indy is a bit older, but the movie even manages to acknowledge that gracefully. The opening scene is especially good, and really would not have been out of place in "Raiders" or "The Last Crusade" other than Indy's age. After that opening sequence I was really hopeful that "Kingdom" would be amazing. Also, bringing Karen Allen back for "Kingdom" was a brilliant move. She's obviously the one true Indiana Jones love interest, and she and Ford still have a good chemistry.

Unfortunately, there were some bad elements that kept "Kingdom" from rising to the level of "The Last Crusade" (obviously hoping to achieve "Raiders" level is just wishful thinking.) The biggest problem is that the movie has aliens in it. Apparently Lucas first came up with this concept over a decade ago, and Ford and Spielberg refused saying it was a terrible concept. After many new treatments of the same basic concept, Ford and Spielberg finally agreed. I guess they finally found a treatment that wasn't so terrible that it ruined the movie, but of the four movies, I would say that this one had the weakest concept. Yes, the concept for "Temple" is pretty mediocre, but it never made me actively blanch like this one did at times.

The other weakness of "Kingdom" is that it was the only "Raiders" movie that actively broke my suspension of disbelief at times. One of the people I saw the movie with was Richard Garfield. I had to agree with him when he said that he had to actively put his suspension of disbelief back together after a few scenes.

The movie that "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" reminds me of is "Casino Royale." The first half of "Casino Royale" is really fantastic, as good as any Bond film ever, in my opinion. Unfortunately, the second half really goes down hill, and the movie kind of staggers to the finish. I know a few people who think "Casino Royale" is really great, which I believe is them editing their memory to ignore the weak second half. It was just so nice to see a good Bond movie again, that it's easier to focus on the good parts and ignore the bad parts.

I feel that people who say that "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" is as good as "The Last Crusade" are also engaged in creative editing of their experience. The beginning of the movie is fantastic, but as the alien storyline comes more and more into focus, the movie gets weaker and weaker. The quality of the first half of the movie is such a pleasant surprise that it's easy to edit out the second half, but I think there's simply no way you can compare this movie to "The Last Crusade" considering how weakly "Kingdom" finishes.

Final Grade: B

Made of Honor (2008) - B

"Made of Honor" is essentially "My Best Friend's Wedding" with the gender's reversed. Patrick Dempsey (McDreamy on "Grey's Anatomy") stars as Tom Shepard. Tom's a playboy who has a bunch of rules to make sure none of the women he dates get too close, like the no back to back dates, or no family functions. His best friend, however, is Hannah, played by Michelle Monaghan ("Gone Baby Gone,") who he met in college when he mistakenly climbed into her bed thinking Hannah was her roommate. They've been friends ever since, and Hannah is the woman Tom always takes to his father's many weddings (Sydney Pollack's final role.) When Hannah goes on an extended business trip to Scotland, Tom realizes how empty his life is without her, and resolves to tell her that he wants to be with her when she gets back. Unfortunately, Hannah shows up with Colin (Kevin McKidd of "Rome") in tow, and announces that she and Colin had a whirlwind romance and are getting married in two weeks, and that she wants Tom to be her maid of honor. Tom's guy friends then convince Tom that he should agree in order to try and sabotage the wedding from the inside.

In the interest of full disclosure I should mention that I am a complete sucker for romantic comedies. Also, I felt a personal connection to the plot because I was a bridesman in John and Jenny Tynes' wedding. That being said, I really enjoyed "Made of Honor." I'm a big fan of all three of the main actors, especially Monaghan, who is an actress I keep hoping will make it big after loving her performances in "Gone Baby Gone" and "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang." While the overall plot is quite predictable, I found the individual jokes to be funny and sometimes surprising. I do realize, though, that this a movie I should only recommend to someone who likes romantic comedies.

Final Grade: B

Iron Man (2008) - A

"Iron Man" is the latest comic book movie. It stars Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark / Iron Man, and has a strong supporting cast including Jeff Bridges, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Terrence Howard. "Iron Man" is one of the best of the recent crop of super hero movies. Robert Downey Jr. is a perfect casting choice for Tony Stark, and he delivers an excellent performance. The strength of the movie is that the script and Downey make Tony Stark the single most interesting character to have been presented in any super hero movie, period. Only Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker comes close. The rest of the cast is excellent as well, and the chemistry between Paltrow and Downey is extremely enjoyable.

On the negative side, director Jon Favreau isn't exactly who I would think of to direct a super hero movie, and the action scenes in "Iron Man" simply aren't that great compared to other recent super hero movies. I don't want to sound too critical of Favreau, though, since the rest of the movie flows really well. The character development scenes are great, and Favreau even manages to make an extended sequence about engineering improvements to the Iron Man suit fun and interesting. My other slight nitpick with the movie is that there are a few plot points that didn't really make sense to me. After talking about them a bit with Skaff, I guess you can come up with explanations for what's going on, but during the actual viewing of the movie I had several "Huh?" moments.

Overall, I only rank the first two "Spider Man" movies ahead of "Iron Man" as far as super hero movies go, and I think it is quite close. I'd definitely recommend the movie to anyone. Also, if you are a super hero geek like myself, you'll definitely want to sit through the credits for a brief extra scene at the very end of the credits.

Final Grade: A

The Forbidden Kingdom (2008) - B

Surprisingly, "The Forbidden Kingdom" is Jackie Chan and Jet Li's first collaboration. It also stars Michael Anganaro ("Sky High ") as Jason Tripitikas, an American teen who is obsessed with martial arts movies. When a group of high school bullies force him to help them break into the Chinese pawn shop where he gets most of his movies, the proprietor is shot, and hands Jason a staff, proclaiming that Jason must return it to it's rightful owner. Jason is chased up onto the roof by the hoodlums, and falls from the roof. When he wakes up, though, he is no longer in America. He is in the Forbidden Kingdom. He meets a master of Drunken Kung Fu (Jackie Chan) who recognizes Jason's staff as belonging to the Monkey King (Jet Li). It is Jason's destiny to return the staff to the Monkey King. Thus begins Jason's quest.

"The Forbidden Kingdom" was choreographed by Yuen Wo Ping ("The Matrix" among many others). As a result, its style is much more Jet Li than Jackie Chan. You won't see wonderful improv fighting with random objects. It's pretty much a straight martial arts movie, beautifully choreographed. The cast is good, with Li and Chan being given roles that suit their respective strengths (meaning that Li doesn't talk much compared to Chan, for example) and Anganaro is appealing as the main character. For a martial arts movie, the plot is above average. It mostly holds together, and the random Zen pronouncements aren't so numerous that they become annoying. The plot isn't quite as good as my favorite movies of this genre, such as "Hero," though, so I can't quite recommend it to everyone. If you enjoy the traditional martial arts adventure, this is one of the better ones, but if that description makes you yawn, you probably want to pass.

Final Grade: B

Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008) - A

"Forgetting Sarah Marshall" is the latest comedy from the Judd Apatow gang. The movie was written by Jason Segel ("How I Met Your Mother" and a memorable small role in Knocked Up,") who stars as Peter Bretter, a Hollywood composer dating the star of the show he works on, Sarah Marshall (Kristen Bell of "Veronica Mars.") After Sarah dumps Peter, Peter struggles to move on, and finally decides that he needs to get out of Los Angeles for a while, and heads to Hawaii. Unfortunately, he goes to a resort Sarah always talked about, only to discover that Sarah is staying there with her new boyfriend. Fortunately, sparks fly between Peter and one of the resort's employees (played by Mila Kunis of "That 70's Show.") Apatow regulars Paul Rudd, Bill Hader, and Jonah Hill play entertaining minor roles. All of the cast does a great job.

Like all of the movies from the Apatow crew, "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" is extremely crude, but sweet at heart, and has a lot of moments that just feel extremely real. It's also the quirkier than the other movies. For example, Peter's secret dream, which he has been working on for many years, is a musical with puppets about Dracula. Naturally, we get to hear some of the hilarious songs from said musical.

The movie also has quite a few elements that make you wonder if they are shout outs to other projects the cast has been involved in. Does Segel just really love being nude in front of the camera (he has multiple full frontal scenes) or is that also a reference to a memorable "How I Met Your Mother" episode where the gang discovers a nude painting of Segel's character that is the source of great embarrassment. Is it just a coincidence that Sarah Marshall's career eerily resembles Kristin Bell's?

I definitely enjoyed "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" but it was also clearly my least favorite movie from this group. I'm not sure if it's just that I've seen the formula enough times now, or if this effort doesn't quite click like the others. The movie was right on the edge of whether I would recommend it to everyone, or just people who are into this genre. In the end, I decided it was just good enough to warrant an A.

Final Grade: A

Leatherheads (2008) - C

"Leatherheads" is George Clooney's first misstep as a director. While I enjoyed both of the other movies he directed ("Good Night, and Good Luck" and "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind"), "Leatherheads" really never quite comes together. The movie is a romantic comedy set in the 1920's. Clooney plays "Dodge" Connelly, a professional football player. Unfortunately for Dodge, professional football is still in its infancy, and his team plays in front of very small crowds on a tiny field surrounded by cows. Meanwhile, college football, as represented by Princeton star Carter Rutherford, played by John Krasinski of "The Office," is thriving with gigantic crowds and beautiful stadiums. When it looks like his team is about to go bankrupt, Dodge comes up with the idea of recruiting Rutherford to play for his team, counting on his college star and war hero status to create giant crowds. Enter Lexie Littleton (Renee Zellwegger), a reporter from Chicago. She has received a scoop that Carter's war heroics (he supposedly got a whole German squad to surrender by himself) are highly exaggerated. She follows the team, and cozies up to Rutherford, trying to find out the truth about his war experiences. Of course, her assignment is complicated by the fact that there's also a spark between her and Dodge.

Unfortunately for the movie, Zellwegger and Krasinski have almost no chemistry. The chemistry between Zellwegger and Clooney is a little better, but it doesn't exactly set the screen on fire either. As a result, there are long stretches of the movie that are really flat (after the movie was over, the people I saw it with were startled to find out that the running time was under two hours, since it felt MUCH longer). Then there's the inexplicable decision to have the climax of the movie be a football game that is so amazingly boring, that several of the characters feel obliged to point out that the game is ridiculously boring. Not exactly the recipe for a stirring finish. There are just enough fun scenes between Dodge and Lexie that I can't say the movie sucked, but I definitely do not recommend it.

Final Grade: C

Stop-Loss (2008) - A

"Stop-Loss" is a strong military drama directed by Kimberly Pierce ("Boys Don't Cry.") The movie opens with a taut combat sequence. Brandon King's (Ryan Phillipe) squad is manning a checkpoint when they take fire from some insurgents in a car. Per standard operating procedure they chase the insurgents and end up in an ambush. The scene is really well directed. It is quite intense and really gives you a feeling for how messy urban combat can be. That action is on King's last day in Iraq, and he and his best friend Steve are planning to leave the military when they get home. Once Brandon gets home, however, he is shocked to find out that he has been "stop-lossed." This relatively unpublicized policy allows the U.S. military to prevent people from leaving the military when their contracts are up. With no draft in place, and military recruitment struggling due to the unpopular Iraq war, stop-loss is essentially being used by the military as a back door draft of people who have served in the military. I was aware of the policy before I saw the movie, but one of the statistics given in the movie that shocked me was that around 20% of the soldiers who have served in Iraq have been stop-lossed.

Brandon goes AWOL and decides to try and fight his being stop-lossed. The movie does an excellent job of showing how desperate Brandon's (and other people like him) situation is, as well as providing a bunch of perspectives on what the right thing for Brandon to do is.

"Stop-Loss" also does a good job of exploring the psychological damage that can happen to those who have served in Iraq. There are two major subplots, and both are interesting and effective. One subplot centers around Tommy Burgess (Joseph Gordon Levitt--the kid alien on "3rd Rock from the Sun,") one of the members of Brandon's squad. His best friend dies in the opening combat scene, and Tommy comes back from Iraq completely messed up. Tommy's friends' struggles to help him get it together are both compelling and gut wrenching.

The second subplot centers on Steve and his girl friend Michelle. Like Tommy, Steve has some issues from his time in Iraq, but the couple's major problem is Steve's desire to reenlist. Michelle loves Steve, but doesn't believe she can take another year of being apart from Steve and worrying about him in Iraq. She's simply not prepared to be a military wife.

All of the performances in the movie are good, and the script is excellent. The situations the characters are put in and their final choices are believable, if tragic. I can't exactly call the ending satisfying since it is so sad, but you walk out of the theater feeling like it ended the only way that made sense. I definitely recommend this movie.

Final Grade: A

21 (2008) - C

"21" is based on a the book Bringing Down the House by Ben Mezrich. I found Mezrich's book to be highly entertaining and recommend it strongly. Where "21" stays close to Mezrich's book, it is quite good. The movie does a good job of giving an overview of how blackjack works, how card counting works, how card counting as a team works, and the intricate game of countermeasures that casinos employ to prevent card counters from breaking their games. Unfortunately, the producers or screenwriters apparently decided that story beyond the card counting presented in Bringing Down the House lacked sufficient drama for a movie, so they decided to spice up that story. The main character Ben can't just be a bright MIT student. Instead, he has to be a desperate MIT student who has gotten into Harvard Med but can't figure out how to pay for it (apparently Ben has never heard of student loans). Even worse, the movie tacks on one of those obvious yet unbelievable Hollywood endings. Also, if you know Vegas and Blackjack well, there are a number of small errors throughout they movie that can be annoying. Overall, I enjoyed the parts of the movie that focused on playing blackjack in Vegas enough that I can't say I thought the movie sucked, but I'd definitely recommend that you stick with the book on this one.

Final Grade: C

Horton Hears a Who! (2008) - B

"Horton Hears a Who!" is an extremely pleasant adaptation of a classic Dr. Seuss book. Any time you adapt something as short as a Dr. Seuss book into a feature length film, you end up having to add lots of stuff to fill time. This movie takes an interesting approach to the new material. There is no attempt to have the new dialogue or action sound like Dr. Seuss. As a result, it is dead obvious when the movie is quoting directly from the original text. I though this worked well, though, because I'm not sure if an adult could take 88 minutes of dialogue that was all trying to sound like Dr. Seuss. With Jim Carrey and Steve Carrell voicing the main characters, I was also a bit worried that the additional material would be a little too out of control and zany. Instead, the movie does a nice job of giving them enough room to unleash their comic energies, without going over the top. I also thought the visuals were quite impressive. One scene where Horton searches through a field of clover was surprisingly stunning. If you're not into animated films, I wouldn't recommend "Horton Hears a Who!" For every one else, though, I think you'll find the movie a pleasant way to spend 90 minutes.

Final Grade: B

10,000 B.C. (2008) - C

I went to see "10,000 B.C." under the theory that despite its terrible reviews, there would be enough cool special effects that I would enjoy the movie. As it turned out, there were just enough fun effects (mostly of humans hunting mammoths) that I didn't think the movie sucked, but just barely. This movie is about as close as you can get to getting a "This movie sucked" grade without doing so.

Unfortunately, everything other than the special effects in the movie is a mess. There are lots of those "Are you kidding me?" moments. It's hard to do voice over narration in a movie well. "10,000 B.C." does it terribly. I pretty much winced whenever Omar Sharif's voice started. The movie also can't seem to decide whether to go historic or fantasy. It mostly tries to stay within the realm of reality, but occasionally embraces some light magic. Since the scenes involving the magic (mostly through a character called Old Mother) universally sucked, I guess they should have stuck with complete realism. I can't recommend this movie to even the most die hard CGI effects fan.

Final Grade: C

The Bank Job (2008) - A

"The Bank Job" is a first rate crime thriller. It stars Jason Statham ("The Transporter") as Terry Leather, a petty criminal who is approached by an old flame, Martine, with the idea for robbing the safe deposit boxes in a local bank. Now Terry and his crew have never robbed a bank before, but the plan that Martine proposes seems simple enough, so they decide to go for it. It sounds too good to be true, right? Naturally, it turns out that the job isn't as simple as it appears. Martine has been asked by MI-5 to set up the bank job because one of the safe deposit boxes has compromising photographs of a member of the Royal Family. Along the way, various things go wrong, and more and more villains and government agencies are out to get the crew.

"The Bank Job" features a first rate script. The risk in attempting a story filled with so many subplots and characters is that it would be easy for the film to either become incomprehensible or have sections that seem pointless and a waste of time. Instead, the film does a great job of spending just the right enough time with each character and subplot so that you understand that part of the story, and each thread feels like it is woven smoothly into the overall story.

The film is based on a real life bank robbery that has generated some conspiracy theories in Britain. The government quashed news coverage of the robbery after a few days, citing national security. The reasons behind the news blackout are still unknown to the public. The script does a nice job of creating a conspiracy that is out there enough to be fun and exciting, but never goes so far that you roll your eyes in disbelief.

The acting is also very good. You can't point to any one performance as being especially brilliant, but there are simply no weak links in the cast. Everyone turns in an enjoyable performance. The end result is an extremely enjoyable film. I give it an outside shot of making my top 10 at the end of the year.

Final Grade: A

Semi-Pro (2008) - B

"Semi-Pro" is another Will Ferrell sports spoof movie. Set in 1976, Ferrell plays Jackie Moon, a former pop one-hit wonder (of course you get to hear his awesomely bad song "Love Me Sexy") who used his record money to become the owner, coach, promoter, and a player on the Flint Michigan Tropics of the ABA. When the ABA commissioner announces that the league will fold after the current season, and 4 teams will merge into the NBA, Moon manages to convince the other owners that rather than picking the 4 best markets to merge into the NBA, it should be based on performance, with the 4 top teams in the standings merging in. In an effort to fulfill his dream of making it to the NBA, Moon trades for former NBA player Monix, played by Woody Harrelson.

"Semi-Pro" is definitely not one of Ferrell's best movies. There are quite a few scenes that are obvious attempts to follow the Will Ferrell sports spoof formula to success, such as an obligatory near nude scene for Ferrell. The movie also has a few structural problems. For example, it can't quite make up its mind whether Will Ferrell or Woody Harrelson is the star of the movie. Monix feels like the main character, since he is responsible for leading the Tropics' turnaround, and he's the one that gets the romantic subplot. On the other hand, this is a Will Ferrell movie, so Ferrel's character gets a lot more screen time, and one of the casualties is that Monix's romantic subplot feels shallow and superfluous, even compared to the standards of this genre, which is a shame since this means completely wasting Maura Tierney's participation in the movie.

In the end, there are enough clever jokes and new scenes, that if you are a Will Ferrell fan like me, you will enjoy the movie. If you're so-so on Ferrell, though, you'd probably be better off skipping "Semi-Pro."

Final Grade: B

2008 Oscar Comments

It was a disappointing year for me, Oscar predictions wise, as I only got 15 of the 24 categories right. Following Entertainment Weekly's picks exactly would have also resulted in 15 correct predictions, and following the consensus picks from AwardsDaily's prediction chart would have gotten 16 correct. The one major variation from the consensus picks that I got right was Marion Cotillard for "La Vie En Rose." See my comments below for why I ended up choosing her. Unfortunately, at the last minute I decided to predict a great night for "No Country for Old Men," which led me to go against the consensus picks for Cinematography and Editing. Had I stayed with the consensus picks, I would have ended up at 17 correct, which would have been enough to share the win at Mike Ryan's Oscar party. On to my thoughts on the major categories!

Best Picture
Winner: No Country for Old Men
Atonement
Juno
Michael Clayton
There Will Be Blood

Since I listed "No Country for Old Men" as my top movie of 2007, it's no surprise I was happy to see the Coen's win. The buzz was that "There Will Be Blood" was the only movie with a shot to top "No Country." I would have been seriously pissed if "There Will Be Blood" had won.

Best Actor
Winner: Daniel Day-Lewis (There Will Be Blood)
George Clooney (Michael Clayton)
Johnny Depp (Sweeney Todd)
Tommy Lee Jones (In the Valley of Elah)
Viggo Mortenson (Eastern Promises)

As I mentioned in my review of "There Will Be Blood," I never like performances like Daniel Day-Lewis's as much as Oscar voters. I would have preferred that George Clooney won. I never saw "In the Valley of Elah."

Best Actress
Winner: Marion Cotillard (La Vie En Rose)
Cate Blanchett (Elizabeth: The Golden Age)
Julie Christie (Away from Her)
Laura Linney (The Savages)
Ellen Page (Juno)

I actually only saw two of these performances (Cotillard and Page.) I feel confident in saying that Cotillard definitely deserved the win, though, because her performance was simply astounding. The range she showed playing Edith Piaf was amazing. She's delightful as a young Piaf (20), healthy, and full of hope. She's equally wonderful as Piaf, wracked by illness and alcoholism, looking far older than her 48 years. She shows us the full gamut of human emotions and experiences, ranging from joy, love, and hope to illness, despair, and grief. "La Vie En Rose" isn't like other recent biopics about famous musicians such as "Walk the Line" or "Ray" where you feel like you've only seen a snapshot of the person, and never really got to know them. Because of the depth, power, and passion of Cotillard's performance, you feel like you really know Piaf after "La Vie En Rose" closes. Her performance was simply one of the best I've seen in the last 5 or 10 years. I ended up predicting she would win the Oscar despite all the buzz being for Christie, because I felt that anyone who saw "La Vie En Rose" would definitely vote for her. It seemed like there was some noise being made about Cotillard as the awards approached, and I felt this would mean that enough voters would check out her performance to catapult her to an upset victory.

Best Supporting Actor
Winner: Javier Bardem (No Country for Old Men)
Casey Affleck (The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Charlie Wilson's War)
Hal Holbrook (Into the Wild)
Tom Wilkinson (Michael Clayton)

I didn't see Affleck's or Holbrook's performance, but it was no surprise or disappointment to me that Bardem's memorable turn as Anton Chigurh took home the statue.

Best Supporting Actress
Winner: Tilda Swinton (Michael Clayton)
Cate Blanchett (I'm Not There)
Ruby Dee (American Gangster)
Saoirse Ronan (Atonement)
Amy Ryan (Gone Baby Gone)

This was the major category with the greatest uncertainty, I thought. I saw predictions of wins for all of the nominees other than Ronan. I didn't see Blanchett's performance in "I'm Not There." Of the other 4, I'm glad that Ruby Dee didn't win (and she was probably co-favorite with Blanchett amongst Oscar prognosticators.) It's not that I thought here performance was bad, it was simply way too short to deserve an Oscar in my mind. She's on screen for less than five minutes! I had a very slight preference for Ryan's performance over that of Swinton or Ronan.

Best Director
Winner: Joel and Ethan Coen (No Country for Old Men)
Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood)
Tony Gilroy (Michael Clayton)
Jason Reitman (Juno)
Julian Schnabel (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly)

I didn't see "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," but considering how good I thought "No Country" was, I'd be surprised if it changed my feeling that the Coen's clearly deserved their win.

Best Original Screenplay
Winner: Juno
Lars and the Real Girl
Michael Clayton
Ratatouille
The Savages

Of the three I saw ("Juno", "Michael Clayton", and "Ratatouille") I thought "Juno" was the deserving winner. I'd be curious to see what I think if I ever get around to seeing "Lars and the Real Girl," though. From the previews, I though the concept seemed really unique.

Best Adapted Screenplay
Winner: No Country for Old Men
Atonement
Away from Her
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
There Will Be Blood

I didn't see "Away from Her" or "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly." I'm not going to complain about any win for a movie as great as "No Country for Old Men," but I was also greatly impressed with the job that Christopher Hamilton did in adapting "Atonement." Ian McEwan's novel isn't one where a lot happens. Instead, it's the time you spend in the characters thoughts and impressions that make the novel enjoyable. This doesn't really sound like a recipe for a good movie, though. The movie manages to capture the essence of McEwan's novel without resorting to anything clunky like voice overs or narration to reveal the character's thoughts.

The Singer (2006) (SIFF) - A

I went to see "The Singer," a French film with subtitles, because of one of the various SIFF guides' description of the movie. In effect, it talked about how it's easy to take Gerard Depardieu's excellence for granted, but then occasionally you see him in a role like this one, that truly blows you away. My feelings for Depardieu and French cinema have evolved a lot in the last few years. Unfortunately, my early exposure to Depardieu was in his American movies. When I first started to explore international cinema, the French movies that were hot in the U.S. would best be described as high on angst and mood, low on plot and character (the horrid "Betty Blue," which somehow got an Oscar nomination for best foreign language film is a perfect example.) As a result, for a long time I considered Depardieu totally overrated, and generally avoided French cinema. Eventually, I saw some French movies that I loved, and I realized that it had been silly for me to believe that all of French cinema would be like the movies I hated. Some of those movies (most notably "Ruby and Quentin" which made my top 10 for 2004) featured Depardieu, and I realized how wonderful he was acting in French.

In "The Singer" Depardieu is truly astounding as Alain Moreau, an aging lounge singer reduced to playing Saturday night dance halls, with aging audiences, wondering what happened to his life. It's the kind of performance that I really love: subtle, complex, full of depth, and without a hint of over-acting or theatrics. There's no clever trick like an accent or some kind of handicap. Instead, you slowly get to know Alain more and more as the movie unfolds, and different aspects of his personality and character are revealed.

The supporting cast is strong as well, especially Cecile de France (she was also excellent in another fine French movie from last year, "Avenue Montaigne") as Marion. Alain meets Marion at one of his shows, and strikes up a complicated relationship with her. Ostensibly, she is working for Alain as his real estate agent because he is looking to buy a new house, but there's definitely a connection there. Marion's far to young for Alain, and just as damaged as he is, so their relationship is complicated, and unusual. The result is a quiet, bittersweet movie that defies easy categorization. It's not exactly a romance, a drama, or a comedy, having some elements of each.

The movie is well enough written that even a decent performance by the lead would have resulted in a fine film. Depardieu's masterful performance makes this a movie I'd recommend strongly to everyone.

Final Grade: A

In Bruges (2008) - B

"In Bruges" is a fun dark comedy about two hit men ordered to hide out in Bruges, a small tourist town in Belgium, after a hit gone bad. The two men's reactions are starkly different. Ray, played by Colin Farrell, hates Bruges. He's not interested in any of the touristy things, so he considers Bruges a "shithole" where there's nothing to do. Ken, played by Brendan Gleeson (you may have seen him as Mad Eye Mooney in the Harry Potter films or the father in 28 Days Later,") thinks Bruges is beautiful, and loves visiting all the medieval buildings, etc. Naturally, wacky adventures ensue for the pair in Bruges.

"In Bruges" features excellent acting. I'm not a Colin Farrell fan, but this is the best performance I've seen him deliver. Ralph Fiennes turns in a fun, memorable, change of pace performance as Ray and Ken's boss. The highlight of the movie, though, is Gleeson. He turns in a stellar performance, making you really identify with Ken, despite the fact that he is, after all, a hit man.

The first half of the movie is a inconsistent, with certain scenes dragging on, and some scenes not nearly as funny as the film makers seem to think. The second half, though, is quite strong, managing to be funny, moving, and suspenseful at the same time. If you've read much of this blog, you know that I usually prefer movies that leave the ending a little open ended, rather than wrapped up in a bow, and I loved the ending to "In Bruges." If you like black humor, I'd definitely recommend this movie.

Final Grade: B

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) - C

"Sweeney Todd" was a major disappointment to me. Ever since the previews came out last summer, I've been telling people that somehow the idea of Johnny Depp as a singing, murderous, barber was really appealing to me. I was even more excited when the reviews for the movie were really good. Unfortunately, my reaction to "Sweeney Todd" was similar to my reaction to almost all of director Tim Burton's movies (2003's excellent "Big Fish" is the one major exception): visually appealing, but I just couldn't connect to the story or characters.

Burton's vision of London as a pit of filth, despair, and vermin is stunning. The set is wonderfully grotesque, and whenever the camera pulls back to give you a view of London as a whole, the effect is haunting. Unfortunately, that's about the only really positive thing I can say about the movie. Since I've never seen the original Sondheim musical, I'm not sure if my problems with the story and characters are the result of the musical or the movie adaptation. I found all of the major characters unlikeable and impossible to relate to, and the minor characters felt paper thin, making brief appearances to move the plot along.

I also have to question the wisdom of casting all the major parts in a musical with people whose singing talents range from passable to kind of competent. "Moulin Rouge" showed that you can make a movie musical work without having top flight singing talent with the right music and script, but the songs in "Sweeney Todd" are far more challenging. Also, even though I doubt Nicole Kidman or Ewan McGregor could carry a musical like "Sweeney Todd," they are both noticeably more talented singers than Alan Rickman, Helena Bonham Carter, or Johnny Depp. Some of the minor characters in "Sweeney Todd" clearly have a background in stage musicals, and the difference between the quality of their songs and the main character's songs is ridiculous. I can't quite make up my mind if the movie would have been better if all of the singers would have been on the level of the main characters. On the one hand, there wouldn't have been any moments where I thought "that was a really good song and really well performed," but it would also have avoided the problem that after hearing one of the good songs, listening to an uninspired Depp and Carter duet was almost like being slapped in the face.

The fine cast (I normally really like Carter, Rickman, and Depp) try their best to carry the weak storyline when they aren't forced to sing, but I felt there just wasn't much for them to work with sadly. I'm kind of shocked that Depp was nominated for an Oscar. It's not that he's bad, but his role just isn't very weighty, and didn't feel at all Oscar worthy to me. The cast did manage to keep the movie out of the "this movie sucked" range for me, but I wouldn't recommend this movie, even to lovers of musicals.

Final Grade: C

Definitely, Maybe (2008) - B

Recently, I had a conversation with my good friend Jenny about the decline of the romantic comedy. It seems that so many romantic comedies these days are all about the "hook" which will make the movie look different enough in the previews and ads to draw viewers. Unfortunately, it seems most recent romantic comedies use up all their creative juices on the clever hook, and then simply fill the rest of the movie with completely generic characters, story, and dialogue.

The hook for "Definitely, Maybe" is that Will Hayes, played by Ryan Reynolds ("Just Friends" and "Blade: Trinity") is just about to get divorced, and his grade school daughter Maya, played by Abigail Breslin ("Little Miss Sunshine"), demands that he tell her the real story of how he met her mother. After trying to put her off with the explanation that "it's complicated," he eventually agrees to tell her the story, except that he is going to change all the names. Maya loves the idea of a "romantic mystery story" where she can try to figure out which of the women in the story is her mother.

Will's story prominently involves three very different women. The first is his girl-next-door college sweetheart Emily, played by Elizabeth Banks ("Seabiscuit" and "Invincible".) The story starts in 1992, as Will plans to move to New York City for two months to work for the presidential campaign of Bill Clinton. He promises Emily that nothing will change, and that he will be back after two months, but naturally she is worried.

Once he's in NYC, Will meets the other two women in the story. First, he meets April, played by Isla Fisher (she's the one who marries Vince Vaughn in "The Wedding Crashers,") because she works in the copy center of the Clinton campaign. She's the opposite of Will. He's hopelessly idealistic, optimistic, ambitious, and earnest, while she's a slacker, cynical, and apolitical since she doesn't think any of it makes a difference (she's working at the Clinton campaign because $12/hour is better than her last job--babysitting.)

He meets Summer, played by Rachel Weisz ("About a Boy" and "The Constant Gardner,") because Emily asks Will to deliver a mysterious package to Summer, who she knew during high school. Summer turns out to be a free-spirited (she immediately hits on Will when she meets him even though she is currently dating her thesis advisor--a really great minor role for Kevin Kline) and talented writer.

At a certain level, "Definitely, Maybe" fits the description of a hook followed up by generic characters, plot, and dialogue. I can't really point to anything in the movie that I would say was out of the ordinary for a romantic comedy, other than the fact that it just feels more real than most movies of its type. For example, each of the three female leads fits comfortably into a standard romantic comedy archetype. The three women feel quite real, though, because the parts are well written, and each of the actresses (especially Isla Fisher) delivers an appealing performance that makes them believable, and easy to relate to. The various beginnings and ends to Will's relationships are also fairly standard, except that they feel a little more true than usual.

The movie did have a few weak points. I usually actively hate Ryan Reynolds. Somehow the way he talks always makes me feel that he is sneering at everyone, which drives me crazy. Here, I found him tolerable, but certainly wished someone else would have played the lead. I almost really liked the ending, because I thought they were about to leave it deliciously ambiguous, but then at the last second the movie decides to beat you over the head with a happy ending. Those last seconds felt so false compared to the rest of the movie, I wondered if they were added after test screenings. On the bright side, though, I thought of a much worse, much sappier, much more "Hollywood" ending early in the movie, and was pleasantly surprised that it didn't go down that path at all.

I toyed briefly with the idea of giving "Definitely, Maybe" an A, but in the end I felt that it wasn't quite good enough. If you enjoy romantic comedies, this is one of the better ones in recent years, but it's probably not quite good enough to make people who don't really go for the genre like it.

Final Grade: B

Vitus (2006) (SIFF) - A

"Vitus" is a Swiss film (in German with subtitles) that I saw at SIFF. The movie is about a young piano prodigy, title character Vitus--actually I should really just say prodigy since his talents include academics and chess as well as music. About half the film covers when he is six, and the rest covers when he is 12. Vitus is an interesting movie because it starts off as a fairly typical movie about a young prodigy (you've seen it before: the family struggles to come to grip with how much to push the prodigy to realize his gift vs. letting him have a normal childhood) but then takes a really sharp right turn during the second half. It almost reminded me of the shocker in "Million Dollar Baby." Fortunately, the change is handled more smoothly in "Vitus" and the movie holds together fairly well as a whole, whereas I felt that "Million Dollar Baby" felt like two different movies awkwardly stitched together.

It's the post-shocker 2nd half that really made me like Vitus. The first half is pretty much just a reasonably well done prodigy movie, but the second half wanders into areas I've never seen before in a prodigy movie, and has some really great moments and surprises. Another strength of "Vitus" is the soundtrack. If you're a fan of classical piano music, which I am, hearing Vitus's various performances is great. If you like the idea of a sweet movie about a young prodigy with some major surprises and twists, you'll love "Vitus."

Final Grade: A

In the Shadow of the Moon (2007) (SIFF) - A

"In the Shadow of the Moon" is a British documentary about the Apollo missions. It takes a simple, but unique approach to the moon missions. There are only twelve men who have ever walked on a heavenly object other than Earth. Three of those men, Pete Conrad, James Irwin, and Alan Shepard, have passed away. The original goal of "In the Shadow of the Moon" was to interview all nine of the other lunar walkers, but in the end Neil Armstrong declined to participate, as he has in almost all public events since finishing his career as an astronaut. In addition, Jim Lovell who commanded the ill-fated Apollo 13 mission was also interviewed.

The movie really emphasizes the words of the astronauts. There are some scenes with on-screen captions, and archival footage of newscasts from the time, but other than that all the words spoken in the documentary are spoken by the Apollo astronauts. Hearing the astronauts recollections about their missions was wonderful, and it was fascinating to listen to the them reflect on how leaving the Earth affected their world views. Almost unanimously they expressed the view that seeing the Earth from that vantage point made them realize how petty the struggles of nations and tribes were in the grand scheme of things.

The other absolutely stunning feature of the film is a whole bunch of rarely- or never-seen footage from NASA's archives. Much of the footage had been in storage in liquid nitrogen for thirty years. Even though I'm a huge moon-buff and I've seen tons of documentaries and movies featuring footage from the moon missions, much of the footage from the film was new to me.

One scene in the footage that really amused me was video of the struggles of the Apollo 11 crew to successfully plant the American flag in the moon for the famous photograph. The scene is doubly amusing because that famous flag photograph is one of the oft-cited pieces of evidence from conspiracy nuts that the moon landings were faked. In the famous photo, the flag does not hang down, but stands out as if blown by the wind, and even has ripples in it, further making it appear that it is wind blown. Of course, there is no wind on the moon so conspiracy nuts have claimed that this photograph could not have been shot on the moon. NASA's official explanation is that to make a good photograph, a rod was used to extend the flag horizontally, and that vibrations from planting the flag in the moon's surface created the bends in the flag. While I'm sure die-hard conspiracy theorists can come up with an explanation of how the footage from "In the Shadow of the Moon" was faked, it pretty much corroborates NASA's official explanation. The behavior of the flag while Aldrin and Armstrong struggle to plant it does not look at all like a flag blowing in the wind, and in fact looks exactly like NASA's explanation.

If you have even the slightest bit of interest in the subject of this documentary, definitely see it. I promise you'll find it both uplifting and inspirational.

Final Grade: A

Gone Baby Gone (2007) - A

"Gone Baby Gone" is Ben Affleck's directorial debut. It stars his brother Casey Affleck and Michelle Monaghan (the female lead in "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang") as two romantically involved private detectives (Patrick and Angie) who are called in to help investigate the kidnapping of a little girl because they are the kind of people who can talk to people who won't talk to the police. There is also a fine supporting cast with Morgan Freeman playing the head of the missing persons unit in the Philadelphia police force, and Ed Harris as the lead detective assigned to the case. Amy Ryan, who portrays the messed up mother of the kidnapped girl, earned an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress.

Naturally, as Patrick and Angie look into the case, they find that it is not as simple as it seems at first, and everyone seems to have a secret to hide. As the mystery unfolds, the characters keep being put in situations where you have to wonder what you would have done in their place. Patrick, especially, makes two gut wrenchingly difficult moral choices, and I found it quite interesting to talk to people after they had seen the movie about whether they agreed with his decisions.

I loved how the script doesn't feel the need to give any pretty answers to the various moral dilemmas or pass any judgments on the choices the characters made. Instead, it simply presents what the characters chose and the consequences. The actors and actresses do a great job of investing you emotionally in the characters, so even when you don't agree with the decisions they made, you can sympathize with their point of view. In the end, I found the seamless blending of a briskly paced mystery/thriller with a thinking movie about big moral questions to be highly enjoyable.

Final Grade: A

Persepolis (2007) - B

"Persepolis" is an animated film (in French with subtitles) based on the graphic novels Persepolis and Persepolis 2 by Marjane Satrapi. The movie chronicles Satrapi's childhood and early adulthood, growing up in Iran during and after the Islamic revolution--actually I guess I should say the revolution against the Shah. One of the interesting things I learned about Iran from reading Persepolis is that the revolution did not start as Islamic, and the Islamic fundamentalists didn't take over immediately after the revolution.

The animation style in the movie is quite unique, not resembling anything that I can think of recently. There aren't quite enough frames for the action to be continuous, instead it looked almost like a flip book movie. As it turns out, this style of animation worked quite well with Satrapi's art, and I found the movie quite visually appealing as well as very true to the style of the graphic novels.

Having just read her graphic novels over the summer, it was also quite interesting for me to see the differences between the movie and graphic novel. Naturally, the movie greatly abridges the graphic novel, leaving out whole characters and incidents, but it also expands on certain parts of the graphic novel, giving more detail about what happened. Overall, I thought that the screenplay was excellent. It did a good job of not feeling like an abridgment of a longer work, and captured the essence of the graphic novels.

Now I happen to think that the Persepolis graphic novels fall into the category of good rather than great. As a result, the movie also fell into that category for me. If you loved or hated the graphic novels, I would adjust my grade accordingly.

Final Grade: B

Michael Clayton (2007) - A

"Michael Clayton" is kind of like "Erin Brockovich" from the other side. George Clooney stars as Clayton, the "fixer" for a major law firm in New York. He is called in when his friend Arthur, played wonderfully by Tom Wilkinson (the father in "In the Bedroom,") snaps during a deposition for a major case the firm is working on. Arthur is defending chemical company U/North from a massive class-action lawsuit alleging that their products have killed or sickened hundreds of people. Arthur decides he can't take the hypocrisy any more, and starts ranting during a deposition, leading the firm's senior partner Marty Bach (played by Sydney Pollack) to send Clayton in to clean up the mess before the firm faces a major malpractice suit.

Clayton is the perfect George Clooney role. You immediately take a shine to him because he's clearly sharp, and definitely knows how to cut through the BS. On the other hand, he's made a long series of poor decisions, including foolishly trying to start a bar with his loser brother, which has left him in debt to the wrong kind of people. You can smell his desperation as he tries to keep everything afloat. Throughout, you can see his basic decency, even though he's definitely been soiled by his long years of doing the firm's dirty work. As Clayton slowly works out the truth behind Arthur's actions, it's wonderful to watch him struggle with conflicting impulses of self-interest, friendship, and doing what is right.

The script is great, filled with sharp dialogue, and creating a movie where you definitely feel you are greatly rewarded for paying close attention. There were several times in the movie where a character would say something and I felt "I was just thinking exactly that thing!" The various twists and turns in the movie are great fun. The strong script, coupled with Clooney's great performance, and strong performances from the supporting cast, meant that I walked out of "Michael Clayton" feeling "Wow, what a well done movie."

Final Grade: A

The Orphanage (2007) - A

I went to see "The Orphanage" because the Rotten Tomatoes summary for the movie intrigued me: "When it seems like every horror movie nowadays is a remake or a grisly exercise in sadism, The Orphanage is a breath of fresh air for critics and audiences alike, seamlessly blending in a poignant tale of loss with the scares..." Actually, the Rotten Tomatoes summary ends with "and blood," but after seeing the movie I felt that the quote was far more accurate without the reference to blood. While there is one brief, grisly scene (you see the mangled body of a woman horribly killed in a car accident), the movie has almost no violence or gore in it. Instead, this poignant ghost story scares you by creating characters you sympathize and identify with, and then putting them into situations where you feel terrified, because if you were in that situation, you would be absolutely terrified. The setting (a creepy former orphanage)effectively heightens the tension, and the movie does a great job of keeping itself scary because it mostly leaves the terror in your own imagination. The most recent movie that I can think of that tries a similar tack is "The Others," but "The Orphanage does a much better job than "The Others" did.

"The Orphanage," a Spanish movie with subtitles, tells the story of Laura. She has just bought the orphanage she was raised in until she was adopted, and intends to turn it into a care facility for special needs kids. Her son Simon starts talking to six new imaginary friends, and insisting that they want to play games with him. On the day the special needs children first arrive at the house, Simon disappears, and as the search for Simon falters, Laura becomes more and more convinced that Simon's new "imaginary" friends were actually ghosts who have kidnapped him.

"The Orphanage" features a wonderfully ambiguous script. You're never quite sure whether the ghosts are all in Laura's mind or really there. Even after all is revealed, you still wonder exactly how much of what you saw was real and how much was in Laura's mind. The big reveal is amazingly satisfying, tying the movie together beautifully. I was reminded of how I felt during "The Sixth Sense" when the big secret was finally revealed. I suddenly felt that everything made so much more sense in the movie, and gave me such a feeling of completion.

There are a few rough spots in the movie, though. The movie is quite slowly paced. While this works well to build the tension once Simon has disappeared, the movie definitely dragged during the introduction. There's also a brief coda that really flirted with disaster for me. I thought the movie was over, then the coda started and I was immensely frustrated for a little bit because I felt like the coda was making certain things clear that didn't need clarification, almost like the film makers didn't trust the viewer to "get it." Fortunately, there is a beautiful, ambiguous moment that ends the movie. Although I still think the movie would have been stronger if it had just ended when I thought it did, that last moment at least made me feel the final scene wasn't a complete waste.

I went back and forth a bit on the final grade for the movie, since I felt it was right on the edge of whether it was strong enough to recommend to everyone, or just to people who liked that kind of movie. In the end, I decided that the great approach "The Orphanage" takes towards being scary was enough to just squeak it into the A category.

Final Grade: A

Children of Men (2006) - A

"Children of Men" is a science fiction thriller directed by Alfonso Cuaron ("Y tu mama tambien" and "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.") The premise of the movie is extremely intriguing: what would happen if people just stopped having babies? The movie is set in 2027, and opens with a news broadcast that the youngest person in the world (who was 18) has just died. Clive Owen stars as Theo Faron, a former peace activist living in London, drinking in quiet desperation while waiting for the human race to extinguish itself. Theo is shocked out of his routine when his ex-wife, played by Juliane Moore, shows up with a mysterious mission, needing Theo's help.

The best part of "Children of Men" is the stunning cinematography. Cuaron's vision of a dystopian London, wracked with violence, dirty, desperate, and dying, is haunting and unforgettable. The scenes in London are the type that make you want to freeze the film or watch the same sequence multiple times because there is so much detail in the background, whether it is government propaganda posters or clips form newscasts, etc. The detail doesn't distract you from the main storyline, but you know that you didn't catch everything there was to learn on the first viewing. The action sequences are also extremely well done, being visually fascinating and exciting without devolving into meaningless explosion-fests. Two sequences that stand out in my mind are an attack on Theo's group as they drive through the country side seeking the coast, and Theo's attempt late in the movie to escape a refugee detention center.

I also found the movie quite topical with the ongoing debate about the future of immigration within the United States. The England of "Children of Men" has chosen to wall itself off from the outside world, rounding up undocumented immigrants into detention camps, constantly warning citizens of the dangers of "'fugees" and urging people to turn in any they know.

"Children of Men" is also filled with strong performances. Owen is the perfect actor for the role of Theo, using his expressive face and haunting eyes to full effect. Moore is her usual strong self as his ex-wife, and the leader of a revolutionary group fighting against the government's repressive policies. Chiwetel Ejiofor (the male lead in "Dirty Pretty Things") gives a strong performance as Moore's second in command. It's fun seeing Michael Caine as one of Theo's former comrades from his protest days.

The script doesn't quite live up to the cinematography and performances, unfortunately. For example, the ending isn't quite as emotionally satisfying as you would hope. The script isn't terrible, it just holds the movie back slightly, keeping "Children of Men" a very good movie instead of a great one.

Final Grade: A

A new blog element!

I've added one quick feature to the blog. On the right you'll now see a "2008 in summary" block. I'll keep a tally of the number of movies I've seen so far this year there, as well as the number of movies I've seen at SIFF. There's also a "Top movies of 2008" list, which will list all the movies I've seen which got an A or A+ for a while. Once I get to 10 such movies, I'll morph that into a "Top 10 movies of 2008" list and keep it up to date.

Superbad (2007) - A+ and Knocked Up (2007) (SIFF) - A

I decided to review "Superbad" and "Knocked Up" together since they are linked closely together in my mind, and many of my thoughts about the two are identical. Both movies come from Judd Apatow's comedy crew. Apatow directed and wrote "Knocked Up," but only served as a producer on "Superbad." If you've seen Apatow's first hit, 2005's "The 40 Year Old Virgin," you should have a good sense of what these two movies are like, although I thought both movies were superior to "The 40 Year Old Virgin." Both films are extremely crude, featuring numerous jokes about masturbation, pornography, and bodily functions, but both are also surprisingly sweet at their hearts.

"Knocked Up" stars Katherine Heigl (Izzie on "Grey's Anatomy") as aspiring reporter Alison who gets promoted to her first on-air role, and meets Ben (Seth Rogen who you may remember as one of Steve Carell's coworkers in "The 40 Year Old Virgin") while out celebrating her promotion. They end up hooking up, and Alison ends up pregnant. When Alison appears on Ben's door step (too tell him that she is pregnant) eight weeks after their one night stand, she is aghast to discover that Ben is a slacker, party guy whose current "job" is attempting to create a website that tells people when there are nude scenes in movies. "Knocked Up" chronicles the two's attempts to build a relationship during Alison's pregnancy. Heigl and Rogen are both hilarious and engaging, and "Knocked Up" features numerous strong supporting characters, especially Leslie Mann and Paul Rudd as Alison's sister and brother-in-law.

"Superbad" stars Jonah Hill (he had memorable small roles in both "Knocked Up" and "40 Year Old Virgin") and Michael Cera ("Arrested Development" and "Juno") as best friends Seth and Evan, two socially awkward high school seniors that are trying to score alcohol for the final party of their senior year, in order to impress two girls they are interested in. Newcomer Christopher Mintz-Plasse is a scene-stealer as their extremely geeky friend "Fogell" who they turn to for help because he has just gotten a fake ID, only to discover that when asked what name he wanted on his fake ID, he chose "Mclovin"--no last name, just "Mclovin." Seth Rogen, who co-wrote "Superbad," puts in a hilarious turn as a police officer who they boys keep crossing paths with. "Superbad" follows the boys during one hilarious day as they plan how they are going to get the alcohol, have various adventures trying to get the alcohol, and then finally get to the party. There's a brief conclusion that shows the morning after the big night.

I loved both of these movies, and recommended them both strongly to my friends during the year with the following sentiment: I saw "Knocked Up" first and thought, "Wow, that was even better than "40 Year Old Virgin!" Then, I saw "Superbad" and thought "Wow, that was even better than "Knocked Up!" Why did I like "Superbad" more? It would be accurate for me to say that I found the characters in "Superbad" a little bit more real, and the movie had more laugh-out-loud moments for me, which more than made up for the fact that "Knocked Up" has Katherine Heigl, who I absolutely worship--I'm even thinking of seeing the completely stale looking "27 Dresses" just because she is in it. I suspect, though, that a lot of my preference for "Superbad" has to do with the fact that, for some reason, I found it easier to identify with geeky high school guys doing foolish things trying to impress girls than with a pregnant couple. My friends who have children tell me that they really found the pregnancy-related stuff in "Knocked Up" to be perfect. I should also give the caveat that, if forced to apply labels, I would say that "Superbad" is definitely more of a "guy movie" while "Knocked Up" is more of a "date movie." I tend to like both types of movies equally, but if you have a strong preference for or against one or the other, you might want to adjust my grades accordingly.

Final Grades:
"Superbad": A+
"Knocked Up": A

Waitress (2007) - A

I used to have a theory that food movies are always good. By food movie, I mean a movie where the preparation and consumption of food is a major part of the movie. Some famous examples of my food movie theory are "Chocolat" and "Eat Drink Man Woman," but I also have other more obscure examples like "A Feast at Midnight" and "Big Night." Unfortunately, last year I saw "Last Holiday," which was thoroughly mediocre despite being a food movie (which I didn't realize until I saw it) and the presence of Gerard Depardieu. Then again, I guess I shouldn't have been so surprised by its mediocrity since as wonderful as he is in French, has Depardieu actually done a good movie in English? Fortunately, "Waitress" is another fun food movie, and I can keep my theory mostly alive.

"Waitress" stars Keri Russell ("Felicity") as Jenna, a waitress/pie-maker, in a small town in the deep South. She is the primary pie maker at her restaurant, and every day she creates a daily special, that reflects her current mood. For example, when she discovers that she is pregnant, she creates "I Don't Want Earl's Baby" pie, which is quiche of egg and cheese, with a smoked ham center. Jenna dreams of winning a pie baking contest so she can get enough money to leave Earl. Why doesn't she want Earl's baby? Well, mostly because he is a childish, insecure, self-absorbed, control-freak, loser. His response to her announcement that she is pregnant? He makes Jenna promise that after the baby comes, she won't love the baby more than him.

Nathan Fillion (Mal Reynolds on "Firefly") plays an OB-GYN that has just moved to town. He feels overshadowed by his wife, who is a more brilliant doctor than him. After Jenna becomes his patient, the two begin an affair. It's fortunate for "Waitress" that the two leads are so engaging. Earl's such a loser you can understand Jenna's desire to get away from him, but Fillion's wife's only flaw appears to be greater competence than her husband. The two leads make their character so sympathetic, though, that you can't help but identify with them, no matter how little you think of their affair. It also helps that the pies Jenna creates during the affair hilariously reflect her conflicted state of mind. For example, there's "I Can't Have No Affair Because It's Wrong and I Don't Want Earl to Kill Me" pie--Vanilla custard with banana...hold the banana.

The film also gets strong performances from the cast of local characters at Jenna's restaurant, including Cheryl Hines ("Curb Your Enthusiasm") and writer/director Adrienne Shelly as Jenna's fellow waitresses, and Andy Griffith as one of Jenna's most faithful customers.

The movie is quirky throughout, and the pies are so amusing in name, and delicious sounding, that I couldn't help but fall in love with "Waitress"--and I really wanted to get some pie afterward.

Final Grade: A

Once (2006) (SIFF) - A+

"Once" is an unusual modern musical, starring real life musicians Glen Hansard (of the Irish band "The Frames") and Marketa Iglova. They play an unnamed guy and girl who meet on the streets of Dublin. He's a street musician who happens to work in his dad's Hoover repair shop, and she wanders by one day dragging her broken vacuum cleaner and is taken in by his music. They have an immediate connection, and a refreshingly different relationship forms. There are definitely sparks between the two, but she is married (although her husband is still in her native Czech Republic) and he still pines for the girl who left for London. They form such a strong musical connection that they decide to record a demo tape together, and they pour their emotions into the songs they work on together.

Now, normally the description "musical" would mean that the characters would sing at times when no one would sing in real life, including lines that are clearly normal talk. "Once" isn't a musical in that way. When the characters sing, it is because they are playing music together, and they talk when people normally talk. I call it a musical, though, because much of the story is told in the songs that the two sing together or to each other. This odd structure works surprisingly well. The two leads are novices to movie acting, but they remain believable on screen because so much of the story is told through the music. If you like smart, folksy rock like I do, you'll love the soundtrack, and it is extremely successful in conveying the story and emotions of the characters.

In addition to the unique story telling technique, I also feel that the script of "Once" really sets it apart. The relationship between the guy and girl is so refreshingly complicated and different from what you usually see in a movie romance (I even really hesitate to call it a romance since it is so different), that it really stands out in your mind afterwards. The script is full of wonderful little touches in how the two relate to each other, and I loved the ending, which is completely un-Hollywood, and manages to be open-ended and ambiguous while still being completely emotionally satisfying.

Final Grade: A+

Letters from Iwo Jima (2006) - A+

"Letters from Iwo Jima" is the second half of Clint Eastwood's Iwo Jima saga. "Flags of Our Fathers" tells the story of Iwo Jima from the American side, while "Letters from Iwo Jima" tells the story from the Japanese side. While "Flags of Our Fathers" was definitely a fine movie, "Letters" is clearly the superior film. Of all of the films that Eastwood has directed, the only one that might be the equal of "Letters" is "Unforgiven."

Eastwood's film uses the backdrop of the battle of Iwo Jima to show a struggle between three conflicting philosophies amongst the Japanese soldiers. Ken Watanabe is stellar as General Kuribayashi, the commander of the Japanese forces at Iwo Jima. He represents the point of view of a progressive, more enlightened Japan, a hint at the economic revival to come after the war. He spends much of the movie struggling against a more traditional, rigid, Japanese military philosophy. The more traditional philosophy is aghast at the idea that Kuribayashi wants to give up certain strong points and fall back to more defensible positions if the situation warrants it. It would be dishonorable to allow those positions to fall, and dishonorable not to attempt, even suicidally, to retake those positions once they fall.

Contrasted with those dueling military philosophies is the point of view of many of the infantry grunts within the Japanese army, personified in the character of Saigo, a baker drafted into the Japanese army, played superbly by Kazunari Ninomiya. Saigo, and the other soldiers like him, has no samurai or military tradition in his family. While he may love Japan, he mostly wants to survive and return home to his family.

Many reviewers I read talked about "Letters" being a great anti-war movie. I don't really agree. I feel that Eastwood's powerful movie doesn't take a position on when war is right or wrong. Instead, he unflinchingly shows us the cost of war, stripping away all the adolescent male fantasies of glory in combat. Some might see how terrible war is and walk away feeling that war is never worth it. Others, like myself, take away a different message. That message is not that war is never right. It is that we can't forget just how terrible war really is. Don't let the video game images of precision cruise missile on CNN make you forget how horrific war is. There still may be times war is the right choice, but it's terrible cost means that it has to be one of the last choices.

I thought that both 2006 and 2007 were great years for movies. One sign of this was that "Letters from Iwo Jima" did not end up being my top movie of 2007, and I'm not sure it would have been my top movie of 2006 had I seen it in 2006. There are many other years where I'm sure it would have been an easy choice for the top spot on my list.

Final Grade: A+

The King of Kong (2007) (SIFF) - A

"The King of Kong" is exactly the kind of movie that makes me love the Seattle International Film Festival. I almost certainly would never have even heard of this delightful documentary if I hadn't noticed the description flipping through the SIFF program guide. "The King of Kong" chronicles Steve Wiebe's (he's from the Seattle area, incidentally) quest to break the Donkey Kong world record. Who knew that there could be so much drama surrounding the high score for a video game?

Wiebe seems like your typical somewhat geeky guy who just has no idea what he is getting himself into when he innocently wanders into the world of competitive video gaming. Apparently, Donkey Kong is considered the most difficult and skillful of the classic video games, so the world record for Donkey Kong is the holy grail of the insular world of competitive video gaming. Wiebe's attempts to break the record run him afoul of Billy Mitchell, the holder of the record, and the rock star of the competitive video gaming world. Unfortunately for Wiebe, he makes friends with Roy Shildt (the self proclaimed "Mr. Awesome") who is apparently the Darth Vader of the video gaming world. This leads to accusations of cheating and questioning of whether or not Wiebe really broke the record.

You really have to hand it to filmmaker Seth Gordon. As he chronicles Wiebe's various attempts to break the record, both at home and in public, and the counterattacks by Mitchell and his supporters, the film is literally edge of your seat dramatic. When the film ended with text announcing that a few months after filming wrapped up Wiebe had finally broken the record, and been recognized as the world record holder, the audience roared with approval, reminiscent of being at a Mariners game and witnessing the M's hit a walk off homer to win it.

Some of you reading this review are probably thinking, "really, a movie about a video game?" Trust me, no matter how little you like video games, the cast of characters you meet in this movie are so fascinating and the drama so palpable, you will enjoy this documentary.

Final Grade: A

Cloverfield (2008) - B

"Cloverfield" has a simple and clever concept. Rob Hawkins is about to leave NY City for a new job in Japan, and his friends throw him a surprise farewell party. His best friend Hud lands the job of documenting the party, including goodbye testimonials from everyone, on a hand held camera. In the middle of the party, a Cthulhuesque monster attacks the city, and Hud switches to documenting what happens to his friends as they try to escape the city. The result is a sort of Godzilla style monster movie shot "The Blair Witch Project" style.

Now, I was not a fan of "The Blair Witch Project." While I thought the idea of using the jittery hand held camera to increase tension was an intriguing one, I felt that the execution didn't really pull it off. I found the movie a rather odd mixture of boredom (I simply didn't find it scary at all) and nausea from motion sickness due to the camera work.

"Cloverfield," however, worked extremely well for me. The camera work was the perfect level of jerky camera for me. It was just enough to make the movie extremely intense as well as slightly physically uncomfortable, which I think is part of the idea, but not so much that I felt so ill that I was forced to look away from the screen (which happened to a friend I saw the movie with). The best scenes in the movie, were exactly what "The Blair Witch Project" wanted to be, but never achieved. There are several amazing scenes where the camera work augments the terror of the story perfectly. For example, in one great scene where the characters are attacked while in the subway tunnels, Hud is knocked down while filming what is happening. The sudden changes in camera angles as Hud sees what is coming, screams for everyone to run, and then is knocked down accentuate the tension of the scene nicely. In addition, you can't quite figure out exactly what is happening on screen. You see enough to be horrified, but it is jumbled enough that your mind is forced to fill in the details, making the scene even more terrifying.

Another interesting conceit in the movie is that Hud is unknowingly taping over a video that Rob shot previously, of a "good day", one that is completely normal. The movie starts with a brief clip from that day, and occasionally the film is broken up with brief interludes from the underlying tape. Clearly some of the audience didn't like this idea since they snickered or giggled nervously whenever this happened, but I found it quite compelling to see the contrast of normal life at its best with the horror of the attack.

I also have to compliment the screenplay. The character's reactions and dialogue feels real to me, and there are some great comedic moments that help relieve the tension that builds all through the movie.

"Cloverfield" is actually a movie that somewhat strains the boundaries of my grading system for me. Purely based on my enjoyment of the movie, I would have given it an "A." It wouldn't be accurate, though, for me to really state that I would recommend the movie to almost anyone, since I'm sure that a lot of people will find that the camera style is too much for them to enjoy the movie. If you're not someone who is susceptible to that, though, I would highly recommend the movie. If you're a little nervous about whether it will be too much for you, I would recommend giving the movie a try, but sitting several rows further back than you normally would, which I think will help with how upsetting the jerky camera work will be.

Final Grade: B

There Will Be Blood (2007) - C

I went to see "There Will Be Blood" full of hope. The film has been getting amazing reviews and tons of Oscar buzz, and I'm a fan of director Paul Thomas Anderson. I'm one of those people who liked "Magnolia" as well as "Boogie Nights," and I loved "Punch Drunk Love." Unfortunately, I found "There Will Be Blood" to be a major letdown.

Now Daniel Day-Lewis is his usual brilliant self as Daniel Plainview, an oil prospector in the late 1890's and early 1900's. His character is fairly interesting, especially his relationship with his son, and I really enjoyed the scenes of his prospecting work, and getting a sense of just how dirty and dangerous oil drilling is. It was also fun to watch how the oil drilling business develops over the years as it takes off--in one early scene I was amazed and appalled to see them bringing oil up by the buckets, literally, and dumping the buckets of oil into a pit dug into the ground.

Unfortunately, the script largely wastes Daniel Day-Lewis's fine work. Despite the fact that he won a Golden Globe for Best Actor, I can't rank this amongst his best portrayals simply because the script doesn't let him really show any growth, insight, or development in his character. Despite the fact that 30 years pass during the movie, you almost feel like you are watching a character trapped in amber. You get a fascinating snapshot of the man, but it simply isn't satisfying in the end since the character is so static. This is one of my major points of contention with many traditional reviewers and award givers. Plainview is an extremely flashy character to portray, but in the end the performance rings hollow to me...it feels like a clever trick instead of a fully fleshed out person. Other famous (and Oscar winning) examples of this phenomenon are Dustin Hoffman's character in "Rainman" and Nicolas Cage's character in "Leaving Las Vegas." Like Plainview, those characters are showy and exciting, but they're just one note characters. I love portrayals where you see the character grow or transform, where you get more than a single tone, no matter how brilliant that one tone is.

I also felt that the final act of "There Will Be Blood" was extremely disappointing. The actions of the characters felt rather arbitrary and disjointed to me. I definitely felt like I had suddenly been thrown into another movie, one of much lower quality than the beginning 80% of the movie. My reaction to the so called "resolution" of the movie was one of puzzlement and frustration. I walked out feeling "Really...that's how you're going to end it?" If you're a gamer geek like me, you'll probably remember the random dungeon generator that was included in some early versions of the Dungeon Master's Guide. I felt like the end of the movie was generated by a random script generator.

In the end, there was enough good stuff in the early parts of the movie that I can't say the movie sucked, but I definitely would recommend that people take a pass on this one.

Final Grade: C

No Country for Old Men (2007) - A+

"No Country for Old Men" is an absolutely brilliant film. I'm a huge Coen brothers fan, and if you forced me to pick, I would have to go with "No Country for Old Men" as their best movie. Based on a Cormac McCarthy novel (which I haven't read), "No Country for Old Men" chronicles the mayhem that ensues after Llewelyn Moss (played brilliantly by Josh Brolin) stumbles on the aftermath of a drug deal gone bad, and finds over $2 million in cash. He foolishly tries to keep the money, drawing the wrath of Anton Chigurh (an amazing portrayal by Javier Bardem). Tommy Lee Jones also has a significant role as the sheriff trying to catch up to Moss and Chigurh before even more violence ensues.

Looking back on it, it is surprising that I loved this movie. It's outlook is devastatingly nihilistic, which is usually a big turn off for me, and without perfect execution, it could easily have been a movie I couldn't connect with because I couldn't identify or sympathize with any of the characters.

The execution of the movie is incredible though. The cinematography is stunning, the script is brilliant, with lots of amazing moments of dark humor that help you swallow the nihilism at the heart of the movie, and the two lead performances are absolutely top flight. Javier Bardem is deservedly getting tons of kudos for his portrayal of Chigurh, including a Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actor. His Chigurh is a spellbinding force of nature that you can't tear your eyes from when he is on screen. As monstrous as his character is, you find yourself utterly fascinated with him. You simply can't look away, as much as you might want to. Chigurh might be the single most memorable character of any movie in the last 10 years.

As great as Bardem is, though, in my heart of hearts I suspect that it is really Brolin's performance that holds the movie together. I'm not surprised that as far as awards go, Brolin's understated performance hasn't received much notice next to the supernova of Bardem's portrayal. For me, though, it is Brolin's character that keeps the movie from degenerating into a disgusting freak show. Moss is full of flaws. He makes many terrible decisions, leading to many horrific consequences, but throughout the movie, Brolin keeps giving you a peak at the innate decency that is buried deep within Moss. In the end, as much as you might consider Moss a fool who brought down disaster on all those around him, you simply can't help but like the man and identify with him. Without that, I think I would have walked away from the movie feeling that despite Bardem's brilliant performance and the wonderful script and directing by the Coen's, that the film was so relentlessly dark and despairing (and I tend to like dark movies), that it crushed all my ability to like or recommend the movie.

Even with Brolin's (and some of the other secondary characters as well) humanizing of the film, it's still not a movie that I would just jump to see again. If I was in the right frame of mind, definitely. But there are plenty of nights I wouldn't want to subject myself to the exquisite torture of seeing such a masterfully despairing film. If you can't stand dark movies, you'll probably hate the Coen's latest effort. If you have any tolerance for dark movies at all though, you don't want to miss the masterpiece that is "No Country for Old Men."

Final Grade: A+