Best of the Decade

#2

I first saw Memento (2000) when it came out on dvd. I didn't love it the first time but it has since grown on me and inspired me as a writer and a filmmaker. It wasn't solely the backwards narrative that makes this movie special, although it is a great exercise in keeping the audience guessing, but rather the old fashion movie making that makes it great. Christopher Nolan now is on the top 25 twice, but this is his masterpiece and I don't know if he will ever make a better movie. Not to mention a great lead performance by Guy Pearce.

Best of the Decade

#3

There was one point where Cameron Crowe's Almost Famous (2000) was my favorite film. I have always said that the most difficult thing to do in film is to make a great life affirming film without it being cliched. Crowe accomplishes just that in this film about an aspiring rocker writer and the band he follows. For Crowe this was a love story to rock and roll, for me this was about William Miller and experiencing what life has to off at the most important point of his life. The combination of music and images are what makes great cinema and with Almost Famous you can play it from any point in the movie and see that on display perfectly. I never lived in the 70's but every time I watch this film its like hanging out with old friends. And it must be said that Kate Hudson is perfect as Penny Lane, one of the few cinematic women I fell in love with.

Need money, Kidnap a kid (done)

I had been hearing a lot about Tilda Swinton's performance in an independent film called Julia (2008). I even heard it compared to Daniel Day Lewis's performance in There Will Be Blood, so naturally with that type of hype I had to check it out. Swinton is good, the movie isn't horrible but the film falls short as a good thriller for a multitude of reasons.

The film surrounds Swintons Julia, an alcoholic, floozy who gets so drunk every night that she wakes up not knowing who she's with or where she is. She gets fired from her job, do to her indiscretions. So with no money and no job she is forced into an AA meeting where she meets a clearly crazy Elena who eventually tries to get Julia to kidnap her son back from her "evil' but rich grandfather.

Though the plot is intriguing, why it doesn't work is because you never buy into caring about Julia's character or the relationship she does or does not form with the kid she kidnaps. Great thrillers have the audience on the edge of their seats wondering what is going to happen next. Julia has none of the apprehension or sure handed direction needed to make it successful. I just wanted the poor kid to get back to his family, but he didn't even make that easy to do because of the lack of acting by Adian Gold as Tom.

Movies like Julia are not bad enough to excuse them, but not good enough to justify their existence. This film has no real unique characters (seems to me that people just bought into the talents of Swinton and didn't realize her character is not memorable), no nerve racking moments, and an ending that isn't really a pay off.

**

Every time you hear a bell ring, someone kills themselves (or something like that)

Although there is a picture of it to the right, pretend you don't see it and tell me what movie I am describing. A man at the end of his rope, his business is about to fail, he may be arrested any moment, everything he has worked for has failed, he screams at his wife and kids while their just going about their daily life, he throws things in a rage at the wall, scaring his entire family, making them cry. He then runs out on them, drinks himself into oblivion, gets in a fight, drives drunk into a tree, survives, then decides to jump of a bridge killing himself for the insurance money. I am not describing a Coen brothers movie, but instead the family holiday classic It's a Wonderful Life (1946).

I hadn't seen It's a Wonderful Life in years and as you can tell it really struck me by how dark the movie was, and I really liked that aspect of this film. George Bailey is a desperate man, a man that seems to have it together until one thing goes wrong and he falls apart. Jimmy Stewart gives maybe his best performance here, watch him as he starts to get angry, he is truly terrifying. As much as I always liked Stewart I have complained that he tends to go through the motions, that is not the case here, I've never seen him have such range.

So is It's a Wonderful Life a classic Christmas story? I don't think so. It takes place during the holidays, its got an angel, and an uplifting ending. It has some classic direction by Frank Capra, but I didn't find it all that Christmasy. I think it is just a classic film.

Not everything about this film works however. More specifically I don't think the beginning or the end work, which when it comes to films those are the two most important parts. I didn't need talking stars to tell me about angels coming to earth, I would have figured it out. Also, the ending is a bit too convenient and tidy, but I can forgive it.

This is my favorite Capra movie and my favorite Stewart performance and that combination deserves praise.

****

Best of the Decade

#4

Sentimentality is allowed when choosing my own personal top of the decade. I am not saying High Fidelity (2000) is not a great movie, because it is, but it is also a deeply personal choice. Yes I have heard that this is a romantic comedy made for guys, but I think it goes deeper than that. It is the most realistic (to the point where it can be painful to watch) portrayal of the male mind in relationships when it comes to dating and love. High Fidelity is the reason I can forgive John Cusack for any bad movie he has ever made or will ever make. Cusack is an every man and he is able to play a jerk without losing his charm and like ability. I have not seen High Fidelity on any other best of the decade lists but it sits proudly as my number 4.

Best of the Decade

#5

So far I have mentioned many of the great directors of the modern era, Scorsese, Tarantino, Eastwood, Nolan, Mann and Scott, and at number 5 comes the great Steven Spielberg with his Science Fiction (although fiction may be able to be argued in a few years time) masterpiece Minority Report (2002). It is everything science fiction strives to be, it is haunting, it is cautionary, it is mind bending and visually stunning. The stories structure is so perfectly crafted that even though you know the events about to happen you are surprised when they do. I can't say enough good things about this film or about the direction from Mr. Spielberg. And if you want to know why I like Tom Cruise, this is why, he does movies like this or Collateral which also made my top ten of the decade.

Best of the Decade

#6

What would a best o the decade be without a Quentin Tarantino movie, and despite my adoration for Inglorious Basterds, and on a smaller scale Death Proof, by far his best film of the past ten years is Kill Bill Volume 2 (2004). I like to take the Kill Bill movies as a package, because neither would be as good without the other, but as a piece of filmmaking Volume 2 is a masterpiece. The way he blends his signature love for cinema with emotion, revenge, and perfectly structured script is why Kill Bill Volume 2 lands at # 6. I must also mention my favorite supporting performance of the year from the late David Carradine as Bill.

Best of the Decade

#7

Adaptation (2002) is one of the best screenplays ever written and Spike Jonzes superb direction only added to what is now a classic. Charlie Kaufman will hopefully go down in cinema history as one of the greatest writers ever to live. Nicholas Cage was great as both Charlie and Donald Kaufman and Chris Cooper absolutely deserved his oscar for this film, and if you round all those characters out with a great performance by Meryl Streep you get the #7th best movie of the decade.

Best of the Decade

#8

Some films are great but are not perfectly made, No Country For Old Men (2007) is both a great film and a perfectly made film. I can and have just sat and watched the aesthetics and choices that the Coens made during this movie. Did I love the ending? No. But it doesn't matter, this film is so engaging and thrilling with a perfect minimalist style that it absolutely deserves the #8 spot of the decade. Not to mention one of the best film villains of all time in Javier Bardem's, Anton Chigurh. Had I loved the ending this would be in the top 5 if not number 1.

Best of the Decade

#9

Gladiator (2000) is the decades first best picture winner and deservingly so. There has not been a sword and Sandal movie made since that has matched this perfectly structured gem from director Ridley Scott. It is true that Russell Crowe probably got a make up Oscar that he should have won for The Insider but he was great as the General Maximus. If you watched this movie there is only one thing I have to ask you "are you not entertained?"

"You are Dangerous"

Everything I like about independent cinema can be summed up in Rian Johnsons Brick (2005). It is a stylish, noir thriller set in a modern day high school. If that sounds like a formula for disaster, well it could have been but Johnsons sure handed direction saved it from making a joke of itself.

I saw Brick in theaters when it first came out and couldn't bring myself to appreciate the sharp dialogue being laid out because it was being delivered by high-schoolers. If you can get over that aspect (because hell it wouldn't make sense for adults to speak this way) then you will thoroughly enjoy all the slang and banter that harkens back to the great noir films of the 30's and 40's.

Johnson had a great script and made it work because he knew exactly what he wanted. There is nothing fancy about any of these shots but they are cinema at its finest, they simply tell the story and show us everything we need to know. We aren't trying to solve the murder along with Brendan but we are enjoying watching him put the pieces together. Anyone with a small budget and a good script should watch Brick and study how he puts his shots together.

Johnson also had a great score provided by his cousin Nathan Johnson. The melodies along with the dialogue remind us of just how great film noir is. I hope other filmmakers take a page out of Johnsons book and make a fun self conscious movie using the basics of filmmaking. Brick is a film I can watch over and over again and never get sick of. I hope people seek it out and watch it.

****

Best of the Decade

#10

Collateral (2004) is a film that took a second viewing to really appreciate. It is Michael Mann's masterpiece of digital cinema. The look and the LA surroundings fit this structured bad ass story perfectly. Tom Cruise is at his best as a robotic assassin, for anyone who doesn't think Cruise can act, check this movie out ( I wouldn't want to meet Vincent in a dark alley). The structure of this film may seem to convenient at first but it grows on you and really works.

You are what you eat

There wasn't to much in Food, Inc. (2008) that I didn't already know, but that may because the subject of what we eat has fascinated me in recent years. For anyone who may be curious about what they are putting into there body, this documentary is a great and entertaining starting point. It covers a vast area of subjects from the what to the cost to the who.

What I like about Food, Inc. so much is that it is not trying to turn you into a vegetarian or necessarily scare you (although it can have that effect) but more or less do what we have not done for ourselves which is educate. If you ever wonder what is in the ketchup your putting on your burger (hint, its probably not just tomato), this movie will start to unravel those questions. And I can imagine to a lot of people be quite eye opening.

What I don't like to hear is that when people start talking about food choices it some how becomes political, or about animal rights. It is not! It is about your health and how the human body consumes and breaks down the things you put into it.

As a film Food, Inc. is bottom line; effective. It is well constructed, but definitely has a message and part of me wishes the ending didn't offer so much of a solution but a suggestion. It does vilify the corporation Monsanto, but its hard to argue against that.

Food, Inc. is one of those rare films that is a must see not because it is a great film, but because its subject matter is so important and so universal (we all eat and there is a lot of us, there are consequences to that).

***1/2

Best of the Decade

#11

So much has been said about this film from Heath Ledgers haunting and fun performance as the joker to Nolans mastery of a genre that used to just be fun summer fair. The Dark Knight (2008) is both highly entertaining and thought provoking. One of the few movies I have seen twice in the theatre and now multiple times on dvd.

A title you will never be able to spell

Morvern Callar (2002) is a UK release that I saw on a couple critics top of the decade list, and being the type of person that doesn't want to miss anything I immediately put it on the top of my Netflix que. I need to apologize for those 499 movies Morvern Callar jumped so that I could see it before the end of the decade.

The title is the main characters name Morvern is played by Samantha Morton an actress I have always enjoyed but have never given to much thought to. In this review I want to concentrate on three main points, 1. the morality of this character, 2. Samantha Morton performance, 3. what's the point.

Many times with these independent beautifully shot dramas you get absolutely no judgement on the main character and their actions, there is no difference here other than we not only get no judgement but we almost don't even get any acknowledgment of her flat out despicable actions. Time after time this soft spoken women will do things that the film very purposely seems to just ignore, its almost as if we as the audience put the blinders onto what she is doing as much as she is putting on the blinders to her own actions. It is a very unusual perspective to take, one I have never really seen before.

One of the main reason's this film evokes such an odd fleeting tone is because of Mortons performance here. Had I never seen Morton in another film I would have not thought she was acting here, and that she really was this loner, on the run type character. It is one of those performances that is so understated its almost catatonic. I feel nothing from watching her, I just watch. You compare this performance to something like Ryan Goslings in Half Nelson, you at least know he is acting and going for something, where as Morton seems to be putting all her power into going for nothing. Now the debate becomes is this great acting or is this stripping the process away. Knowing how good Morton is in other roles I tend to vote for the first option.

So far I have listed a couple reasons why at least this may be a movie worth checking out, but as a whole I found myself asking what was the point. Mortons performance, the tone, the loneliness, I don't feel like it ever served a bigger purpose. The character never finds anything substantial, the film never really asks any questions. I don't know why it exists other than to show off some interesting if not pretentious cinematography and to frustrate the audience. Part of me thinks it is some sick experiment by writer, director Lynne Ramsay to see what messages people will interpret from this seeming-less blank slate. And apparently according to those critics who's best of the decade list includes this film she may have succeeded. I wonder if maybe by my response and how long this review is, if Ramsay may have succeed with me too.

**

Best of the Decade

#12

Pixar has become everything Walt Disney attempted to be and succeed with when he first conceived of his production company in the mid 1930's. Pixar is a production company that is synonymous with quality and family entertainment and in my opinion their crowning achievement is Wall E (2008). Wall E is perfect cinema, a film that tells its story almost entirely through just pictures and music, its like a silent film and painting combined. It also is highly entertaining, moving and socially relevant. Here is to Pixar continuing its great run through the next decade.

Best of the Decade

#13

Man on Wire (2008) is a film about going and achieving your goals. Going into the film I wasn't very interested in the subject matter but the film transcends a story about a tight rope walker and turns the story into something bigger without having to make it a story about the Twin Towers.

Best of the Decade

#14

It is only a coincidence that Mystic River (2003) comes on the heals of my review or Clint Eastwoods Invictus. I mention in my review for Ivictus that Eastwood would be my Director of the Decade. Between, Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby, Changeling, Letters from Iwo Jima and Invictus he has not only been proficient but outstanding. I chose Mystic River over Million Dollar Baby because it perfectly combines structure, acting and plot. It is Shakespearean in its content, and Sean Penn gives one of his many great performances of the past ten years. The ending has its detractors but as a whole Mystic River is an engaging and emotional who done it. Here is to Mr. Eastwood making movies for the next ten years!

A good poem can help you win the world cup

If I had to chose my favorite all around director of the past decade it would be Clint Eastwood. No other director has put out as many quality films as he has the past ten years. Invictus (2009) is not his best film, but it certainly is another solid effort from the great director.

It is always difficult to do sports movies because the film has to be more about the process then the end result of the game. We watch sports because they are not scripted and we don't know what is going to happen, here you have a film about a tournament and a team where we already know the end results. So Eastwood's challenge here is to elevate the film to another level, beyond the sport, and he has mixed success with this. To try and achieve this he cast his old friend Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela and shows us a sliver of this mans life during the 1995 world cup and what the tournament meant to Mandela as a person and as the leader of South Africa. Freeman is spot on as Mandela and surely deserves another Oscar nomination. Where the film could have done more is to give us a better understanding of the politics of the South African nation beyond the racial problems we saw represented through the Rugby team. The film made Mandela seem like he had a bit of tunnel vision when it came to all the problems he was certainly dealing with.

Matt Damon has never been better as the captain of the Springbok rugby team and the man that Mandela projected his hopes onto. Damon plays this character with a subtle weight of the world demeanor, but never goes over the top with outwardly emoting what he is certainly feeling inside. Damon should be sure to see a supporting actor nomination come the Oscars.

Despite my enduring love for Eastwood as a director, my criticism of his has always been the same, he depends to much on exposition and sometimes goes overboard with his sentimentality (I never want him to change because when it works it is great). In Invictus Eastwood sometimes tips the scales towards the overly sentimental way, especially during the last Rugby game. There are a few times he plays a cheesy song with slow motion and you wonder if your not watching Mighty Ducks 4. However Eastwood is a master director and despite the few times he goes over the top there are also many genuine moments that rang true and were inspiring. You know you are in the hands of a great director when your watching a political movie about Rugby (a sport I know nothing about) and am never once bored.

Should Invictus win best picture? No. But Eastwood should be proud of this film, and it is another notch in the great directors belt. I hope Eastwood can continue to make movies for another 20 years.

***1/2

Best of the Decade

#15

Darren Aronofsky has certainly made a career for himself since coming on the scene in the late 90's. His best work is still probably his mood picture Requiem for a Dream (2000). It is a film that launched a thousand quick cuts while taking pills. It has one of the best scores of all time and an innovative style that marked Aronofsky as an auteur. It may not be an easy watch but it certainly doesn't glorify any drug use. It also marked a tour de force performance from Ellen Burstyn.

I'm on the Bus

Again, I don't always know why I get certain movies from Netflix, but regardless I sat down to watch Spike Lee's Get on the Bus (1996) after it came in the mail. Its a Spike Lee movie through and through, at points I just wanted Spike to come on screen and tell us exactly how he feels about the blight of the black man in modern society. But one of the reasons Spike Lee is more than just a polarizing figure is because he is a storyteller first and foremost and he is able to somehow transcend his preachiness and give us an enjoyable character study.

Get on the Bus surrounds a group of black men from all different walks of society taking a long bus ride to Washington D.C. for the million man march in 1996. What makes this film work is the great acting and the characters that Lee gives us. These characters walk a fine line between being pawns in Lee's social point and being three dimensional characters. There is a biracial cop, a documentary filmmaker, an old timer, an actor, a gay couple, two different bus drivers, the ring leader, and the black republican to name a few. All of these characters serve a purpose both as points to be made and in the story itself.

There are times when the dialogue goes overboard, speeches are made, reactions are had that seem false and contrived but in the end the film is just as much about the people as it is about its message. Lee raised money and shot this movie quickly on 16 mm. I think if he had more time or money this film would have fallen really flat. It has an energy and sense of purpose that works well, more time and precision and I probably would have hated this film.

A couple standout performances are from the great Ossie Davis and Andre Braugher, two characters that are at the opposite end of the spectrum. Get On The Bus feels like a slice of life at a time that may not always be remembered. Yes all these characters are larger than life, but this film isn't a documentary it is a sense of heightened reality. It is very difficult as a filmmaker to make a 2 hour movie where the camera stays on a bus the whole time and all we do is listen to conversations, but Lee pulls it off and I have to give him credit for that.

***

Best of the Decade

#16

Todd Fields In The Bedroom (2001) was sort of a benchmark American film for realism and tension mixed perfectly together. It has two great performances, one by Sissy Spacek and the other by Tom Wilkinson, both of whom I believe should have won the Oscar. In The Bedroom is a film about grief, revenge, and the subtleties of human life.

None of those pieces were easy

I get the sense from a lot of films of the late 60's and 70's that filmmakers wanted to capture that feeling of restlessness or unease that we all get in our twenties and sometimes later. Five Easy Pieces (1970) is one of those films, and like The Graduate that preceded it, it gives us no discernible answers just more questions, like a great movie should.

Jack Nicholson plays Robert, we first see him in the oil fields toiling and working hard. He is dating a waitress played by Karen Black. He lives about as rural a life as one would expect. Fun activities include hanging out with his local friends and going bowling. There is one scene early on in which Robert lashes out at his friend, when he compared their lives in a similar manner. We don't understand at that moment why, (they seemed to be on the same level). We soon come to find out that no, Robert doesn't belong in the oil fields. He is from a very well to do musically gifted family. Robert is always trying to escape from his families past, whether it be because he wants his own path or because he feels like a failure, of which is the truth I am not sure.

Five Easy Pieces is essentially about that universal longing to be your own person, to carve out your own destiny. Robert uses his upper middle class values when he needs too, but most of the time tries to separate himself from them. He never seems to quit know what he wants but he always knows he doesn't have it.

I had seen Five Easy Pieces previous to this review, and it had much more of an impact on me this time around. Bob Rafelsons direction is very subtle and open ended, and it works really nice in a film like this. Nicholson gives one of his best performances here because he manages to reign it in when needed. 70's cinema is know for its wondering loners, and here is one of the best.

****

Best of the Decade

#17

Ben Affleck had a roller coaster decade. He went from a joke actor too being the director of one of my favorite films of the decade. Gone Baby Gone (2007) is a Boston based, tension filled, crime drama that has my single favorite final shot of any movie this past ten years. There is certainly still room for improvement for Affleck but Gone Baby Gone is one of the best directorial debuts and I hope he can continue this type of filmmaking as he continues to get the opportunities behind the camera.

Best of the Decade

#18

Half Nelson (2006) is a superbly made independent drama. A lot of indie films like this one that deal with drugs, have a way of being to melodramatic, but Half Nelson creates a perfect tone and Ryan Gosling gives one of my favorite performances of the decade. I always say the best endings are the ones you could never have guessed but once you have seen them their is no other ending that would work. With one exchange of looks, Half Nelson provides that type of ending and provides me with the #18 best film of the decade.

"His soul is still dancing"

I love unapologetic movies! A lot of times certain aspects don't work, but what does work is that much better. The Bad Lieutenant:Port of Call New Orleans (2009) is one of those films, and despite what works and what doesn't work it is very entertaining.

It takes place in a New Orleans slightly after Hurricane Katrina, nothing is glamorized about the city or its inhabitants. The film isn't gritty in the realistic cinema verite' sense but instead pulpy and dynamic. The director is Werner Herzog a filmmaker that has made it on this blog a lot lately. Herzog is a director that does what he wants to do, weather it is be touching and poignant like in my number 24 best film Grizzly Man or sentimental and ethical as in Invincible. With The Bad Lieutenant Herzog is exploring the line between sanity and insanity and whether it even matters if the final results are positive. And of course there is the crazy Nicolas Cage who takes this already daring film and adds a performance that is brilliantly over the top and unapologetic. If it wasn't for Cage most of the laughs wouldn't hit, and the film would delve into a somber state that would be hard to bare.

Cage plays a drug addicted and obsessive gambling police officer that is simultaneously looking for his next fix as well as solve a murder. He is dating a prostitute played by Eva Mendes (in what is probably her best performance), who runs into troubles of her own, that Cage needs to solve. Ironically though, this movie is not about its plot, which is very tight, but more about Cage's characters process and lifestyle.

Not everything Cage does works perfectly (about half way through I noticed he started talking like Jimmy Stewart for some reason), but as a whole his choices are perfect for this film. I don't think that Cage will be recognized by the Academy for this performance or neccessarily should be, it elevates this film, but when taken by itself it isn't a game changer.

The Bad Lieutenant:Port of Call, New Orleans is one of those rare films where the perfect balance of crazy and pulp works together. There is no way to teach this or any formula to tell you how to balance all these elements to make them work, you just have to go for it and hope for the best.

****

Best of the Decade

#19

Martin Scorsese almost returns to his peak in his crime thriller The Departed (2006). This is a film that gives us all the patented Scorsese music and cinematography, mixed with a great performance by DiCaprio that finally made us realize he could play something other than a young boy. It is an energetic film that shows us a immoral society where there is no principles anymore. I am hoping in the future that Scorsese can give us a few more films like The Departed but I also think a lower budget would help the director return to his roots. Regardless this film finally netted Scorsese his much deserved Oscar (even if it was a make up award).

On The Road again

High expectations were the name of the game coming into The Road (2009). It is a film that is based on a Cormic McCarthy, and it is coming off the heals of the great No Country For Old Men. Every still I had seen from this film and the trailer looked amazing, I thought it was going to be a sure fire Academy Award best picture nominee. It still may touch Academy voters, and we may be seeing this film come Oscar time, but to me it fell far from my expectations.

It started out well, showing us a world so desolate that you don't blame a Father for showing his kid how to commit suicide if he decides that is what he wants. With most Apocalypse movies there is some sense of hope that everything will turn around, that there is some sort of savior or safe zone where people have figured it out, you never got that sense in The Road, and I thought that was a nice touch. The problem then becomes, what is the point? Why are we watching these characters? The Road tries to solve this dilemma by proposing the question of what makes us moral when there is no society. I loved the concept, but for some reason just couldn't be executed in the film because it became too black and white (I tend to think that it is done real well in the book). Kodi-Smit McPhee plays Vigo Mortensens son, and he is constantly asking if he and his father are the good guys and who are the bad guys. It may have simply come down to his almost nagging tone that made this morality tale too simple, but it really got on my nerves and I had wished they tried to give some more depth to it.

So a lot of the faults could have come down to bad child acting. Mcphee wasn't horrible but he wasn't good enough to work, and I could see the veteran Mortensen struggling to act across from him. The combination of the incessant questioning of the good guys and bad guys, along with the lack of structure as to where the film was going, had me laughing at points towards the end, and there is no reason for anyone to laugh during this movie. And don't get me started on the final 400 Blows freeze frame shot at the end. It was stuck in there for no reason other to reference the famous film, it wasn't even conveying the same message.

The cinematography and set design were stunning and perfectly captured this realistic post-apocalyptic world. There was one scene in particular that was so suspenseful and scary I almost yelled in the theatre (would have been embarrassing). Viggo Mortensen seemed to do more for the preparation of this role than he did during the shoot. He looked the part, he was haunting, but his acting fell short of his aesthetic. Two good supporting performance came from Michael K Williams as the thief, and the great Robert Duvall as the old man. I think part of the fault has to go to the director John Hillcoat for not being able to make all these elements work together.

Unfortunately I think this film will receive a lot of acclaim solely because the movie screams to be recognized as a great peace of art. Looking beyond its pedigree The Road is a flawed film that can't rise to meet it's own ambitions.

**1/2

Best of the Decade

#20

I often times realize that maybe the most difficult thing to do in filmmaking is to make what is considered a great movie that is uplifting and genuinely inspiring without being cheesy or manipulative. Dear Zachary:A Letter to a Son About His Father (2008) is exactly that type of film. It is a documentary of immense power, that gives us two characters that should be considered modern day Saints. This is not an easy watch by any means because it will strike some sort of emotional chord, whether it be tears, anger or love, or as in my case all of the above. It is a film that tries you but leaves you feeling that even through tragedy there is a lot to love about life. It may be the most life affirming movie I have ever seen.

"My Precious"....Gollum

There was one point in Lee Daniels new film Precious where I was going to give up on it and was ready to walk out of the theatre. I have never been one for a happy ending but really what is the point of a film if there is no hope. To quote the great Andy Dufresne "Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things". I am glad I didn't walk out (I always threaten too, but never have) because Precious did not forget about hope, even amidst the hopeless of the surroundings.

This film is a hard watch, it is filled with depravity upon depravity, but like Precious's character every once and a while we get a glimpse of decency and it is enough to keep us going. I credit the watch-ability to the filmmaking and the screenplay, both of which deserve some recognition. Child abuse of any kind is a difficult topic to deal with in a film, but in Precious we have to live with it in every frame and so does this poor 16 year old girl, who wants nothing else in life but to be loved and appreciated.

Much is going to be made of the performances in this movie and deservingly so. Lets start with the hands down, sure fire, Academy Award nominee that will be Monique playing Precious's mother. This is why her performance is so impressive, she is playing a character so evil that I probably have more in common with Hitler than with her (not the Jew hate thing, just the power struggle thing), yet she makes this character believable to the point where we see her reasoning and thought process. Also the Academy should take a look at Precious herself played by the new comer Gabourey Sidibe. I often think people miss great performances that are not showy, and here Sidibe gives us a character that defeat is written all over her face, confidence has been drained from her soul. Sidibe may never be able to give another good performance again, and maybe this was the role for her, but people need not ignore that and give her the credit that is deserved.

On the other end of the spectrum I could have done without an ugly Mariah Carey, her lack of make up and attempt to be "normal" was just distracting, and the one scene she had with Monique did not bode well for her. The other performance that I was torn on was that by the beautiful Paula Patten. I have heard complaints by other critics (yeah I put myself in the group of critics) that her character was too one dimensional, that she was too perfect, nice, sympathetic. I would very much disagree with that assessment, I think she was just a normal decent human being and the film did a good job of not painting her as the savior for Precious. Now there was one scene specifically where I really felt Ms. Patten fell far short of the mark, and hurt the overall movie as Sidibe out acted her and the balance of the two characters didn't ring true.

Precious is a powerful and emotional ride that is not for every body. I think the worst thing you could do for your viewing experience is take this movie as a social and political message first and a film second. The movie stands on its own and deserves to be recognized for its artistry not for Oprah and Tyler Perry promoting it.

****

Best of the Decade

#21

Donnie Darko (2001) is a cult Sci-Fi classic that has spawned many debates, a sequel and Richard Kelly to continue to do movies. In this film Kelly manages to incorporate all his interests into one collage of images, sounds and Patrick Swayze as a pedophile, all of which manages to stay together as a coherent film that is not only interesting but entertaining. Donnie Darko may have been lightning in a bottle but I am glad it struck.

Insanity Reins!

Apocalypse Now will forever be remembered for its insane production, a slice of which was captured in Heart of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse (1991). People don't understand how one production can lead to several breakdowns, a heart attack, 100's of days over schedule and millions over budget, it must have been the passion for the art that drove Francis and all these men to such extremes, right? NO! You take a bunch of young men in the 1970's, all of which are drunk and drugged out of there mind (on speed, pot, coke), throw them in the Philippine jungle with no real structure, no idea what your story is or how its going to end, and all that is an obvious receipt for the psychotic. Yes there is passion, there is drive, but honestly the film is a mess, and Heart of Darkness is a good argument against giving a director full control over a production. In the film Eleanor Coppola compares both her and her husbands mental state to that of the character Willard played by the great Martin Sheen. I almost tend to say that there experiences were more surreal and that those comparisons are not an exageration. I say this because at least Willard was in the midst of a war, here they are making a film, but nothing about this feels remotely normal or grounded.

I recently reviewed Lost In La Mancha another movie about a troubled production. Heart of Darkness makes Lost in La Mancha look like an elderly person who passed away in their sleep. La Mancha knew when to cut its losses, Francis Ford Coppola refused, and carried on. The reason this film is a much better documentary than La Mancha is because it made me ask questions, and it made me want to get out there and sacrifice to make a film. My desire to want to make a film following me seeing this documentary is interesting because the biggest question I kept asking myself is; what is the point that art is not worth pursuing it? I mean is it worth it at loss of sanity? Loss of love? Loss of life? Where is the line? Is there a line? Was what the filmmakers went through worth you popping in Apocalypse Now on dvd? Or worth me sitting in Panera Bread writing this blog? Should the final product even matter, was their journey the true art, and the movie just a by product? The fact that I would be willing to put myself through their ordeal just to produce something, would suggest that yes, it is worth all those things.

Let me say that all the crazy on this film was not Francis's fault. He was dealing with a government that kept taking back there helicopters to fight a war, actors like Brando who showed up on set fat and had not read the source material, or Dennis Hopper who was so drugged out that he couldn't remember his lines, or a Martin Sheen that was so unhealthy he had a heart attack at 36. But regardless the result, all this is fascinating and this is a documentary that truly explores what it means to be an artist on an epic scale.

***1/2

Best of the Decade

#22

Here is a film that contains not only one of the best performances of the decade, but of all time. Bruno Ganz is Adolph Hitler as the third Reich comes to a close. The film chronicles the last days of the Nazi party. The film some how manages to work while having its main character be Hitler. Downfall (2004) never sympathizes with the man, but manages to be fascinating. I urge anyone who hasn't seen this film to check it out in its original form (although there have been many funny youtube videos featuring a scene from this film).

Do you feel the heat breathing down your neck....if so, get out

I have mentioned on this blog before my respect and adoration for Michael Mann and his films. Heat (1995) is generally considered Mann's quintessential movie. I would agree with that in principal, in so far as Heat does incapsulate a perfect balance of everything one would consider a Michael Mann film. It is about men and their jobs and how that effects their relationships with loved ones and with each other. It has big gun fight scenes, it is filmed in that gritty Mann way, but back when he was still using film, so the cinematography is a bit better. It takes place in all parts of Los Angeles that we don't normally see on film. These are all staples of a Michael Mann film, but despite those qualities and the praise for the film, I don't think it is his best movie.

As much is made of the De Niro, Pacino combination, this film is very much a mosaic that tries to explore the lives of both cops and criminals. It focus's in on their obsessions, their drives, and how their career choices have alienated them from loved ones. Unfortunately in trying to achieve all these aspects, the film over stretches itself and leaves a lot of the relationships feeling flat. I think Mann would have been better off to keep the wives and girlfriends out of this and to just concentrate on the relationships between the cops and the criminals. In fact, the De Niro relationship with his girlfriend played by Amy Brenneman was so unrealistic that I found myself yelling at the screen at one point, asking why she would stay with him. The movie is nearly 3 hours as is, and Mann just doesn't have time to flesh out any of these extra relationships and because of that they seem to distract from the main story, which is very interesting and well done.

Heat has one of the top 5 shoot out scenes in movie history. It is a captivating film, that is able to explore a side of the cop and robber story that is not normally explored, the human side of both. The film looks at all these characters, good or bad, and doesn't judge, doesn't differentiate it just gives us these people and lets us watch the drama unfold. De Niro's Neal McCauley may be a sociopath, but how much different is he that Pacino's Lt. Hanna? Both men have principals and they follow them.

No review of Heat would be complete without discussing the performances by De Niro and Pacino. I think it is pretty obvious who gives the better performance here; De Niro. Not only does he give a better performance than Pacino, I think he gives his last great performance. The subtlety in which he carries himself in this film is something to behold. It also doesn't hurt that his counterpart is chewing the scenery worse than ever before. De Niro does so much more with a look than Pacino does with a yell, there could be a class on acting based on this film. Now I don't by any means believe that this is the determiner between those two legendary actors as to which one is better. De Niro just happens to win this one.

Heat is a procedural and a character study before its an action movie and that is what makes it great. I would have liked to see Mann condense certain aspects like he does in his two best films Collateral and The Insider but overall this movie does everything that Public Enemies attempted to do but better.

****

I get it, men suck. Not gonna change, so....

As the Oscars approach you start to get films like Lone Scherfig's An Education (2009). It is a period piece, character, coming of age driven drama. If all that seems like a movie that was just made to grab some Oscars then maybe, but the film is able to balance all of that perfectly without falling into over-dramatic territory.

Carey Mulligan (despite her washed out Katie Holmes look) is getting well deserved Oscar buzz for playing Jenny an overly educated 16 year old with grand dreams of the outside world. She feels stifled by her fathers demands for her to go to Oxford, not because she doesn't believe in education, but because she believes the world has more to hold than books and papers. Although this premise is relatively cliched, we go with it because Jenny is so smart and she has a sophistication about her that makes her more mature beyond her years. Her characterization works so well when she is confronted by the much older and worldly David, played with such ease by Peter Sarsgaard. David seduces Jenny with the exact world she has dreamed of. The movie balances this line of wanting to go with David because he is so charming, but also realizing Jennies naiveté but understanding it at the same time.

There relationship is disturbing, but at the same time understandable. It reminds me of a time where ambition and dreams meet expectations and reality. In this point in a young person's life it really is up to those who are more mature to guide them in the right direction, even if that person sounds smarter than you.

The great thing about this movie, and especially from a guys perspective is that I don't know if women ever truly learn this lesson. As long as a women is single and believes in romance a man can always take advantage of that, no matter what the age (trust me I try). And sadly I could see myself in David, and I got the sense from the audience that Jenny got what she deserved, and that she is better off for having gone through this.

Both Mulligan and Sarsgaard deserve to be recognized by the Academy for their performances. Yes Mulligan will be an A list star within two years. Nick Hornby also deserves recognition for his screenplay. This is a well crafted anti-love story that should be seen. I know as a guy I was skeptical to see it because it was British and about love, but as the decent (500) Days of Summer touted itself as the anti-romantic comedy of the year, I think An Education does it better and less gimmicky.

****

Best of the Decade

#23

M Night Shamalamadingdong's (I made that up not Tarantino) Unbreakable (2000) is a film that has certainly grown on me over time. It shows why he should be directing movies (if you were wondering because of The Happening, see review below). It is a well crafted, and perfectly structured gem, that has his most satisfying end revelation. It is the super hero film reinvented, it was dark and gritty before dark and gritty was the way to do super hero's. If you need too, take a look at it again, you will be pleasantly surprised.

Was it only a Dream?

Now that I have embarked on doing my best films of this past decade I take a look at the film Roger Ebert called the best film of the 90's Hoop Dreams (1994). The best film! In a decade that included Goodfellas, Magnolia, Three Kings, The Matrix, Schindlers List, Pulp Fiction and these are just the movies I came up with off the top of my head (not to bad). There is no way I could justify putting Hoop Dreams number one on that list, but on the same token I would have a hard time in arguing against Ebert. This is one amazing documentary.

Hoop Dreams is a film where the camera follows two inner city basketball players from the summer before 9th grade all the way through High School as they try and achieve there biggest dream which is to make the NBA. If this were a scripted drama, the film would end one of two ways, the characters would either achieve there goals, or learn a great life lesson about the power of sports and teamwork that would make the journey worth while. Those overly cliched topics are the reason I don't like scripted sports movies and also why this film shows us the true potential of the relationship between sports and the individuals pursuing them.

I don't know how much I want to say about the specifics of what happens in this film. The movie unfolds like a Shakespearean drama, the depth this movie explores is amazing. It is about basketball, it is about dreams, its about expectations, its about inner city society, its about money, family, loss, love and it just goes on, and its all wrapped up in a plot that if scripted would have won an Oscar. Sometimes I felt myself wanting to yell at the screen "It's just Basketball", and I am a sports enthusiast that has played all my life. But I got so caught up in the lives of these young men that I almost felt protective of them. I felt the weight of all parts of society coming at them, all wanting different things. What keeps everything together is that ultimate goal of the NBA, and this film shows you that skills alone are not enough to make it to the pro's there is so much more that has to go right.

This film is so expansive in both its themes and having taken place over so many years that when things like having unexpected children happen, fathers leaving and reappearing, we as an audience just go with it without the filmmakers having to try and manipulate those moments. The movie has an amazing ability to not overemphasis those points one would think to be monumental, but keeps its eye on the bigger picture.

I guess this film could be considered long at almost 3 hours. I kept looking at how much time was left, not because I wanted it too end, but to see how much story was still to be told, hoping it wouldn't keep going on. Despite the films nearly perfect structure and dramatic threads William Gates and Arthur Angee are not characters, they are not larger than life. In this film they were two young men with dreams and goals and flaws all of which we can relate too.

The timing of this review is interesting because it comes on the eve of the release of the fictional film The Blind Side, about the true story of Michael Oher going from high school to making the NFL with the help of MILF Sandra Bullock. The previews of this movie make me puke a little in my mouth, how about everyone skips The Blind Side and rents Hoop Dreams instead, trust me you won't regret it.

This film may not be my number 1 movie of the 90's but it certainly would be on my top 10. This is a great, great film. And deserving of my second 5 star review.

*****

Best of the Decade

#24

Grizzly Man (2005) is a film that moved me deeply. I know people like to simplify this story and talk about how bottom line Treadwell was an idiot and deserved what he got, but in this film Herzog is able to tell a deeper story about love, nature, loneliness and how they all relate to the human condition.

It was a marathon

John Schlesinger's Marathon Man (1976) is one of those quintessential 70's paranoia thrillers that has been spoken about and referenced so much that I had felt like I had already seen it. It had the unstoppable 70's combination of a popular novel, Schlesinger as the director, Robert Evans as its producer and Dustin Hoffman as its star. Also add into that mix an individual who many consider the best actor of all time in veteran Sir. Laurence Olivier and you have at least an interesting film no matter what the result.

I can't profess to completely understand the marathon connection to the film. Hoffman is running toward his future or away from his past, maybe something like that. Nonetheless as the film starts we see Hoffman running and that is inter cut with an old man going to a bank and grabbing something from a safe deposit box. The questions start there and we really don't get any answers for at least 45 minutes and I don't think we ever get everything answered. Nonetheless you don't really acknowledge your questions because most scenes are so well put together in and of themselves that you are enjoying the ride.

Watching Marathon Man now the film does feel a bit dated. It has everything a thriller needs, but some things seem implausible or too expected. Every other person is not who they seem, and nothing is what you think it is, which in a way makes it hard to care about anything. In fact some of the paranoia gets lost because how can you be paranoid when you don't know what the threat is and its hard to see where your main character fits into everything. The climatic scene of the film seemed very contrived and out of place, and it is too bad because the film really needs that ending to hit. Despite its flaws Marathon Man is quintessential 70's filmmaking and it understands the genre it is working in, and maybe tries to hard to exceed the expectations of the genre that it things get a bit messy.

Hoffman is very good as an annexed ridden 40 year old grad student (although he is playing mid twenties). Why he is so annexed ridden I am not entirely sure, something to do with his father, the film touches on it several times but never gets into it. It is very interesting to watch Dustin Hoffman's method acting going up against Olivier's classical trained acting. The difference is palpable, but they are both very good. There is the famous embellished story where Hoffman stayed up nights because he wanted to look tired for his character, and Olivier just looked at him and said "why don't you try acting my boy, it's easier". Olivier was the one to deservingly get the Academy Award nomination for this film. I am sad to say that this is my first exposure to Sir Laurence and he truly is brilliant. I hope to catch up on his hole cannon eventually. My favorite performance of the film is the always brilliant Roy Scheider as Hoffman's older brother. Scheider is high on my list of top underrated actors, he really commands the screen here and you feel safe in his presence.

If you like to read I am sure the book is better and fills in the gasps of the plot. But just for a classic 70's thriller Marathon Man is a good watch. Just don't expect the famous torture scene to make as much of an impression as it did to audiences when it was released.

***1/2

Best of the Decade

#25

Alfonso Cuaron's Y Tu Mama Tambien (2001) is arguably his greatest work. His 2006 film Children of Men had great potential but despite its amazing cinematography fell short. Y Tu Mama Tambien is a sexual road trip film that both enlightens and scares those characters involved. This is a simple character driven movie that is both funny and poignant with a strong revealing ending and it certainly deserves a place on this list, as it sits at number 25.

Top 25 films of the past decade

2000-2009

So I guess it is that time and a sign of my age but I can finally write with some sense of knowledge a best of the decade list. Although the decade is not completely over I figure I better get started with this list if I am to reveal the movies one at a time over the coming weeks. If a movie comes out in the next couple months that I believe deserved a spot on this list (no film this year has) I will certainly make a note of it. Some people say I am much to stingy with my rating system (I do only have one 5 star review on this blog) but you can consider every film on this list a five star movie. Most all of these movies I have seen at least twice, but of course my opinion and the order is subject to change.

Let the great debate begin!

Invincible except still needs a tetanus shot

Werner Herzog's Invincible (2001) has a look and feel like it was made in the mid 80's. It is a period drama that takes place just before WWII, but it doesn't have the sharp look of other movies of this past decade like an Atonement. Instead it has a glossy, washed out look, that evokes a style of filmmaking that seems as old as the time period it takes place. This was obviously a deliberate choice on the behave of Herzog and cinematographer Peter Zeitlinger, but I do think this decision drew more attention to the problematic parts of this film (to be discussed later).

I love the concept and the simple moral code of the film. It takes place before Hitler and the Nazis seized power in Germany, it surrounds Zishe Breitbart an incredibly strong Jewish blacksmith who is summoned to Berlin to perform feats of strength for the German upper class. Zishe comes from a family of very strict moral and religious principles and has to adapt or chose how he is to implement his values while entertaining those who we know will soon come to persecute his people. Zishe is played by real life strong man Jouko Ahola. Ahola is simply not a very good actor, but somehow manages to work here in creating (or simply having) an innocence that works so well for his character. Herzog may not have casted a lead that can act but he did find someone who's face never lies and with whom we can sympathize.

On the opposite end of the acting spectrum is an unforgettable performance by Tim Roth as the owner and operator of this circus type show. Roth is so convincing as a man who is desperate for power and can manipulate most any in his path to get his own means. There is one scene in the film where he hypnotizes a women, it is said that during this he both hypnotized the women and the camera man. I believe this because I found myself coming close to falling in his trance. It is quit a remarkable and look over performance by Roth, maybe the best I've seen of his.

Where Invincible fails to deliver is in its execution. There is way to much on the nose dialogue being delivered by very poor actors. Any scene in which a crowd gathers is very awkward and it seems like everyone is just yelling out the obvious, at points it is laughable. In the end the story even fails to deliver on its potential and you're left wondering, what's the point?

There are so many movies in the world, I don't know why Invincible showed up in my Netflix queue but I am glad I saw it. And despite its pretty significant flaws I would recommend the film.

***

Who Killed Don Quixote?

Lost In La Mancha (2002) is the documentary film about Terry Gilliams failed attempt to make The Man Who Killed Don Quixote. Obviously the filmmakers didn't start out the process knowing that this film would so disastrously fall apart and one would think that this turn of events would have catapulted an average making of documentary into a great one, but I don't think that ever happened.

The film starts as an introspective of Terry Gilliam and tries to convince you of how unconventional he is as a director, but I don't think that comes across. In fact it portrays Gilliam as a normal creative guy and in no way was it his demands or expectations that doomed the film. It was injuries, flash floods, low budget and just the difficulties of filmmaking in general, and they all proved to be too much.

Even though this film takes a turn toward the disastrous for all those involved in the making of Don Quixote the documentary itself never reaches a level where it reveals some sort of greater truth or realization. It is just a making of documentary who's movie never gets made. We don't learn anything about the loss of important art or commerce in filmmaking.

If anything Lost In La Mancha gave me a greater respect for Terry Gilliam and his work (and his string of bad luck in his productions even since). But the good news is it looks like we are eventually going to get a Terry Gilliam directed Don Quixote film as it is in pre-production.

**

Lend money to old ladies!

Sam Raimi's Drag Me To Hell (2009) is a film that knows exactly what it is and really has fun with it. It is amazing how well it works because it has some pretty cliched characters (again though, the film is aware of this is and uses it), and typical horror scenarios (but again it uses this to its advantage) and cheesy special effects.

Drag Me To Hell surrounds Christine Brown a loan officer who in an attempt to impress her boss and put her in a position to earn a promotion denies a very creepy old women a loan. This old women curses her and that is when the haunting begins and so does the countdown for Christine to figure a way to get this curse off of her before she is literally dragged to hell.

The film navigates genuine scares and some unexpected laughs. Justin Long is good here as an apple using professor and the boyfriend of Christine. Christine is played by Allison Lohman who falls flat as she does her best Drew Barrymore impression (but Raimi still is able to utilizer her).

Where Drag Me To Hell works, where other horror films fail is it realizes it is a movie first and a horror film second and because of that balance it can deliver serious scares. Don't go into this movie expecting The Exorcist and you will have a good time.

***1/2

There was some blood, not as much as you would think

So this is the third time I have watch PTA's There Will Be Blood (2007). I saw it in the theatre when it came out and was disappointed, but like all of Anderson's movies, the film lingered with me, calling me to see it again. So as soon as I could I rented it, appreciating it much more the second time, but still couldn't articulate why. Then I bought the DVD, watched it again, and now have the perspective and understanding to sit down and write a review of this modern American classic.

Why was I so hesitant to really like this movie? I think its because while you are watching it you are to aware of its emptiness. This is not a plot driven movie, all the action sneaks up on you and in some way is contrary to the vastness of the landscape. When thinking back on the film, you realize that the moments are huge to the characters and yet the characters are very representative of uniquely American traits. It becomes like a black hole caught in a vacuum. It makes it hard to wrap your mind around yet impossible to forget.

There Will Be Blood is about Daniel Day Lewis's, Daniel Plainview and his journey to American riches by drilling the vast open spaces of the West. Much has been made of Lewis's Academy Award winning performance and whether or not it was over the top. It was a bit over the top but it worked and it really is one of the best performances of all time. You never want to look away from Plainview, he is absolutely captivating and his character is more complex than a lot of people give him credit for. I have read a lot of reviews that talk about the pure evilness of Plainview, I never just saw evil, I saw a guy who did care about his child at one point, but got caught up in his ambitions and eventually did become the antithesis of what the American dream is really about.

There is no opposite end of the spectrum to Plainview. The other character of interest is Paul Dano's, Paul Sunday. He is the films American religion, a Christian minister of the church of the third revelation. As Plainview's wealth grows, so does the church, and all this happens despite the fierce rivalry and hatred between the two men. Dano plays sunday as weak, a con man, selfish. It is a very good performance that does well to balance against Plainview. Dano didn't get the credit he deserved because he is dwarfed against Lewis here, had his opposition been someone else I think he would have seen an Academy Award nomination.

The world created here is outstanding, you get the feeling that this is what it was really like at the turn of the century. The cinematography by Robert Elswit is majestic. The score from Jonny Greenwood is original, but at times really draws to much attention to itself. However, the real star of this movie has got to be Paul Thomas Anderson for taking all these elements and making them work together. Anderson really is one of the great American directors and has created a film that despite the fact that not everything about it works (I think it should have expanded at the end but contracted) There Will Be Blood is if nothing else enchantingly captivating.

****1/2

Where the Wild Things Aren't

It's hard to not get excited about a film that had one of the top five best trailers of all time. So my expectations going into Where The Wild Things Are (2009) where needless to say were very high. I wanted nostalgia to pour over me in the theatre, I wanted to feel like a child again, I wanted to go to where the wild things were. That didn't necessarily happen, but Spike Jonze had something else in store for me, something that reminded me that childhood is not all warm nostalgic feelings, but there were also times of loneliness and struggle.

The only skepticism that I had coming into this film was from the many rumors I had heard about the delays, and reshoots that this film suffered. Those didn't seem to be an issue and I hope the final product is something the director is pleased with and it carried out his original vision. And it was only his vision that was at stake but also the author Maurice Sendak who helped produce the film. I have a feeling that Sendak must be pleased because Where The Wild Things Are not only made a 5-10 page book into a feature length film but kept the spirit of the book, the essence that made it such a classic.

This film is not only about the innocence of a child but also about the anger and the rage a child can have. Max's parents are divorced and his mother played by Catherine Keener is dating a new guy (played unnecessarily by Mark Ruffalo). Despite these heavy topics Jonze steers away from cliches and concentrates on the essences of the emotions, something all children have. To escape Max makes up an imaginary land, with imaginary beast, that like him are at once ferocious and kind. All the wild things are different parts of Max's psyche, from the understanding to the outright angry. They serve the purpose to expose Max to his own strength and weakness's, and by the time he leaves them, he is more the wiser.

There are 4 categories in which I would like to see Where the Wild Things Are nominated when it comes Oscar time. The first being Jonze's cerebral direction, and his ability to take the spirit of children's novel and turn it into a full movie without it dragging. The second being Max Records as best actor. Children tend to get nominated for playing more mature characters than there age dictates, (Tatum O'neal, Abigail Breslin) but here Max does an outstanding job of conveying complex emotions of a child his age. Jonze should be ever so grateful he found this kid. The third is with Lance Acord's amazing cinematography and his ability to create a totally imaginary world out of our own. The fourth is a best supporting actor nomination for James Gandolfini as the voice of Carol, the often misunderstood wild thing. Gandolfini brings an emotion and a complexity that outwardly shows Max's struggle.

The question of if children should see this movie has come up a bunch. The answer is yes they should, they can handle and understand more than we like to acknowledge and Where The Wild Things Are provides it to them in just the right way.

****

On Broadway but based in Boston

The only reason I saw this little indie movie is because I knew some of the producers and talent involved in the film and the entire film was available to watch on Hulu. On Broadway (2007) is done by writer director Dave McLaughlin a local Boston guy who was able to with the help of his producer Charlie Harrington raise about a million dollars and to attach local actors like Will Arnett, Mike O'Malley, Eliza Dushku and Amy Poehler to make this film. Essentially it is a passion project, which I am sure on some level mirrored the struggles of the characters in the film.

Joey McIntyre of New Kids On The Block fame stars as Jack O'Toole, the son of an Irish immigrant living in Boston. As the movie opens up we witness the death of Jack's uncle, a man that seemed to have more impact on his life than his own father. Now before I lose your attention because you saw that McIntyre stars in the film, let me say that he is very good, and comes off extremely like able as a guy who decides to write and construct a play based on the funeral and wake of his uncle. Now the set up of the movie doesn't really hit home, in fact the first 25 minutes are boring instead of what they should be which is to make the audience realize what Jack realizes so we understand why there is a drive for him to make this play. But to the critics of the first part of the movie, I say, bear with it and except it, and if you do, the rest of the film will be much more rewarding.

McIntyre's character wants to make a play about family, loss and loyalty, but so does McLaulin, and I think both succeed. To be perfectly honest, the big reason this film worked for me despite its predictability, it's weak plot devices and on the nose dialogue is because there was a lot of truth that I personally can relate too. I am a Boston based guy who understands the difficulties of putting together something creative, the toll it takes on loved ones, wanting parental approval, the frustrations and anger when everything goes wrong, and doing it all not knowing the end result. This movie really speaks to those things, so if you are a struggling artist, ignore the artist integrity of the film, but jump right to the sole of the picture and it will tug on the old heart strings.

Its interesting to note that the performances that really stood out in the film where not the likes of Arnett and Poehler, in fact those two felt out of place in the story. It was Eliza Dushku, Lucas Caleb and especially Mike O'Malley as Father Rolie who brought both an authenticity and truth to the story.

There is absolutely some personal bias in this review of On Broadway. There is nothing original or gritty about this little film, but it did effect me and really isn't that what we are all striving for when creating art.

***