Midnight In Paris (***)

It would be very easy to rank Woody Allen as one of the most innovative and clever filmmakers. With films like Annie Hall, Bullets Over Broadway, and the genius Hannah and Her Sisters under his belt, it is safe to consider Allen close to genius. However, Midnight In Paris simply pales in comparison to Allen's more rich, detailed scripts with characters that are just shadows of some of his best work. Perhaps with age, Allen is losing much of his gusto, and unfortunately I found the film rather flat.

The plot (if there is one) follows a man named Gil played by Owen Wilson. Visiting Paris with his absurdly-negative fiance and her parents, he finds pleasure in walking the city at night - stumbling into a sort of vortex that leads him to the city in the 1920's where he meets a whole gang of famous artists. And.... that's it. Scene after scene follows this man as he journeys back in time to point out to the audience that 'wow you're the REAL Gauguin?' or 'He looks like Cole Porter.' A basic love story emerges with the ever-radiant Marion Cotillard, but for the most part the film is merely a series of actors portraying historical figures.

What more can be said? The costumes are accurate and the cinematography is surprisingly lush. It is obvious that Mr Wilson is trying extremely hard to fill the stuttering manic shoes of Woody Allen in the lead role, but overall I couldn't help but be taken out of the story. The basic lack of clever writing that Allen is known for is surely missed, and while Midnight In Paris isn't a horrible film, it's not one I would expect to win a slew of awards either.

(Awards potential: Best Original Screenplay, Best Cinematography)

Moneyball (*****)

Following in the traditions of some of the greatest sports movies, Moneyball at times seems to top them all, becoming a film that is both an enormous crowd pleaser as well as a tightly-crafted human drama. The film has slowly begun to reap awards regardless of its early Fall release date, and there is no question that it deserves every accolade it receives.

Based on a true story, the film follows Billy Beane, the General Manager for the Oakland Athletics. Upon meeting Peter Brand (played remarkably well by Jonah Hill) who is a Yale graduate with a scientific mindset towards the game of baseball, the two begin a never before tried experiment of how to win games, ultimately resulting in their record-setting 20 win streak in 2002.

Bennett Miller, the director who made Capote, perhaps the finest film of 2005, brings his unique touch in creating moments of somber darkness and character contemplation. Many have noted the film has a definite slower pace for a sports film, but nothing feels more right. The loud atmosphere of sports arenas contrasts with the quiet and dark spaces behind the scenes.

Of course, this film revolves around Billy Beane, played by Brad Pitt, and it is perhaps the most remarkable performance of his career. Having amazed us consistently with films from The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Babel, The Assasination of Jesse James, and even Se7en, it could be argued that Pitt is at his career-best. It is not as showy of a performance as his disciplinarian father in this year's The Tree of Life but he captures the pure spark of a man who will not give up. His performance, coupled with Jonah Hill's more subdued character, make up some of the best acting of the year and should easily garner Oscar nominations for both men.

Moneyball is a true success. There is not a flaw to be found in the screenplay (co-written by last year's Oscar winner for The Social Network Aaron Sorkin) nor in the performances or the pacing. This is truly a great film, and one that I can't wait to watch one more time.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Pitt), Best Supporting Actor (Hill), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Original Score, Best Sound Mixing)

The Tree of Life (*****)

At last I have finally found time to watch one of the most talked-about and controversial movies of the year, and to my great satisfaction and amazement, the film both surpassed my expectations and challenged my conceptions of what films can be. Terrence Malik has made only a handful of films in the past 30 or 40 years, but with each one he pushes his limits. With The Tree of Life he has perhaps changed filmmaking forever.

Everyone has heard how 'weird' the film is, with extended montages of the creation of the universe, the end of the world, various characters walking through the desert, heck, we even see some dinosaurs. This is not a movie intended to be viewed with anything but an open mind. Those coming into it hoping to see a great story with the traditional story arc with be unbelievably disappointed. I wouldn't be surprised if many people walked out of this movie within the first minutes - and I couldn't blame them.

The film, simply put, seems to be about life. From conception to birth to death. The birth of the universe and all that has happened since is seemingly juxtaposed with that of a typical family living in the 50's. The lives of such an insignificant family is proven to be one of enormous consequences, and as the opening narration tells us, life is one of either two things: grace or nature.

Brad Pitt and Jessica Chastain play the parents. One represents grace, one is nature. The strict disciplinarian nature of Pitt makes his children resent him and cherish the moments he is gone. Chastain indulges the spirit of her children and encourages such 'grace' to grow. These two actors have never been better. Brad Pitt dominates every second he is in, while Chastain matches every emotion. I don't think I've seen two more dynamic or fully-complete performances all year. Oscars would be assured were it not for the controversy surrounding the film.

There are things that people seem born to do, and it seems that Emmanuel Lubezki, the film's cinematographer, was destined to photograph this film. Quite simply put, I don't think I've ever seen more stunning or shocking images than those captured by Lubezki, and there is no doubt in my mind that he will at last win his long-deserved Oscar. The definition of cinematography is soon to be changed to this film alone.

Alexandre Desplat, world-famous composer, crowns the film with a perfect tone. Yes, nearly all the memorable music from the film are works from other composers from history past, but let's not put it past the Academy. Babel won Best Original Score when the majority of the composer's work was simple guitar plucking. The bulk of the soundtrack was source material. This is not to discredit Desplat, who is one of the greatest living composers today, nor to diminish his contributions to the film, which are stunning.

I do believe this film may be a masterpiece, on the same level of genius as 2001: A Space Odyssey in terms of sheer thought and concept. Many will fail to grasp the ideas this film presents, but I don't think it can be debated that The Tree of Life will be remembered as one of the defining moments in the history of cinema. Yes, it's non-linear and abstract, but at least there is a filmmaker out there today who is brave enough to challenge audience members, not just spoon-feed them.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (or Supporting: Pitt), Best Supporting Actress (Chastain), Best Original Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Original Score, Best Sound Mixing, Best Visual Effects)