OUR RATING SYSTEM
(*****) = do NOT miss! This one is as good as they come.
(****) = Fantastic - It's worth the price of the ticket (and then some).
(***) = Average - Nothing really bad, nothing really spectacular...
(**) = Perhaps you should find another movie to see.
(*) =
The bottom of the barrel. It would be hard to find something less entertaining or more unworthy of your time.



Maureen
(Mo) holds a PhD in marine geophysics (Dr. Maureen, to you) and works for the U.S. Geological Survey in Santa Cruz, CA. Maureen enjoys the outdoors (skiing, swimming, hiking, camping), dogs, cooking, singing, getting into (and out of) uncomfortable situations, and most importantly, watching quality movies. She makes a point of seeing as many Oscar-nominated films as possible each year and (correctly) predicting the winners. Her role on this blog is primarily as an advisor, collaborator, and "chime in"-er.

John (Jo) holds a Bachelor's Degree in Nursing, as well as a Bachelor of Arts degree in Film Studies. He currently lives in Chicago, Illinois and works as a nurse. His one true obsession in life is movies... The good, the bad, and everything in between. Other than that, he is busy caring for his cat, painting, writing, exploring Chicago, and debating on whether or not to worship Tilda Swinton as a deity. John is the master and commander and primary author of this blog.

Sunday, January 2, 2011

Animal Kingdom (****1/2)

Animal Kingdom is a brutally real look at the life of an organized crime family in Australia. While its thematic elements are dark to say the least, the story is told with such a cinematic eye and clever acting that it becomes an amazing film-going experience.

The film opens with one of the most disturbing and matter-of-fact death scenes I think I've ever seen. Right away we learn so much about Josh, this quiet teenage boy, left with no where to go. While the film seems to mimic the narrative style of films like Goodfellas as times, the story is unique and oftentimes much more gritty. There is nothing glamorous about the lives this family leads.

The cast is stellar, but Guy Pearce and Jacki Weaver truly steal the show. Pearce plays a detective tracking the family and set on protecting Josh in what ever way he can. Weaver plays the matriarch, the mother with a constant smile on her face as her family descends deeper and deeper into darkness. Her role is complex and so riveting to watch, and while she may be considered a villain at times, she also has moments of pure heroism.

There are several things working against this film in terms of awards potential, mainly its status as an independent film from Australia. While Weaver may be the film's best shot at an Oscar nom, that doesn't stop it from being one of the most finely-crafted films of the year.

(Awards potential: Best Supporting Actress (Weaver), Best Original Screenplay)

Saturday, January 1, 2011

Rabbit Hole (*****)

While I consider 2010 to be a fantastic year for movies, I would still only consider a handful of them to be truly moving and revelatory pieces of cinema. Rabbit Hole in that sense is one of the best movies of the year, an honest, tragic, and inspired look at the lives of two people destroyed over the death of their son.

Nicole Kidman. Aaron Eckhart. While both have made fine films in the past, they give career-best performances in Rabbit Hole. The level of frustration and grief required in roles like these could easily be overdone and melodramatic, but these two actors understand the great balancing act required. What we are left with are two of the most honest and thought-out leading roles of the year.

Kidman is a revalation. The Others, Moulin Rouge, The Hours... Had she not recently won an Oscar for her turn as Virginia Woolf, this would be a shoe-in for the win. The majority of the film accounts for the suppression of her grief, all building up to one of the most heartbreaking and visceral emotional breakdowns I have ever seen on film. Aaron Eckhart's character is more focused on preserving the past, yet his frustrations are more visible and we are never quite sure who is the more stable in the relationship.

Rounding off one of the greatest casts of the year is Dianne Wiest, another Oscar winner (2 times) who would be a shoe-in for the win any other year. Wiest perfectly encapsulates the role of Kidman's mother, a woman also familiar with the death of a child, yet the two are never quite able to see eye to eye.

The film is a masterpiece in the way it documents the quiet lifestyle of the 'suburban family' and how isolated people truly are from one another. Although the film is heavily weighted down with mature and grim themes, there is still a great sense of wit and dark humor infused throughout the film. That is not to say it's a black comedy - but it does work so perfectly well as a means to create a full picture and emotionally-satisfying film. This film easily ranks right alongside Ordinary People, another masterful film dealing with similar topics of loss and separation.

Emotionally, this film left me devastated. It is rare that you see such a sophisticated level of film making on display. While this film is clearly a showcase for the actors, it is still one of the best of the year. Why Aaron Eckhart or Dianne Wiest aren't receiving more nominations for their work is frustrating and completely baffling to me. Likewise for the director and screenwriter especially. Hopefully, come Oscar nominations, Rabbit Hole will be duly rewarded.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actress (Kidman), Best Actor (Eckhart), Best Supporting Actress (Wiest), Best Adapted Screenplay)

Friday, December 31, 2010

The Ghost Writer (****1/2)

I vaguely recall when The Ghost Writer was released in theaters very early in the year, and i'm sure I just passed it off as a less-than-satisfactory winter thriller. After all, how many decent movies are released in the first months of any year? How shocked was I to discover that The Ghost Writer is definitely one of the best movies of the year!

Roman Polanski is a director I am not too familiar with, aside from The Pianist and his 60's horror flick Rosemary's Baby. While he is an exceptionally visual and emotional director, I think his work with The Ghost Writer could easily qualify as some of his best work.

The film is a great homage to the work of Hitchcock. It is in the silent moments that suspense is created - what we don't see as opposed to on-screen action. The story follows Ewan McGregor, a ghost writer assigned to complete the memoirs of a former Prime Minister, played with surprising depth and quality by Pierce Brosnan. As the past is resurfaced, current dramas and scandals arise, and the film takes an intensely thrilling turn. I can't think of any other way to appropriately describe it, other than a brilliant political thriller and sharply-tuned drama. All technical aspects are brilliant, with noteable praise going to the original score, easily some of the best work by one of the greatest living composers: Alexandre Desplat.

Unfortunately for the film, its early release date will most likely hamper its chances at any nominations - although they would be richly deserved. This movie will be proof that in order to win Oscars, you need not be the best of the year, rather a film released in the latter half of the year. This is a fabulous, amazing film.

(Awards potential (Based on what I believe the film deserves, not necesarily what it will receive nominations for): Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Brosnan), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Original Score)

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

True Grit (Mo***1/2 Jo****)

John says:
Having one of the best trailers of the year, I was entering into the showing of True Grit with mildly-high expectations. On the whole, the film is technically brilliant. The Western genre is perfectly recreated with beautiful sets, costumes, and camera work. After the movie was over, though, I realized that while the movie had few flaws, it simply did not live up to the expectations one expects when going to see a Coen brother's movie. As absurd as it sounds, True Grit was just too 'by the book.'

Right away it must be said, Jeff Bridges and Hailee Steinfeld carry the movie with ease. Each one's character is stubborn, determined, and completely believable. While it may not be a career-best piece for Bridges, it is nonetheless a solid performance, especially knowing it stands on equal footing with John Wayne's Oscar-winning turn in the same role 40 years ago. Hailee Steinfeld's performance easily steals the show. Her whip-smart performance and delivery of some of the most clever dialogue of the year equally matches Bridges and Damon and establish her as one of the finest young actors.

Having seen the original, I was surprised both at the similarities and differences. I am aware this film is based on a novel, but it is interesting seeing the different interpretations of the story. On the whole I still believe that the original may be a more enjoyable film, but the ending of the Coen's film, like all their others, is perfect and definitely left me wanting more, even though a majority of the film I found myself approaching bored with scene after scene of extensive dialogue.

My consensus? A finely-made Western with sharp performances and beautiful sets. The cinematography is exquisite (thanks to the immaculate Roger Deakins (though I am not sure if this should be the film he finally wins an Oscar for. It was beautiful, but nowhere near his best work..)) I suspect fans of the Coen brothers may find themselves more disappointed with this movie than others, which is interesting. It may help bring them a larger fan base and get people more interested in their other films, too.

Maureen says: 
Being a Coen brothers fan and having somewhat of a soft spot for old-looking movies and westerns, I had high hopes going into True Grit. Although certain aspects of my expectations were realized and then some, the bulk of the film did not quite live up to the promise of its predecessor. Although technically nearing perfection, this film simply does not have the "wow" factor to win at the awards this year.

The film began relatively slowly... although wonderful acting by newcomer Hailee Steinfeld steals the show from the get-go, the audience cannot help but wonder, "when is something finally going to happen?" This is uncharacteristic of the Coen brothers' usual style, which is perhaps why the film ends in an ultimately unsatisfying fashion. Truly, the acting by Steinfeld and Bridges carries the film; without them, it would hardly be interesting to the average viewer at all. To the actors' credit, however, the characters are developed fully and intricately, and both Steinfeld and Bridges should receive well-deserved nominations in the coming awards season. Steinfeld, in particular, holds her own against the well-established Bridges and Damon, and is the center of attention in nearly every scene.

Aside from the acting, the film is equipped with a variety of beautiful ornaments, including score, cinematography, art direction, and costumes. It seems hard to imagine that it will not be recognized for these categories at the upcoming Awards. Even with the beautiful sets and camerawork, however, the overall effect of the script was dull and monotonous. Often, scripts filled with dialogue can be as riveting as the most action-packed film; here, the talking falls flat and the audience finds itself looking at its collective watch.

Coen brothers fans will find this film different from nearly everything else they have ever done, and unfortunately, not always in a positive way. Though True Grit exhibits impeccable filmmaking and will undoubtedly be recognized with multiple nominations for this in the awards season, the film does not quite realize what should be the ultimate goal of any movie: entertaining the audience.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Actor (Bridges), Best Supporting Actress (Steinfeld), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Art Direction, Best Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Sound Editing)

*The Academy recently announced the film's Original Score was deemed ineligible for one reason or another. This is especially upsetting considering the score is one of the best aspects of the movie and is easily one of the best original scores of the year

Sunday, December 19, 2010

The King's Speech (Mo***** Jo*****)

John says:
Having finally seen The King's Speech, I think I can finally say that yes, it has lived up to all my expectations, and yes, it is easily one of the best movies of the year. The cast is flawless, the filming is immaculate, and the story is memorable and powerfully moving.

Colin Firth stars as King George VI, a man lacking in self-confidence who is suddenly thrust into the role of King when his father dies and brother refuses the crown. He is supported by his wife, playes by Helena Bonham Carter, and his newly-found speech therapist, the lively Geoffrey Rush.

The movie succeeds mainly because of the stellar cast. When Colin Firth wins the Oscar in February (not if, WHEN), it will not be a sympathy vote for last year's A Single Man, it will be because his performance here is one of the strongest in recent memory, a man so pained by his past yet so focused on his commitments to his wife and country. Geoffrey Rush, playing the Australian doctor, is equally moving. He brings a certain sense of humor to the movie yet manages to portray one of the most sympathetic and loving fathers and friends. Helena Bonham Carter, fresh off her turn as Bellatrix Lestrange, also delivers a solidly warm performance. The three of them work amazingly on their own, but it's the time when they act off each other where the 'magic' really happens.

I don't think I have a single word of criticism for the film. I was completely engrossed in the story, amazed by the art direction and visuals, and completely absorbed by the story, one that I hadn't even been aware of before until seeing the film (yet now want to find out even more!). Easily a film that could and should win multiple Oscars, not because it's a historical drama or it 'fits the profile,' but simply because it's a damn good movie.

Maureen says:
Not only one of the best pictures of the year, but easily one of the most flawless historical dramas ever made. After watching it, comparisons to films such as La Vie En Rose come to mind (and if you know the extent of how much I love that film, that is quite something indeed). The King's Speech is emotional, completely engrossing, and impeccably filmed.

I cannot say enough about Colin Firth's performance in this film, and at the same time, I am utterly speechless. He gives a heart-wrenching performance, painting a perfect picture of the multi-faceted King. Firth's work with the King's stutter is outstanding, but it is only the icing on the cake to the portrayal of his character. I found myself completely and personally involved with the King, and Firth develops him in the best way possible. He manages to convey heartbreak, anger, insecurity, embarrassment, confidence, sadness, and joy; separately to perfection, but somehow combining them throughout the film in the King's overall demeanor. His performance fills out a movie that would stand well on its own and makes it all the more outstanding. Firth's work in last year's A Single Man, though excellent, looks like child's play compared to his acting here. I have seen few performances rivaling this one; among them, Cristoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds (sure to go down in filmmaking history) and Marion Cotillard in La Vie En Rose. Both of these performances swept awards during awards season, and Firth is almost sure to do the same. In fact, I think it is safe to say that Firth's performance would be a strong contender in any Oscar race from any other year, with any other opponent. Especially considering Firth's lack of strong competition, I am officially predicting his win, and probably with a near-sweep of the Academy's votes.

Helena Bonham Carter (playing the King's wife) and Geoffrey Rush (as the King's speech therapist) are also impeccable in their roles, providing remarkable performances while still allowing Firth to shine. They embody the meaning of "supporting" actors. Each develop distinct characters that play off of each other, creating real theatrical magic. Though not as certain of wins in their respective categories as Firth is this year, both Carter and Rush deserve - and should receive - nominations and recognition.

The King's Speech is really all about Firth and his performance, but it does not succeed solely because of it. Technically, the film is perfect also. Wonderful lighting and cinematography throughout, beautiful costumes, smart editing, and a lovely, fitting score. The screenplay, which is (a little surprisingly) an original work, will be strong competition in the race this year also. The dialogue is perfectly constructed, giving the actors a solid foundation upon which to perform. The film is deserving of multiple nominations, and it will receive them.

Though the race for Best Picture seems it will be tight with The Social Network, my preferred film this year has become The King's Speech. Perhaps it won't win, but it won't be because it does not deserve to. A historical drama that is not really a history, or even a story about a king, but a tale of a man, his struggles, and how he overcomes them. This film receives my very highest recommendation.

(Awards potential: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Firth), Best Supporting Actor (Rush), Best Supporting Actress (Carter), Best Original Screenplay, Best Art Direction, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Original Score)