One problem with waiting a long time to see such a highly acclaimed movie is that it gives you time to hear and absorb the hype. I really liked Pan's Labyrinth, but unfortunately I didn't like it as much as I thought I would. It's not that the film wasn't brilliant. It was. I'm just not sure that any film could really live up to the kind of hype I'd been hearing for months before I finally got around to seeing it. But enough negativity—what was good about the movie? Well, the obvious thing is that the production design was nothing short of amazing. Tim Burton at his best manages a similar sort of dark weirdness, but where Burton—even in his good moments—usually feels a little cartoonish, this one really felt more like a fairy tale come to life. Which is, of course, what they were going for. There were also some very good performances—Maribel Verdú springs to mind in her role as Mercedes. My one complaint about the movie was that there were some violent scenes that I thought could have been less graphic.

Viewed: 2007-03-03 | Released: 2006-12-28 | Score: A

IMDb Page

Juliette made an observation as we were leaving this movie that I think sums up the experience pretty well: she said that it was pretty slow, but that it was still tense and she was interested the whole time. Lack of action is a common problem for any psychological thriller but the good ones—and this is a good one—manage to maintain the tension somehow. Good performances are crucial, and that's where actors like Chris Cooper come in handy. I've liked Cooper since the first time I saw him (I believe it was in the '98 version of Great Expectations) and this one definitely continues that trend. Ryan Philippe also did a very good job as the young operative assigned to uncover Cooper's espionage. The only blip for me was Laura Linney's performance. When she's good she's really good, but at other times she can come off as a little too needy and "actorish" in her performances. Anyway, this was the first film we've seen that was released in 2007 and I'd say it's an auspicious beginning.

Viewed: 2007-03-17 | Released: 2007-02-11 | Score: B

IMDb Page

Huzzah! More than a full day remains before the Oscars and the SMAs are ready and rarin' to go!

OK, enough of that silliness, on with the show (I know you are all just waiting with bated breath):

Best Drama: The Departed

I really wanted to give this one to The Great New Wonderful—not only was it a really, really good movie but picking such an unknown film would have been really satisfying to my inner snob. In the end, though, I had to go with Scorsese. A lot of people think that this could be the one that breaks Scorsese's long streak of losing at the Oscars and I can see why. Thrillers don't get much more intense than The Departed and, besides, the whole cast was fantastic.

Runners-Up: Babel, Children of Men, The Great New Wonderful, Pursuit of Happyness, The Queen

Best Comedy: Little Miss Sunshine

I'm not completely sure why I picked this one. Borat was funnier, and all of the runners-up were smarter. Still, Little Miss Sunshine had a certain charm to it. I can't quite put my finger on what about it I like so much; I just like it. Not exactly high praise, I know, but there you have it.

Runners-Up: Borat: Cultural Learnings of American for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan, Stranger than Fiction, Thank You for Smoking, Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story

Best Actor: Will Smith (Pursuit of Happyness)

This was another close one for me—Hugh Jackman really did a fantastic job in The Fountain. Ultimately, I chose Will Smith because I think his role was a little more challenging. See, the "down-on-his-luck guy who struggles and eventually makes good" story has been told enough times now that the shine has worn off, and it's really easy to let that role slide into cheese. Smith, though, actually brought tears to my eyes. I'm a pretty jaded movie snob but even I found this movie heart-warming, and that was entirely due to Smith's performance.

Runners-Up: Leonardo DiCaprio (The Departed), Paul Giamatti (Lady in the Water), Hugh Jackman (The Fountain)

Best Actress: Helen Mirren (The Queen)

So, it does turn out that Helen Mirren wins my award this year because she's the only one who qualified, but don't let that fool you. She really did do a fantastic job with this performance, investing her character with both authority and vulnerability. Mirren's performance inspired me to learn more about the real Queen Elizabeth—I can't think of much higher praise I could offer.

Best Supporting Actor: Alan Arkin (Little Miss Sunshine)

Funny and moving—what more could you ask for? That's Alan Arkin for you. On the one hand, his grouchy old man schtick made me laugh out loud. At the same time, the relationship with his on-screen granddaughter was really quite touching. He really made the movie, for me anyway.

Runners-Up: Billy Crudup (Trust the Man), Robert Downey, Jr. (A Scanner Darkly), Eddie Murphy (Dreamgirls), Mark Wahlberg (The Departed)

Best Supporting Actress: Emma Thompson (Stranger than Fiction)

What struck me about Emma Thompson in Stranger than Fiction was how old she looked. That's one of the things I find so interesting about her, the way she can look so different from movie to movie. In this one, she just nailed her character—a curmudgeonly hermit of a writer. I'm never surprised when Thompson does a good job, but I'm always impressed.

Runners-Up: Adriana Barraza (Babel), Jacinda Barrett (The Last Kiss)

Heavily theme-oriented movies tend to be problematic. Either they focus too much on the theme at the expense of plot and character or they develop the film well but fail to really delve into the theme. Babel, fortunately, manages to do both very nicely. The central idea of the film is human communication—or, more accurately, miscommunication—and what really impressed me about the movie was how when I thought back over it, nearly every single interaction between any of the characters involved miscommunication in some way. But rather than getting lost in mere ideas, the writer managed to construct a very compelling set of intertwining storylines, which were brought to life by some very skillful performances. My one complaint would be Brad Pitt. Not to say he did a bad job, it's just that I don't understand why they would pick such an iconically young and virile actor for a role and then age him with makeup. For one thing, there are plenty of older-looking actors out there who could have carried off the role as well or better, and, for another, there didn't seem to be any particular reason for his character to look old. It's a pretty minor criticism, though, and I'd definitely recommend this one.

Viewed: 2007-02-08 | Released: 2006-10-26 | Score: A

IMDb Page

Let me preface this review with the statement that I have little to no interest in the British monarchy. Oh, I do find the institution to be somewhat intriguing from a historical standpoint, but I have no real interest in the actual individuals as celebrities. Despite that, I found this movie to be quite compelling. To begin with, the acting was simply flawless across the board—Helen Mirren definitely deserves all the attention she's been getting this year on the awards circuit. The film documents the reactions of the Royal Family in the aftermath of Princess Diana's death and I would imagine that people who are interested in the royals will find that aspect of it fascinating. For me, though, it wasn't so much the action of the film that drew me in as what it revealed about the characters. We're presented with a portrait of people who are so isolated by privilege, so wrapped in layers of protocol and ceremony, that they are almost completely unable to relate to the ordinary people they supposedly symbolize. It actually left me feeling kind of sorry for them—it seems like a lonely life. A film that takes a subject I don't care anything about and manages to draw me in like that, well, that's a film I can recommend.

Viewed: 2007-02-02 | Released: 2006-10-05 | Score: A

IMDb Page

Why is it that I only write about the bad stuff? I guess that's not really accurate. Looking back over the archives I only see a few negative ones. It kind of feels that way right now, though. I mean, I didn't write about it when we bought our house five months ago or when we brought our puppy home four weeks ago. I haven't written anything in over six months. And what finally gets me to start again is the email I got from my mom yesterday, telling me that another one of her cats died over the weekend.

When I saw the subject line—"We are down to one cat..."—I figured that this time it was the oldest one, Leon, the one who I found as a kitten in our back yard when I was a kid, the one I had grown up with and who was now crotchety and arthritic and going blind and senile. But no, it was Bill, a stray that my parents took in while I was in college.

Because I was already moved out when Bill came on the scene I never really got to know him all that well. He was sweet-natured and had a very cute face. My mom says that he always got along well with the other neighborhood cats; which was unusual in our house because the other cats were always either extremely timid or ferociously territorial. Once, a friend of my stepdad's brought his two-year-old daughter over and she was quite taken with him. She couldn't pronounce "kitty cat," though, and it instead came out as "diggy dat." From then on he had the nickname "Diggy."

Last year, not too long after my parents moved to Virginia, Bill was hit by a car. One of his hind legs was shattered and he had to have steel rod installed in his leg. When we came to visit last spring he was still recovering; the incision from his surgery hadn't healed completely and from time to time the tip of the rod would poke through. He limped a lot, but he seemed in good spirits even though my mom says he never completely got better.

This past weekend Bill's kidneys began to fail. The vet said that there wasn't anything they could do for a cat of his age—he was 12 or 13 by then—and on Sunday my parents decided to put him down. They were pretty upset about it, especially my stepdad. Meanwhile, their remaining cat, who is 16 years old now, has been looking like he's had one foot in the grave for a while now, but he still eats like a horse and even catches the occasional bird or squirrel. Hopefully, Leon will last at least long enough for me to see him when we go visit my parents this summer. Up until just recently he was the pet that I most thought of as my own and I have a lot of good memories of that cat.

I was sad for my parents but not being very attached to Bill myself, I didn't feel much personal loss. What really struck me was that someday my puppy is going to get old and die. I've got 10 years, maybe 15 if I'm lucky, but it'll happen and that thought does make me sad. When I stop and think about it, it's kind of weird that I've become so attached to Cooper in so short a time. A month ago I'd never ever set eyes on him, and I was even a little resistant to the idea of getting a dog. Now I find that I think about him all the time and I really love the time I spend with him, whether it's taking him for walks or playing in the yard or just having him sit with me while I watch TV. It's a really weird phenomenon, that a person could feel such a strong bond with a creature, but I do.

In the absence of a real conclusion for this entry, I'll just end with a cute picture:

I'd never heard of Blindsight or Peter Watts before Raja (writer of the Strobelight Review here at Sakeriver) posted his review of the novel in the forum. Like him, I found this book engaging and the ideas in it intriguing, but at the same time I also found it kind of disturbing. Watts presents some very interesting ideas about the nature and function of human consciousness—indeed, he says in the endnotes that the book is really a thought experiment on that topic—but the conclusions he presents are the sort that tend to push me into the kind of existential introspection that I really don't enjoy. Still, Watts is a good enough writer that he does make a real novel out of Blindsight, with rich characterization and a fascinating, if—to my mind, at least—bleak milieu, rather than the mere veneer of a story that is all many hard SF writers can manage. If you're a fan of hard SF I'd recommend this one. It's a little hard to keep up at times but it's good enough to be worth it.

Started: 2007-01-08 | Finished: 2007-01-29

Purchase from Amazon

I was pretty torn on whether or not to give this one a fourth star. On the one hand, there were a number of moments in the movie that made me cringe. On the other hand, there were far fewer than I was expecting and while I didn't laugh as often as Juliette and my friends did, when I did laugh I laughed harder than I have in quite some time. And, even more than cringing, I found myself just amazed that anybody would go that far with his comedy. I mean, he's not just over the line; he can't even see the line from where he goes. One things for sure: Sacha Baron Cohen has balls. And, as anyone who sees this film will find out, so does his co-star, Ken Davitian. I do recommend this one, but with the caveat that it's easily one of the most outrageous and offensive movies I've ever seen, so it's definitely not for everyone.

Viewed: 2007-01-19 | Released: 2006-11-02 | Score: B

IMDb Page

By now this movie has already won three Golden Globes—Best Motion Picture (Musical or Comedy), Best Supporting Actor, and Best Supporting Actress—so unless you don't own a television I'm sure you've already heard plenty about it. A lot of people love love loved it, including Juliette. For me, though, it was just good, not great. Yes, the music was great and I will admit that I was very impressed by Eddie Murphy's performance. The main thing that kept me from really enjoying the movie is that I absolutely hated one of the main characters, Effie. Now let me note that it was the character that I had a problem with, not the actress (Jennifer Hudson) or her performance. So it's really a writing problem, but for me it was a big one. I think it's pretty important to this movie that the audience sympathize with Effie's troubles, but I just can't bring myself to feel very sorry for a character that strikes me as a self-absorbed prima donna. I will say, though, that even I was moved by Hudson's performance of "And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going," and considering what I thought of her character that's saying something.

Viewed: 2007-01-13 | Released: 2006-12-14 | Score: B

IMDb Page

From a certain perspective it's a little surprising that I liked this movie so much. The reason I say that is that I see so many movies that it usually takes an unusual plot, interesting characterization, or at least a couple of scenes that really showcase a great acting performance to make me love a movie, and Children of Men didn't really have any of those. The plot was a pretty straightforward "damsel in distress" type of story and none of the writing really popped for me, nor did it allow the actors much room to maneuver. What was it that grabbed me, then? The direction. Director Alfonso Cuarón did an absolutely masterful job of presenting us with a dystopian future England that felt absolutely real. What's more, he managed to convey a truly remarkable amount of detail with almost no exposition. The end effect is that the movie actually makes you stop and consider the ramifications of its premise: what would the world be like if people stopped being able to have children? This one is definitely a must-see for any fans of science fiction. No, I'll go one further—it's a must-see for anyone who's a fan of good cinema.

Viewed: 2007-01-06 | Released: 2006-12-24 | Score: A

IMDb Page