War Horse

Summary:  This takes place in England at the beginning of the 20th century. Albert is the son of a drunken farmer and a hardworking mother.  They rent their farm from a greedy landlord who is interested in buying a certain horse at an auction.  Albert's father outbids the landlord out of spite and brings home a thoroughbred instead of a work horse like they needed on their farm.  Little did his father know, this was the horse Albert had his eye on.  Albert names the horse Joey, and they bond quickly.  In order to save the farm, they have to plow a rock-ridden and dried up field.  Albert and Joey try, but they can't do it.  Once it starts raining, the ground softens enough that they get the job done.

When WWI starts, Albert's father sells Joey to the army to pay off the farm.  (A heavy rain ruins their crops from the field Joey and Albert plowed.)  Albert is devastated.  He wants to enlist to go with Joey, but is too young.  The officer who takes Joey ensures Albert that he was take the best care of him and return Joey to Albert if at all possible.  This is the start of Joey's journey, through many countries, families, and owners - none of which would I like to spoil for you.

OaTs:  This would be one of those films that I truly enjoy watching for the first time, but cannot really see myself putting on a list of my favorite films.  It was beautiful, touching, and epic.  I truly believe in the connection between man and animal, and I love watching films about it.  I'm a sucker for animal films.  I love horses, or at least the idea of them since I have minimal personal experiences with horses.  I find them beautiful and majestic.  So to follow a horse on his journey was a really special viewing experience.

I was expecting the film to follow Albert more than Joey, but it was the other way around.  The people that Joey met along his journey through WWI, or The Great War at the time, were unexpected, but very welcome.  I got attached to some of them, who took temporary ownership/care of Joey.  Even so much that I wondered if I wanted him back with Albert instead of another person.  Ultimately, though, Joey was meant to be with Albert.  And the movie made me believe it.  I don't know how they got the horses to convey these feelings, but it worked really well.

If I have one complaint, it's in the lack of screen time for Tom Hiddleston.  He's a new favorite of mine, having previously seen him in Thor, Midnight in Paris, and The Deep Blue Sea.  He plays an Army Captain who takes Joey to war.  Their time together is too brief.  Captain Nichols was an upstanding man who promised Albert to return Joey to him if at all possible.  Then Joey moves on to another person.  Then another, and another.  The temporariness of Joey's caretakers, though, was in great service to the ultimate meaning of the story, so I understand why Hiddleston's time on screen is limited.  I can be a selfish viewer sometimes.
 

Score:  8/10

Young Adult

Summary:  Mavis Gary is the author of a young adult book series.  It was once popular, but is now on the discount table.  She grew up in a small town in Minnesota and is now living in Minneapolis.  When she hears that her high school sweetheart has had a child, she decides that she needs to save him from his boring life as a husband and father in their hometown.  While trying to do this, she meets a former classmate who was crippled in a "prank" pulled by the jocks they went to school with.

OaTs:  Charlize Theron was fantastic as Mavis.  She really made you hate her and sympathize with her at the same time.  I really felt like I was looking at a girl who lived off of her status in high school.  She was even using those memories to make a living as an adult.  She never really grew up, which is why she thinks her former boyfriend needs to be rescued.  And he couldn't be happier with his life.

So Theron was great.  And so was Patton Oswalt as Matt, the man still carrying around a grudge from what happened to him in high school.  But that's pretty much where my love for this movie ends.  I'm not into dark comedies.  I don't enjoy laughing at awkward and painful situations.  I felt embarrassed for her, and that's not a feeling that I enjoy while watching a film.  I feel that's what the writer and director were aiming for, so they succeeded, but I didn't like it.

I'm glad I saw it.  Sometimes an okay movie is worth it for a great performance like this.  She saved it from a much worse grade from me.  I understand that many critics are loving this movie, and that's just fine.  But it's not up my alley.  I'd cringe when she guzzled her Diet Coke right from the two-liter bottle.  I felt bad for her dog that was left in her hotel room for hours on end.  It was uncomfortable for me, so definitely not something that I enjoyed watching. 

Score:  6/10

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

Summary:  Based on the first book of the Millennium Trilogy by Swedish author Steig Larsson, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is the story of a journalist and private investigator solving a forty year old crime.  Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer), an old, rich gentlemen hires journalist Mikael Blomqvist (Daniel Craig), who recently lost a huge libel lawsuit, to figure out who killed his niece, Harriet, over forty years ago.  In exchange, Henrik will provide Mikael with all the information he needs to prove the story that got him in trouble.  Mikael soon enlists the help of a private investigator, the young girl who did the background check on him for Vanger:  Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara).  They dig deep in to the family history, full of Nazis and other sordid things, in order to figure out what happened to Harriet.

OaTs:  This has got to be one of the best adaptations I have seen in a long time.  I actually liked it better than the original Swedish film, which I did think was very good.  It was much more true to the book in tone - more gray, cold, and eerie.  I felt that Rooney Mara was much closer to my image of Lisbeth than Noomi Rapace in the Swedish adaptation.  And though I was hoping they would cast Viggo Mortensen as Mikael, Daniel Craig was an excellent choice.  He really played the part well.

They did change the ending a bit.  Not in a big way.  The answer was the same, but revealed in a different way.  I actually liked the new ending.  It was more concise.  The original story climaxes, then takes another twenty or thirty minutes to wrap things up.  This one only took about ten minutes.

It's a really gripping story.  I'm a huge fan of murder mysteries, or mysteries in general.  I have been ever since my love of Nancy Drew books in elementary school.  This one is really dark.  Really dark.  There are some difficult things to watch, including rape, torture, and murder.  I wouldn't watch this with anyone unless they knew what they were in for.  It's hard to recommend something like this unless I really know someone's taste.  I wouldn't want them looking at me like, "Why the hell did you show this to me?"  Yeah.  I'd like to avoid that conversation.

Funny story:  I went to the very first screening of the film with a friend of mine who shares my love of the books.  When we got our tickets, it said we were in Theater 3.  I found this odd because it's one of the smallest in the theater for a premiere of such an anticipated film.  I mean, not like Harry Potter, but the Millennium Trilogy is a phenomenon all over the world.  Anyway, we went to sit down and when the commercials came on, they were for Cartoon Network, PBS Kids, and other things of that nature.  Then the previews started.  They were all for movies rated PG or G.  You combine all of this, and my little red flag goes up.  I thought, "There's no way studios would pay to advertise children's movies at this movie.  The most UN-children's movie of them all." 

I knew they were going to play the wrong movie.  But I waited.  Maybe they just had the wrong reel of previews.  Then when the studio title cards started rolling, one said "Happy Madison Productions."  Yep.  They were showing us the Adam Sandler movie.  This was a Tuesday night.  The theater was packed.  We weren't there to see the Adam Sandler movie that had already been out for a month and received scathing reviews.  So I briefly explained this to my friend, Christal, and got up from my chair to tell someone they were playing the wrong movie.  A man in the audience tried to tell me it was the wrong movie and I told him that is where I was going.

I told the boy at the concession stand and he alerted the manager.  When I got back to the theater, the screen was showing the slide advertisements they show before all movies.  They had stopped it.  And the theater applauded for me when I got back.  I fully fill Christal in on how I knew and she agreed that the previews and commercials were odd once she thought about it.  The manager came in and apologized.  My theory is that they printed the wrong theater number on the stubs.  There's no way they'd have this film in such a small theater for it's first screening.

So that was my viewing experience for this film.  It started about a half hour late.  Then Christal and I stood outside the theater and discussed it for about ten or fifteen minutes.  It was a great evening that made for a great story. 

Score:  8/10

J. Edgar

Summary:  This film chronicles the life and career of J. Edgar Hoover, founding director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, played by Leonardo DiCaprio.  He started working for the government when crime scene investigation wasn't practiced.  Edgar grew frustrated with this, suggesting they were letting criminals get away with things.  His appointed second-hand man, Clyde Tolson, stuck by Edgar through think and thin, occasionally pointing out flaws in Edgar's approach.  Edgar's long-time secretary was the keeper of his secrets and one of the few people he could trust with everything.

It follows him from the time no one took him seriously, through the time he became the legend that he is today. 

OaTs:  When this film was announced, I was fairly excited to see it.  I have been a fan of Clint Eastwood, the director, and Leonardo DiCaprio for a long time now.  I thought it would be a great match.  And it wasn't a horrible match, but I have to say that I expected more.

I felt like it was trying too hard.  DiCaprio has always been a favorite of mine, but I am recently coming to a different conclusion.  I'm getting frustrated with the showiness of his performances.  I will always love him in The Departed, and maybe even Revolutionary Road, but I feel like he is going to have to do something really different in order for me to consider myself a fan once again.  I'd like to see him play an average guy using his given voice.  I can't remember a time I've seen him in a movie without a fake accent, except maybe Inception, of which I was not a fan.  His next role is Jay Gatsby in The Great Gatsby.  I'm looking forward to seeing what he does with that.

Eastwood has been letting me down as of late.  I was one of the few who enjoyed Hereafter last year, but it wasn't anywhere near his best stuff.  Invictus and Changeling were disappointments.  Gran Torino, on the other hand, was fantastic.  Anyway, I'm not sure if I am on the Eastwood band-wagon anymore either.

J. Edgar is a fascinating person, so I can understand why it was so appealing to make a film about his life.  I do feel, however, that there is too much left unknown.  I couldn't help but think to myself, "I wonder how much of this is true."  Since I'm a history nerd, I like to see historical movies tell the truth.  I understand that this doesn't always make for a good movie.  So why even make them?  There are some truly excellent films about history that are honest as well as entertaining.  If you're going to do it, do it right.

Then there was the makeup.  I keep going back to two films that used aging makeup to great effect:  Citizen Kane, of course, and La Vie En Rose, the latter of which won the academy award for Best Achievement in Makeup.  They realistically changed performers in their twenties and thirties into older versions of their characters and you didn't even think about the makeup until the movie was over.  The entire time that I looked at DiCaprio as the older Hoover, I got distracted by the stuff on his face.  Armie Hammer as Clyde Tolson was even worse.  As Hoover's secretary, Ms. Gandy, Naomi Watts' makeup was pretty good, though.

I think that, once again, an effort to get DiCaprio an Academy Award has failed.  He needs to stop trying so hard.  With The Departed, I could tell that it wasn't his goal.  It was a movie made for entertainment and it happened to be fantastic.  In my opinion, that's a much better way to win awards than to aim for it and win.  Make a good movie.  If it's recognized, that's great.  If not, at least you still have a good movie instead of a failed attempt at Oscar glory.  All in all, a very disappointing movie.  I was hoping for better.

Score:  5/10

Shame

Summary:  Brandon is a man in his mid-thirties, living in New York with a pretty good job.  You'd think he had everything going for him, but he's wrestling with sex addiction.  His sister comes for a visit which makes his life much more difficult.  She is a singer who routinely visits when her life starts getting difficult, usually caused by a boyfriend. 

OaTs:  I saw this at the Toronto International Film Festival.  Before the screening, director Steve McQueen asked the audience just to "look at the film."  I found it a simple request, and one I was more than happy to oblige.  It was exquisitely filmed and acted.  There wasn't a terrible amount of dialogue.  This is because Michael Fassbender, who played Brandon, could tell you just about everything with his face.

For instance, there is a scene, my favorite in the film, where is sister, played by Carey Mulligan, is singing the old standard, "New York, New York" at a club in New York.  She begs Brandon to come hear her and he finally relents.  She sings it simply, quietly, and beautifully, unlike any other rendition of the song I have heard.  And the look on Brandon's face is something else.  I found it hard to tell what exactly he was thinking, but I knew what he was feeling.  I was equally moved by the performance.  Brandon had tears running down his face.  It was a beautiful piece of acting.

The sex addiction part is so interesting.  Steve McQueen is a British director, and when asked why it isn't set in Britain, he responded that he couldn't find anyone over there to talk about sex addiction.  He could find people in New York to talk about it, so he set it there.  It's a subject that I am unfamiliar with, because it is so hidden from the public.  It's funny to me that there were people in American more comfortable talking about it an less in the UK.  I've always found, in film anyway, that Europeans are more comfortable with sex than Americans.  I guess maybe it's the "addiction" part that screws them up.  I don't know.

It's not a film for the faint of heart.  There is a lot of nudity and a lot of sex going on.  I think I would have been more uneasy with it had it been gratuitous.  It wasn't.  It was necessary to tell the story.  You can't tell a story about sex addiction without showing sex.  It is rated NC-17 for a reason.  

I'm not sure that it's a film I'd want to see again, just because it is so emotionally draining, but I am glad I saw it.  I think it's easy for people ignorant on the subject to call people "weak" when they are addicted to something.  I can honestly say that I may have been one of those people years ago.  I finally opened my eyes to all of the different people of the world and have come to an understanding that there are things I can't attempt to understand for myself.  I refuse to judge others, as it is not my place.  And this is one of those films I will be able to recall as one that helped me to understand something a little better than I had before.

As Walt Disney said, "I would rather entertain and hope that people learned something than educate people and hope they were entertained."  To say that I was "entertained" by this film may be a bit of a stretch, but the film came across as more of a work of art than a lesson for the audience.  Every now and then, a film can come out that is more than a film.  I believe this is one of them, as it surely changed the way I see things.  And it do so without shoving a lecture down my throat, which I very much appreciate. 

Score:  8/10

Hugo

Summary:  In Paris at the early part of the 20th century, a young boy named Hugo, was taught to repair clocks by his father, who also repaired clocks.  One day, his father brings home a broken automaton he found in a museum.  He wants Hugo to help him fix it.  The father is killed in a fire before it can be fixed.  Hugo is taken in by his drunken uncle who works on the clocks at the train station.  After his uncle disappears, Hugo continues working on the clocks and trying to fix the automaton.  He steals parts of toys for his automaton from a shop at the train station and is caught by the owner of the shop.  The owner takes everything in Hugo's pockets, including the notebook of his father's with instructions on how to fix the automaton.

Hugo then makes friend with the shop owner's goddaughter, Isabel.  She tries to help Hugo get his notebook back after he tells her why he wants it so badly.  The thing is, even though Hugo fixes the automaton, there is still a missing key in the shape of a heart that he needs.  It happens to be hanging around Isabel's neck.  Once it is all put together, the automaton draws a picture of the famous George Melies silent film, A Trip to the Moon, which happens to be the first film Hugo's father ever saw.

From here on, the story takes a turn into exploring who the toy shop owner is and why this notebook meant so much to him.  I refuse to reveal any of the secrets to those who haven't seen the film, which is a shame because these very reasons are why I love this film so dearly.

OaTs:  Martin Scorsese isn't known for making family films, but he is known for his love of film.  This is probably the reason that I like him so much.  I can tell that he has a deep love and affection for film history.  Scorsese is also known for his work in film restoration and making sure that we don't lose the treasures of the past.  This comes through in Hugo, more than any other film he has made.  Films about film make me incredible happy when done right.  So between this movie and The Artist, I am loving the movies right now.

After seeing the trailer for this film, I wasn't interested in seeing it at all.  It was in 3D, which I had successfully avoided for the past two years, and it seemed to be a children's movie that I wouldn't really like all that much.  Then, after reading glowing reviews by Peter Travers and a critic at Movieline.com, I decided that it was a film I should try.  To claim that it's the greatest use of 3D to date, and that Scorsese makes it plain how much he loves film, I thought that I would be a shame to miss it.  Little did I know just how much this movie would mean to me.

I love film history.  I have a deep affection for old black and white movies of yesteryear.  So for Scorsese to explore the origins of film in France, and effectively tell the audience that the loss of these films is a devastating loss, was a pure pleasure for me to watch.  Not many people I know are aware of who George Melies is and just why he is so important.  They also wouldn't know that the poster to this film, on display above, is a homage to Harold Lloyd, a great silent film comedian.  This is yet another film that I feel was made for me.  I love it when a filmmaker can do that:  make me feel like this movie was made especially for me. 

Score:  9/10

The Artist

Summary:  George Valentin is a silent film star.  He is admired by all, and adored by upcoming starlet Peppy Miller.  She bumps into him while he is posing for publicity pictures on the sidewalk.  After her pictures run in the paper, she starts getting small parts in films as a dancer or back ground actor.  Her parts steadily grow once films add sound.  She becomes America's new sweetheart.  

George's career, however, takes a dive once talkies become popular.  He stubbornly decides to fund his own silent film, which tanks at the box office.  He is forced to auction his belongings and fire his driver/assistant.  The only companion that stays by his side is his pet dog.  His wife leaves him and he has to move out of his mansion.

Peppy is still drawn to George, long after years have passed since their first meeting.  She tries to help him get back into film and he rejects her help.  Coming to a breaking point, he finally accepts the changes in film a joins Peppy for a show stopping dance number.

OaTs:  I have wanted to see this film ever since I learned of its existence.  I love films about the film industry.  I love French films.  I love black and white films.  This seemed to have all of this going for it.  It was screening at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF), but only before I was schedule to arrive in Toronto to volunteer.  I didn't get the chance to see it there, and was rather bummed because I thought the chance of it coming anywhere near the Shenandoah Valley was slim to none.  Guess I was wrong.  I'd like to send out a big "Thank You!" to the Virginia Film Festival.

My sister, Lisa, joined me for the screening at The Paramount Theater in Charlottesville.  It was the perfect venue for a silent, black and white film.  It was an old theater with upholstered seats and intricate detailing on the walls and ceiling.  And there was a balcony.  It's was old-timey.  It was perfect.  Even the presenter of the film said, "Somewhere, Samuel Goldwyn is smiling at people watching a silent movie in a theater like this."  Like I said, perfect.

When I have told people about the film, they seemed surprised that I, or anyone, would have enjoyed a silent film.  They obviously don't know me all that well.  I respect and admire film history more than I can express.  To be able to step into a time machine and go back to the cinemas of the 1920s and 1930s was an irreplaceable experience.  This experience almost means more to me than the film itself.

Anyway, I absolutely loved it. The acting was incredible.  You get to know these characters and sympathize with them even though they aren't speaking.  Their face tells the story.  You understand their feelings just by their body movement and facial expressions.  Jean Dujardin and Berenice Bejo played the leads to great results.  Their chemistry was incredible.

After watching the film trailer more times than any person should, I came to the conclusion that the film would be more dark than light.  I was wrong.  There was lots of humor and plenty of comedic moments for the leads and their wonderful supporting cast.  I was worried it would be too much like A Star is Born or Singin' in the Rain.  But it actually combined the best parts of both stories/films to great effect.  The drama hit a bit harder once you had been laughing.

I'm really hoping this does well come Oscar night. 

Score:  10/10

Some Sundance

In January 2011, I volunteered at the Sundance Film Festival for the second time.  As a full time volunteer, you get unlimited access to films on a space available basis, using special volunteer tickets they set aside for the 1600 of us donating our time to the festival.  Since it was my second year, I knew the ropes and got to see more films than I did the first year.  And I saw some pretty good ones.  Here are my thoughts on several that are making headlines and generating Oscar buzz, no matter how much of a dark horse they may be.

Like Crazy:  This is the story of a young couple, an American boy and a British girl, who are torn apart when her visa expires.  The rest of the film follows their struggle to get her allowed back in the US.  They break up and get back together and drift apart and reunite and do it all over again by the end of the film.  It's heartbreaking and also heartwarming.  Don't ask me how this movie does it, but it really does.  Felicity Jones plays the girl so wonderfully and simply.  I'm a big fan of subtle performances like this.  And Anton Yelchin is equally great as her boyfriend.  Each time they part, your heart breaks with them.  I highly recommend this one to romantics and cynics alike.  (8/10)

Margin Call:  One of my absolute favorites of the festival.  I'll be perfectly honest in saying that I didn't understand all of it.  It follows a Wall Street company on the verge of the 2008 stock market collapse.  There are many different individuals all approaching this crisis in a different manner.  The cast is exceptional.  The dialogue is great.  The tension is thick.  And it's soooo relevant.  Kevin Spacey leads with his great performance and he is thoroughly supported by Zachary Quinto, Stanley Tucci, Jeremy Irons, Paul Bettany, Demi Moore, Simon Baker, and Penn Badgely.  I can't wait to see it again so I can catch more things and possibly understand it more.  Though, I'm not counting on it.  (9/10)

Martha Marcy May Marlene:  I really wanted to see this film for one reason:  John Hawkes.  I saw him at Sundance the year before in Winter's Bone and completely fell for him.  Such an astounding actor. He plays a cult leader that takes in the main character for a couple of years before she runs away.  This girl, Martha, calls her older sister to pick her up.  Martha then goes to stay with her and her husband.  The cult haunts her and causes her to break social norms.  It's a chilling tale, one that stays with you long after watching it.  Martha is played by Elizabeth Olsen, another young actress to watch in the future.  She could become something really great.  (8/10)

Tyrannosaur:  An independent film from the UK about a very violent tempered man.  When his path crosses with a Christian woman with secrets of her own, he starts attempting to curb his violent tendencies.  These characters were played by Peter Mullan and Olivia Colman.  Their chemistry was incredible.  I hadn't seen either actor before.  It's a rather intense film, but one I would consider watching again because of the beautiful acting performances.  I'd love it if this became a contender come time for nominations, but I am not holding my breath.  (7/10) 

------------------------

Here are a couple more films I saw that I loved, but have passed quietly over the past few months.  They all got mixed to positive reviews.  But one of them was my favorite of the festival. 

Another Earth: A girl whose life has collapsed seeks solace in the man she hurt the most while the world is consumed with the discovery of another plant. One exactly like Earth, even the people. Fascinating story. Wonderful acting. Captivating and original. Brit Marling (co-writer and star) is going places. Remember her name. (8/10)

The Devil's Double: The true story of Uday Hussein's body double, Latif, and how he got out of it. Incredible acting performance by Dominic Cooper as both Uday and Latif. A bit gruesome in parts for me, but the story was well worth the squeamish moments. The hero was one of the more moral and good characters I've ever encountered. (7/10)

Higher Ground: A woman's journey of faith through out her lifetime. She joins a Christian fundamentalist group with her husband and children and struggles with the demands of the community. It's about so much more than just faith, and it's a role most actresses in Hollywood would kill for: a strong woman who thinks for herself and makes herself a priority. Congrats to Vera Farmiga for being both a wonderful actress and director on this film. (8/10)

The Music Never Stopped: Based on a true story, a long lost son returns with a brain tumor, ridding him of his memories. The only way his parents can make a connection with him is through his music. His father struggles with this because he believes this music made his son run away. A new all time favorite movie of mine. Poignant, funny, and everything I could hope for in a movie. JK Simmons was perfection as the father, Henry Sawyer, who loves his son so much he learns to love music that he used to hate in order to reconnect.  I'd probably pick JK Simmons as MY Oscar winner for Best Actor.  At least as of today. (10/10) 

------------------------- 

There was one other film that I really loved at Sundance that I haven't heard much about since.  I don't believe it has been released.  I hope it does eventually, because it was a really beautiful film.

Perfect Sense:  Two lonely people finally find love in each other but then the world around them starts to come crashing down. People all around start losing their senses, starting with smell, and no one knows why. Interesting and original story for me. I found myself very invested in these characters, played by Ewan McGregor and Eva Green.  It makes you think about what you might do in that situation.  And it could scare the hell out of you.  (8/10)

50/50

Summary:  Adam is a 27 year old guy working for an NPR-like organization when he finds out that his back pain is a result of a tumor on his spine.  It's a large tumor, growing around many of his vertebrae.  He undergoes chemotherapy, meeting some great characters in treatment.  His best friend, Kyle, is also a big presence, trying to be supportive in a roundabout way.  Adam's girlfriend is the classic passive-aggressive girlfriend who makes the situation all about herself.  And Adam's mother is the hovering, worrying mother who Adam hardly ever calls back.  He also starts seeing a therapist, Katherine, who is 24 years old and still working on her doctorate.  He is her third patient. 

OaTs:  Based on the life of screenwriter Will Reiser, I'd have to say that, not having ever had cancer myself, it was a very realistic portrayal of how a young man would cope with the diagnosis.  At first, he seems to be handling it well, but as a chemo friend dies, and he gets further information from the doctor about his condition, he breaks down a little at a time.  And Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who plays Adam, is absolute superb in this role.  I wish it was a more realistic expectation for him to be nominated for an Academy Award come next year.

I really think Seth Rogan was cast well as the best friend.  He had a great mix of humor and support going on.  Sometimes you can't tell if he really is trying to help or if he is trying to use this to get girls.  There's a great moment before Adam goes in for surgery that helps flush out Rogan's character and I really liked what I saw.  I think it's natural for a best friend to want to take your mind off of everything, and for that to both help and hurt the one diagnosed.  It was a really great dynamic.

I also really liked Angelica Huston as Adam's mother.  While taking care of Adam's father who has Alzheimer's, she doesn't have many people to talk to.  You can understand her need to talk to her son so often, but Adam is also completely justified in wanting to ignore her.  They come to an understanding and it's a great moment to see.

Anna Kendrick played Katherine, the therapist.  You can tell that she is trying really hard, but she's not all that great at her job yet.  She is still trying to find the best ways to relate and support her patients, but it doesn't come across as helpful in the beginning.  She would have made a great girlfriend of a cancer patient, which Adam also sees, but as a therapist, I don't think she was quite ready for what she got herself into.

Adam's girlfriend, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, was absolutely horrible.  Not in a villainous kind of way, but in a "let's make this all about me" kind of way.  She wouldn't even go into the hospital to wait for him, insisting on waiting in the car because she doesn't like hospitals.  Adam's chemo buddies get this, but don't push the issue with Adam.

His buddies, by the way, were one of my favorite parts of the film.  The ate pot-macaroons and shared frustrations.  When one passes away, it's a real eye opening moment for Adam, where I think he finally realized that there a chance he may not beat this.  There are a couple more moments in the film where you can really feel Adam's frustration and fear.  I don't want to spoil the moments for you, but up until that moment, I was questioning whether or not this movie would tug at my heartstrings.  And it did.  It really did.  No tears, but some serious choking up. 

Score:  8/10

Moneyball

Summary:  Billy Beane, the General Manager of the Oakland Athletics, tries to rebuild his team like no other GM has done before.  With a limited budget, he employs someone to help him look at stats and base players on their On Base Percentage (OBP) instead of all the intangibles scouts use.  Three of the A's biggest players leave during the off season, so Beane tries to replace them with lower-paid, less-flashy players.  The manager of the team, Art Howe, doesn't appreciate Beane's methods and resists.  After losing too many games, Beane moves some players around so Howe is forced to play the team the way Bean meant it to be played.  They start winning.

OaTs:  Directed by Bennett Miller, Moneyball based on a true story.  This is where I find most of my problems come in.  His theory of only looking at stats doesn't really work.  They have used it to some extent in the MLB since Beane brought it to everyone's attention, but those intangibles really are key to building a quality team.  And since it only made a slight difference in the A's status, it's hard for me to see how it was such an important story to tell.  This may be a little harsh, but I follow baseball too much in real life to let all of that go when I watch a movie.

But if I'm looking at it as just a movie, a fictional story with no attachments to real life, it wasn't half bad.  I will complain a little about the lack of time spent on the field.  There was really only one game they showed in any detail.  It was an important game, so I'm glad they did.  I just wish they'd have done it more.  I love baseball movies.  There aren't enough made anymore.  I'm glad for what I can get, but I was a little let down with the lack of pure baseball action going on.

Brad Pitt, as Billy Beane, was pretty good.  I loved him a couple of years ago in Babel, where we played an average husband and father.  I remember thinking that I'd like for him to play more roles like that - an average guy in different circumstances.  He found a role like that here and he did a really good job.  I bought into how much Beane cared about making the team successful.  I could tell he had a real appreciation for the game, which I love to see.  

I will say that my favorite scenes of his, though, were the ones with his on-screen daughter.  Billy is divorced from the mother and they share custody of their 12 year old girl.  He takes her shopping for a guitar, and when she finds one she likes, she sits down and play a few bars, humming along with the melody.  He asks her to sing and she does.  The look on his face when he's watching her is absolutely wonderful.  You can tell that he is completely in awe of her and her talent.  Loved that moment.  But it did hit me after seeing the movie that it was kind of a random scene.  I'm not sure what the point was of having it in there.  Maybe that storyline should have been its own separate story.

Jonah Hill played Pete Brand, the guy who comes up with the theory Beane puts into practice.  Brand becomes Beane's right hand man.  Their dynamic was really special.  There was a lot of sharp and witty dialogue that kept the movie from becoming boring and monotonous.  I could tell that some of the words came from none other than Aaron Sorkin, a favorite writer of mine.  No one can write dialogue like him.

So that's about it.  It's not going to be a favorite movie of mine, but I did enjoy it.  Partially because I was at the Alamo Drafthouse in Winchester, VA.  It's a theater where you can order a meal while you watch a movie.  I met family there because it's almost halfway between us.  We had a great evening.  That's probably what I'll associate with this film the most, a great evening of family, food, and film.

Score:  7/10

The Ides of March

Summary:  A political thriller centered on the press secretary for the democratic presidential nominee.  Stephen Meyers, the secretary, starts sleeping with an intern on the campaign and finds out that the candidate, Mike Morris, had slept with her before.  She got pregnant by the candidate and needs to take care of it.  Meanwhile, the opposing campaign manager tries to recruit Stephen for their team.  Stephen is supposedly one of the greatest young political minds out there.  The whole situation implodes and Stephen has to decide what he's going to do:  continue working for a candidate you once believe to be different than the rest, or admit that he's just another corrupt politician and work against him?

OaTs:  The press secretary is played by Ryan Gosling and the candidate is played by George Clooney, who also directed.  Philip Seymour Hoffman was the campaign manager and Marissa Tomei was his wife, a reporter for a big newspaper, reporting on the presidential race.  Evan Rachel Wood played the intern on the campaign.  Paul Giamatti was the campaign manager for the opposition.  Given this cast, I figured I was in for a great ensemble piece that I'd be rooting for come Oscar Night.  I was wrong.

The story was much more focused on one person than I thought it would be, which is quite a shame given the ensemble.  There was hardly a scene Gosling wasn't in.  He's played to be an upright and genuine guy at first, and then you start to wonder about him.  The constant reminders of how good of a guy he's supposed to be started to ring false after a while.  I found him to be rather annoying and cocky after I got to know him.  

I was much more interested in Philip Seymour Hoffman's character, Paul, who is Stephen's boss and Morris' right-hand man.  I adore Hoffman and every word he utters sounds like music to my ears.  I love his voice, but that’s not nearly as important as the fact that the audience can totally understand his conviction.  He seemed to be a decent guy, but didn't profess to be.  And actions speak louder than words, especially in film.  I could have watched a film about his character all day.

There's really not much to say without giving away the ending of the movie, but I feel justified in my belief that the movie could have been more engaging and much less predictable. But the biggest reason for my disappointment is that I absolutely loved Good Night, and Good Luck, Clooney's Oscar nominated directorial effort from 2005.  It's one of my favorites of the past decade.  I had high hopes, and they were quite dashed by the end of the film.

I found myself predicting the very last shot.  When the last scene began, it all started to seem very familiar.  The way the camera moved.  The character's actions.  The noise and dialogue in the background.  I could feel what was coming next.  Then it happened.  Exactly what I saw in my mind a minute or two earlier.  And I was disappointed.  I wanted something new.  Something that I hadn't seen before.

The thing is, I actually don't like it when I figure things out.  In that brief moment, after I predict the ending and before it's revealed that I'm right, I think to myself, "Prove me wrong. Surprise me."  And I wish that with all my heart.  When I walk into the theater, I ache to see something different.  I sit down in my seat, preferably in the middle of the row, directly in front of the screen, and beg the screen, "Wow me."  It doesn't happen as often anymore.  I was hoping this film would, but it didn’t.

Maybe The West Wing set the bar a little high for political shows and films.  Maybe I shouldn't have listened to the hype and reviews coming out of Toronto.  I don't know.  I can't call it a bad film, it was just a predictable one.  And those are my least favorite.  I can like a bad film.  I've liked many in the past.  But it's hard for me to like a predictable one.

Score:  6/10

Warrior

My first entry about just one film.  And I couldn't have picked a better film to start off this new form of blog entries than this one:  Warrior, directed by Gavin O'Connor.

[Side note:  I plan on giving a lot more information about films in these entries.  I was so concerned about the length of the other articles that I omitted things I would normally include.  Facts, like who the director was, are very important and I hate that I had to leave it out of other films.]

Summary:  This film follows two estranged brothers and their alcoholic father in the world of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA).  Tommy, played by Tom Hardy, is the younger brother.  Recently home from serving in the Marines overseas.  He shows up on his father Paddy's doorstep one night, after not seeing him for years. Paddy, played by Nick Nolte, used to be an alcoholic and is almost 1000 days sober.  His drinking lead Tommy and his mother to leave when Tommy was a teenager.  Tommy used to be a fighter, and decides to start up again with Paddy's help.

Brendan, the older brother, is played beautifully by Joel Edgarton.  He is married with two young daughters.  Because of the youngest daughter's medical bills, his house is nearing foreclosure.  He is a former MMA fighter, now a high school physics teacher who fights at night to pay the bills.  After being suspended for coming to school with bruises on his face, he decides to fight full time in order to make ends meet.  He hasn't seen Paddy in years and doesn't allow him to visit.  The only contact he allows is via mail or phone.

I don't want to ruin the rest of the film, so I'll keep it simple.  Both Tommy and Brendan enter the same MMA tournament, which is the equivalent of the Super Bowl for that sport.  The family struggles, between brothers and between the father and his sons, are much more important to the film than the MMA fights.  This story could have been told using most any sport, though I don't know how someone would get suspended from teaching for playing basketball at night.

OaTs:  I can honestly say, that as of today, this is my favorite film of 2011 thus far, though I will admit that one film I saw at Sundance back in January comes pretty close.  When I saw the trailer for the film, I knew immediately that I wanted to see it.  Not because of the subject matter, but because of the cast.  I was introduced to Joel Edgerton when I saw the Australian film Animal Kingdom at the 2010 Sundance Film Festival.  It was one of my favorites from the festival and I've kept up with the Aussie actors ever since.  Edgerton was a standout and I believe, based on reports of upcoming films, that he just may have what it takes to make it in Hollywood.

I also liked Tom Hardy once I saw him in Inception last summer.  Now, I don't want to get into a debate about that film, but I will say that Hardy was one of the few things I liked about Inception.  So I kept up with him too.  I didn't know that much about Nick Nolte's work, but I did know that he has had some personal problems.  I hate that the way I knew him was through the media and not through film.  So I was really excited to see him in something as well.

Boy was I in for a bigger treat than I ever could have thought.  All three men really brought it.  Nolte was truly heartbreaking as the alcoholic father.  Through conversations, we come to find out that he was also abusive.  The only thing he was good at was training Tommy as a fighter.  Also an ex-marine, he understood - to an extent - what Tommy was going through after returning home.  There are two quite memorable scenes of Nolte's that I can't quite shake.  One with each son.  I'd love if his work was recognized come Oscar time.  And he just might stand a chance, depending on how the rest of the year goes.

Hardy and Edgerton were equally as great but I'd say that Edgerton is the more subtle of the two and the one I was partial to.  Hardy played Tommy to be almost frightening.  His intensity was incredible.  Brendan was more sympathetic.  More of a "good guy" while Tommy would be the "bad boy."  It's not often that you have a story with two protagonists that antagonize each other.  Sure, you can have multiple protagonist on the same team, but this film was not set up this way.  I found it be quite unique in story structure.

But I have to say that one of the biggest reasons I liked it was that I had no idea how it was going to end.  None.  Which one would win?  Would either of them win?  Other sports movies are rather obvious.  They follow one team or athlete and you get a feel about if they will succeed or not.  But with two men to root for, how would the storyteller decide who should win?  No matter what, people will be disappointed.  I really admired the guts it took to tell a story like this.  It seems that movies are playing it more safe.  This can actually make them more dull.  But the entire time, I kept thinking, "Who's going to win?  Brendan or Tommy?"

The story and the acting were superb, and that, my friends, is why this is my favorite film of 2011.

Score:  10/10

Red Box Trip - Weekend of September 23rd

Jane Eyre:  I love Michael Fassbender, and he was fantastic as Mr. Rochester.  He brought such deep emotion to his face, you understood exactly what the character was feeling.  I find him to be absolutely breathtaking.  Perfectly cast for such a loaded role.  I just wish his leading lady held her own.  I don't think there was anything wrong with Mia Wasikowska, but she wasn't really Jane for me.  In previous versions of this story, Jane has been strong willed and determined.  And she was in this one as well, because of the script, but I didn't feel the power and strength coming from Wasikowska that I wanted to feel.  She was too soft spoken.  And I didn't see much life in her face.  She was delightful in a previous film of hers that I saw, so I had high hopes.  I guess that's what happens when I have expectations.  (7/10)

Prom: I blame my desire to see this on Aimee Teegarden, Julie Taylor from Friday Night Lights.  She plays the main character in this teen ensemble piece about, yes - you guessed it, PROM.  It wasn't horrible.  One storyline I actually liked because I actually thought it sent a good message to teen and preteen girls.  The girl who was expected to be Prom Queen found out that her boyfriend, also expected to be Prom King, was cheating on her.  She broke up with him a couple of days before but when to Prom by herself anyway.  I thought that was fantastic.  They both won and she left him on stage and refused to dance with him.  She was great.  But anyway, Aimee Teegarden's character was the main Prom planner.  A motorcycle driving, leather jacket wearing, slacker is punished for missing class and forced to help her out.  And I'm sure you can guess where this is going.  They fall in love.  Some cliche moments, but the Prom Queen moment really made it worth seeing.  Hopefully young girls saw that and thought to themselves, "I don't need a guy to be validated.  I'm fabulous on my own."  (6/10)

The Conspirator:  A film based on an true, untold story in American History and directed by Robert Redford.  Of course I saw it.  It told the story of Mary Surrat, the mother of a co-conspirator of John Wilkes Booth, the man who shot Abe Lincoln.  She was the only woman on trial for the assassination.  She was stunningly played by Robin Wright.  Her lawyer was played by James McAvoy, who is quickly becoming more and more a favorite of mine.  He's really something else.  And I like it when there is a truly good person in a story to really root for.  Some people may disagree and find the "anti-hero" character more interesting.  Not me.  I mean, I love a good "anti-hero" every now and then, but I'd much rather find someone with truly good intentions.  And that was McAvoy's character.  Determined to defend his client even though his friends told him to give up on it.  I don't want to share the outcome, but since it's part of history, the truth is out there.  But whether or not she was found guilty or not isn't the point.  It's whether or not you think she is guilty.  I have my thoughts.  Come find me after you watch it and I'll share my point of view.  A great movie to spark debate, but also entertaining.  (8/10)

African Cats / The Lion King

Here are my adventures with Disney's films about Africa and the incredible animals that live there.  These films defy any rating system, so I won't even try to assign a number to them.

African Cats:  I love Mother Earth.  I love Mother Earth more than I love most people on this Earth.  So every April 22nd, I celebrate Earth Day with the DisneyNature release each year.  I missed the first one, Earth, but have seen the last two, Oceans in 2010 and this year's African Cats.  It's a great way to celebrate my love of Mother Earth and Disney all at one time.  So I took myself to the theater this past April to see African Cats.  I liked Oceans from last year, but it's not something I'd really crave to watch again.  There was no real storyline, just an exploration of the world under the sea.

I LOVED African Cats, though.  It told a story.  The filmmakers followed several families of lions and cheetahs.  And while the power struggle was fascinating, I really enjoyed the focus on motherhood.  It explored the way a lioness protects and loves her daughter, and the way a cheetah mother taught her young.  I got extremely attached to the lioness story.  It was so beautiful.  She was the most experienced huntress in their pride.  She gets injured and it's absolutely heartbreaking to see her daughter love on her.  And the fact that it's a true story - complete with names given to each cat by the filmmakers - made me fall even more in love with the film.

The Lion King:  Disney decided to re-release their 1994 classic in 3D this fall.  I wasn't planning on seeing it until I realized that it would also be in 2D.  Our entire family when to see it in theaters when it first came out, but I don't have vivid memories of the event.  So I was very excited to be able to see it on the big screen and hear Elton John and Tim Rice's wonderful music on such a sound system.  It was better than I could have dreamed.  I cried four times.

If you haven't seen this movie, then I don't even know what to say to you.  It's loosely based on Shakespeare's incredible tragedy, Hamlet.  I remember that in high school, after watching The Lion King once again, that I had an idea.  An idea to make this film into a live action film with humans in the roles.  Then I found out it was based on Hamlet.  Then I thought to myself, "I guess it has been done before."  Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's a timeless story.  One of betrayal, love, duty, and destiny.  Absolutely one of the best films Disney has ever done.  And to have seen it on the big screen, for what I consider the first time, was a great honor for me.  A really great way to spend a Saturday afternoon, with my sister who watched our VHS tape over and over again with me.  We still have it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was worn out.

The Comedies

I don't really have much to say about comedies.  I don't normally watch many unless they are of the "romantic" variety.  It normally takes some pretty positive feedback from the media and audiences to get me in the theater to see a comedy movie.  And that's exactly what happened for the first film below.

But when I find a comedy film that I like, I really like it.  If it makes me laugh, then I instantly have a connection to it.  Getting me to laugh can be quite difficult, unless I'm watching Wipeout.  I love classic screwball comedies like Bringing Up Baby or Some Like It Hot, but to find one in the theaters now can be difficult.  I'm just not in the target audience for most comedic films.

I find things much funnier when they are either subtle or sarcastic.  When Lisa and I recently saw The Sound of Music in theaters, we were laughing at so many lines throughout the film.  It's not a comedic movie.  It's actually quite serious in parts, but once I know the characters and get a feel for them, sometimes certain lines can strike me as funny.  Hilarious even.  Steel Magnolias, one of the saddest films I've ever seen, is hysterical in parts and it is because of the characters.

Here are the comedy films I've seen this year:

Bridesmaids - This could be considered a Women's Film, but it's more of an outright comedy than anything else.  Co-written by and starring Kristen Wiig from Saturday Night Live, it's a film about the drama caused by and surrounding bridesmaids.  If you've ever been a bridesmaid, then you'll understand a lot of it.  Maybe that's one reason I found it so hilarious.  Wiig, along with Maya Rudolph, Rose Byrne, and Melissa McCarthy provide plenty of laughs.  Some of the laughs are rather dark humored, but it all makes sense.  It has more of a storyline than most comedies.  There's character depth and growth.  The characters are even fairly complex, which rarely happens in comedies that I've seen.  I hope it's not the last of Wiig we see on the the big screen.  I think she'll be one of the few to make the transition from SNL to other projects fairly smoothly.  (9/10)

Midnight in Paris - I struggled with putting this in the comedy category.  It's not a Women's Film.  It's not a Drama.  It could be considered "adventure" but didn't really fit in with the other films in the post.  So I put it here.  Being that it is directed by Woody Allen, I feel confident in my choice.  I love films that are hard to label!  Anyway, this one is about a writer who is in Paris with his fiance and her family.  While out walking one night, he happens upon a great...adventure.  I really don't want to spoil it for those who haven't seen it.  It was a wonderful surprise when I realized what was happening and I'd love for everyone else to be as happily surprised as I was.  

So, in avoiding the plot, I'll just tell you how wonderful the cast was:  Owen Wilson was perfect as a quirky writer; Rachel McAdams played the passive aggressive fiance really well; and Michael Sheen was absolute brilliant as the know-it-all friend who motivates Wilson's character to seek spending time elsewhere.  Sheen's character, I forget his name, is full of "knowledge" on every subject.  When they visit a museum, he "knows" everything.  I'm a huge fan of Michael Sheen and this is the first time I've really seen him play a comedic role.  He should find roles like this more often.  Loved him in this.  Marion Cotillard is in it as well, but I don't want to spoil her role.  And there are so many things to talk about that I can't.  Watch it and then find me somewhere so we can gush about it together!  (9/10)

Crazy, Stupid, Love -It was an "alright" movie until the end.  I wasn't expecting it at all, and it completely made the movie.  I'm normally not a big fan of twist endings because sometimes they don't make sense, but this one was perfect.  But other than the ending, I really liked the chemistry between Steve Carell and Ryan Gosling.  I thought they made a great pair and would be a great crime fighting duo.  And like I mentioned in my writeup about The Help, I'm loving me some Emma Stone.  She and Gosling also fit well together.  It was just a really great cast in an "alright" script.  Until the end where it became a pretty awesome script.  I can't wait to watch it again, knowing the outcome.  I'm glad I didn't the first time, but I think it could make for an interesting second viewing.  (8/10)

Action and Adventure

These are the films that are better seen in the theater than at home. Well, I could argue that all movies are better on the big screen than the small one and I think I’d have a lot of support with that. But what I really mean is there is a bigger difference in these movies than dramas or comedies when you rent them instead of going to the theater. The true art of these films lie in the sound and the spectacle. I can’t imagine seeing The Lord of the Rings Trilogy for the first time on my small television. I’ll remember, for the rest of my life, the moment the Black Riders came charging out in The Fellowship of the Ring. And the musical score of the film completely enraptured me.

It’s no surprise to me, then, that my least favorite film in this category was the only one I saw at home. I had heard good things about it but missed it on it’s first run. Once it was available at Red Box, I rented it and gave it a shot. On Blu Ray which always helps. But I think it lost its charm when downsized. I strongly urge audiences to see these films in a theater because it makes a world of difference.

I like to get lost in films, to completely forget the outside world while becoming immersed in another. This is near impossible at home for me. I get so easily distracted. The phone will ring. A visitor will show up. A fellow watcher will want to pause to get something to eat or go to the bathroom. There is no pause button at the theater and [hopefully] no phones ringing. And at home, I have this nasty habit of checking to see how long a film is and how much time is left throughout the film. Another one of Ted’s sayings was, “If you’re counting the beers, you’re not enjoying them.” This can speak to so many things, but whenever a student would ask how long a movie was, this was his response.

So I guess my point here is to quit being a passive audience. Be an active one. I don’t mean walking around the the theater and talking while it’s being shown. Actively prepare yourself: get in the car, drive to the theater, get your ticket [and possibly snacks], sit down, turn off your phone, and brace yourself. Hopefully you’ve chosen wisely and will enjoy the next couple of hours. Watching a movie doesn’t have to be a lazy activity. Work for it, because it’s worth it when all of these variables come together for a perfect movie-going experience.

Here are the Action/Adventure films I have seen this year:

Hanna - Joe Wright is probably my favorite working director. And I’m saying that as of September 2011. I’ve seen four of his films and have loved three of them. That’s a pretty high percentage if you think about it. Anyway, his latest is Hanna, the story of a young teen girl who was trained to be an assassin by her father. Saoirse Ronan (pronounced Sear-sha) plays the titular character, being hunted down by Cate Blanchett. It’s been a while so I can’t remember all the details, and I don’t want to ruin it for you anyway, but let’s just say it’s a wild ride. I liked it very much. So different from Wright’s other films I loved (Pride & Prejudice and Atonement) but I could still tell it was him. The music by The Chemical Brothers was a great layer to the action and quiet moments alike. It really made some of the sequences pop. Definitely happy I saw this in theaters. It was a great experience. (8/10)

Source Code - I really had no intention of seeing this one, but after I heard from multiple sources in the media that it was a well paced and original thriller, I thought I’d give it a shot. Boy, am I glad I did. Jake Gyllenhaal could be really good if he picked his roles better. I’ve never seen a movie quite like this. It was a bit sci-fi, a bit suspense, a bit action. In a nutshell, a bomb exploded on a train in Chicago. Jake’s character was tasked with trying to stop it, by reliving the last 8 minutes before it went off, over and over again, to try and figure out what happened. There are more layers to it, but discovering it yourself while watching it would be more satisfying than if I told you. If you like action at all, this is one for you. Best original action movie I’ve seen in a long time. (9/10)

X-Men: First Class - I loved the first two X-Men films from the early 2000s.  Absolutely loved them.  They are probably still my favorite super hero films.  Then I saw the third one.  Then the Wolverine one.  And my love started to diminish for the world of the X-Men.  When I heard that they were semi-rebooting the series, I was skeptical.  Then after hearing the cast list, I was encouraged.  I knew I'd see it no matter what, so I was glad there were some great actors and actress in it.  And it was great!  Michael Fassbender totally took over the film with his role as Magneto.  His quiet power is breathtaking.  And James McAvoy is a great player on the other side of the mutant coin.  I love them both and they were perfectly cast.  I cannot wait to see both of them in these roles again.  (I hope I don't live to regret that statement.)  (9/10)

Super 8 - I have loved J.J. Abrams since my days of Alias and Felicity.  Then came Lost.  Then came Star Trek.  Who'd have thought that I'd like Star Trek?  But I really really did.  And supposedly this is the first TRUE Abrams movie, his tribute to the films he loved growing up.  I really got that feeling while watching it.  It was about a group of young teens making a movie and accidentally capturing an alien in their footage.  Kyle Chandler, a favorite of mine from television's Friday Night Lights, plays the father of the main teen character and sheriff of the town.  A great summer film for people of all ages.  Well, maybe twelve and up, depending on a child's tolerance for aliens and tense moments.  (8/10)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 - If you know me at all, you are probably aware of my love for the Harry Potter books.  I've always seen the films in the theater, but never anticipated them as much as the novels.  But I was really looking forward to this one.  It was fantastic.  As good as I could have hoped for.  It included the great moments and added some really cool moments in the battle.  I didn't mind it so much because Rowling didn't describe the battle in specific detail.  McGonagall has a wonderful moment, as did Mrs. Weasley.  I laughed and I cried.  I cried really hard.  Sirius Black has an incredible power over me.  A fitting end to a wonderful series.  It defies a rating so I won't include one.

Limitless -  The only one of the films in this bunch that I didn't see in theaters, which may contribute to the fact that I didn't like it as well.  Bradley Cooper is fast becoming a lead actor and movie star, something I don't think I would have predicted when I was watching Alias all those years ago.  Not that I have a problem with it.  And I will say a large part of the reason I watched this was for Abbie Cornish, who I have loved since Bright Star a couple years ago.  This wasn't a bad film by any stretch of the imagination, but I didn't really get into it.  (6/10)

The Debt  - Really like this one, though I did have some issues.  Kind of like the film Last Night in my previous post - I liked half of the movie.  The film follows a team of Mossad agents (Israeli intelligence agency) who are tasked with capturing the Surgeon of Birkenau - a doctor who worked for the Nazis performing experiments.  This operation takes place in the 60s, where the doctor leads a normal OBGYN practice.  The female agent, Rachel, is pretends to be a patient to confirm his identity.  The other two agents are men, both of which are attracted to Rachel.  While I really liked the operation part, the romance storyline was a favorite part as well.  It all blended together well and didn't become overly dramatic.  But then came the present storyline where the agents have to deal with the situation again in the 90s.  The operation didn't go as planned and it comes back to haunt them.  I think the movie would have been better had it stuck to one time period.  Preferably the first.  It was much more engaging.  (8/10)

The Dramas

I love a great drama, but I can be pretty skeptical. Some are shameless attempts to earn an Oscar nomination while others are bad adaptions of great/successful books. And usually ones released in the first half of a calendar year are not going to be that great. The good ones are, more often than not, released at the end of the year for a better shot at awards glory. So, let’s say I’m surprised that I have anything good to say about a drama I’ve seen before August is over.

I am generally left unimpressed by a lot of contemporary dramatic films, feeling like I’ve seen a lot of it before. I’m always looking for something new or different. That doesn’t mean something has to be either new or different for me to like it, but I’m more likely to watch a film if it seems like something I’ve never seen before. For example:

I wasn’t so impressed by The Fighter last year because it was yet another boxing film with yet another drug addict turning his life around. Another guy with no way out of his situation than to follow his dreams of boxing. Another inner city setting where there’s little chance of amounting to anything. I couldn’t find one thing in this film to latch onto as something different.

Now, there’s a film out now called Warrior that I’m actually interested to see. It concerns MMA fighting, which could be considered similar to boxing. I’m sure MMA purists will hate me for saying that, but to a casual viewer, they seem similar - like baseball and softball. You know why I want to see this one? It’s two brothers that are competing against each other, not with each other. I don’t know the ending going into the film. In The Fighter, I knew going in that Mark Wahlberg was going to be the underdog and end up successful. But in Warrior, I have no idea which brother will win. I want to see what happens.

Give me a story where I want to see what happens and I’ll be there.

Here are the Dramatic films I have seen this year:

Water for Elephants - I read this book last fall and absolutely fell in love with it. So much so that I have now started fostering an orphaned elephant in Kenya through a wonderful organization called the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust. (Please look into this organization. It does great work.) From the get-go, I knew I wasn’t going to like the movie all that much. While I think Reese Witherspoon and Christophe Waltz did great justice to their characters, Robert Pattenson wasn’t really my cup of tea. The elephant beatings were hard to handle as I wanted to jump through the screen and throttle Waltz’s character. It was a beautiful film which was all I really wanted out of it. Hal Holbrook brought great life to the older version of Pattenson’s character. He was perfectly cast and I wish there was more of him through the movie. It was my favorite part of the adaptation. But as is usually the case, the movie isn’t not as good as the book. (6/10)

The Lincoln Lawyer - Holy cow did this ever surprise me. I used to be a big Matthew McConaughey fan in high school. Then he kind of became a parody of himself, always playing the same guy. I lost interest and therefore didn’t think much about this film when I heard about it. Reviews came out and said that it was surprisingly good. There were comparisons to his mid-nineties film A Time to Kill, a Grisham adaptation, Grisham being another one of my high school phases. I’m a sucker for legal thrillers so was encouraged to hear this was was good. I waited too long and missed it’s run. I got it almost as soon as it came to Red Box and absolutely loved it. I really wish more films were made like this. And I think McConaughey could be really good again if he found scripts like this one and ignored what he has done for the past five years or so. (8/10)

The Help - (This might also be considered a Women’s Film.) I tried the read the book. I made it about four chapters in and gave up. People were telling me to give it more time, and I don’t feel I should have to give a book that long to grab me. Anyway, I was excited to see the film. Allison Janney is a favorite of mine and I’ll watch anything with her in it. I’m also a blooming Emma Stone fan and loved Viola Davis in Doubt. Plus, it’s about incredible women so what’s not to love. And I did love it. I’m glad I didn’t read the book because I’m sure I’d have felt the same as I did about Water for Elephants. I’m grateful I got to enjoy this as a film as a film and not an adaptation. I can understand where the complaints are coming from - about a central white character in a film that’s supposed to be about black characters. Maybe it’s because I’m white, but I didn’t see race in this as much as I saw gender. It was about women taking care of women and that’s something I can really get behind.

I laughed. I cried. And it takes a special movie to get me to do both. I don’t laugh easy in movies. It’s easier to get me to cry than laugh. I loved the characters and their quirky traits. I loved the line Davis’ character Aibileen said to the little girl she was in charge of, “You is kind. You is smart. You is important.” I really think all children should be told these exact words, both girls and boys. Kids need to believe in themselves and the connection between the maids and the children they raised was my favorite part of the story. I really loved it. (9/10)

Last Night - There is one reason that I wanted to see this film, and his name is Guillaume Canet. He is a French actor and director that I have come to know and love over the past few years. This is one of his very few English speaking roles and I was very excited to see it. It’s about a married couple, Joanna (Keira Knightly) and Michael (Sam Worthington), who are each tempted to cheat on the same night. Joanna with her former flame Alex (Canet) and Michael with a coworker (Eva Mendes). I liked half of the film. The Michael storyline didn’t interest me. I didn’t think it was really anything new. But the Joanna and Alex storyline, I really loved.

(SPOILER WARNING:  I can't say what I want to say without ruining the end.)  The chemistry between Knightly and Canet was incredible. I think they should do more work together. When her husband is out of town, Joanna runs into Alex who is in town on business. They agree to go to dinner and their honest conversations completely enthralled me. I love dialogue movies, where nothing more really happens but the words mean everything. Joanna didn’t end up physically cheating on Michael (Michael did, however) but her emotional cheating was far more intense. You could tell she still loved Alex, and the expression on his face and how brokenhearted he was when Joanna told him she couldn't leave Michael, made the film for me. Keira Knightly is actually becoming a favorite of mine. (8/10 - averaged from 10/10 for Joanna half and 6/10 for Michael half)

The Women's Films

I have come to realize that all film lovers I know have a genre in which they love just about everything. My film professor, Ted, happens to love horror films. The more obscure the better. Other people in our class would be suckers for low-grade action films, some for raunchy comedies, and others for shameless Oscar panderers. My genre is romance. These are the movies where it doesn’t matter what the critics or audience members say. The rating on Rotten Tomatoes holds no sway over me when it comes to romance, especially romantic comedies.

Ted always called these films, “Women’s Films,” in objection to the common term, “Chick Flick.” This is a habit I have since picked up. Women’s Films include romantic comedies (When Harry Met Sally), romantic dramas (Hope Floats), epic love stories (Titanic), female empowerment (A League of Their Own), best friend stories (Steel Magnolias or Beaches) and of course some franchises (Sex & the City or Twilight). Some of these films can also attract an occasional male viewer, but it must be admitted that these films are marketing toward and made for the female audience.

I’ve actually come to a decision that would rather not see these in theaters for a couple of reasons:

• While I enjoy them, they aren’t usually worth the money. I get just as much out of them on my television at home, while other films are better to watch on the big screen either for scenery (Midnight in Paris) or for action that has a larger impact when it’s bigger (Source Code). I’m usually content to wait until I can borrow it from Red Box or watch it streaming on Netflix.
• The perfume. The shear amount of females in one room, a large percentage of which sprayed some sort of smell on themselves, is quite astounding. I have been known to get a pretty bad headache from the combination of at least a dozen different perfumes wafting toward me from all directions. And when you’re lucky enough to sit next to a woman with a large spritz on her neck, it’s enough to ruin the movie.

Here are the Women's Films I have seen this year:

Something Borrowed - The primary reason I saw this film in theaters was that I just really wanted to go to the theater.  And having read the book, knew it was a movie I’d see sooner or later. I actually liked the book.  Some people don’t because, let’s admit it, it’s about one girl falling for her best friend’s fiance. For me, that’s not the reason I enjoyed it. I liked the romance storyline, not the best-friend storyline. I mean, haven’t we all wondered what it would be like if our crush actually crushed on us in return? I know I have and that’s probably why I like this film at all. The dialogue is cheesy, the acting is alright, and it’s obviously cliche. But I think Ginnifer Goodwin is one of the cutest actresses working today. It’s just a shame she had to hide her cute pixie haircut with a plain brown wig. And the actor that played Dex, Colin Egglesfield, holds a striking resemblance to a young Tom Cruise. The voice is so unbelievably similar that it’s hard to not think about it. Seriously, check it out for just that reason. Are we sure Tom Cruise didn’t have a son no one knew about? (7/10)

Life As We Know It - I loved Katherine Heigl after becoming hooked on Grey’s Anatomy back in high school. Then with all the backstage drama, I kind of had my fill of her. I liked Knocked Up but after seeing The Ugly Truth, (the primary reason I hardly go theaters for romantic comedies anymore) I wrote her off. She always played the Type A (re: ANNOYING) “plain” girl. There’s nothing “plain” about Katherine Keigl. She’s beautiful. Anyway, I ignored this movie. But after realized it was directed by Greg Berlanti, of Everwood fame, I decided to give it a try. And I didn’t hate it. While Heigl’s character was a little uptight, it was nowhere near as bad as it could have been. It was actually cute. Cliche? Sure, but that’s hardly something you can use in an argument because is anything ever really that original anymore? (7/10)

Beastly - Beauty and the Beast is my favorite Disney movie. I always wanted to see a modern version of the story, so when I found out this was being made, I knew I’d see it. It wasn’t horrible, but it definitely wasn’t all that great. They could have picked a more annoying actress than Vanessa Hudgens, so I’m grateful that it at least had a shot. The “beast” was a little to pretty-ugly for my taste. And I don’t understand how the idea of her going to live with him wasn’t more of an issue. Neil Patrick Harris brought some great humor in. It was a cute, but I’m glad I didn’t pay to see it in theaters. (6/10)

Just Go With It - I’ll confess that I initially had no intention of seeing this movie. But after reading an interview with Brooklyn Decker, I decided to check it out. She seemed surprisingly “average girl” for a Sports Illustrated swimsuit model. And since she is married to Andy Roddick, a favorite tennis player of mine, I wanted to find out a little about her. And I found out that she’s not a horrible actress! But it was an Adam Sandler movie. Not really my cup of tea, but I’m glad I gave it a shot. It was worth it for the ending, showing Decker’s character meeting a tennis player on the airplane. Andy Roddick cameoed. And it was hilarious. Decker’s character was a big ‘NSYNC fan (a plot device to show how young she was) and Roddick’s character was wearing an “I <3 Justin!” necklace. Worth it for just that scene. (5/10)

One Day - Loved the book. Absolutely loved the book. And after seeing the movie, I realized that this story isn’t suited for a movie. There’s too much involved. It follows Dex and Emma, who meet on graduation night, on the same day for the next twenty years. The movie cut out and shortened some of the days which may not have seemed important, but were vital for character growth. Anne Hathaway was a casting mistake. I don’t understand why they couldn’t have cast a British girl alongside Jim Sturges. I really liked him as Dex, though he wasn’t as likable in the film as he was in the book. It’s a great story, and the movie didn’t do it justice. (5/10)