Happy Birthday!!

....to the Man

Baby Mama (**1/2)

BABY MAMA
Written and Directed by Michael McCullers



**1/2

For the last couple years, it seems that the aura of Tina Fey has continued to grow more and more. She became somewhat of a cult hit as the host of Weekend Update on "Saturday Night Live". She gained a lot of recognition, and a Writer's Guild nomination for her script for the teenage hit Mean Girls. She left SNL, and created the brilliant NBC sitcom "30 Rock", and plays the main character Liz Lemon--an ode to her geek chic style. "30 Rock" has won numerous Emmys, and Golden Globes, leading the way for Fey to headline a Hollywood motion picture for the first time in her career. It's a wonder it didn't happen sooner.

Joining her is fellow Second City comedienne, and former Weekend Update co-host Amy Poehler. Together they team up for the incredibly light film Baby Mama. The story is about Kate (Fey), an independent, wealthy woman who works for a health food company, but has been struck with a sudden case of baby fever, when she realizes her biological clock is ticking. She tries adoption, but can't seem to break through. She tries to get artificially inseminated, but her doctor has issues with her "T-shaped uterus", and claims she is infertile. Finally, Kate finds a solution to her problem.

She finds a surrogate mother program, led by an extremely fertile, but extremely strange older woman (Sigourney Weaver), who explains the process to Kate. That is when Kate comes into contact with Angie (Poehler), a coarse woman, with no manners and a slick tongue. Together, Kate and Angie decide that Angie will be the surrogate mother, and carry Kate's child. All seems well for Kate, when Angie becomes pregnant, but when Angie dumps her loser "common law" husband (Dax Sheppard), Angie decides to move into Kate's apartment.

There is plenty of odd couple moments between Kate and Angie (Angie sticks numerous pieces of chewed gum under Kate's coffee table), and they get under each other's skin on more than one occasion, but over time they come to understand and respect each other, forming a strong friendship. Weaving in and out of the story is Rob (Greg Kinnear), a fruit drink store owner who catches Kate's eye; and also, there is Oscar (Romany Malco), a doorman with a heart of gold and a strangely close relationship with the hotel's patrons.

It's a credit to the cast and their comic ability that this film comes off as funny and warm, since the story is framed by a script that is so incredibly mild and safe, that is guaranteed to only be liked by everybody or nobody. Nothing will surprise you, and everything unfolds so conventionally that there is never any real suspense to the story, whatever twists and turns that McCullers tried to throw in. Any fans of Fey's and Poehler's past comedy will be underwhelmed by this film's complete lack of bite, no doubt a technique used to agree with the most demographics possible.

But in the end, the chemistry between Fey and Poehler is infectious, as well as hilarious. Fey proves once again that she can be a very dependable actress when she is put in her comfort zone, and Kate is role taylor-made for her wonderful sarcasm and straight-man reactions. On the other hand, Poehler is a revelation. Angie is not an incredibly complex character, but Poehler takes the character and runs wild with it, creating someone who is as smart as she is inept, and as confident as she is neurotic.

Everything in this movie is supposed to feel bubbly, almost to a fault, but it's compelling to watch these actors have fun with this light material. Steve Martin makes a wonderfully funny cameo as Kate's narcissistic guru boss, but that is the only thing this film has in the way of edge. Malco, Kinnear, Sheppard, and Weaver are all dedicated to their confined roles, and with the guidance of Fey and Poehler, there is nothing dissatisfying in this film, and it gets the audience result that it searches for: a chuckle and a smile.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall (***)

FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL
Directed by Nicholas Stoller



***

Despite Forgetting Sarah Marshall being a startling impressive debut from director Nic Stoller, and featuring to television stars in Kristen Bell and Mila Kunis, the undeniable star of this film is Jason Segal. The film's writer, and main star, Segal's presence is the dominant one throughout. Segal is another member of the oh-so-popular Apatow comedy crew. I bet I wasn't the only one who cringed when Apatow but his name on a blunder like Drillbit Taylor, but it didn't take long, and with the help of Segal's hilarious script, the Apatow films continue on successfully.

Peter Bretter (Segal) is a composer who writes music for a hit cop television show titled "Crime Scene", and is lucky enough to be the boyfriend of the show's superstar lead, Sarah Marshall (Bell). Everything is fine for Peter, until Sarah decides to break up with him. The news is so surprising to Peter, it's jaw-dropping (and towel-dropping, with Segal letting it all hang out). He can't get over Sarah, but attempts to by sleeping with random women. Unfortunately, this doesn't fix his broken heart. Taking advice from his helpful step-brother Brian (Bill Hader), Peter decides to go on a vacation to clear his mind.

Off to Hawaii Peter goes, only to find that Sarah has decided to stay at the same hotel. Making it even more unbearable for Peter, is that Sarah has dragged along her sex-addicted, rock star boyfriend Aldous Snow (Russell Brand). The one bright spot in Peter's trip is meeting Rachel (Kunis), a free-spirited woman, who's sympathetic to Peter's plight, having been on the wrong end of break-ups before in her life. In between awkward moments and run-ins with the oddballs of the hotel, Rachel begins to help Peter realize that there may be more to life than just Sarah Marshall, as broken-hearted as he is.

So, we all know where this one is going to go, right? In a way, that is the beauty of all of the Apatow comedies. None of them are about the destination, but about the journey. Sure, plot lines are recycled throughout this film from other romantic comedies, but it's the execution of this picture that makes it so unforgettable and so unbelievably funny. Segal's script is so honest, yet so hysterical. The words are so subtle, sometimes the heart in them is hard to comprehend, particularly when they are behind so many weed and sex jokes. But the heart is there.

We've all heard by now of Segal's notorious full-frontal scenes. Other than shock value, the scene showcases Segal's commitment to the film (not that Segal appearing nude in a film is anything particularly surprising). Of course, the film's humor is abundant, such as the numerous segments from "Crime Scene", in which Sarah co-stars with William Baldwin, who spurts out one one-liner after another ("I don't think she'll be able to re-enter that pageant... without a face").

Segal is buoyed by his supporting cast. Kunis, who's grown into a glowing beauty since her days on "That 70's Show", is probably the most rounded female character in any of the Apatow comedies. Her brashness, as well as her sweetness, play well throughout. Bell, ironically a TV star herself with "Heroes" and the now-canceled "Veronica Mars", seems to add all of it to her role as Sarah Marshall. Of course, Sarah comes around to Peter again, but Bell pulls it off with honesty, not schitck. Then, of course, there is Russell Brand. Already a famous comic in England, Brand's spot-on portrayal of rock star narcissism is gut-bustingly funny, perhaps getting the biggest laughs of the whole movie.

There is no Apatow comedy without the onslaught of hysterical minor characters, fleshed out by the Apatow mainstays. There's Matthew (Jonah Hill), the waiter who is constantly pestering Aldous with his own rock star ambitions. There's Chuck (Paul Rudd), a surfing coach who is in a constant state of weed-induced utopia, allowing him to say such classic lines as "the weather outside is weather". Also, we meet Derald (Jack McBrayer from "30 Rock"), a God-fearing newlywed, whose frightened about having to consummate the marriage. These are roles and performances that are more ambient than useful to the plot, but without them, the film's hilarious energy would not be the same.

Overall, I don't know if I'd endorse this film as much as The 40 Year Old Virgin or Knocked Up, but it is more in the league of last year's hit Superbad, and that's not a bad place to be. This is not a film for children, nor a film for anyone who is averse to seeing Jason Segal's penis (it makes a cameo in two scenes). But it is easily the best comedy to come out so far this year. Filled to the brim with uproarious scenes, it still manages to be somewhat earnest about heartbreak and falling in love. In the end, that's what makes it stay with you after you leave the theater.

Smart People (**1/2)

SMART PEOPLE
Directed by Noam Murro



**1/2

The story goes: renowned commercial director Noam Murro was approached to make his feature film debut with The Ring Two. Murro, after much consideration, turned it down, and decided to introduce himself to the film world with Smart People. Not having seen The Ring Two, I couldn't really say giving up one for the other was a good decision, but I can say that Murro's first film does struggle with a contrived plot. The film's charm, though, comes from it's wonderful, star-studded cast.

The story is about Lawrence Wetherhold (Dennis Quaid), a widowed father of two, who teaches (well, kind of) English at a university. He's become a crusty curmudgeon, judging his students before even meets them, citing that students today do not have the right amount of passion for literature to properly digest his grumpy teaching methods. His son, James (Ashton Holmes), attends the school where Lawrence teaches, but tries his best to avoid him because of Lawrence's crass attitude. Lawrence lives alone with his over-achieving daughter Vanessa (Ellen Page), who's own behavior is no less self-absorbed then her father's.

After suffering a seizure, Lawrence meets Dr. Janet Hartigan (Sarah Jessica Parker), whom he learns later was a former student of his. She tells him that a seizure legally prevents him from driving for no less than six months. Catching wind of the opportunity, Lawrence's adopted, never-do-well brother, Chuck (Thomas Haden Church) decides to be a chauffeur, and in return is given a place to stay. As the story moves forward, Lawrence develops a romantic relationship with Dr. Hartigan, and Chuck attempts to teach Vanessa how to get fun out of life.

The film was produced by Michael London, the same guy who was behind the masterpiece Sideways. There are many concepts within Smart People that reminded me of Sideways, mainly the cranky, socially-nonfunctional protagonist whose only coerced out of his introverted persona by a sweeping romance. The big difference between the two films though is its story development. With Sideways, we never wonder why the characters do what they do, because the film took the time to truly develop them, making sure the audience knew them better than they even knew themselves. Smart People--which was penned by first-timer Mark Jude Poirier--has a conflict which goes from sad, to happy, and back to sad so inexplicably, we wonder why these characters do anything we see them do in the film.

But that being said, I enjoyed Smart People quite a bit. Its quick-witted, snappy dialogue pops, and the film has a perfect cast to fill the shows of every part. Dennis Quaid, a much underrated actor, finds a soul within the grizzled Lawrence. It's difficult play a character that's so unbelievably unlikable, yet is on the screen more than 75 percent of the time. Very easily, he could have given Lawrence a very honorable personality, to give him more leeway with the audience, but instead, he makes Lawrence even sadder, more sunken into his own narcissism. I wouldn't be surprised if Quaid's performance turns off some of his loyal fans, but it was the right thing to do for the character.

Thomas Haden Church, an actor with uncanny comedic ability brings most of the laughs of the film. Church, an actor who's always brought depth to his black sheep characters (see him also in his Oscar-nominated performance in Sideways), gives little to no energy to Chuck, instead relying on his subtlety and comedic timing to flesh his slacker character out (not to mention more than one shot of him bare-ass). Ellen Page, the little Canadian that could, is in full Juno-mode here, if Juno were a grade-grubbing Republican, whose worries were not babies but getting a perfect score on the SAT. But there is a depth to her performance, creating a character with complex (almost Oedipus-like) issues, brought on by her maddening father. It's not until Chuck brings it out of her, that she sees the emptiness of her ambitions.

Parker and Holmes, as well, are striking in their supporting roles, each successfully portraying how someone can both hate and fall in love with Lawrence. Truth is, for a first director, Murro truly hit the jackpot with his cast. This film is hard to market; it is certainly too high brow for casual moviegoers, but not nearly as complex for hardcore movie fans to give full acclaim. I, myself, am on the fence with this one, and probably won't know my true opinion of the film's quality until I view it a second time. But I will say this, I enjoyed this more than I enjoyed any other film I've seen so far in 2008, so I guess that's something.

10 Music Videos

This is a bit of a sidetrack, but this was a list of the ten best music videos I thought up the other day while I was bored.

10. "Hypnotize", Notorious B.I.G.

The quintessential rap video of the nineties: big-budget, shot in widescreen, and equipped with a strong, intriguing plot line (usually hacking off a famous action film). Though Tupac’s “California Love” was bigger in terms of style, concept, and popularity, it was B.I.G.’s “Hypnotize” which perfected this style of video which is still common today. Involving a sing-a-long bouncing ball which allows to follow along with the lines of the song, our eyes are mostly focused on one of the best car chase scenes in music video history, which involves B.I.G.’s sidekick at the time, Sean “Puff Daddy” Combs, driving backwards. What it lacks in coherence it makes up in style with the white suits, and the surprisingly stunning cinematography.



9. "Freedom '90", George Michael

George Michael’s career has seemed to have an unfortunate devolution into numerous gay jokes, but he was at his peak in the year 1990, when he released the song “Freedom ‘90”, a huge hit that was supported by a wonderful music video. The video, which involves numerous famous super models of the time canoodling alone within a ragged building, while simultaneously lip-synching the lines of the song, was most notorious for the absence of Michael himself. Looking to do away with his Wham! past, Michael took himself virtually out of the video, instead being replaced by Naomi Campbell, Linda Evangelista, and Cindy Crawford. Nobody can forget the ceremonial explosion of his niche leather jacket and jukebox.



8. "Smells Like Teen Spirit", Nirvana

Nirvana's introduction to the music world came with a bang, leaving the phony prestige of 80's hair bands in their dust. Set in a murky school gym, it was a video that reached out displayed teen angst in its most bare form. With essentially every band member covered by long, unclean hair, the band performs with an audience of moshing schoolchildren, and high school is shown the way it feels for most of it's inhabitants: a grim hell, where the only escape is letting off steam listening to your favorite band with the volume all the way up. It was as revolutionary as it was innovative, setting the stage for incoming alternative rock throughout the 90's, and inadvertently placing lead singer/songwriter Kurt Cobain to the forefront of the movement. The song and the video still stand as a cornerstone for that entire decade.



7. "Need You Tonight/Mediate", INXS

This double video, containing to songs and videos with completely different styles in terms of tone and complexity, became a huge hit in the late 80's. A majority of "Need You Tonight" consists of a groundbreaking (for its time) multi-layering technique which allowed a black & white band to play in the background, while a color, and almost grainy Michael Hutchence sang in the foreground. The dark tone of the video's visuals coincide with the song's dark, immediate lyrics. And for a moment, for what seems like no reason other than to add a moment of strangeness, Hutchence walks in the foreground with a white mouse nestled on his shoulder. "Mediate", the second part is a nice homage to Bob Dylan's "Subterranean Homesick Blues", arguably the first official music video, which you can see here.



6. "Virtual Insanity", Jamariquai

A video that is brilliant mostly because of it's simplicity. Consisting mostly of lead singer Jay Kay trying to find his way around a room where the floors refuse to stop moving, throwing couches, chairs, and love seats in every which direction. There are cameos made by several large bugs and a bird, and when all is said and done, both couches are left bloodied by the abuse the room has put them through. Sporting a trademark hat, Kay performs moves some of the best gymnasts couldn't pull off, working his way around a room where lord only knows which way the walls will close in on you. On top of everything, the hyperactive room and the bleeding furniture is all allegorical for the meaning of the song, spouting the fear that technology can have over our simple minds.



5. "Coffee & TV", Blur

Another video pulled along by allegory. The video tells the story of a very optimistic carton of milk attempting to find the missing son of the family who purchased him. On his journey, he comes along the terrors of the real world, including angry hookers, dark alleyways, and watching the love of his life (a pink milk carton), getting smashed rather violently by a rather omnipresent foot. Despite it all, the little carton continues on his trek, determined to find the boy, and when he finally does, the boy pays him back by drinking his milk, and throwing him in the trash. Representing our own mistreatment of the little guy, the video's imagery is bettered by the most adorable milk carton anyone's ever seen. There is a happy ending, though: he meets up with his pink-carton love in milk heaven.



4. "Everlong", Foo Fighters

After the end of Nirvana, drummer Dave Grohl moved over to the Foo Fighters, and when they released their underrated masterpiece The Colour and the Shape, along with it came the video for one of the album's biggest hits, "Everlong". The video, a dream sequence mixed with an action film mixed with a romance, is as hard-rocking as it is nonsensical. In a quest to save his wife from a dream in which she's being attacked by two strange men with Elvis hairdos, lead singer must go to sleep himself, to enter her dream and kill the attackers. His weapon? A magically large hand that grows when he gets angry, so he can bitch-slap people to death. Of coarse, all of the characters are played by the members of the band, and the video ends as they rip off their costumes and conclude the song, instruments in hand.



3. "Weapon of Choice", Fatboy Slim

There's a famous rumor that actor Christopher Walken has never turned down a part in his life. Whether or not that's true, I don't know for sure, but one thing that I do know for sure, is that Walken did not turn down the part for the Spike Jonze-directed Fatboy Slim video, "Weapon of Choice". The video displays the wackiness we've come to love from Walken, as he shows off some surprisingly good dance moves throughout an empty hotel lobby. Defiling desks, magazines, and escalators, Walken glides from area to area with an exuberance of a man half his age. His youthful energy becomes so much, that it actually allows him to fly toward the end. Brilliant in its simplicity, the video is a collaboration of two masters of their craft: Walken and Jonze. Hopefully, it is not the last of the projects the two will have together.



2. "Loser", Beck

From depths of underground folk in 1994, came the long-haired, pasty-white Beck. "Loser", a song mixing alternative guitar strumming mixed with nonsensical rap lyrics ("Shave your face with some mace in the dark"), struck a chord with most music-lovers, in the first sign of great music to come after Kurt Cobain's suicide. The film that has a message that combines apathy with downright laziness seemed was supported with a groundbreaking video that matched the song's style exactly. Consisting mostly of homemade-looking videos scrapped hastily together, creating a feeling of havoc which only Beck could make so harmonious. With film negative shots of exercising cheerleaders, and another image of death cleaning someone's windshield in blood, the film's viral energy brought Beck into pop music where his strange innovation still reigns true.



1. "Sledgehammer", Peter Gabriel

This is easily music video equivalent to Citizen Kane. It's innovation and bold attempt to recreate the definition of what a music video was make it stand any other music video of its or any time. Using stop-motion animation combined with Gabriel's face, we're able to go on a pretty interesting adventure through the depths of somebody's subconscious. The video's constant shape-shifting ability makes it fascinating to watch even today. At one point, "Sledgehammer" was the most played video in MTV history, played so much that Gabriel himself called to ask the station to please stop. The film's near-cinematic quality and hypnotizing visuals culminate in a sequence involving two uncooked, dancing chickens. Of coarse, the video ends as Gabriel shifts shape one last time, into a man made out of stars.

GREAT FILMS: Children of Men (2006)

GREAT FILMS: CHILDREN OF MEN (2006)
Directed by Alfonso Cuaron

After the critical smash Y Tu Mama Tambien, and summer blockbuster Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, director Alfonso Cuaron then moved on to his passion project. A film based on the dystopian novel by P.D. James entitled Children of Men. What came forward was an incredibly bleak film, detailing a future in which all hope is lost. In the near future, woman can no longer reproduce, spelling certain doom for the human race within the century.

As a result of this, the world has become a wasteland (note the many references to T.S. Elliot's work throughout the film), and only Britain has been able to continue as a somewhat functioning society. Not that they don't have their own issues, the country has to make sure to keep out any desperate refugees who are attempting to escape the horrors of the outside world in which everyone must fend for themselves. Amidst this all, the whole country is mourning the death of Baby Diego, who was, at 18, the youngest person on the planet.

Amongst the many shoved into the small island of the U.K., there is Theo Faron (Clive Owen), a disillusioned bureaucrat who's only pleasure comes from spending time with an old pothead/dealer named Jasper (Michael Caine, in a purely Lennon-esque look). Theo's life changes when he's kidnapped by his estranged ex-wife Julian (Julianne Moore), who is the head of the terrorist group called the Fishes, who work for the rights of illegal immigrants. She wants Theo to get transit papers in order to get a young woman to the coast.

It isn't until later in the film that we find out what makes the young woman, Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey), so special. Somehow, she has become pregnant. Realizing what is at stake, and later threatened by the crumbling Fishes, Theo convinces Kee and her midwife/bodyguard Miriam (Pam Ferris) to travel with him toward the coast in an attempt to get her to the Human Project, a mythological group of scientists who are attempting to find out what has stunted humans' abilities to make babies.

The plot, as convoluted as it sounds, is tight and flowing, as to not create confusion. The audience is left to suppose quite a bit of details for themselves. For example, there are no details given as to why most of the world has been destroyed, and until the end, you aren't even sure whether or not the Human Project exists or not. That said, those details are only complimentary, and by taking them away from us, Cuaron puts more of the film's focus on the turbulent journey of Theo and Kee.

The film is the total and complete vision of Cuaron, who experiments in long takes and grainy cinematography (by Emmanuel Lubezki). The film's violence--which there is much of--is shot entirely at eye-level, making you feel almost like an unwilling participant within this horrific society. In a moment of stunning filmmaking, a small splatter of blood gets in the lens of camera. As opposed to cutting away, the shot stays with the blood on the lens for nearly the entire six-minute take. There is even another long take, which takes place within a car. In the scene, the mood changes from cheerful to horrifying in a matter of moments, and it is all captured within one shot.

The power of the film comes from the human element. It is an unflinching meditation on the best and worst humanity is capable of, and the power of human will even through the world's darkest times. This element is supported by it's incredible cast. Clive Owen has always been an actor who has brimmed with subtle darkness under every character he plays, which makes him perfect for the role of Theo. Clare-Hope Ashitey's almost unaware portrayal of Kee is uncanny, mixing fear and toughness so well. The excellant supporting cast includes Moore, Ferris, as well as Chiwetel Fjiofor as Luke, the incredibly radical member of the Fishes. Above all, Michael Caine's small role as the long-haired, be-speckled Jasper is one of great exhilaration from a great actor, giving the film some comic relief which it desperately needs.

The film's climax is as satisfying as any classic film, and despite the film's dreary outlook, it's almost surprising to find that the film's entire theme depends on hope. Human beings have managed to survive on Earth for millions of years, and this film manages to capture the resiliency of the human race to find the light throughout all of the darkness. A true masterpiece in the tradition of 1984 or Fahrenheit 451, I do not see Children of Men as a cautionary tale. After all, we don't know why the world was destroyed, and film has no ecological preaching. Instead, the film stresses the importance of continuing soldier on, despite the desolate odds.

Stop-Loss (***)

STOP-LOSS
Co-written and Directed by Kimberly Pierce



***

People have been waiting for a film to fully digest the War on Terror going on in Iraq. Films like In The Valley of Elah tried, but their heavy-handed messages sent more than a few people away. There has yet to be a film to comprehend this war, the way Saving Private Ryan did World War II, or Apocalypse Now did Vietnam. Hell, even the first Gulf War was perfectly dissected in Three Kings. With Stop-Loss, we have a film that's earnest--if to a fault--and brutal in it's portrayal of wartime dehumanization. What I noticed mostly when watching the film though, is that it is nearly impossible to make a coherent war movie, when the war that it's portraying makes close to no sense.

Stop-Loss is the second feature film from Kimberly Pierce, the same filmmaker who also co-wrote and directed the single most iconic film about homosexuality to date, with Boys Don't Cry. After that, though, she's seemingly been a ghost within the film industry. Like Boys Don't Cry, her latest film is pretty grizzly as well as up, close, and personal. This film pulsates with an energy that was absent from most films made about this war, and though it can't quite steer clear of unneeded sentimentality, it's brashness leaves it's mark in your mind.

The film is about Sgt. Brandon King (Ryan Phillipe), a squad leader who comes home a war hero, decorated by the purple star. Coming home with him are his buddies Steve (Channing Tatum) and Tommy (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). They're happy to be home, but are almost immediately haunted by the images they saw during the war. Steve and Tommy both have troubles with their fiances, when their nightmares turn into blind rage. Brandon, particularly, cannot forget leading his men into an ambush where men were killed and many others were wounded.

But all is well, because Brandon's tour of duty is finished and he can stay home. That is, until he is stop-lost. Stop-loss is a part of his military contract which allows the Army to send him back into the war, even after his tour is over. "It's like a back-door draft," Brandon explains to his parents. Filled with rage, and unwilling to go back to the Middle East, Brandon goes AWOL, and takes off with Steve's fiance Michelle (Abbie Cornish) toward Washington D.C., to get help from a senator who'd previously promised to give Brandon anything he'd ask for. The closer he and Michelle get to D.C. the more they both realize the futility of Brandon's race. Brandon's options quickly begin to shrink in front of him, and so does, unfortunately, the film's steam.

The movie mostly succeeds when focused on the shell-shocked soldiers. Sure, Phillipe, Tatum, and Gordon-Levitt look more like Calvin Klein underwear models than Texas good ol' boys, but it doesn't stop each of them from expressing the pain and anguish of the three disillusioned boys. Pierce, in her two films, has shown that her imagery is generally uncompromising, particularly when showcasing raw emotion. Even during the few good times that the boys have back at home, they all walk around, morose and with a violent burst just waiting to show itself.

Being produced by MTV Films, there are definitely more than a few moments when montages are spurred together like music videos, and the melodrama becomes a bit overwrought. Essentially, these have been the issues with all the films made about the current Iraq war, and consequently, every single one of those films has been universally rejected by the public audiences. This film, though, does take a bold step forward, closely showcasing our violent intrusion into a country we know nothing about.

What keeps the film afloat for the most part is the work of it's star cast. Being a fan of Gordon-Levitt for a long time, his striking--albeit, short--performance as Tommy was more than intriguing. This is my first look at Channing Tatum, a former model, and luckily he doesn't overstep his boundaries as the sharp-shooting Steve, but instead brings a quiet, contained rage to a very complex character. Abbie Cornish's performance as Michelle is good, even if her character is puzzling. Why drive across the country with your fiance's best friend? She's able to sell the idea of it.

More than anyone, though, the work of Ryan Phillipe as Brandon is the most impressive. Phillipe has always seemed to be a member of the Keanu Reeves Wooden Actor Society, but with his startling, yet subdued portrayal of a man who is forced to go against his very own beliefs is more than uncanny. This kind of character is difficult to play, because it is so easy to slip through the cracks and begin to ham it up, but Phillipe's ability to balance between the brewing anger and the restrained leadership is not only inspired, but captivating.

I'm sure many will judge this film based on their own political beliefs, which is unfair, since this film rarely deals with any type of politics (except for one very entertaining "Fuck the president!" rant by Phillipe). That said, as long as were are still overseas, people will only respond to this movie with polarizing viewpoints. All that aside, it's a very entertaining film, even if it does slug through it's second act quite a bit. It's not the masterpiece which will help us understand this war, but it's abrasiveness has shown that non-documentaries can be made to show the horror of what our troops are going through.

Drillbit Taylor (*)

DRILLBIT TAYLOR
Directed by Steven Brill



*

The latest Judd Apatow comedy, Drillbit Taylor, deals with three bullied teenagers that hire a homeless, ex-military man to be their bodyguard. When the three boys first think over the idea, one of the boys, Ryan (Troy Gentile), exclaims "That's one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard". Needless to say, most of the audience will feel the same way, and walk away pondering why they would then employ this very, very "stupid" idea.

Drillbit Taylor takes place in one of those Hollywood high schools where the nerdy and the not-so-nerdy are very easy to tell apart, and the bullies aren't perturbed young men with insecure complexes, but homicidal maniacs who attempt to run nerds over with their car. The nerds in question are the before mentioned Ryan, who's the usual pudgy smart-mouth, and his friend Wade (Nate Hartley) who's skinny figure leaves him victim to nicknames like "Skeletor". They eventually befriend the tiny, musical-loving Emmit (David Dorfman), who exudes nerdy-ness because he's short.

When a crazy bully named Filkins (Alex Frost) wreaks unspeakable (and unpunished) havoc on their lives, they decide to hire a bodyguard. Not only does this give the film an excuse to show a montage of unsuitable bodyguards, but it gives the kids the chance to meet Drillbit Taylor (Owen Wilson). Taylor is homeless, showers on the beach, and sees the three boys as a chance to make some cash, since he's saving some money to take a life-changing trip to Canada.

With ease, Drillbit penetrates the boys' high school as a substitute teacher, Dr. Illbit, and falls for the English teacher Lisa (Leslie Mann). Lisa seems to be the most unprofessional, nymphomaniacal teachers I've ever seen, as she hops into bed with Drillbit between classes, and then bemoans the fact that she "only attracts losers". Of coarse, Drillbit decides to leave his conniving plans behind when he decides that he actually cares about Wade, Ryan, and Emmit. The sentimentality isn't too forceful, but it's still enough to make you sick.

I guess I've become spoiled by films like Superbad and Juno, but it really angers me when people sit down to write scripts about high schools that NEVER existed. High schools where crazy students can punch substitute teachers with no consequence, and where that same crazy student makes the same remark to Wade after being provoked, "What? Do you think I'm dumb? Trying to get me in trouble?". It's all the more disappointing when you find out the film is co-written by Superbad's co-writer and co-star Seth Rogan.

What makes this film most irritating is this film's strange documentation of human behavior. What world does this take place? A world where supposedly smart, pretty English teachers give it up to temps who they've hardly known. A world that has a bully with no parents, yet drives a Bentley and lives in a mansion. And of coarse, a world were there are enough kicks to the crotch that you wonder how anybody produces children. Can someone please explain to me how two young boys punching each other (to learn how to "block out the pain") is funny?

Filkins, the extremely sociopathic, violent bully is played by Alex Frost, previously seen as one of the deranged killers in Gus Van Sant's meditation on school shootings, Elephant. Part of you expects Frost to begin wielding one of those M-80 rifles, since he spends most of the film darting eyes that make him look like a descendant of Charles Manson. But of coarse, he goes along unpunished, and even unscolded by anyone in school. I know it's a comedy, but are we really supposed to just buy this?

You may have noticed how I've avoided most discussion on the film's titular star, Owen Wilson. That's only because I wanted to discuss that on it's own. If anyone's ever seen Wilson's performances in his four Wes Anderson collaborations, you know that Wilson is a performer with great depth and incredible comedic timing. Yet, it seems, for the most part, his talent is left to rot on films with little to no point, and an extremely mistaken view of reality. Truth is, I gave the film one star for the few laughs Wilson's able to cook up in this abomination, but even he doesn't seem like he's enjoying himself too much. He has much more ability than say Vince Vaughn or Will Farrell, but why does he seem fixated on roles meant for those kinds of actors?

Overall, the film's laughs come few and far between. Judd Apatow has been living at the summit of film comedy for the last four years, but this film is really his first major blunder. There's nothing horrible or offensive in Drillbit Taylor, but maybe what makes this film so bland is it's lack of risks or variety. Every story line fits together with convenient erraticism, and not to mention the film's length. There was a time when films knew when they were supposed to be under 90 minutes long. This film has the cojones to go over a hundred.

Paul Thomas Anderson

How many filmmakers could juggle the complex characterization of Hard Eight? The sprite humor combined with tragedy within Boogie Nights? The labyrinth of tortured characters in the masterpiece Magnolia? Find the beauty throughout all the strangeness in Punch-Drunk Love? And then, create his most epic, ambitious picture with There Will Be Blood? To be frank, I could name plenty of filmmakers who could've accomplished each feat individually, but I honestly can't think of one who could have done all of them and within the one twelve-year period. Anderson is still young, and has yet to be sucked into his own cuteness the way Stanley Kubrick had and the way Woody Allen has, but the films are already legendary. Here's a little movie to bring it all back:

The Tracey Fragments (**1/2)

THE TRACEY FRAGMENTS
Directed by Bruce McDonald



**1/2

Tracey is a trouble-maker. She hypnotized her little brother, Sonny, into thinking he was a dog. Tracey is an outcast. She is alienated by all her peers, and ridiculed relentlessly by boys and girls alike as the "Titless Wonder". Tracey is a romantic. When she sees a new boy named Billy Zero in her school she fantasizes about all the wonderful times they would share if they were sexually intimate. Tracey is fragmented, as the director Bruce McDonald, is frequently reminding us throughout the film.

While watching this exciting independent film, a lot of things told me that it didn't work, but there's something to wonder about a project brimming with ambition. IMDb lists this movie as the "First feature film to use Mondrian multi-frame compositions for the entire length", and part of me hopes it's the last, because it requires the audience to sit through constant split screens that are more annoying than the unbelievably "unsteady" use of Steadicam in Cloverfield.

And after all that, I still can't get The Tracy Fragments out of my head. The story is about a 15-year-old girl named Tracey (Ellen Page). Really, that is the most definitive plot summary I can give you, but I can give you more details. After losing her younger brother, Sonny, she runs away from home to try and find him. Also, Tracey is considered a total freak in her high school, and the only salvation she gets from attending is daydreaming about the new kid in school named Billy Zero (Slim Twig) who is equally "freakish". Also, Tracey's parents are irrational, and self-destructive, and are seemingly trying to make Tracey go insane (it can be agreed that Sonny is already insane, being he thinks he's a dog and all).

There are other sub-plots, including Tracey's relationship with an androgynous therapist (Julian Richings), and Tracey's other relationship with a man named Lance (Maxwell McCabe-Lokos), who may or may not be a drug dealer. Lance takes her in for a little while after she's run away. I think you see where I'm going here. The story lines are so convoluted, you really don't know which is being followed at any particular time, nor can you even decipher the difference between them until the end. When I felt that I'd finally understood what was actually going on in this film, I came to the conclusion: to the point that I do understand, I don't really care.

I'd be remiss to say that I watched this film for any other reason than my newfound admiration for the young actress Ellen Page. I feel safe saying that it is her unbelievably nuanced performance as Tracey that makes this film, at times, enchanting. Just like in her films Juno and Hard Candy, Page's ability to deliver such powerfully intimate dialogue while still staying true to her character is uncanny. It's important to say that the characters she plays in each of the three films are completely different, yet her performances come off so natural, to the point where she has become hypnotizing. It's no wonder Page has sometimes been confused as "playing herself".

There are moments in The Tracey Fragments when the idea of teenage alienation is shown quite honestly. I wished McDonald had toned down his use of the split screen, and I also prayed the looping of the same lines of dialogue over and over again would end. They never did. There were times when I felt comfortable with it, and others where it just flat-out got in the way. But part of me was intrigued by this style, and maybe in better hands, this type of filmmaking can inspire some true innovation. The uneasiness I felt with this film is the right kind. The kind where you know that the filmmakers involved truly stretched their imaginations as far as they could.

The Tracey Fragments is an indie from Canada, made with what seems like little to no budget, and may or may not be released in the US around May. It can be found on the internet in numerous places, but I'm sure it's chaotic style is more appropriate for the big screen. I can't go quite as far as to call the film a success because it's flaws are large and glaring, but it should be said that it delivers an iconic performance from one of the best young talents in the business. That alone, is something to watch. It's interesting to watch actors and directors take a chance. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't, but it is always more enjoyable than box office fodder.

The 2007 Academy Awards: A Review

THE 2007 ACADEMY AWARDS: A REVIEW

Congrats to No Country, Javier Bardem, and the Coens. It was their night more than anyone else's despite winning only four in an evenly-spaced award ceremony. All five of the Best Picture nominees won at least one award, though There Will Be Blood was the only other movie to win more than one, scoring two: one for Daniel Day-Lewis in the Best Actor category, and the other for Robert Elswit's cinematography. Tilda Swinton's surprise win in the Best Supporting Actress category for Michael Clayton was pleasant, and Bardem won his much-predicted Supporting Actor award. I didn't totally agree with Marion Cotillard's win in the Best Actress category for La Vie en Rose, but it was a joy to see her ecstatic happiness when she accepted it. All in all, I don't have much to say here. I was happy Diablo Cody won Best Original Screenplay for Juno, if only to rub it in the face of all of it's smug criticizers who are more pretentious than the film will ever be. Jon Stewart was funny, and in a night with so many Hollywood hard-hitters, even Glen Hasard and Marketa Irklova from Once were able to share in the joy when they won Best Original Song for "Falling Slowly". Great night, great movies, and now we start again and look forward to 2008.

Oscar Predix: Who Will/Should Win

OSCAR PREDIX: WHO WILL/SHOULD WIN

In the stacked 2007, predicting the Oscars will prove to be as easy as, say, picking my favorite Beatles song, but alas, it is a necessary evil in the world of the obsessive movie snob. Some are pretty obvious, some not so much. What will follow are my true predictions to who will win, and who I'd give it to if I had the single, only vote.

BEST PICTURE

WHAT WILL WIN:
No Country For Old Men. Yeah, There Will Be Blood was equally loved by the critics, but it's dark strangeness will put so many people off, as unforgettable as it is. Juno was the big-time box office hit, but the backlash against the film has been so hard, I can't see it coming out on top. With Michael Clayton and Atonement just being happy to be nominated, the stage has been set for No Country and the Coen brothers to get their gold statue.

WHAT SHOULD WIN:
No Country For Old Men. I can't think of a reason to describe why this is the film of the year which I haven't already said. Suffice to say, that if you saw it, there wouldn't be any discussion. Period.

BEST ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE

WHO WILL WIN:
Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood. This is pretty locked up for the meticulous method actor. Other than Clooney's subtle turn in Michael Clayton, there is little to no competition.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Tommy Lee Jones, In The Valley Of Elah. The film is average, but Jones is outstanding. It's hard to pick him over Clooney or Day-Lewis, but what the decision comes down to is that Jones controls the dramatic emotion better than both of them. The simmering anger only explodes when it's supposed to, and for the rest of time, he keeps his cool.

BEST ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE

WHO WILL WIN:
Julie Christie, Away From Her. Christie, the English goddess, has been riding a wave of buzz since May when the film was released. Marion Cotillard is close behind her with her portrayal of Edith Piaf in La Vie En Rose, and Ellen Page could surprise everyone by winning for her enormously popular performance in Juno. That said, it seems obvious that Christie will have the upper hand and walk away with her second Oscar.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Ellen Page, Juno. For anyone who actually reads my blog, you will know that this is a change of heart for me, as I've supported every single aspect of the film Away From Her. That said, no other actress nominated dominates like Page (no, not even Cotillard, who owes credit to her make-up, not her ability) in her respective film. She has strong wit, and real emotion. It's the performance that will be remembered the longest.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

WHO WILL WIN:
Javier Bardem, No Country For Old Men. This is just a straight lock. No explanation or analysis needed. Unless Assassination of Jesse James fans catch Casey Affleck fever, this is the most predictable category.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Javier Bardem, No Country For Old Men. Every single characteristic of Bardem's Anton Chigurh is memorable: the stun gun, the oxygen tank, the haircut, the coin flip, "Friendo"--it all adds to what is already one of the greatest movie villains of all time.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

WHO WILL WIN:
Ruby Dee, American Gangster. This is where things begin to get interesting. Every single nominated performance has a true shot here. Cate Blanchett was the early front-runner, for her take on Bob Dylan in I'm Not There, but the film's title can be considered a summation of how the general public felt about the movie. Then Amy Ryan literally swept all of the major critics awards as the irresponsible mom in Gone Baby Gone. Now, there are rumblings since Tilda Swinton won the BAFTA award for Michael Clayton. That said, I think the Academy will settle on giving it to Ruby Dee for what was basically an extended cameo in American Gangster, rewarding her for her lifetime achievement.

WHO SHOULD WIN
Tilda Swinton, Michael Clayton. Right from the time that she's introduced, Swinton's Karen Crowder is a ball of nerves. She practices her television speeches religiously, and plans her schemes with such meticulous detail, it is only more damaging to her as she watches it all fall apart. Watch for a killer showdown between Clooney and Swinton at the end of the film which brings everything to a incredibly satisfying conclusion.

BEST DIRECTOR

WHO WILL WIN
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, No Country For Old Men. It's fair to say that they've got this award more locked up than Best Picture, since they've won the DGA award, which is always a fair prediction. Paul Thomas Anderson was finally recognized by the Academy, and Julian Schnabel's magical vision made The Diving Bell and The Butterfly spectacular, but I don't see either surmounting the Coens here.

WHO SHOULD WIN
Julian Schnabel, The Diving Bell and The Butterfly. This movie was made with such beautiful imagination and vision, and none of that would have been possible without the work of Schnabel. His chances seem low, with Diving Bell not being nominated for Best Picture, but one of the few things good about being snubbed, is that it never takes away from the beauty on the screen.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

WHO WILL WIN:
Diablo Cody, Juno. In an outpouring of witty dialogue and heartwarming characters, cult-blogger Diablo Cody created the most beloved little movie of 2007. The script has little to no competition, as it has been cherished since the film's premiere at the Toronto Film Festival.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Tony Gilroy, Michael Clayton. The script doesn't make you laugh or smile like Juno, but in the end, the effect is just as fulfilling. Gilroy has been a much-respected screenwriter for a very long time, but it isn't till now that he's getting the recognition that deserves. Truth is, Gilroy has probably the only slight chance of up-ending Cody at the ceremony.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

WHO WILL WIN:
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, No Country For Old Men. The Coens actually have one a previous Oscar for screen writing, when they won the 1996 award for Fargo. That said, this is the first time they took the "adapted" route. Also, many feel that awarding the Coens is a way to award the beloved Cormac McCarthy, who wrote the book on which the film is based.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, No Country For Old Men. I was tempted to say Paul Thomas Anderson, cause I love his movies so much, but the fact is this: There Will Be Blood's main weakness begins with it's screenplay. That, plus the Coen's reworking of Cormac McCarthy is uncanny, tense, and actually has some smatterings of humor.

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

WHO WILL WIN:
Roger Deakins, No Country For Old Men. It only helps that Deakins' biggest competition is, well, himself for The Assassination of Jesse James. Robert Elswit's widescreened tunnel view for There Will Be Blood has a shot, as well as multiple winner Janusz Kaminski's brilliant work in The Diving Bell and The Butterfly. That said, Deakins has been an Oscar bridesmaid five times before, they'll give it to him this time.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Roger Deakins, but surprisingly, for The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford. I just saw the film recently, and I was completely floored by the beauty of Deakins' work in it. The film itself is long-winded, but so very, very tranquil. Most of that credit goes to Deakins.

BEST EDITING

WHO WILL WIN:
Christopher Rouse, The Bourne Ultimatum. Of course, this movie does have the most edits, so it's got that going for it. All in all, this film relishes itself in it's own editing technique more than any other film nominated, which is why it's the front-runner, despite going up against films like There Will Be Blood and No Country.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Dylan Tichenor, There Will Be Blood. I'd love to see 'Roderick James' win for No Country, and watch the Coens "accept it on his behalf", but that's mostly for a laugh. Tichenor's job at slowly pulling together this deliberately-paced film is something that shouldn't go unnoticed.

BEST ART DIRECTION

WHO WILL WIN:
Sarah Greenwood, Atonement. This was a big, lofty picture, and films of that kind usually dominate awards like this. The recreation of Dunkirk, the beautiful Tallis estate, it's all there. And the Oscar's there too.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Jack Fisk, There Will Be Blood. Fisk does just as good of a job as Greenwood, but his job entitles him to do the exact opposite. While Atonement is sprawling and beautiful, Fisk creates a dismal dystopia from the 1920's. All the houses are creaking, but that giant oil well stands gloriously.

BEST COSTUME DESIGN

WHO WILL WIN:
Jacqueline Durran, Atonement. Keira Knightley's green dress has already become the most famous costume since Audrey Hepburn donned a black dress as Holly Golightley in Breakfast At Tiffany's. Sure, Elizabeth: The Golden Age recreates Elizabethan England, and Sweeney Todd's costumes add to the already morose characters, but none of them have that green dress.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Jacqueline Durran, Atonement. Did I mention that green dress? To be fair, the work in the film is balanced throughout, be it with the soldier's soiled attire, to the stark white nurse uniforms.

BEST MAKE-UP

WHO WILL WIN:
Jan Archibald, La Vie En Rose. I can't see the Academy honoring Norbit (the nomination alone was baffling), and the third Pirates of the Carribean always had a luke-warm following. So, that being said, Rose wins by default.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Jan Archibald, La Vie En Rose. I didn't see the other two films, and don't plan to (Do you? Didn't think so). To be fair though, Archibald's make-up is the real star of this film, concealing the gorgeous Marion Cotillard in the body of the brash Edith Piaf.

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE

WHO WILL WIN:
Dario Marianelli, Atonement. Combining the typewriter keys to the blistering music was a smart choice on Marianell's part. He lost the last time he was nominated for his much superior work in Pride & Prejudice, so he'll get it this time.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Dario Marianelli, Atonement. I liked all of the scores nominated very much, but Marianelli's work, in all of his films including this, seems to stick with me. Still humming it in my head.

BEST ORIGINAL SONG

WHO WILL WIN:
"Falling Slowly" from Once. Enchanted may have stolen three of the five nominations, but that really does nothing for the film, except cancel all of the nominations out. They'll give it to the rarely recognized indie gem Once.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
"Falling Slowly" from Once. Come on, have you heard the song? If you have, you'll understand what I'm saying.

BEST SOUND/SOUND EDITING
(Connecting them, cause I believe they'll be won by the same guy)

WHO WILL WIN:
Kevin O' Connell, Transformers. Not that I know jack-crap about sound, but there is an interesting dynamic here. Nominee Kevin O'Connell has been nominated 19 times (NINETEEN!?!?!), and has yet to win one. He's like the Susan Lucci of the Oscars, except no one knows who he is. The Oscars like to give out these kind of back-patting awards, and I'll think they'll do here.

WHO SHOULD WIN:
Skip Lievsay, No Country For Old Men. Well, I just said that I know jack-crap about sound, so my opinion on the matter should be moot, but there are moments in No Country where the sound is used so well (Llewelyn waiting for Anton in the hotel room). Anything that makes me understand the concept of sound is what I think should be considered the winner.

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS

WHO WILL/SHOULD WIN: Transformers. Haven't seen any of the three nominated films, but this one has giant cars changing shapes, while the other two have pirates (Pirates of the Carribean) and talking polar bears (The Golden Compass). I'll go with the morphing automobiles.

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

WHAT WILL WIN:
Ratatouille. I think Persepolis may have won over more critics, but Ratatouille did the impossible by making everyone fall in love with the idea of a rat cooking food for human beings (there are never any health issues addressed in the film).

WHAT SHOULD WIN:
Ratatouille. It's a rat that cooks, how cute is that?

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FEATURE

WHAT WILL WIN:
The Counterfeiters. Seeing as the three most popular foreign language films of the year (4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days, The Diving Bell and The Butterfly, and The Lives of Others) were either disqualified or used a year early, this Austrian film becomes the front-runner.

WHAT SHOULD WIN:
The Diving Bell and The Butterfly. Yeah, I know, that's cheating. But, hey, I doubt any of the five nominated films showcase as much innovation.

BEST DOCUMENTARY

WHAT WILL WIN:
No End In Sight. Michael Moore may be the most popular, though divisive, documentary filmmaker in the US, but his film Sicko was not nearly as applauded as this film which chronicles the mishaps after America's invasion of Iraq.

WHAT SHOULD WIN:
No End In Sight. It's another case of me not seeing any of the other films nominated, but I feel pretty good in my choice here. Charles Ferguson's film is truthful, and to be honest, very much needed for a country that tries to pretend that a war is not happening.

No End In Sight (****)

No End In Sight
Written, Directed, and Produced by Charles Ferguson



****

It's amazing how many Hollywood pictures have gone down the drain when they tried to tackle subject matter dealing with the War in Iraq. The opposite could be said, though, for documentary filmmaking. Ever since the notorious Michael Moore blew the whistle in his surprise hit Fahrenheit 9/11, there have been numerous documentaries that have taken different perspectives on the war. Three, in fact, have been nominated for Best Documentary in the 2007 Oscars. One of those nominated films, No End In Sight, displays the aftermath of the war with such clarity and honesty, it may go down as the best to tackle the subject matter.

Moore's Fahrenheit was admittedly a two-hour, biased campaign to bring down the Bush administration before the 2004 election. The "character" of George W. Bush is rarely in this film, though. In fact, his absence during all the events displayed in the picture is much more damning than any well-edited montage of interviews and mispronunciations that Moore could put together. What No End In Sight does so well, is allow the actual people who were there tell the stories themselves. And those stories aren't very good...

What the bulk of No End In Sight deals with is the numerous failed attempts the US made to restore Iraq after they'd invaded the country, and captured Saddam Hussein. On May 1st, 2003, President George W. Bush famously stood at a naval base with a giant sign that read overhead: "Mission Accomplished". As shown in the film, close to little had actually been accomplished, other than America once again flexing it's nonchalant muscles, and invading a malnourished country. Saddam was found, so what do we do now? Some left, some tried to stay and help, but the only sure thing is that the situation brought nothing but confusion to many people.

Today, many Iraqi families have been severely impoverished, while the streets are filled with dangerous militias. With the Shiites and the Sunis already warring, the destruction left by the American invasion did nothing but up the violent tension between the two. Most of the exclusive interviews within the movie are with people assigned the important job of trying to rebuild Iraq, despite limited resources or help from the US government. By the time of these interviews, close to all of these people have been dismissed from their positions, after their pleading and ideas on Iraq were ignored.

What this film does best is stand on it's own, with no links to particular denominations. Even the narrator, actor Campbell Scott, has a narration that is bland and suppressing. The interviewed individuals display their opinions: many are anti-American, many sad, but all simply baffled by how the situation has become so out of control. "There were 500 ways to do it wrong and two or three ways to do it right," said ambassador Barbara Bodine, a member of ORHA, a group created to think up ideas to rebuild Baghdad. "What we didn't understand is that we were going to go through all 500."

Their are spectacular stats presented: by the end of the war, it may end up costing the United States over $1.8 billion. There is fear instilled in the audience: with our invasion of Iraq, we have now empowered their biggest rival, the equally dangerous Iran. More than anything, though, what Charles Ferguson has done with his film is display a war on the screen that we expect (but don't get) from our own American media. As the public ignores Hollywood films addressing the war, and are content with news which would rather cover celebrity exploits as opposed to the rebuilding of Iraq, the middle eastern country is slowly disintegrating into a lawless nation where many American soldiers, to this day, are still being killed.

In the end, No End In Sight is a story of bad decision-making, inflated egos, and numerous sad endings. Like Fahrenheit, the film juxtaposes images of war and insurgency, with the faces of American political leaders back in Washington laughing, giggling, and rationalizing. It's comfortable for the average American to be apathetic to the situation in Iraq, and I don't deny doing it myself. What this film brings to the forefront, is our biggest fears. It shows the greatest horrors of a puzzling war, that we've tried to turn our back on.

Oscar Breakdown: Best Picture

OSCAR BREAKDOWN: BEST PICTURE

Seeing as I've said about as much as I can about all of the five films nominated here, this 'oscar breakdown' post will be a little more succinct. The idea of the '5 Best Films of the Year' is a bit dubious. It varies from one person to the next what makes a great film. More than anything, 2007 has shown the ludicrous idea of one movie being the 'Best Picture' of the year. With the vast amount of great films in varying genres, surprisingly I actually have no problem with any of the five nominated films this year. There's always that one little mistake in the five, whether it be the result of a giant hype machine (Chocolat!?!?!?!?!), or something that is totally beyond explanation (Field of Dreams!?!?!?!?!?!), there's always that one. But this year, I awoke, saw the five films nominated, and to be honest, there was an almost a disappointment. After all, one of the main hobbies of a film snob like me is to complain about these kinds of things, and there was nothing to complain about. Then, as time passed by, I sat back and appreciated the Academy for getting it right.

ATONEMENT

Hyped as the romantic epic (the Titanic you could say) of the decade, instead, Atonement was a beautifully scaled picture, about a small girl's mistake, and the disastrous effects it has on a young couple in love. Filled with beautiful, long tracking shots, iconic costumes, and heartbreaking images, Atonement is definitely the prettiest film of 2007. It's use of differing cinematography and a combination and quick and slow editing bring the story to life. It also stars two of the biggest young stars (Keira Knightley and James McAvoy) as the doomed lovers, but the star of the film is stolen by the character of Briony (played by all three: Soairse Ronan, Romola Garai, and Vanessa Redgrave). The plot itself, can be described by Briony herself, in a line from the film: "It's about a young girl, who sees something which she doesn't understand, but she thinks she does." Briony's lifelong mission to atone for her sin is what drives the movie through it's beautiful landscapes, and her appearance late in the film, at a time when life has well passed her by, brings even more twists to the story.

JUNO

In the past month or so, the "Juno backlash" has been coming hard and often. Complaints range from the pretentiousness of the dialogue, or the preposterous idea that nobody so young and in such a taboo situation would treat it with such casual wit. It is true that the film uses pregnancy more as a plot device than a focus, but that is because the actual focus is on Juno (Ellen Page) herself, not her unborn child. I'm sure there were moments of morning sickness and strange cravings in Juno's pregnancy, but the film's tight 91 minutes decides to turn it's eye on other things. Truly, I cannot sing enough praise for the work of the cast in this film, to take all the hurdling words and transform them into the most heartwarming film of the year. There is nothing Hallmark in the movie, like some have claimed, and if this film does seem pretentious, it is only because it is so much smarter than any other teen film to come out recently. It doesn't try to say "Teenagers like to have sex, and sometimes they get pregnant." Instead, the movie shows the mistakes we make, and how they can lead to life-altering realizations (clue: it's not only Juno).

MICHAEL CLAYTON

I had a feeling for a while that this film would get snubbed at the Oscar nomination table, if only because it is so hard to appreciate a solid genre piece. Clayton is a legal thriller, and it does not attempt to trick you with plot twists or romantic sub-plots. Instead, it goes for the jugular, displaying corruption at it's basest level. The film succeeds where films like Syriana just leave the audience baffled, because this movie understands that a film that is this complex doesn't need to be that confusing. Of coarse, a grade A cast, and surprisingly superb work from debut director Tony Gilroy ultimately help. Clooney, already a Hollywood icon, and the most loved actor in Hollywood gives the performance of his career as the morally-misguided, emotionally-exhausted Michael Clayton. When you have a supporting cast the likes of Tilda Swinton, Tom Wilkinson, and Sydney Pollock and all of them giving wonderfully steady performances, it does nothing but further display the greatness of Clooney himself. From Gilroy's own script, Clayton is slick, tense, and overall, satisfying.

NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN

I've tried very hard to find a flaw in No Country, and to this day, I have yet to find one. That said, I know a lot of people who can, and there complaints usually have to do with the slow pace, the long passages of silence, and most particularly, the last act. But as far as I see it, none of those things are flaws, but instead, they further endear the picture to the level of a masterpiece. Created by those zany Coen Brothers, the film's meticulous attention to deal and cut-throat dialogue only add to the already tension-filled story about a welder (Josh Brolin), and his attempt to run off with $2 million in drug money, while a stungun wielding madman (Javier Bardem) is close on his tail. Many of those detracted by the film have passed it over as "serial killer movie", but no other serial killer movie that I've ever seen addresses the ideals of greed and fate so well. Twelve years removed from Fargo, it seemed rather unlikely that the Coens could ever make a film as astutely made, and with such beautifully nuanced performances. Luckily for us, we were wrong.

THERE WILL BE BLOOD

Somewhere deep inside the heart of Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis), there is a sharp, jagged-edged love that rarely shows itself. We see it a couple of times, when he is with his adopted son, H.W., and once with a man of whom Daniel thinks is his brother. That's about all you get, though. For the rest of picture, Daniel paces around with his wide-brimmed hat, and does absolutely anything he can to get the riches he cherishes so badly. There Will Be Blood, another "magnum opus" from the mind of Paul Thomas Anderson, broke into the race late. It was released after Christmas, and with strong word of mouth and the inclusion of the seldom-working Day-Lewis, the film has quietly become the highest grossing picture in Anderson's career (just over $30 million). By sweeping some late critics awards in addition to Day-Lewis' dominance in the Best Actor campaign, the film grew, and is a popular pick for a dark horse winner. I loved this movie, whole-heartedly, and see Paul Thomas Anderson as the easily the best filmmaker of his generation (even if that generation includes Tarantino). Tackling universal themes of greed, religiosity, and family, the film promises blood, and we get it.

Oscar Breakdown: Best Actress In A Leading Role

OSCAR BREAKDOWN: BEST ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE

This year's crop of Best Actress nominees are very intriguing. We all know the struggles it is for women to find roles competent enough to be nominated to begin with, but this year we have something interesting. We have one woman who is obviously at the prime of her acting career (Blanchett), an English cinematic queen with a long resume (Christie), and one very young woman who grasps one of the biggest breakthrough performances in recent memory (Page). These varying generations battling it out makes this category very intriguing for me. Added to that, we also have a nomination for two very dependable actresses, one American (Linney) and the other French (Cotillard).

Cate Blanchett, ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE

The Golden Age is an awkward film that is as interesting as it is historically accurate (I don't exactly understand the title either, since it takes place during the times of the Spanish Armada and the plague). The one constant in a picture filled with annoyingly loose ends is Blanchett. Reprising her role as Queen Elizabeth I from the thrilling Elizabeth, there were false feelings that this sequel might be something near that--we were disappointed. Blanchett, though, still plays Elizabeth with enough fire and subtle beauty that we are able to watch the film without the explosion of anger. In this film, she is drowning in a sea of big, puffy dresses abd cake make-up, which makes the performance even more of a challenge, but Blanchett--who has worked quite a bit as of late--takes it in stride, and with a menacing sneer.

There is a foolish romantic subplot thrown into the film, between her and Walter Raleigh. Despite the hysterical idea that these two even dined with each other let alone were romantically involved, it's Blanchett's sincerity and honesty to the character that makes the entire idea somewhat appealing. Through all the face paint and costumes, her shining blue eyes still peak through to express regret, resentment, and probably most important, power. She has loud, lofty speeches that radiate throughout your mind, and a gaze that is at times endearing and other times intimidating. Truly, Blanchett is everywhere now, and we can see that people may have gotten sick of her. But if they have, it's for the wrong reasons, because in every role she has taken, she has showcased her immense talent and passion for the craft.

Julie Christie, AWAY FROM HER

For my money, despite Julie Christie's front-runner status, and the films surprise nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay, I still think Away From Her has been one of the more underrated films of the year. There are only a few films that I have ever seen (and none in '07), that so fluidly display rare human emotion as well as this movie does. The story is about Fiona (Christie) and her mental deterioration at the hands of Alzheimer's. Against the wishes of her loving husband Grant (Gordon Pinsent), she checks into a wellness center, where all the memories of their loving relationship begin to disappear. Christie, a legendary actress who has an Oscar for 1965's Darling, is the most heartbreaking aspect in a very heartbreaking movie, and she has basically trenched through every major award up to now.

The magic in Christie's work in the film is the way she creates a woman who's not there. By not there, I mean that she is like a vagabond who has inhabited this successful woman's body. There's a point in the film, where she can't remember the word 'wine', and that slowly progresses to her not even recognizing Grant when he comes by. The vague, painful look on Christie's face throughout the film is heart-melting. There are moments though, like regular Alzheimer's victims, where those memories come back, and her shifting in and out of consciousness is a chameleon move Daniel Day-Lewis would be proud of. When she whispers to Grant in front of the television "Don't they remember Vietnam..." we are filled with such meaningless hope, as she later recede into the many side affects of her Dementia.

Marion Cotillard, LA VIE EN ROSE

I could spend days talking about the tons of make-up Cotillard had to wear in this movie, but that does not give the performance justice. Playing the famous diva Edith Piaf, Cotillard physical transformation is so that I didn't even remember that I'd seen Cotillard in numerous other films. Cotillard, a beautiful French woman, de-glams for this role, even showing Piaf at her balding, fuzzy haired worst (how can you look like you're 80, when you're only 48? a combination of drugs and liver cancer never helps). The movie itself is scatter-brained, told in a non-linear way, I assume to intrigue the audience. The affect of that storytelling gets confusing a bit, but what we are never confused about is the astonishing effort Cotillard puts into the performance.

There are two scenes in particular that stayed in my memory. One involves the fantasy Piaf has that her lover is laying in bed with her just moments before she realizes that he has been killed in a plane crash. Another consists of Piaf pleading with her friend to let her perform despite her health issues, for if she can't she will lose all faith in herself. Both scenes require Cotillard to produce Banshee-like howls, but the result is something more than Pacino-esque screaming, but shrieks of human emotion. Cotillard must have gone through a lot for this role, because her life as shown through the film was so damaging, mostly from her own doing, but what the film and Cotillard remind us is that the beauty of Edith Piaf was in her magical voice and wonderful songs.

Laura Linney, THE SAVAGES

I was so elated when I discovered on Oscar nomination morning that Linney had made it on the shortlist for Best Actress. When I saw the film, The Savages, I came to a surprising conclusion: that Linney had supplanted Julianne Moore as my favorite modern day actress. She has worked just as much Cate Blanchett, even if the films are a little less noteworthy, but it is her work that has been more challenging, and for the most part, scathing. In Savages, she plays Wendy Savage, who, along with her brother John (Philip Seymour Hoffman), struggle with the guilt of having to put their dementia-plagued father (Philip Bosco) into a nursing home. What they discover is that there is no such thing as a de facto nursing home, just a place that makes it more comfortable to die.

Probably the biggest testament to how good Linney is in this film is that her co-star, the usually overpowering Hoffman, recedes and allows her to take control. The character of Wendy is interesting: she's an aspiring playwright who's currently writing something based on her troubled childhood, and in her spare time, she's has affairs with a fiftysomething teacher. Throughout the film, she has romantic issues. The idea of the affair is treated rather lightly in the film (the guy is actually a pretty decent fellow, despite being an adulterer) because it is just a further examination of those issues. The romantically confused woman reaching middle age is something Linney has tackled before (You Can Count On Me), but this film adds the extra ingredient of family, which is so much more universal.

Ellen Page, JUNO

Out of every character that I was introduced to over 2007, I didn't fall in love with any of them as mush as I fell in love with Ellen Page's Juno. The surprise blockbuster hit has been so successful because of Page, essentially. Her grasp of Diablo Cody's wordy script, and her ability to say those words with such fluidity and wit make the film irresistible. Any complaint about Juno's cleverness end with Page, cause no one can deny that she makes the role alive. All the while, never forgetting Juno is still a child where it all stands (remember with how much abandon she tries to beautify herself for Bateman's character), Page's performance is a response to all the brain-dead portrayals of teenage girls in films like Bratz or anything starring Lindsey Lohan. She's almost an anti-hero, for we adore her for her faults.

Despite her intelligence, the entire structure of the film's plot hinders on the biggest mistake in Juno's short life: getting impregnated by her effeminate boyfriend Paulie Bleeker. The process of pregnancy isn't really paid attention to the way it is in films like Knocked Up, but the film is not about pregnancy as much as it's about Juno's learning experience. Through her pregnancy she learns from Mark and Vanessa, the adoptive parents of her child. She learns from her father the virtue of wisdom. And later, she learns where her heart truly lies, culminating in such a charming, romantic scene between Juno and Paulie on the track at school. It's as satisfying a climax there is to a film this year, and in that one scene we see Page nail every word and every quirk in her speech. It's the most dominant performance of the five nominees, the funniest, and the most endearing.