Midnight in Paris (2011)

Woody Allen's record hasn't exactly been spotless lately. For example, though I basically enjoyed his effort last year, I was certainly in the minority, and his other recent films "Whatever Works" and "Vicky Cristina Barcelona", though with their admirers, are certainly not up to par with Allen's earlier filmography. That's why "Midnight in Paris" had so much promise - with many at Cannes calling it a return to form for Allen. And though the film does deliver in many ways (especially in the charm that it's been repeatedly said to exude), it also fall short from being as good as classic Allen.

Owen Wilson plays Gil Pender, a screenwriter who is on a vacation in Paris with his fiancee, Inez (Rachel McAdams), and who is also working on a novel which he hopes will solidify him as a legitimate writer - not just the shallow corporatized one he feels he has become in Hollywood. Feeling disillusioned by his modern life and with his fiancee's rich parents (Mimi Kennedy and Kurt Fuller) and pedantic friend Paul (Michael Sheen), Pender yearns for what he considers the golden age of Paris - the roaring 20's. Gil soon gets his wish when a mysterious car comes to pick him up at the stroke of midnight, and transports him directly back to the time period for which he yearns, throwing him into the midst of great authors and artists like F. Scott Fitzgerald (Tom Hiddleston) and Ernest Hemingway (Corey Stoll) along with an enigmatic beauty, Adriana (Marion Cotillard), with whom he soon falls in love.

As a continuation of Allen's cinematic love affairs with European cities (Barcelona in "Barcelona", London in "Tall Dark Stranger"), "Paris" is completely successful. Sure, it treats Paris like an unrealistic utopia, but that's acceptable considering that most Americans see it in that way. Plus, Allen never forgets the fact that the film is in essence a love letter to Paris, filling the screenplay with monologues about its beauty and even making the movie's first three minutes a montage of Parisian streets. For someone who's never been to Paris (like myself) this adoration of the city is perfectly welcome.

Also completely welcome is the lack of a narrator. This allows the film to work on its own behalf for the most part - a refreshing change from the plodding narration in other recent Allen films.

Though Wilson is given a few solo talking-to-himself monologues that could be effectively interpreted as narration, he sells them, and despite the fact that it doesn't quite allow the film to speak for itself as much as it could, compared to a bored sounding male reciting how excited a particular character was about architecture, it's tolerable and, occasionally, even a bit endearing.

What's absolutely not endearing about the film, however, is its complete lack of complex characters. Though it does make sense for the famous authors and artists of the past to be somewhat "fake", there's no excuse for real life characters like Inez and Paul, both of whom (among others) are devoid of any shades of interesting characterization. Problems like this make many of the plot points of the film more like plot nubs (because they're pointless -- ha ha, get it?).

However, that is not to say that the acting is poor, as the cast works very well despite the script's shortcomings. Wilson is probably giving his best performance to date (it helps his character is actually kind of interesting) and works perfectly as a stand-in for Woody. Mimi Kennedy, Adrian Brody and Alison Pill all shine in brief roles, and Marion Cotillard gives her potentially stock character the most interesting shades of humanity (not that this should come as any surprise - it seems like Marion is always doing more than the script's bare minimum). And even Rachel McAdams and Michael Sheen do well considering what they're given to work with.

But despite the movie's fundamental problems, it still manages to be irresistibly

charming and utterly adorable. I couldn't stop smiling throughout - it's funny, it has clever dialogue, and the ending is almost perfect.

It's not necessarily the Woody Allen comeback some are claiming it is, but we're definitely getting closer. If Woody can mix the charm and fantasy of this film with the complex characters of his earlier work - perhaps we'll then have a new masterpiece. For now though, we can at least enjoy what he's giving us.

See it: If you have a yearning desire to go to Paris, if you like seeing a cast at its best, if you are a Woody Allen die hard, or if you've always thought that Owen Wilson could be taken seriously as an actor but he just never got the right role.

Skip it: If you like complex characters, or if you've seen "I Spy" and know that Owen Wilson can never be forgiven for that movie.

8/10

Source Code (2011)

I'm not sure if it was the train-centric opening credits, the Herrmann-ian score by Chris Bacon, the enigmatic female performances from Vera Farmiga and Michelle Monaghan, or something else entirely; but while watching Duncan Jones's "Source Code" I could not help but be reminded of an Alfred Hitchcock film. "Source Code" is not really on the same level as most of Hitchock's filmography, but it wouldn't be difficult to imagine the king of suspense making a movie rather similar to it if he was still alive. Needless to say, the film is smartly, stylishly, and suspensefully put together (helped greatly by its brilliant minimalist structure) and makes for an extremely entertaining hour and a half. However, beyond that hour and a half, the film isn't particularly memorable, perhaps because it skirts around the philosophical questions that it seems to want to ask and never really asserts itself visually. The most lasting aspect of the film is, unsurprisingly, Farmiga's performance - unbelievably complex, gorgeously layered and quietly powerful, her eyes say everything the overall film fails to.

7/10

In the Classroom

Having watched "Confessions" and "Half Nelson" both in a short period of time, it was impossible not to compare the two. Both movies are about teachers - teachers who are slightly unhinged, slightly off. However, though both movies deal with a similar central character, the two movies could not be more different.

Japan's Oscar submission from last year, Confessions, is a dark and frightening tale of a teacher, Ms. Moriguchi (Takako Matsu) whose young daughter Manami was killed by two students in her homeroom class. Ms. Moriguchi decides to take revenge on the two boys in what becomes a tense web of mind-games and manipulation, structured in a series of "confessions" from one of the accused students, the mother of one of the accused students, and a sympathetic and introspective young girl in the class.

Half Nelson is the story of Brooklyn junior-high school teacher Dan Dunne (Ryan Gosling), whose philosophical approach to teaching inspires his students but isn't quite in line with the curriculum. However, despite his success in the classroom, his own life is simply a mess - he has a debilitating drug habit, poor relationships with others, and he cannot seem to turn his life around, until he meets Drey (Shareeka Epps), an impressionable young girl with problems of her own, who he befriends.

The most striking difference between the two movies is how each of the imperfect teachers deals with the problems that surround their life - rather, how each teacher uses their class as a kind of therapy. For Gosling's Dan, his students are the only thing that keeps him going, the only part of his life in which he is able to have some control and success. On the other hand, Ms. Moriguchi's problems are caused almost completely by her class, and her path to equilibrium consists of the complete destruction of at least two of her students.

One of the most interesting illustrations of this contrast between the two characters is how the "chaos of the classroom" is portrayed. Throughout the entire exposition of "Confessions", Ms. Moriguchi has to fight to be heard over the obnoxious chatting, texting, and outright disrespect that comes from her pupils, making us completely sympathize with how much she hates these kids. Though Mr. Dunne's students are just as noisy and rambunctious, their din is one of creativity, of excitement and of learning - an almost healing bedlam.

In fact, one of the most frighteningly brave aspects of "Confessions" is how it has no qualms with portraying children as pure evil. These kids are unflinchingly rude, manipulative, dishonest, hateful, and even murderous. It's an exaggeration, perhaps, but surely all teachers have felt the kind of disdain for their young pupils that the audience feels for the kids onscreen. It's a brilliant technique that creates an unyielding discomfort.

Moving past the content itself though, both movies are cinematically commendable as well. Matsu and Gosling both give fantastic lead performances, and the supporting casts, be they the evil children of "Confessions" or the supportive students in "Half Nelson", are really strong. "Confessions" is stylish to the point of being almost arbitrarily so, but for the most part it works, and "Nelson"'s camera work is unique and smart, often times focusing not quite where you'd expect.

Okay, so, neither of these movies really have anything to do with each other. They don't really belong in the same genre, and their plots are radically different. But they're both such fascinating portrayals of teacher-student dynamics that they become unintentionally perfect companion pieces, both of which I highly recommend.

Have you seen "Confessions" or "Half Nelson"? Which portrayal of classroom dynamics did you prefer? Is there an even better school-related movie? Sound off below!

Black Narcissus (1947)

I've decided that now that Oscar season is over and 2011 has officially not yet given me a single movie that I want to see, it's time to catch up on some classics. So, if you have any suggestions, please mention in the comments and I'll almost surely watch what you suggest. "Black Narcissus" is a rather fascinating film that survives mainly because of its gorgeous cinematography. The colors are planned so well it's almost as if the movie is one hour and forty minute long painting, and some shots are just so breathtaking it's unbearable. The fact that the entire thing was filmed on a backlot in London is stunning when you see shots like the nuns ringing the bell on the cliff, or the panoramic looks at the "Himalayas". For the most part the acting is quite fantastic - Deborah Kerr's icy, yet vulnerable performance is absorbing and exhilarating to watch, and Kathleen Byron is a whirlwind in her final scenes. The story is paced somewhat strangely - the climax is fantastic but the lead up to said climax doesn't necessarily make sense. The script could have used more narrative focus though it's not bad enough to detract majorly from the rest of the amazing things happening in this film.

8/10

Yay, Gosling! Nay, Gosling... (Two Short Reviews)

All Good Things: It's really disappointing when a concept with such high potential falls as flat as this one did. The real life story is fascinating and the cast looked to be truly intriguing, but due to the film's unfocused direction and tonally-confused screenplay, the entire film turns into a boring slog that goes completely nowhere and leaves you knowing less about the topic than you did before you watched it. However, while Gosling and Frank Langella were unable to come out of this film unscathed, Kirsten Dunst was quite the opposite - in fact, she did quite fantastic work, the likes of which could be the only redeeming thing about this movie. Dunst gives such subtle work and her arc was absolutely perfect. I do hope we see more of her soon, because she's proven here her worth, and this movie is perhaps worth watching to see her fantastic performance. Oh! By the way -

Kristen Wiig is hilarious. (5/10)

Blue Valentine: Despite what the critics will have you think, this film does have flaws, which I attribute in large part to its screenplay. The overall effect of the writing is perfect - the development of the relationship between Gosling and Williams is perfectly paced and bittersweet. However, some of the smaller units end up feeling slightly unnecessary and rambly. Of course, starting with this small complaint is to give too much emphasis to the negatives, which really pale in comparison to the wonderful things about this movie. Williams, who I love, may not be doing her best work here, but it is still a heartbreaking performance; and Gosling is simply stunning. He completely inhabits his character and the way he plays the very last scene is simply devastating. In reality, that last scene sealed the deal for me - what with the Grizzly Bear score and the fireworks and the...aghhh. It was just so moving. The film is truly an achievement, if not the masterpiece that some have called it. (8/10)

Animal Kingdom (2010)

Everything you've heard about this film is true. In other words - Jacki Weaver is an absolute force of nature in this Australian family crime drama. Weaver's masterful juxtaposition of her character's corrupt intentions against her seemingly innocent and sweet persona is simply breathtaking to watch, and it's a performance that just keeps reminding you how great it is as the time goes by after you watch it. However, Jacki's brilliance also works against the film, since it seems to lilt a bit whenever she's not on screen. That is not to say, by any means, that the rest of the film is of poor quality - in fact, quite the opposite. It's a fine piece of cinema with a strong screenplay, good acting from the rest of the cast and subtle directorial choices that create masterful pathos. Though it may seem paradoxical, simply put, Jacki is so fantastic, so brilliant and so marvelous that even as good a film as "Animal Kingdom" is, it does not shine quite as brightly next to her.

8/10

Mother (2009)

Joon-ho Bong's "Mother" is a film that intrigued me ever since it became Korea's submission to the Oscars last year and its exciting trailer started circulating the blogosphere. Then, I watched (and heartily enjoyed) Bong's prior, more famous film "The Host". Enjoying that film so much made me extremely interested in seeing what he would do with such an interesting and actressy concept. Being matched up with it for the Film Community Potluck at Anomalous Material finally gave me the incentive to watch it and I was not disappointed.

Hye-ja Kim plays the titular character, an elderly woman who loves and lives alone with her son, Do-joon (Bin Won). She is completely devoted to Do-joon, and her entire world (which is pretty much solely based on her role as his mother) is completely torn apart when he is convicted of the murder of a young girl in their small village. Convinced of his innocence, she begins her own rogue investigation of the crime. But not everything is as it seems and soon the story grows more and more twisted.

"Mother" is really a masterfully written spin on the age old plot device that is being wrongly accused of a crime. As each layer of the story stacks up perfectly the audience is left in awe and suspense, all with beautifully rounded characters. Bong avoids the problems that I feel he encountered in "The Host" - "Mother" is much more focused (though it does admittedly drag a bit in the second act) and the humor is executed flawlessly, not awkwardly.

Speaking of execution, "Mother" is a stylistic masterwork. Bong's direction is sharp and tense, and with very little score he is able to make single shots excruciatingly suspenseful. The film is also beautifully shot - the cinematography is often breathtaking. The opening and closing shots in are particularly memorable in their beauty and motivic significance.

Of course, the most stunning achievement of this film is Hye-ja Kim's performance. She truly is a tour-de-force. Her love for her son is unbelievably strong, almost to an unhealthy level that Kim is absolutely not afraid to explore. One word that kept coming to mind in regards to her work is "operatic". The fearless, unhinged and raw emotion so often seen in opera is rarely found in film (simply due to the differences in the mediums), yet Kim's work is nothing short of operatic, and it's breathtaking to watch her.

Joon-ho bong has truly created a classic to be in the crime genre. Though it may not be a perfect film, it is crafted so skillfully that it is impossible to ignore. Hye-ja Kim's performance alone can simply not be praised enough - it is unique and brilliant. I absolutely recommend "Mother"...don't wait like I did, watch it ASAP!

9/10

I Finally Saw "The Social Network"!

I know, I know, I'm always behind everybody else. But, hey, I saw it a couple days ago, and I loved it! It lived up to the hype, and then some. It's intelligently written, witty and complex without being cold, it's thrilling and engrossing without losing the human spirit at its center. The ensemble acting is fabulous, Jesse Eisenberg gives his best performance since "The Squid and the Whale" and Andrew Garfield was just wonderful. So much heart. I also want to mention that Rashida Jones was lovely, in her teeny-tiny role. Besides that, I can't really say much more that hasn't already been said, except that I also found the score very, very notable. It was unique, interesting and modern - one of my favorites of the year so far. Anyway, if you haven't seen it yet, go now, because it lives up...and this is going to sound cliche, but seriously, you'll never look at Facebook the same way again! Muahahaha.

9/10

Wendy and Lucy (2008)

Not much can be said about this film besides the brilliance of Michelle Williams as Wendy. After all, the story is rather limited - in so many words, it's basically Wendy screaming for her dog the entire time - yet, somehow, thanks to Williams and the director, Kelly Reichardt, it works so well. Williams is SO effin' good in this movie! Add her to the growing list of horrible Oscar snubs in 2008, because she gives one of the best performances of that year, if not the entire decade. She inhabits so completely this character - even the way she walks is brilliant. It's really remarkable, how wonderful Williams is. Also, I think something should be said for all the bit-part actors. I feel like in these one-man-show indie films, the supporting players are usually not that good, but in this film, they were all quite impressive! So, despite being somewhat limited, it works so, so well and everything feels so real. What an achievement.

9/10

A Beautiful Mind (2001)

Um, okay, so I honestly don't have much to say about this one. Like most movies based on an interesting true story, it makes me really want to find out more about the actual facts. Very Ron Howard, meaning pretty safe and predictable (direction wise). Though he definitely knows how to make tension...tense. The script was very obvious. Everything was just fine. Really, there was nothing wrong with this movie besides that there was nothing really right, either. The score was nice. Jennifer Connelly was...good, if not inconsistent. I give her props for doing so well with that ridiculous histrionic scene that she had. Not a bad movie at all, very interesting, everything was good, okay, whatever.

7/10

"Never Let Me Go" Trailer

Via Awards Daily!

I'm not quite sure how to interpret this (I've not read the novel or the plot synopsis yet). Is it a creepy tale of a distopian boarding school? An emotionally charged period romance? A quiet character study? I'm definitely not sure what it's about. BUT, what I am sure of, is that I want to see it. Carey Mulligan looks like she's going to be lovely, and Sally Hawkins! Yea Sally Hawkins! Her presence in this trailer alone would make me want to see it. Anyway, I'm quite intrigued. Time to read the book!

What are your thoughts on "Never Let Me Go"? I know a lot of you are anticipating it...did the trailer live up to your hopes? Comment below!

Double Indemnity (1944)

There's this feeling that you get when you're watching an absolutely brilliant performance. It's not always possible to describe the aspects of the performance that make it great, but you know that it is simply because...it is. That's how I felt about Barbara Stanwyck's performance in the 1944 classic, "Double Indemnity", a film I'd known about for ages but just finally got to watching.

In the film, Fred MacMurray plays Walter Neff, an insurance agent who becomes enamored with a client's wife, Phyllis Dietrichson (Barbara Stanwyck). Phyllis expresses a mysterious interest in buying her husband accident insurance, and Walter, in an effort to woo Phyllis (who is unhappy in her marriage), encourages her to buy the policy and kill her husband. However, though the murder goes smoothly, things end up falling apart. The story is being narrated by Walter himself, who is recording his testimony in his boss's office.

"Double Indemnity" is a great noir that is, for the most part, extremely thrilling and entrancing. The story just wraps you in from the very beginning and the sharp dialogue keeps you going. Another great thing about the movie is that it perfectly balances the crime with the romance with the investigation to create a perfect piece of noir. As aforementioned, Stanwyck delivers a mind-blowingly good performance. She knows exactly how her character should change throughout the movie and does it perfectly - her mannerisms are impeccable and you can feel this woman through every scene she's in.

However, Stanwyck does such a wonderful job that the movie flounders a bit when she is not present (which is a surprisingly large chunk of time). Fred MacMurray gives a decent performance but he just doesn't elevate the material the way his co-star does, and even the exciting performance by Edward G. Robinson as Keyes couldn't make me stop wanting Barbara back.

Additionally, movies that utilize narration are always a little bit hit-or-miss with me. In this case, I was not completely convinced by it - it just didn't seem right that Neff would be describing his past two or so weeks in such grand detail especially (SPOILER ALERT) with his arm having been shot. Clunky narration like that is extremely bothersome at times. However, the ending did do a pretty good job of making up for it.

"Double Indemnity" is quite a thrilling piece of cinema, though in the end it didn't quite do as much for me emotionally as I thought it would. However, even though the film had its faults, Barbara Stanwyck gives an absolutely mesmerizing performance that should be considered one of the best of all time.

8/10
(so close to being a seven but Stanwyck was just too good for that)

Now Playing: Mother and Child

I'm really surprised more people aren't talking about Mother and Child over the blogosphere! It's had a pretty significant amount of buzz and seems like one of the first really prestigious movies that has come out this year. With such a potentially Oscar-y cast, it was a movie I highly anticipated. But I'm getting ahead of myself! On to what I actually thought of the film.

"Mother and Child" tells the story of three women. The first is Kathy (Annette Bening), a neurotic nurse who lives with her mother who constantly thinks of the daughter she gave up for adoption 37 years prior. That daughter, Elizabeth (Naomi Watts), is the subject of the second plot line in the film. Elizabeth is an extremely successful and icy lawyer who enters an affair with her superior (Samuel L. Jackson). Finally, we have the tale of a woman named Lucy (Kerry Washington) who is attempting to adopt a baby.

I believe that the film does quite a good, though not completely flawless job of balancing the three stories. All three serve to enhance each other, especially Bening and Watts's. The mother and child, as it were, that never knew each other, both searching for meaning in their lives - realizing that what they needed all along was each other. That sounds corny but it's really, really meaningful, especially if you can relate it to a relationship with your own mother.

Kerry Washington's storyline is perhaps the most interesting of the three, yet it is so often pushed aside for the other two. This is where the film falters - I found myself at times waiting a bit too long for the Washington subplot to reappear. This is only a minor problem, however, considering the quality of the other two.

Easily the film's strongest asset is its performances. Annette Bening is absolutely divine in the role of Karen. She seems to be completely immersed in her character - she knows who this woman is so well. She saves the fireworks for when they're really needed making them so much more effective. Naomi Watts, who I love, was also fantastic, and her almost ridiculously written character arc makes complete sense because of the quality of her performance. I also really liked Samuel L. Jackson! He did really, really well playing a role that is sort of off type for him.

As for the film's Oscar chances? I don't know! I really would love to see some love for Annette. Though her screentime is limited due to the triangular nature of the screenplay, I could see her potentially getting a Nicole-Kidman-in-The Hours-esque nomination. She is absolutely marvelous in this film, and I'm really hoping she gets some recognition. Naomi Watts and Kerry Washington would also make good nominees if this turns out to be a weak year. This is sort of a small film though, so it'll be interesting as to how it is received.

ANYWAY, I actually quite loved this movie and though it's not without its flaws, it's inched itself just one notch above "How to Train Your Dragon" in order to get the honor of being the best film I've seen so far this year! With its fabulous performances and pretty-well balanced screenplay, it's definitely a film that should be seen by all, especially if you're in the mood for something touching. ;)

So who's seen it? I want to know! I'm surprised I haven't heard more about it on the blogosphere!

The Official Story (1985)

Politically charged films are often fascinating, especially if you live or lived during the time period in which the film takes place. However, if you have absolutely no knowledge of the event(s) that serve as the basis of the story, you're more than a little bit at a loss. Such was the way I felt while watching the Argentinian Oscar-winner "The Official Story", which takes place in the 1980's in Argentina.

So, a brief history lesson! After Juan Peron's widow (not Eva, but Isabel Martinez) was ousted from Argentina, a military rule led by Jorge Rafael Videla took over in about 1976 or so. When he and his junta took control, their goal was to eliminate any dissenters to their rule, thus marking the beginning of what was called the "Dirty War".

Videla himself. He's so creepy looking.

The following years were full of "forced disappearances" of people who the government thought were activists. Really, anyone who even looked like a government dissenter was kidnapped discreetly and taken away, many of whom were never seen again. Most of these victims were tortured, many often being killed in concentration camps. Babies born by mothers who were kidnapped during this time were abducted and given to government families.

And that, my dear readers, is where "The Official Story" begins! The film starts 5 years after the protagonist Alicia (Norma Aleandro) and her government-official husband adopted a baby girl named Gaby. Alicia is visited by an old activist friend, Ana, who was one of the disappeared and reveals the terrible injustices suffered at the camps, including the kidnapping of the newborns. Alicia begins to wonder if Gaby's mother could have been tortured at the hands of the government, and sets off to find out the truth about her daughter.

The film is very human, but the political context serves as the foundation of the plot. It's just extremely important to know the background information, because when I watched the film I had absolutely no knowledge of the Dirty War and knowing about it completely changed my outlook on it.

"The Official Story" is a very slow moving film, but not to the point of being boring. In fact, the slow pace allows each character and performer to thrive, making the viewer question everyone's true motives. And, the buildup to the last scene is just superb, even if that final scene, while fiery, is a tad bit over the top. Only a little bit though.

Norma Aleandro's performance is absolutely marvelous. She portrays the political and ethical awakening of her character brilliantly, and she dominates the screen. Alicia's character arc is basically the entire plot of the movie, so it's extremely important for Aleandro to make it work, and she does it brilliantly.

Even with all the movie does right, I didn't fall in love with it, in large part due to my ignorance of the historical context. After watching the movie and doing research, it makes me appreciate the film much more and I really thank the film for giving me the motive to discover this fascinating and disturbing chapter in history. I do apologize for doing more history teaching than reviewing, but Alicia was a history teacher. She would have wanted it this way. :)

8/10

Notes on a Scandal (2006)

People seem to love movies in which characters mentally unravel throughout the course of the plot. Movies like "Rebecca" and "Gaslight" and countless others, which revolve around paranoia and secrecy, thrive and are often called classics...and I agree! The human mind is a crazy place and films that deal with it are often quite brilliant, especially giving its actors a chance to shine. However, if not done perfectly, these films often come off as manipulative."Notes on a Scandal" works on both the best and worst levels of its genre.

"Scandal" revolves mainly around Barbara Covett (Judi Dench), an old and traditional teacher who keeps a diary that chronicles her lonely existence. She befriends a new, young art teacher, Sheba Hart (Cate Blanchett) and sees their friendship lasting forever. When Barbara finds Sheba is having an affair with a young student, she takes the opportunity to manipulate Sheba for her own gain. Things begin to grow tense and uncomfortable for Sheba and her family, as the secret between them becomes more and more lethal.

From the very beginning of the movie, we are drawn into Barbara Covett's psyche. She is a lonely woman, an extremely disturbed one, who seems to care nothing about people. It's implied that she is a lesbian, but it's never really clear if it's an emotional or physical lust that she has for Sheba. Either way, Dench wraps us in from the beginning and never lets us go, relentlessly toying with us. We hate her one minute, pity her the next - it's vicious, in the best of ways.

Cate Blanchett, in one of her most polarizing performances, I find absolutely brilliant. She displays the declining life of Sheba Hart so perfectly. Even when Sheba is making terrible decisions that we know are wrong we cannot help but root for her. The last scene between her and Dench, which many call too over the top, I find absolutely perfect. It's heart wrenching, terrifying, and ultimately saddening. Blanchett has been criticized for her histrionics but I find them justified...I really cannot imagine any better way to have done those scenes

Philip Glass's music just seals the deal on the tense atmosphere this film creates. It's frightening, scary, and just overbearing enough to make us feel uncomfortable. The writer and the director seem to know exactly what they want, and it's rewarding for the audience. The film is working as a thriller, a character study, and an acting showcase (for at least Dench and Blanchett) all at once, so well.

However, the movie is far from perfect. It's not a happy film but even so it sometimes feels overly manipulative. Also, some of the supporting cast was kind of weak. I just did not like the kid who played Sheba's young lover at all. I felt he was a bit boring and I cannot see why he was desirable to Sheba whatsoever. Also, you want over the top? The guy who played the principal in that scene with Dench. He was obviously having a lot of fun yelling all of his lines.

Nonetheless, though the movie isn't perfect, it's still quite fantastic and works so well on so many levels. Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett both give performances that I believe are possibly the best in their careers, the writing and music are tense, and it's all crafted quite marvelously. It's a horrifying movie that ultimately ends up being extremely sad.

8/10

All the President's Men (1976)

It's rare when a movie comes along with the perfect combination of having an amazing cast, a fascinating source material, and impeccable direction. Needless to say, "All the President's Men", which has all three of those things, is a nearly perfect film.

The story of the film, which is based on a true story, is extremely interesting. It follows two Washington Post journalists (Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford) as they fight the odds to reveal the truth behind the Watergate Coverup.

Their investigation leads them into a world of secrets, nobody wants them to publish their story, nobody wants to go on record, and they have to deal with all of this in order to get the truth to the world before it's too late.

Perhaps the best thing about this film is how natural it all feels. The lines are delivered (or written?) with just enough pauses and "ums" that it feels perfect, like you're watching the events actually unfold. Every actor completely inhabits their roles and the editing make the actions quick, exciting and sharp. I especially liked Dustin Hoffman. He really, really stole the show in my opinion.

The only performance I wasn't completely convinced by was Jane Alexander...she wasn't bad, I think she just underwhelmed me because of her Oscar-Nominated status. Plus, her character wasn't given a lot to do.

"SIX. MILLION. DOLLARS."

But I haven't even mentioned the intense art direction...that Washington Post Office has got to be one of the most well designed sets in movie history!

The issue...if there is one, with this movie, is that everything happens so fast that it's often hard to follow. Thus, it sort of alienated me. Its emotional content isn't really deep either, so on an emotional level I had a hard time connecting.

However, the story is just so fascinating. The fact that all of this stuff actually happened, that these two reporters basically single handedly brought the truth about Watergate to the public, is just amazing. It really makes me want to read the book.

So, by taking an absolutely engrossing story, making it completely natural and turning what could have been a boring office drama into an exciting political thriller, "All the President's Men" is certainly a must see film, despite its low emotional content.

9/10

Frost/Nixon (2008)

I had no idea this was going to be a mockumentary! That totally caught me by surprise...and despite my affectation for mocks, I felt like it was not the right decision for this movie. Unlike something like "District 9", this film didn't quite transition the documentary parts to the non-documentary parts too well. However, it's still impeccably written, so sharp and exciting. Nixon was portrayed so humanely that it was hard not to feel sorry for him. And the acting is phenomenal. I swear sparks were flying when Michael Sheen and Frank Langella were onscreen together! Yikes! And the supporting cast was fantastic as well...Rebecca Hall is always lovely and Sam Rockwell was stellar. So all in all, it's a thrilling and exciting movie that is brought down by its bizarre structure.

8/10

Catch Me if You Can (2002)

As usual, Amy Adams steals the show. But seriously, this movie was pretty okay...it had a lot of strong moments and the benefit of having a really interesting subject. Actually, I really want to read the book by Frank Abagnale himself now because it's such a fascinating story. However, the movie does drag and it's your conventional biopic. Out of sequence stuff! Troubled childhood! Etcetera. Even if it is based on a true story, you've got to be a little bit more original than that. Christopher Walken and Leo were both quite great but Tom Hanks was really underwhelming and his parts were the worst. It is bolstered by a pretty cool score by John Williams that is a nice departure from his usual stuff. Really, this should have been a documentary.

6/10