Best Picture review: 2007.

I enjoy listening to Queens of the Stone Age when I am supposed to be doing homework. It isn't productive, but so what?

THE WINNER: The Coens' NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is an expert piece of cinema, alternately terrifying, hilarious, and thought-provoking. It is the film that turned me into a cinephile, ladies and gentlemen. It is a tale about chance, chaos, fate, and the innate qualities in man. Perhaps my favorite part of seeing it three times in the theater was the reactions to the ending from the decidedly lowbrow audience. Did they really need it explained to them? Yes, evil wins and sometimes the good guy quits, if he even survives in the first place. The win is likely a large part of an apology for snubbing FARGO, but it is still an excellent film and, assuming INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS does not win Best Picture, it is the finest winner of the decade. However, it was not the best nominee of the year.

THE ALSO-RANS: Paul Thomas Anderson's THERE WILL BE BLOOD is just a hair better, but an important hair. Daniel-Day Lewis was properly awarded for his role as a man who is most honest with himself and the world in which he lives. Perhaps my interpretation of the film is vastly different than everyone else, because I was rooting for Daniel Plainview rather than feeling repulsed. He is not an evil man, just a pragmatic one. MICHAEL CLAYTON is a serviceable enough film, featuring a fantastic cast and enough intrigue to keep it going until it's rather anti-climactic finale.

ATONEMENT is a weird film to think about. Too often, it feels like someone else's idea of a great film. Within this, however, there are great moments. Everyone except Keira Knightley turns in good performances, but her presence is grating. The infamous beach scene is marvelous, of course, but what of it? The central plot twist is needlessly manipulative, and while it did properly garner my tears, were they deserved? Too often, the film is style over substance, as Joe Wright has continued to do throughout his career. JUNO is the worst film of the decade, a smug, condescending, emotionally immature "exploration" into an issue one would expect a woman to understand more. Cinema's greatest folly in the 2000's has been to allow Diablo Cody to move from stripper pole to the stage of one of the most prestigious film awards ceremonies in the world. By all appearances, she would still work successfully in the former.

CONCLUSION: All in all, a pretty good year. Both THERE WILL BE BLOOD and NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN stand as two of the best films of the decade, and while both are problematic, the Academy can do much worse than an adult drama like MICHAEL CLAYTON or the needed British period drama ATONEMENT. I would venture to call JUNO a colossal mistake, but much to my perplexion, people actually like it. Why an esteemed critic like Roger Ebert would call it the best film of the year, I will never understand. Alas, here are my rankings for the year:

5. JUNO
4. ATONEMENT
3. MICHAEL CLAYTON
2. NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
1. THERE WILL BE BLOOD

Next on tap is 2008, which features MILK, FROST/NIXON, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON, SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE, and THE READER. Since the 2009 race is so competitive, I doubt I get to write that one, although maybe the race will become a formality over time. Who knows.

Movie week in review, January 31-February 6

I am going to try something a little different with these weekly write-ups. The previous version is, quite frankly, a pain to write, and as I am finding, it is much more fun to connect themes. So, here we go.

Perhaps the biggest movie of all time, AVATAR is an enigma in the sense that I do not understand what the big deal is. Sure, it is gorgeous; often, I found myself wholly lost to the reality that what was on the screen was rendered in a computer. However, what of it? Like most young men, I seek sexual relationships with beautiful women, but does that really stick? A plain girl with a fascinating story is far more intriguing. In contrast, CORALINE is decidedly old-school in it's stop-motion animation. While less glaring than THE FANTASTIC MR. FOX, it is still a defiant attempt to stop the loss of storytelling in favor of explosions. While the characters of AVATAR will fade from my head as time goes on, the title character of Coraline represents an attempt to create a fully-fleshed character, and it works. While movies like AVATAR will always make these offensive amounts of money, who will love them when they grow old?

The problem with James Cameron's creation is not a lack of passion. You do not spend that amount of time on a project without believing in it fully. But how does such an undertaking compare to the work featured in the documentary IN A DREAM? There is a man with a passion for his work, and someone who makes things that he feels. While I had reservations about people watching blue creatures on screen, Cameron's film is ultimately a commercial one, never taking a chance on characterization or plot. Isaiah Zagar, on the other hand, makes murals without thinking whether or not they will be warmly received. Such a man is more honorable.

One does not have to look farther than THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL to see how freedom from studio money equals freedom of expression. While no one would confuse Ti West with Alfred Hitchcock, he is able to build a sort of suspense that the modern horror film, and AVATAR, lack. I had no idea what would happen next in THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL, while I saw every step of AVATAR coming. Of course, the presence of the lovely Greta Gerwig inevitably changes things, although I doubt I would appreciate her as a Na'Vi. West's blasphemous use of Gerwig's character, however, makes me as sad as Giovanni Ribisi when he realizes he is wasting his time in a silly role.

Speaking of the Na'Vi, that language is a bit silly, right? Why listen to imaginary languages when 2009 offered such wealth in foreign films, including FRONTIER OF DAWN, TULPAN, LORNA'S SILENCE, LAKE TAHOE, and LEMON TREE. None of these films need hundreds of millions of dollars to tell low-key stories about human emotions. While Sam Worthington sounded like a man reading his lines for the first place, the always wonderful Hiam Abbass was projecting real depth and emotion as she sought to save her precious lemon tree groves. Of the batch, LAKE TAHOE has stuck with me for it's Jarmuschian atmosphere and it's goofy characters. All of these, of course, are better than AVATAR.

This week, I will be viewing BRONSON, DIRTY PRETTY THINGS, CONTROL ROOM, NORTRE MUSIQUE, WERCKMEISTER HARMONIES, A.I: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, AN EDUCATION, PRECIOUS, JERICHOW, and INK. I will have my 2007 and 2008 Best Picture reviews up, as well, and will unveil my Top 50 Best Picture nominees of the decade. Lastly, I will be writing a full review of Chad Hartigan's LUKE AND BRIE ARE ON A FIRST DATE. I do not think a director has ever read one of my review's before, so I must tread lightly. Of course, my Indianapolis Colts will be winning their second Super Bowl tomorrow, so watch out for that, as well.

Best Picture review: 2006.

The kiosk in my temporal lobe is shaped like Rosalynn Carter.

THE WINNER: What is there to make of THE DEPARTED? Obviously, a large part of the win had to do with director Martin Scorsese never having won before. We all know that as fact, but isn't it still amazing to think about? No love for MEAN STREETS, RAGING BULL, TAXI DRIVER, THE KING OF COMEDY, or GOODFELLAS? To my knowledge, no one thinks this was Scorsese's best work, but it is an effective and engaging thriller, even if the tacked-on shot at redemption feels wholly un-Scorsese. While Jack Nicholson plays the stereotype he has built for himself, isn't that what we want? Special attention needs to be paid to Matt Damon, who has the hardest role of all, a man who seeks to be good while being the most evil of all. However, as it has continued to be, this was not the best of the nominees.

THE ALSO-RANS: What a wonder LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE was the first time I saw it. While it's flaws are more prominent as time goes on, the characters are so rich and engaging that it flows finely in repeat viewings. Perhaps most memorable is the Grandpa, played by Alan Arkin, who does heroin and tells his teenage grandson to copulate with as many women as possible. Steve Carrell's greatness in this only makes his continued involvement in the dreadful adaptation of THE OFFICE all the more depressing. BABEL, on the other hand, is a film with too many flaws to allow the inspired efforts by Rinko Kukuchi and Brad Pitt to go to waster. It was far too self-important and needlessly connected to work as a film.

LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA deserves a lot of credit for being daring, but is that enough to make a film work? Every war cliché is involved, from the understanding officer to the reading of the enemy's letters home. Of course, it is a more important and more effective film than it's American counterpart, FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS. THE QUEEN is a lovely film, full of restrained emotion and fully realized characters, but it is the sort of thing I find myself admiring more than loving. One may call it a nice film, but is it a film that anyone loves?

CONCLUSION: Well, there are really no terrible movies, but there are no classics either. LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE and THE DEPARTED have their flaws, but they are fine enough upon first viewing. THE QUEEN is a tightly-wound little drama, if one that does not make a significant enough mark to attain greatness. Both LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA and BABEL attempt to make bold statements about understanding different cultures and how similar we all are, but they quite simply do not work. Here are my rankings for the year:

5. BABEL
4. LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA
3. THE QUEEN
2. THE DEPARTED
1. LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE

Next up is 2007, which features NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, THERE WILL BE BLOOD, ATONEMENT, JUNO, and MICHAEL CLAYTON. I will try not to allow it to affect me emotionally.

Top Ten Palme d'Or winners of the decade.

While we often get wrapped up in the immediacy of the Academy Awards, the Cannes Film Festival regularly awards films that are better than the Best Picture nominee of the same year. Each year this decade, the Palme d'Or winner has been superior to the film the Academy deems worthy. This is tricky, though. It just so happens that weak years and strong years correlate. In 2004, FAHRENHEIT 9/11 was a colossal disappointment for a longtime Michael Moore fan, but MILLION DOLLAR BABY did not have the resonating power to best it in my theoretical cage fight. Conversely, the Academy boldly chose the amazing NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN in 2007, only to have the Cannes Film Festival happen upon 4 MONTHS, 3 WEEKS, AND 2 DAYS. I guess that is life, presumably. Alas, here is how the decade's work stacks up.

10. FAHRENHEIT 9/11: Dubya.

9. DANCER IN THE DARK: Björk.

8. THE WHITE RIBBON: Rape.

7. THE SON'S ROOM: Death.

6. L'ENFANT: Libertarianism.

5. THE WIND THAT SHAKES THE BARLEY: Ireland.

4. THE CLASS: Globalization.

3. THE PIANIST: Survival.

2. ELEPHANT: Nihilism.

1. 4 MONTHS, 3 WEEKS, AND 2 DAYS: Ceauşescu.

82nd Academy Awards: What Just Happened?

Well, there were good moments and bad. Let's get to it, shall we?

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM: Well, my predictions for THE WHITE RIBBON,THE MILK OF SORROW, A PROPHET, and AJAMI all worked out. SAMSON AND DELILAH fell to THE SECRET IN THEIR EYES, which I frankly should have predicted. I have only seen one, so I have no real feelings about the whole production. 4/5.

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE: Everyone expected THE COVE and FOOD, INC. to make it, and they did. Not a lot of people were picking BURMA VJ, but I could feel it coming. However, my predictions for EVERY LITTLE STEP and MUGABE AND THE WHITE AFRICAN were wrong, falling to WHICH WAY HOME and THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN AMERICA: DANIEL ELLSBERG AND THE PENTAGON PAPERS. I liked THE COVE a lot, and while it is no TYSON, it will be a worthy winner. 3/5.

BEST ANIMATED FILM: Everyone was picking UP, THE FANTASTIC MR. FOX, THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG, and CORALINE, as did I. The fifth spot was presumed to be CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS, although PONYO was a popular pick for that spot. Instead, the unknown film THE SECRET OF KELLS snuck in. I stuck with the hive mentality, and as a result, I failed to achieve a perfect score. At this point, I think that UP is a worthy winner, even if I like Wes Anderson's work on a more personal level. 4/5.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: Best Picture nominees UP, THE HURT LOCKER, INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, and A SERIOUS MAN all made it here, as I expected. A lot of people were going with (500) DAYS OF SUMMER, while I switched to AVATAR at the last moment. Instead, THE MESSENGER snuck in, and for a brief moment, I thought that meant a Best Picture nomination. Hopefully Tarantino wins, but THE HURT LOCKER might ride it's wave of momentum. 4/5.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: Best Picture nominees UP IN THE AIR, PRECIOUS, DISTRICT 9, and AN EDUCATION were all nominated here, but since I had no faith in DISTRICT 9, I did not pick it. Instead, I put my faith in THE BLIND SIDE and CRAZY HEART. Given the former's surprising nomination, it seems like a logical choice. Those two did not make it, however, and the glorious IN THE LOOP somehow found it's way in. I did a fist pump. If it could somehow win, I would be ecstatic, but I am not insane. UP IN THE AIR will win handily, which is not a terrible thing. 3/5.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Mo'Nique of PRECIOUS, as well as Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick of UP IN THE AIR were all to be expected, and I went with them. However, things became dicey onward. I picked Diane Kruger in INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS and Julianne Moore of A SINGLE MAN, but neither was to be. Somehow, Penélope Cruz was able to rise above the disappointment of NINE to get in, while Maggie Gyllenhaal of CRAZY HEART seems like something I should have picked. It still seems like Mo'Nique's to win, but I cannot get that feeling in my stomach about Kendrick to go away. 4/5.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Everyone picked Christoph Waltz of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS and Woody Harrelson of THE MESSENGER, and it delivered. Beyond that, though, I failed. I threw out Stanley Tucci in THE LOVELY BONES and Christopher Plummer of THE LAST STATION, and I underestimated Matt Damon's role in INVICTUS. Alfred Molina of AN EDUCATION seemed like a lot, and a lot of people were starting to turn for Anthony Mackie in THE HURT LOCKER. Christian McKay in ME AND ORSON WELLES was always unlikely, but oh well. Waltz deserves to win and he will win. 2/5.

BEST ACTRESS: As expected, Meryl Streep, Sandra Bullock, Carey Mulligan, and Gabourey Sidibe were nominated for their respective roles in JULIE & JULIA, THE BLIND SIDE, AN EDUCATION, and PRECIOUS. Most people achieved a perfect score here for picking Helen Mirren's role in THE LAST STATION, but I stuck with Emily Blunt in THE YOUNG VICTORIA to the bitter end. I have only seen Streep's film, and she deserves to win even if it seems difficult now. 4/5.

BEST ACTOR: Well, everyone and their grandmother got this right. George Clooney, Jeff Bridges, Colin Firth, Jeremy Renner, and Morgan Freeman were nominated for their respective roles in UP IN THE AIR, CRAZY HEART, A SINGLE MAN, THE HURT LOCKER, and INVICTUS. I would like to see The Dude win, and he seems prepared to do so. 5/5.

BEST DIRECTOR: We all knew it was going to be Jason Reitman, Kathryn Bigelow, Quentin Tarantino, James Cameron, and Lee Daniels. Quentin deserves it, but Kathryn wins. 5/5.

BEST PICTURE: Just about everyone assumed the five directorial nominees (UP IN THE AIR, THE HURT LOCKER, INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, AVATAR, PRECIOUS) would make it, as well as the British entry (AN EDUCATION) and Pixar's redemption (UP). Beyond that, though, it was tough. A SERIOUS MAN just felt like a sure thing to me, and I was rewarded. I took a risk with my last two choices, bumping INVICTUS and NINE for THE BLIND SIDE and THE HANGOVER. The latter was wishful thinking, while the former was an uneasy feeling about the racism of the Academy. While the comedy of our time did not make it, DISTRICT 9 did, which many saw coming but I did not feel comfortable about. It seemed unlikely that they would award two science fiction films. I don't care who wins, as long as THE BLIND SIDE does not. 9/10.

So, for the nominees I cared enough to predict, I was 47 of 60, which would be a C+ in polite society. Best Supporting Actor killed me.

I will have my full list of predicted winners in the sidebar when I get to it, and I will be seeking out the Best Picture nominees I have not seen yet (AVATAR, PRECIOUS, AN EDUCATION). However, I will assume that THE BLIND SIDE is the worst nominated film of the decade and save my time and money.

Best Picture nominee The Blind Side.

Fuck the Academy.

A more detailed analysis when I get home from school.

Don't let me be misunderstood.

I would give it all up for a night with Rose Byrne. I would get into detail about the things I would do to her, but many of you are under 18.

Obligatory Oscar Post, Part V: No more regrets.

Well, in less than 48 hours, we will know what films managed to buy off enough voters to garner an Academy Award nomination. This distinction helps these films be remembered and sought after for time eternal, I assume, so here I go, giving my final predictions. Keep in mind, I am often wrong and have no formal training.

BEST FOREIGN FILM: I really have nowhere to move. I have now seen one of the films, and while it isn't their cup of tea, it should make it. I will guarantee this, though: with nine films on the shortlist and five overall nomination spots, I will get at least one right. I think A PROPHET, THE WHITE RIBBON, and AJAMI are the safest, given their previous recognition by various pre-cursors. SAMSON AND DELILAH and THE MILK OF SORROW are probably the most vulnerable, especially considering the acclaim for Argentina's THE SECRET IN THEIR EYES.

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE: It still looks like THE COVE, FOOD, INC., MUGABE AND THE WHITE AFRICAN, EVERY LITTLE STEP, and BURMA VJ. The latter could lose to UNDER OUR SKIN, especially since Academy members would probably much more rather see that.

BEST ANIMATED FILM: I cannot see any reason to move from UP, THE FANTASTIC MR. FOX, THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG, CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS, and CORALINE. I hope PONYO finds a way to beat the goofy meat film, but I do not have the faith to call it.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: Now, this is where it gets interesting. UP, INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, and THE HURT LOCKER are all locks. Beyond that, though, it gets interesting. Assuming it gets a Best Picture nomination, A SERIOUS MAN should get the fourth spot here. However, can the monumental success of AVATAR mean that it takes the fifth spot from (500) DAYS OF SUMMER, which is competing for nothing else? I think it very well could. If it gets the nomination, I think the chance of a Best Picture win increases dramatically.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: UP IN THE AIR, PRECIOUS, and AN EDUCATION are all locks. CRAZY HEART will probably find it's way onto the list, but what then? Some say DISTRICT 9, to which I say hogwash. I am sticking with THE BLIND SIDE, and it will not be the only surprise on Sunday morning.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Mo'Nique's turn in PRECIOUS and the lovely women of UP IN THE AIR are all locks, but after that it is a toss-up. Julianne Moore is respected enough to earn a nomination for A SINGLE MAN, but after that it is anyone's guess. With NINE seemingly dead, so to are the fates of it's actresses. Perhaps as wishful thinking, I will replace Marion Cotillard with Diane Kruger's work in INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS. I am probably wrong, but what else is new?

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: It is still Christoph Waltz versus everyone else, but who? I like Alfred Molina and Woody Harrelson's chances, for AN EDUCATION and THE MESSENGER, respectively. Beyond that, though, I need to mix it up. Stanley Tucci may be great in THE LOVELY BONES, but the film is gone. Further, INVICTUS is on too shaky a ground for me to give a spot to Matt Damon. Anthony Mackie in THE HURT LOCKER and Christian McKay in ME AND ORSON WELLES sneak in; the former because it will likely win Best Picture and the latter because, sometimes, those who deserve to succeed.

BEST ACTRESS: We still have the duel of Meryl Streep of JULIE AND JULIA versus Sandra Bullock of THE BLIND SIDE, with Gabourey Sidibe of PRECIOUS and Carey Mulligan of AN EDUCATION as sideshows. Who is fifth? Pre-cursors mostly say Helen Mirren's work in THE LAST STATION, while I say Emily Blunt will sneak in for THE YOUNG VICTORIA. You know what? Maybe someone will make sense and give it to Abbie Cornish for her beautiful work in BRIGHT STAR. That would be the most realistic pleasant surprise of the nominations.

BEST ACTOR: Jeff Bridges is going to win for CRAZY HEART while George Clooney deserves to for UP IN THE AIR, and the rest is straightforward. THE HURT LOCKER is dominating, and Jeremy Renner will garner a nomination because of it. Colin Firth is the coattails of which everyone is riding for A SINGLE MAN, so he is destined. While INVICTUS has been received coolly, Morgan Freeman gets in on name recognition.

BEST DIRECTOR: Why bet against the Directors' Guild of America nominees? Tarantino for INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, Lee Daniels for PRECIOUS, James Cameron for AVATAR, Kathryn Bigelow for THE HURT LOCKER, and Jason Reitman for UP IN THE AIR. Next.

BEST PICTURE: Just about everyone agrees we will hear THE HURT LOCKER, AVATAR, INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, UP IN THE AIR, PRECIOUS, UP, and AN EDUCATION on Tuesday. Beyond that, though, no one knows. I feel the Academy's Jewish contingency, and the Coens' former accolades, will mean a spot for A SERIOUS MAN. However, INVICTUS and NINE both have to go. THE BLIND SIDE is becoming the film nobody can ignore, and with Bullock looking like more of a contender every day, I see it making it in. My last pick is a full-circle prediction: THE HANGOVER. Watch and see.

Movie week in review, January 24-30

I have been liking too many films. Perhaps I am going soft.

1. RAY: Jamie Foxx gives a fantastic performance as the singer, but there is little else to grab onto. The narrative surrounding the construction of his most popular songs is interesting and whimsical, as well as a cameo from The Bunk, but the film is ultimately the type of procedural that works only if you have not seen it's contemporaries. After the mastery of I'M NOT THERE, a by-the-numbers effort like this cannot help but underwhelm. Of course, the music is excellent and in many ways more polished than the original Charles masters. 2/5.

2. TRUCKER: A wild (wo)man is reunited with her long-forgotten child and learns a part of herself that (s)he didn't know (s)he had. While the film is as unoriginal and predictable as one can imagine, the performance by Michelle Monaghan makes the entire thing worthwhile and emotionally engaging. However, it is one of a seemingly countless number of films featuring children that come from another planet. What child acts so unruly and obnoxiously? Even the ruffians in my day were more respectful to their adult guardians. Still, this film certainly did not create the problem. 3/5.

3. AMREEKA: A divorced Palestian woman and her son win a green card lottery and move to a Chicago suburb to be with their family, and must cope with anti-Arab sentiment in the run-up to the Iraq War. While the situation is rife with possibilities, the whole thing falls flat. Can the film really not stretch any further than to have the black guy, himself an outcast among white students, become the only sympathetic outsider? Does the blue-haired, pierced high school drop-out have to be the one who gets what she is going through? Does the nerdy, ultra-white principal have to become culturally influenced by the wacky family? Still, it is a mildly amusing movie with some sort of message beneath it's formula. 3/5.

4. THE SON'S ROOM: A family and a community struggle with the aftermath following the death of the prodigal son. The film never seeks to portray the family as unstable, insane, or any other device that so many lesser films would use. Director Nanni Moretti is haunting as the father of the son, and one can truly feel the grief and heartache the man goes through, even if we only have a few brief scenes with the son. The third act features a type of arrival that comes off as a little bit too needy and illogical, but it does not ruin the artistry of the preceding chapters. 4/5.

5. DANCER IN THE DARK: A Czech immigrant seeks to earn enough money to give her son the crucial eye surgery he will need to be able to see, while she goes blind herself. Björk is quite intense, and the songs she performs in this quasi-musical stand up against many of the classics. However, the film is terribly average for stretches, and some of the brutality is quite pointless. Lars von Trier is more subdued here, but it is still not one for the meek. A little overlong, but Catherine Deneuve and Peter Stormare aid Björk and make this an intriguing, if incorrectly done, film. 3/5.

6. IN THE LOOP: Maybe my expectations were too high. The film follows British and American bureaucrats as they argue and plan over a war in a certain Middle Eastern country. The cast is excellent, featuring such anger and ferocity, including the always great James Gandolfini. Perhaps the most quotable film in some time, the whole thing ends a little flat. Perhaps the fact that I did not want to leave these characters behind so soon was a part of it. It was the first film I immediately watched again in a long time, but it feels weird that a little gem like this is so well regarded. 5/5.

7. YEAST: Doctor Chad Hartigan prescribed this to me to cure me for my love for Greta Gerwig, and it almost worked. A woman passive aggressively berates her two friends, who do their part to return the favor. In a scant seventy-seven minutes, the film explores the reality of friendship. Real life is not about "best friends forever" or so many other lifelong bonds that films portray. Too often, different experiences cause us to grow apart from our friends, and while some drift away, just as often some will stubbornly try to make things work. While the mumblecore movement has it's flaws, no other type of filmmaking more honestly portrays the difficulty of the modern American's twenties. 4/5.

8. ADAM: An elementary school teacher moves into a new apartment and becomes involved with the mysterious man next door, who suffers from Asperger syndrome. The illness is a crutch for a film about finding out how to love and how to accept people as they are, but these plot contrivances can be forgiven because of the soulful performances by Hugh Dancy and Rose Byrne. At this point in time, I will watch anything Rose Byrne does. The film is alternately heart-breaking and upbeat, and it's sentimentality works thanks to the integrity of the performers. 4/5.

9. UP: Who would not love a movie about an old man sticking it to the world? Said old man decides to visit South America after his wife dies, but he has to improvise when contractors try to put him in a nursing home. Along the way, an androgynous child hops on board and follows the adventure. Despite the inherent rules in a mainstream effort like this, the peril is actually quite thrilling. Edward Asner's voice work is a delight, and a talking dog manages to make it adorable for a change. Also, two old men have a semi-sword fight. How can one not be curiously moved by Pixar's daringness? 4/5.

10. THE WHITE RIBBON: A story about a German village in the days before World War I, and the mysterious attacks that begin to occur. The children in this movie are real and sincere, and even the ugly ones are adorable in their own precociousness. However, for all the talk of social relevance and senseless chatter about the film being a symbolic explanation of fascism, I found it to be intellectually irrelevant and quite forgettable. I have only embraced one of Haneke's films in the past, so perhaps I am missing something. However, it is a well-done piece of cinema, even if it's lofty ambitions are unfulfilled. 4/5.

This week I will be viewing CORALINE, THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL, IN A DREAM, LEMON TREE, LORNA'S SILENCE, FRONTIER OF DAWN, TULPAN, and JERICHOW. This will be a busy week for this humble blog. Along with Best Picture write-ups for 2006 and 2007, I will be unveiling my Top Ten Palme d'Or winners of the decade. On Monday, I will be revealing my final Oscar nomination predictions, and I will have my reaction on Tuesday. I am going to see all the Best Picture nominees this week, which, according to my predictions, means I must seek out AN EDUCATION, AVATAR, PRECIOUS, INVICTUS, and NINE. AVATAR, PRECIOUS, and AN EDUCATION seem like locks, so I will get to them as soon as possible. If I am lucky, STAR TREK and DISTRICT 9 will knock out INVICTUS and NINE, but I doubt it.

Up in the Air.

UP IN THE AIR
WRITTEN AND DIRECTED BY: JASON REITMAN

There are often movies that can touch at a personal level; maybe a movie romance ends as you cope through yours, or perhaps a film about a dying family member echoes that much stronger because of the tragedy in your own house. One would assume that common practice dictates a critic attempt to suppress these feelings; after all, the piece is meant to advise a general audience, not reaffirm your own emotional state. However, there comes along a film, perhaps only once every few years, that can resonate with a wide audience because of it's timeliness and it's universal themes, and Jason Reitman has made that film.

Reitman is one of the most perplexing filmmakers in modern cinema. After the brilliant, subdued first effort, THANK YOU FOR SMOKING, he took the helm of the Diablo Cody-penned JUNO, perhaps the worst film ever to be nominated for Best Picture. While his debut was biting and full of interesting ideas, it had no emotional depth, and JUNO failed at it's attempts to do so. With UP IN THE AIR, Reitman has decided to make a film aimed at adults, much to the chagrin of my audience, who were laughing at a trailer which featured Jennifer Aniston punching Gerard Butler in the testicles. Who finds that funny, anyway?

You all know the basics of the plot. Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) works for a company that fires other company's employees for them. He is on the road for close to 300 days a year, and he likes it that way, free of emotional attachments and pursuing the interests of like-minded women like Alex (Vera Farmiga). Trouble arises, however, when young Cornell graduate Natalie (Anna Kendrick) develops a computer-based system that would save the company from spending so much money on travel, yet de-rail Bingham's life. He takes Natalie on a trip to attempt to convince her the way things should be done, and our tale begins.

Without giving much away, I must say that this film is the most emotional movie I have seen from 2009. There is such an honesty to the way these people being fired, and played by real people who had been fired, simply lay it out on the line. As stirring as that is, the romance between Bingham and Alex is so adult and authentic that it puts most anything to shame.

See this movie.