Pick the Oscars Contest!

Kinsey and I decided to throw together a quick Oscar contest before the show rolls around on Sunday. Basically you just send us your picks by email or leave them in the comments section (if you're brave), and the winner will receive a fabulous used DVD of the Saturn Award winning film, Jumanji.

Here are the nominees along with our picks for who will win and who should win.

Best Picture:

Avatar

The Blind Side

District 9

An Education

The Hurt Locker

Inglourious Basterds

Precious

A Serious Man

Up

Up in the Air

Will win: The Hurt Locker
Should win: The Hurt Locker

Best Director:

Avatar - James Cameron

The Hurt Locker - Kathryn Bigelow

Inglourious Basterds - Quentin Tarantino

Precious - Lee Daniels

Up in the Air - Jason Reitman

Will win: Kathryn Bigelow - The Hurt Locker
Should win: Kathryn Bigelow - The Hurt Locker

Best Actor:

Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart

Colin Firth - A Single Man

Jeremy Renner - The Hurt Locker

Morgan Freeman - Invictus

George Clooney - Up in the Air

Will win: Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart
Should win: Colin Firth - A Single Man

Best Actress:

Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side

Meryl Streep - Julie & Julia

Gabourey Sidibe - Precious

Carey Mulligan - An Education

Helen Mirren - The Last Station

Will win: Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side
Should win: Carey Mulligan - An Education

Best Supporting Actor:

Matt Damon - Invictus

Woody Harrelson - The Messenger

Christopher Plummer - The Last Station

Stanley Tucci - The Lovely Bones

Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds

Will win: Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
Should win: Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds

Best Supporting Actress:

Penelope Cruz - Nine

Vera Farmiga - Up in the Air

Maggie Gyllenhaal - Crazy Heart

Anna Kendrick - Up in the Air

Mo'Nique - Precious

Will win: Mo'Nique - Precious
Should win: Vera Farmiga - Up in the Air

Animated Feature Film:

Coraline

Up

Fantastic Mr. Fox

The Princess and the Frog

The Secret of Kells

Will win: Up

Should win: Up or Fantastic Mr. Fox

Original Screenplay:

The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds

The Messenger

A Serious Man

Up

Will win: Inglourious Basterds

Should win: Up

Adapted Screenplay:

District 9

An Education

In the Loop

Precious

Up in the Air

Will win: Up in the Air

Should win: In the Loop

And the most anticipated category of all...

Sound Mixing:

Avatar

The Hurt Locker

Inglourious Basterds

Star Trek

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Will win: The Hurt Locker

Should win: The Hurt Locker

Tiebreaker:

Which film will win the most Academy Awards?

Kinsey and Wade's Top 5 Films of 2009

Well, it's March 2010, and you know what that means... finally time to stop talking about movies from 2009. So here it is, Wade and Kinsey's Top 5 Movies of 2009. Drum roll, please.

Kinsey's Top 5

5. Inglourious Basterds

I'm very surprised to see this on my list. I have not been a Tarantino fan in the past; I didn't actually see this movie in the theater (made Wade go on his own) and had to catch up with it later on DVD. When I finally did force myself to watch it, I was amazed by how much I enjoyed it. The characters were fascinating and the story was entertaining in its entirety.

4. A Single Man

I especially enjoyed the acting in the film; Colin Firth and supporting cast were all fantastic. I also loved how the film captured the feel of a classic short story. A very well done movie.

3. UP

I don't mean to always put Pixar films on my top 5 list, but they're so good! Every time I watch this movie I love it more.

2. Up in the Air

Charming, clever, and humorous, with a strong message which is well portrayed, yet with a light hand and with respect for the audience.

1. An Education

Great direction, great story, great script, and great acting. This film was excellent, truly inspiring and mesmerizing.

Wade's Top 5

5. Bright Star

This was the biggest surprise of the year for me because I'm usually not the biggest fan of period films. But Bright Star is buoyed by wonderful performances from leads Abbie Cornish and Ben Whishaw, as well as an inspired turn by Paul Schneider. Plus director Jane Campion puts forth some beautiful visuals and I'm a sucker for beautiful visuals.

4. An Education

An Education has some of the best acting of the year, especially from Carey Mulligan, who makes the film what it is. It's a simple story, which I appreciate, and it doesn't try to do too much. Instead it simply focuses on the trials and travails of its main character.

3. Up in the Air

With his third film, director Jason Reitman has established himself as one of the best directors around, and as a director who knows his actor's strengths. Reitman extracts a wonderful performance from George Clooney, simply by having him play a tabloid version of himself. This movie's ending really threw me for a loop and is one of the more emotionally devastating films of the year.

2. The Hurt Locker

Best action movie of the year. Period. The Hurt Locker is the first film to successfully capture the Iraq war, by putting it through the eyes of the soldiers without trying to push too much of a message. This film had me gripping the armrests with teeth-clenching suspense. Jeremy Renner gives one of the most perfect, underplayed performances of the year.

1. Fantastic Mr. Fox

This film is so charming. I've always gone back-and-forth with Wes Anderson (Rushmore, good; Life Aquatic, not so good), but he hit the nail on the head with his first foray into animation. Perfect tone, perfect voice work, perfect visual style.

REVIEW: The Last Station

Plot summary from Landmark Theatres:

After almost fifty years of marriage, Countess Sofya (Helen Mirren, Academy Award nominee for Best Actress), the devoted wife, passionate lover, muse and secretary of Leo Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer, Academy Award nominee for Best Supporting Actor), suddenly finds her entire world turned upside down. In the name of his newly created religion, the great Russian novelist has renounced his noble title, his property and even his family in favor of poverty, vegetarianism and even celibacy. When Sofya then discovers that Tolstoy's trusted disciple, Chertkov (Paul Giamatti)—whom she despises—may have secretly convinced her husband to sign a new will, leaving the rights to his iconic novels to the Russian people rather than his very own family, she is consumed by righteous outrage. Into this minefield wanders Tolstoy's worshipful new assistant, the young, gullible Valentin (James McAvoy). In no time, he becomes a pawn, first of the scheming Chertkov and then of the wounded, vengeful Sofya as each plots to undermine the other's gains. Complicating Valentin's life even further is the overwhelming passion he feels for the beautiful, spirited Marsha (Kerry Condon), a free thinking adherent of Tolstoy's new religion whose unconventional attitudes about sex and love both compel and confuse him. A tale of two romances, one beginning, one near its end, The Last Station is a complex, funny, rich and emotional story about the difficulty of living with love and the impossibility of living without it.

An interesting, beautifully done film exploring the dilemna that can often exist between one's high arching morals and what their heart tells them they want, and the conflict that arises in trying to determine which is the "correct" action.

Amazing acting all around, in particular James McAvoy. Towards the begining there is a fantastic seen where McAvoy is meeting his idol Tolstoy (Plummer) for the first time that was extremely well done. I felt as if I were meeting my own idol. Helen Mirren also does a nice job as the Countess in a slightly different role for her. Her character is overly dramatic and self-centered, yet charming and sympathetic. The passion, love, and anger her and Christopher Plummer convey is amazing and complex. While they obviously adore one another, the have matured in such different paths it has become impossible for them to live with one another in peace. The tension of being so in love yet at such odds is present all the time. Both the moments of rage and the moments of loving understanding are so well done and very beautiful.

The Last Station is a movie about the high ideals of right and wrong and most importantly love. Love of life, love of ones people, love of an ideal, and love of a romantic nature/soul mate. While Wade felt the movie seemed to jump around a lot without being able to really "get to the point", I felt that it leant itself perfectly to the idea of deciphering an ideal or moral code. Its challenging to work it out, what works with life and what should be discarded. There are always distractions and side-steps, never a clear path, and the movie shows that perfectly. In the end, you need to find the balance between living your ideals and living your life.

Wade: 3/5 stars

Kinsey:4/5 stars

REVIEW: Precious

Plot summary from fandango.com:

Monster's Ball producer Lee Daniels follows up his 2005 directorial debut, Shadowboxer, with this adaptation of author Sapphire's best-selling novel about an overweight, illiterate African-American teen from Harlem who discovers an alternate path in life after she begins attending a new school. Clareece "Precious" Jones is only a teenager, yet she's about to give birth to her second child. Unable to read or write, Clareece shows little prospect for the future until discovering that she has been accepted into an alternative school. There, with a little help from a sympathetic teacher (Paula Patton) and a kindly nurse (Lenny Kravitiz), the young girl receives something that most teens never get -- a chance to start over. Mo'nique co-stars in an inspirational drama featuring the debut performance of screen newcomer Gabourey "Gabbie" Sidibe.

Viewing Precious was a traumatic experience. It's hard to watch someone go through so much torment, tragedy heaped upon tragedy. Things happen in this film that I will think about for days on end. I'm glad I saw it, but I never want to see it again.

Precious tracks the life of illiterate, pregnant, African-American teen Clarice "Precious" Jones and the movie really hinges on the presentation of this character. Luckily, director Lee Daniels discovered actress Gabourey Sidibe, who takes Precious through one of the most well-acted character arcs we've seen this year. Actually it may be one of the best portrayals of character development in any film ever. While no outward or quantifiable change happens during the movie, at the end she's still overweight, unattractive, and reading at a lower than high school level, Gabourey slowly conveys an internal increase in self-worth and assertiveness that was completely lacking in the the quiet, fearful, timid Precious we are introduced to at the beginning of the film.

Precious features one of the worst mothers ever captured on film. Mary Jones, as portrayed by Monique, is matronly hell. It's almost difficult to imagine someone can be this cruel. Monique is a lock to win the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for this, which is fine, although it would be hard not to bring an Oscar-worthy performance to this role. Not a lot of subtlety in her acting.

Precious has been criticized for evoking many African-Americans stereotypes. Slums, welfare, physical abuse, lack of respect, even dietary with many scenes featuring boiled pigs feet, collard greens, and fried chicken. Considering that the director Lee Daniels is African-American himself, it seems unwise to say that negative connotations were put forward.

While this film was extremely difficult to watch, it personally made me want to be a more understanding person. There is one scene in particular that evokes an entirely different response without its context. Precious, who is obese, makes all the food for her and her mother. Lacking any food to prepare or money to purchase a breakfast, Precious is left with the option of stealing breakfast. So she steals a bucket of fried chicken. Not the best breakfast, but its clear that raising a healthy child is not a high priority for her mother. The shot I'm talking about is with Precious, an overweight black teen, walking down the street in the morning, eating fried chicken, with grease all over her face. Now, if I had passed her on the street, I would've been disgusted, nothing but negative thoughts in my mind. But in context, it's only a struggling girl in survival mode. This movie brutally reminds me that everyone is going through something, and some individuals out there with true horrors they are trying to overcome - it just may help to try to be kind and non-judgmental.

We would recommend seeing Precious, but make sure you prepare yourself first.

Wade: 4/5

Kinsey: 4/5

DVD REVIEW: Bright Star

Plot summary for Bright Star from comingsoon.net:

London, 1818 – a secret love affair begins between 23-year-old English poet John Keats and the girl next door, Fanny Brawne, an outspoken student of fashion. This unlikely pair started at odds; he thinking her a stylish minx, she unimpressed by literature in general. But when Keats's younger brother falls ill John and Fanny are drawn together. Keats, touched by Fanny's efforts to help care for his brother, agrees to teach her poetry. By the time Fanny's alarmed mother (Kerry Fox) and Keats's best friend Charles Armitage Brown (Paul Schneider) realize their attachment, the relationship had an unstoppable momentum. Intensely and helplessly absorbed in each other, the young lovers were swept into powerful new sensations: "I have the feeling as if I were dissolving," Keats wrote to her. Together they rode a wave of romantic obsession that deepened as their troubles mounted. Only Keats's own fatal illness proved insurmountable.

With Bright Star, director Jane Campion goes back to the period genre, continuing where she left off with The Piano and The Portrait of a Lady. I have to be honest, this type of film isn't usually my favorite. I did enjoy Joe Wright's Pride and Prejudice, but typically period films aren't my cup of tea. So it came as a bit of a surprise that I really enjoyed Bright Star, even more so than Kinsey.

Bright Star is grounded by two captivating performances from the romantic leads, Abbie Cornish as Fanny Brawne and Ben Whishaw as poet John Keats. A romance needs its two lovers to be convincing, and this film delivers a lovely arc of a relationship, moving from mutual disinterest to coursing passion. Fanny's strength of character and independent notions make her the perfect match for the edge-of-society Keats. And a relationship like theirs can only end in tragedy.

One would think that making a movie about a poet wouldn't be the easiest thing to do, as the composition of poetry can be a pretty boring process. Luckily, Campion avoids training her camera on a blank piece of paper or watching Keats frantically scribble verse. Instead, Keat's profession serves the film. His poetry comes out fresh and proud, signifying his dedication to his work through adversity. Or it comes out in halting stammers, when he becomes smitten with Fanny at a dinner party. Campion makes the art of poetry lifelike, when it could so easily become an eye-rolling practice of Poetry 101.

Bright Star also features a wonderful supporting performance from Paul Schneider, from NBC's Parks and Recreation, as Charles Brown, Keat's close friend. Brown brings that needed dose of reality to a period film, showing that people in the Victorian age did act rudely, goof off, and literally jump around like apes.

And finally, I have to show appreciation to any film that features oodles of visual splendor. Gorgeous imagery permeates the entirety of Bright Star. Every frame is perfectly orchestrated. Really just wonderful to look at.

Wade: 4.5/5 stars

Kinsey: 3/5 stars

REVIEW: The Lovely Bones

Plot summary for The Lovely Bones from comingsoon.net:

Based on the critically acclaimed best-selling novel by Alice Sebold, and directed by Oscar® winner Peter Jackson from a screenplay by Jackson & Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens, "The Lovely Bones" centers on a young girl who has been murdered and watches over her family – and her killer – from heaven. She must weigh her desire for vengeance against her desire for her family to heal. Oscar® nominee Mark Wahlberg and Oscar® winners Rachel Weisz and Susan Sarandon star along with Stanley Tucci, Michael Imperioli and Oscar® nominee Saoirse Ronan.

After the Oscar nominations came out, and I realized that we only had seven more to see in order to fill out the top seven categories, I assumed the movie I would enjoy the least was The Blind Side. Well, I was wrong. I absolutely hated The Lovely Bones. Horrible, just horrible.

Of course, I'm sure disappointment factored into some of my dislike. I really enjoyed the novel, and I've given Peter Jackson respect as a director in the past. With such great source material, a proven director, and a decent cast (Rachel Weisz and Mark Wahlberg), its not ridiculous to expect something great, or even just good. But this movie is such a disaster it's hard to know where to start. Maybe it'll be easier in list form.

1. The script: Completely flat, uninspired and disgustingly sentimental. I was miming gagging motions to Wade while Saoirse Ronan dramatically yelled "Dad" from heaven for about the 100th time, in a breathy, whispery voice no less. Everything was overly dramatic and always accompanied by an over-the-top musical score.

2. The CGI: Peter Jackson should really take a break from Weta Digital, his go-to special effects crew. While the computer-generated stuff was nice to look at, it became the focus in this movie. The heartbreaking and poignant aspects of the story were cut short due to all the special effects, which stripped them of their power. I felt bad for Mark Wahlberg. It looks like he's doing a poor job, but every time he has a scene it's completely interrupted with another fantasy sequence. Nothing develops naturally because the CGI is always getting in the way.

3. The editing: The Lovely Bones was 2 hours and 15 minutes long, but feels more like 3 hours. Peter Jackson needs to learn how to cut out the fluff. Specifically, again, the CGI scenes seemed to last forever, yet some moments that really needed to be explored, given the purpose/story, were cut short.

4. Other: Susan Sarandon is completely unnecessary as the grandmother, only providing comic relief in this weird "can't figure out the housework" montage, which feels completely out of place in the movie. Also, a major theme of the book is sexual violence, the consequences not only on the victim, but also family and others, yet Jackson tones this down immensely in order to get a PG-13 rating. While certain events are implied, this evasion of the subject of rape almost seems like an insult to Alice Siebold's work.

Wow, went off on this film a bit... Yet I have no regrets about this review, only that I saw The Lovely Bones to begin with.

Wade: 1/5 stars
Kinsey: 0/5 stars

REVIEW: The Blind Side

Plot summary for The Blind Side from fandango.com:

Taken in by a well-to-do family and offered a second chance at life, a homeless teen grows to become the star athlete projected to be the first pick at the NFL draft in this sports-themed comedy drama inspired by author Michael Lewis' best-seller The Blind Side: Evolution of a Game. Michael Oher was living on the streets when he was welcomed into the home of a conservative suburban family, but over time he matured into a talented athlete. As the NFL draft approaches, fans and sports radio personalities alike speculate that Oher will be the hottest pick of the year. Sandra Bullock stars in a film written and directed by John Lee Hancock (The Rookie, The Alamo).

We would never have seen this movie, given our disdain for it since we first saw the preview, if it hadn't been nominated for an Oscar for Best Picture, as well as Best Actress. Given these accolades, we have to judge it as a film worthy of Oscar contention. In that regard this movie is terrible, with nothing, nothing (not even the soundtrack) worthy of any praise higher than that of the basic popcorn flick. Substandard script (ultimate cheeseball), poor acting (Tim McGraw - blerg), and cliche storyline.

This movie is based on the true story of NFL offensive lineman Michael Oher. It's an inspiring story, one of hardwork and compassion, yet the only moment that had any sense of emotion was the last few moments of the film where they switched to actual footage of the real Michael Oher being drafted. This heart was never portrayed during the actual film, due to the overdone and schmaltzy script and poor acting. Despite the emotional subject matter, the film completely failed to convey any of it. I felt more emotion during the live footage with no words than in the previous 2 hours of the movie.

I read something interesting about The Blind Side in the New York Times regarding its marketing. Important decisions about the movie were made simply to sell it to a certain group of people. Not to improve the quality of the movie, but simply so it would make more money. For instance, Tim McGraw was cast in a supporting role not because of his acting ability but because of his appeal to country music fans. Real college football coaches were cast to bring in male college football fans. The marketing company for The Blind Side even offered online sermon outlines based on the movie, with clips that could be used in churches with video screens. It makes me question the intentions of the film, and respect it even less.

On a final note, I think I should comment on the football, since this is a sports movie at its core. I played high school football and I watch a lot of football, and The Blind Side is the same as a lot of other football movies, which is to say that the football scenes are not too great. It highlights the sports cliches the same as all the other cliches in the movie. Too much trash-talking and too many devastating tackles.

If Sandra Bullock wins an Oscar, I will be very disappointed.

Wade: 0/5 stars
McKinsey :1.5/5 stars

REVIEW: Julia

Plot summary for Julia from fandango.com:

Tilda Swinton gives the performance of a lifetime as Julia, a middle-aged alcoholic who totters around nightclubs on six-inch heels, and gets by on nickel-and-dime jobs sandwiched between shots of vodka and one-night stands. Julia is manipulative , unreliable and a compulsive liar, and when an opportunity presents itself to make a substantial amount of money, she jumps at the chance and commits a desperate act. As the repercussions spiral beyond her control, she is forced to make a choice between sacrifice and redemption.

The bad thing about movies in January or February is that there isn't much interesting new films hitting theatres. The good thing is that all the interesting films you missed in the fall are coming out on DVD. By way of recommendation from the great podcast Filmspotting, we were able to catch one of those under-the-wire fall releases the other day, Julia starring Tilda Swinton.

It's amazing how many different faces Tilda Swinton has; we've seen her in a few films now, and she's always playing a completely different character. As the title character, Julia, Tilda Swinton is a very difficult character to engage. An alcoholic, a floozy, and a liar, she seems to have no sense of human decency. Its an interesting arc of character development; while Julia has no degree of respectability, she slowly and in certain ways starts to develop maternal compassion and loses some of the self-centeredness and false victimizing evident in the beginning. Yet the character and story is definitely a step away from the standard story, as Julia never "gets sober" or starts making intelligent decisions. Many compliments to Tilda Swinton for the performance; ugly, unflattering, and intense.

The movie is very suspenseful, one of those films you hold your breath throughout with no idea on how each scene is going to play out. Its also one where you don't even know what you want to happen. Julia is such a despicable mess, but with no other protagonist, you feel torn between her getting what she deserves and hoping that somehow things will workout for her. The plot takes turn after turn, often with no set-up, and constantly had me trying to keep up.

This film wasn't nominated for an Oscar although you could easily argue for a best actress nod. We're seeing The Blind Side this weekend, actually, and if Sandra Bullock does a better job than Swinton, I'll eat my hat. In the end, definitely worth checking out and we'd recommend you add it to your queue.

Kinsey: 3.5/5 stars
Wade: 4/5 stars

REVIEW: In the Loop

Plot summary for In the Loop from comingsoon.net:

"In the Loop" is a smart comedy with razor-sharp, truly laugh-out-loud dialogue that pokes fun at the absurdity and ineptitude of our highest leaders. With everyone looking out for number one, and the fate of the free world at stake (but apparently incidental), the hilarious ensemble cast of characters bumbles its way through Machiavellian political dealings, across continents, and toward comic resolutions that are unforeseeable.

Well, I really hope government interactions as portrayed in In the Loop don't really work like this. It's was hilarous, yet as the story progressed, serious and depressing moments slowly started building up, and by the end, the importance of these politician's actions became very depressing. An interesting element of the story is that it focused on the government middlemen, people who have "Assistant" in front of their name. Every character had his or her own agenda, and backstabbing and tush-kissing were rampant in this realm of the political sphere.

In the Loop is a zippy political comedy, with so much back-and-forth dialogue the script is probably as thick as War and Peace. This film deserves its adapted screenplay Oscar nomination, if only for its creative use of swearing and swear word combinations. Before In the Loop, I never knew you could use the F-word as a descriptive adjective both before and after the same noun in the same sentence. The banter is pretty non-stop and complete concentration is needed to keep up. We actually resorted to sub-titles about 10 minutes in; with the non-stop verbals and the thick English accent we were starting to lose the main ideas.

Most of this creativity stems from the character of Malcolm Tucker, an angry Scot whose job is fixing other government employee's goof-ups, which is why I imagine he's so angry. In this film, his job is to correct the vocal trainwrecks of unimportant minister Simon Foster, who's "war is unforseeable" quip, quickly followed by "climb the mountain of conflict" apparently doesn't toe the party line.

There is no sympathetic character in the film, everyone is watching out for number one. Interestingly, there is also no true villian. While a couple of individuals are more reprehensible, there isn't a single character who stands up for what's right. For example, the assistant secretary of state character state, Karen Clark, resigns due to "her principles"regarding the war, but this idea was conceived as the best move for her political career.

While its never said as much, the film is obviously commenting on the politics leading up to the Iraq war. The film was balanced in that everyone, regardless of whether they wanted war or not, still cared more about their own careers than the actual consequences of war or not going to war, yet there was still an obvious bias in the movie towards not going to war. The one or two more serious moments where characters discussed the consequences of war were all done from the anti-war side, with no explanations given to why other characters wanted war in the middle east. The audience is just left to assume that it must be for reasons of wealth and political advancement. While having an agenda in a film is perfectly fine, and one of antiwar is quite appropriate right now as the Iraq war is winding down, its a bit unoriginal at this point. Yay, another movie against the Iraq war and the politicians who started - how exciting! (please note sarcasm).

That aside, still a very enjoyable, hilarious, yet serious movie that we recommend seeing.

Wade: 4/5 stars
Kinsey: 4/5 stars

Commenting on the 2009 Oscar nominations...

Best Picture:

Avatar
The Blind Side
District 9
An Education
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Precious
A Serious Man
Up
Up in the Air

So the big thing this year is the 10 movies up for best picture. I think its a good thing just given that UP made best picture, hopefully this means that just because a movie is animated is won't be shunted to the Best Animated Film category alone. Of course this does allow in movies such as The Blind Side. Wade said that if this wins he will be boycotting the Oscars from now on. I'm just upset because we always see the films up for Best Picture, and I really didn't want to see this.

I don't have any big issues with the nominated films that I've seen. It's a nice mix of small film and crowdpleasers. Definitely pulling for The Hurt Locker, although as long as its not Avatar or The Blind Side, I'll be OK.

Best Director:

James Cameron - Avatar
Kathryn Bigelow - The Hurt Locker
Quentin Tarantino - Inglourious Basterds
Precious - Lee Daniels
Up in the Air - Jason Reitman

My vote would be for Kathryn Bigelow or Jason Reitman. I disagree with the nom for James Cameron, but it was expected.

Got to be Kathryn Bigelow here. I really hope its not James Cameron just so I don't have to listen to that blowhard give a speech.

Best Actor:

Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart
George Clooney - Up in the Air
Colin Firth - A Single Man
Morgan Freeman - Invictus
Jeremy Renner - The Hurt Locker

I haven't seen Invictus yet, but I really want Colin Firth to win this. I love him and he was amazing in A Single Man. The buzz is that Jeff Bridges is a lock, but I didn't think his performance was especially amazing.

I don't think Jeff Bridges and, from what I've heard, Morgan Freeman should be here. There are probably more deserving performances out there. Go Jeremy Renner.

Best Actress:

Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side
Helen Mirren - The Last Station
Carey Mulligan - An Education
Gabourey Sidibe - Precious
Meryl Streep - Julie & Julia

Not to be a snob, but Sandra Bullock? Seriously?!! Carey Mulligan was great in An Education, but we need to quite a few in this category. Congrats to Meryl Streep though on her 16th nomination. While I didn't especially love Julie & Julia, her performance was fantastic; I loved every minute she was on screen.

Here's hoping for a 2002 style split vote between Meryl Streep and Sandra Bullock, with Carey Mulligan in the Adrien Brody role as surprise winner.

Best Supporting Actor:

Matt Damon - Invictus
Woody Harrelson - The Messenger
Christopher Plummer - The Last Station
Stanley Tucci - The Lovely Bones
Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds

We have a lot of work to do before March 7th...

This is probably Christoph Waltz's to lose. My main issue is who didn't get nominated, i.e. Anthony Mackie in The Hurt Locker or Stanley Tucci in Julie & Julia, not The Lovely Bones or Alfred Molina in An Education or, heck, even Alec Baldwin in It's Complicated. And yes, I am judging some of these films before I've seen them.

Best Supporting Actress:

Penelope Cruz - Nine
Vera Farmiga - Up in the Air
Maggie Gyllenhaal - Crazy Heart
Anna Kendrick - Up in the Air
Mo'Nique - Precious

I really disagree with both the nomination of Maggie Gyllenhaal (nothing special in her role/performance) and Anna Kendrick. Throughout Up in the Air, I though Anna Kendrick was the weakest player and her performance pulled me out of the film repeatedly.

Not much to say about this one, other than Vera Farmiga was probably my favorite here. It would've been really awesome to see either Melanie Laurent or Diane Kruger from Inglourious Basterds here, but what are you goin' to do?

Yay for Oscars!! Let hope those who deserve it win...

REVIEW: Crazy Heart

Plot summary of Crazy Heart from fandango.com:

A worn-down country singer and a burgeoning journalist form an unusual bond in this drama adapted from the novel by Thomas Cobb. His spirit broken by multiple failed marriages, too much time on the road, and too many nights with the bottle, Bad Blake (Jeff Bridges) had started to feel like he was headed down the path of no return. When probing young writer Jean (Maggie Gyllenhaal) digs deep enough to unearth the broken man behind the legend, however, Bad realizes that redemption may not be such a long shot after all. Robert Duvall and Colin Farrell co-star.

Kinsey and I saw Crazy Heart the same day as we saw The White Ribbon and the two films couldn't be more different. The latter is a film that leaves you unsatisfied and contemplating the scenarios long after its over, while the former brings you along for the ride and drops you off at the end, done deal. It all depends on whether or not you liked the journey. Maybe I was just in an analytical mood, but the ride wasn't enough for me.

Now, there is plenty to like about this film. Jeff Bridges gives an admirable performance, though not his best (and definitely not the stone-cold lock for Oscar which seems to be the case). There is some wonderful old-timey country music and a charming supporting turn from the great Robert Duvall. But this story isn't something that hasn't been done a hundred times before. Down-on-his-luck drunk finds redemption isn't exactly the most original thing in the world.

And I don't know if its just me, but the story seemed to force the viewer to laugh at Bridges' character, Bad Blake. Not with him, at him. At times, it portrayed him as a fool, when the protagonist of this story should be a sympathetic figure. Crazy Heart is like a poor man's The Wrestler.

A major flaw was events seemed o happened simply to move the story along, not because it made sense for them to happen. Jean fell for Bad because the film needed romance, Bad lost Jean's kid because he needed a reason to get sober, Bad was a drunk because he was a musician. The perfect illustration of this was a scene where Bad needed to contact Jean on the road. So, of course, he pulls over to a phone booth... in the middle of the prairie! Nothing around but a phone booth.

So overall a decent film, but pretty unoriginal and, when you come down to it, forgettable.

Kinsey: 3.5/5 stars
Wade: 2.5/5 stars

REVIEW: The White Ribbon

Plot summary of Michael Haneke's Palme d'Or winning, The White Ribbon:

In a village in Protestant northern Germany, on the eve of World War I, the children of a church and school run by the village schoolteacher and their families experience a series of bizarre incidents that inexplicably assume the characteristics of a punishment ritual. Who could be responsible for such bizarre transgressions? Leonie Benesch, Josef Bierbichler, and Rainer Bock star in director Michael Haneke's Palm d'Or-winning period drama.

There are some movies that are a fun time and easy to digest and then there are movies that force you to analyze the product. If you're up for the latter, I'd suggest checking out the filmography of Michael Haneke. Both of his films that I've seen, Cache and now The White Ribbon, definitely leave the viewer with questions to ponder.

The film is told in flashback from the memory of the village's schoolteacher, as he tries to come to grips with the violent occurrences that took place, especially in light of his existence in post-WWII Germany. Memory is important as it informs not only the surreal quality of the black and white visuals, but also the partial omniscience of the camera as it seems to probe every character (through the teacher's perspective and knowledge of them, of course) yet never witnesses the violent acts and, at times, dawdles at the edge of a scene, not seeing what is happening just out of view.

This is really a film about violence: it's causes, it's repercussions, and what it leads to. It's not giving anything away to say that suspicion is cast on the children of the village as the possible perpetrators of these violent acts. But why? Why would children in such an idyllic village commit such acts? One only has to look at Haneke's portrayal of their parents for explanation. There's the cruel doctor who molests his daughter, the steward who savagely beats his son, the baron who treats his wife coldly and sarcastically, and the preacher who not only beats his children but also publicly shames and ridicules them. Do the actions of the parents beget the violence of the children? Are the children passing revenge through these violent acts? Haneke never directly answers these questions, except once, when after being berated by her father, the preacher's daughter ferociously impales his pet bird.

After contemplating the film, what Haneke is driving at starts to become clear . Just look at the time period. It's 1914. These children, supposedly committing these violent acts, are teens and pre-teens. In 20 years, the roots of Nazi Germany will begin to take hold and these children will be adults. The connections are for the viewer to decide.

On a final note, the visuals in this film are amazing. The black and white is striking and Haneke exquisitely composes every scene. Really, its almost worth seeing the film just for the visual pleasure.

Reason my rating is so different from Wade's: blah! I need more than just two and a half hours of seemingly setting and set-up, with only a hint of the climax, and then its over. Although the movie did keep me intriqued, and Wade's right, the art direction is beautiful. Still I felt frustrated when the movie was over, all that effort and concentration and it ended with no answers...

Wade: 4.5/5 stars
Kinsey: 3/5 stars

REVIEW: Avatar

A quick plot summary of Avatar from jamescameron.org:

Far into the future, Human space travelers find a planet given the name Alpha Centauri B-4. It's known as Pandora, which is bountifully blessed with weird and wonderful creatures and plants that breathe ammonia instead of oxygen. The Humans seek to take the wealth of this amazing planet for themselves. The hero of the story is an injured, former marine named Jake Sully, who unwillingly joins the native population of Pandora in a dramatic and mesmerizing battle to avoid conquest by the invading extraterrestrials from Earth.

James Cameron has cranked out a lot of blockbusters in his movie-making career. Terminator, Aliens, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, True Lies, and, of course, Titanic. Avatar is definitely in this vein.

I'd like this review to remain positive as long as possible. I do have to say that the visuals were pretty amazing and better than I expected, especially the landscape of Pandora. The creatures on the planet and the blue natives were pretty obviously CG but still pretty darn well done. The fight/war scenes were well choreographed, thrilling and exciting. It was pretty good spectacle. Unfortunately, a movie can't be all just spectacle.

This movie has one of the most heavy-handed stories I've seen in a while. Its hard to find something that isn't an obvious cliche. We've got the iron pumping, scarred, tough guy sergeant who plays by his own rules. The ex-Marines spouting lines like "Yeah, get some!" while they mow down natives. On top of that throw in the wise-cracking scientist and the money-is-everything, Gordon Gekko-esque corporate guy. It is pretty difficult to take a movie seriously with that cast of known characters.

Not only are the characters cliche, but the story is a cherry picking of history. Now I don't mind metaphors in movies, but please try to add some layer of subtlety or original thought while you're at it. Of course, Avatar is basically the story of the Native American's battle with European settlers, like Dances with Wolves in space. Cameron doesn't add anything new to this story. He just replaces the Native Americans with Na'vi. There's even that haunting, chanting music over serious scenes, just like every other movie about native peoples. Even the weaponry is the same, guns versus bows and arrows. Actually, the one twist Cameron does throw in is breaking down the Na'vi's Mother Earth-based mysticism with a scientific explanation. In my opinion this hurts the story even more (it reminded me of Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menance, when they boil down the Force to a blood condition).

In the end Avatar is just too self-serious. I would have no problem treating it like Die Hard or Transformers-level empty fun, but the critic's and Cameron's bestowal of importance won't allow that. So, great job on the special effects, but the story and characters just aren't worth the hype.

Kinsey: 3/5 stars
Wade: 2.5/5 stars

REVIEW: A Single Man

Plot summary for A Single Man from fandango.com:

Fashion designer Tom Ford makes his directorial debut with this dramatic outing starring Colin Firth, Julianne Moore, and Matthew Goode. Ford and David Scearce adapted the story from a book by Christopher Isherwood, which tells the tragic tale of a professor's loss of his longtime partner.

It had been awhile since we'd seen an experimental indie film; A Single Man ended that streak. Visually adventurous with a capsule of a story and a standout performance from Colin Firth, it's everything a nice indie film should be.

This is fashion icon Tom Ford's first film and he comes in with his creative guns blazing. For the most part everything is beautifully constructed and shot, but he does occasionally let his creativity get the best of him, specifically shots involving unneeded closeups of eyes and lips and goofing around with the saturation levels. Fortunately Ford is aware enough as a director to know when to let Colin Firth do his a thing. In a devastating scene where Firth is learning of the death of his partner by phone, Ford shows wonderful restraint in letting the camera simply linger on Firth's face.

This scene specifically is a great example of the mastery of Firth's performance in the film. In the scene, Firth struggles to keep his composure even as he sits alone in his house, unwilling to break. With this struggle he demonstrates so much about his character and even the setting and era of the film. He struggles to hide his grief and emotion in the same way he must hide his orientation and love of another man. A wonderful job by Firth. One irritation I had with the film was that everyone kept commenting that Firth's character looked terrible, but I thought the guy looked quite dapper. It was easy to imagine Ford's involvement in costume and set design; both were hip and perfect for the setting.

With daring visuals and courageous acting, A Single Man is really the epitome of indie film. Even the plot is similar to that of a modern short story, short on the timeline, narrowly focused, tragicomic (a darkly absurd suicide preparation), and with a kicker of an ending (although maybe a bit too ironic in my opinion). All in all, a singularly pleasureful experience.

Wade: 4/5 stars
Kinsey: 4/5 stars

REVIEW: It's Complicated

Plot synopsis for It's Complicated from moviefone.com:

Writer/director Nancy Meyers ('Something's Gotta Give,' 'The Holiday') directs Meryl Streep, Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin in 'It's Complicated,' a comedy about love, divorce and everything in between.

Jane (Streep) is the mother of three grown kids, owns a thriving Santa Barbara bakery/restaurant and has--after a decade of divorce--an amicable relationship with her ex-husband, attorney Jake (Baldwin). But when Jane and Jake find themselves out of town for their son's college graduation, things start to get complicated. An innocent meal together turns into the unimaginable--an affair. With Jake remarried to the much younger Agness (Lake Bell), Jane is now, of all things, the other woman.

Caught in the middle of their renewed romance is Adam (Martin), an architect hired to remodel Jane's kitchen. Healing from a divorce of his own, Adam starts to fall for Jane, but soon realizes he's become part of a love triangle.

Should Jane and Jake move on with their lives, or is love truly lovelier the second time around? It's...complicated.

One thing in particular nagged at me throughout the entirety of this movie: the false reality that writer/director Nancy Meyers creates. Sure, Streep's character Jane owns a thriving bakery, but is that enough to afford a million dollar addition to her already multi-million dollar home? And this addition is for the kitchen of her dreams because, apparently, the one with the two stoves and seating for six isn't enough. It looks like a Williams and Sonoma ad. In fact, the whole movie feels like an ad for luxury goods. Everyone is stylishly dressed (and, of course, super good-looking), driving luxury cars or hybrids, it was just way too much to have to swallow.

The saving grace of this movie is Meryl Streep and Alec Baldwin, specifically Alec Baldwin (Streep has a couple weird "giggly" moments). But Baldwin is winning and charismatic and, this might have something to do with my love of 30 Rock, hilarious. These two have amazing chemistry together. Given the convincing attraction between Baldwin and Streep, it was a stretch to believe that Jane would see anything in Adam, Steve Martin's character, who is a complete nerd. Martin and Streep's on-screen time falls completely flat.

The movie does have a few hilarious moments and some great one-liners. But it's mostly full of dumb jokes that go on too long (let's have Meryl Streep and Steve Martin smoke pot!) and throwaway gags (let's put John Krasinski in a pre-teen girl's pajamas!). Also there are these odd "we're having a good time" montages full of sap. Overall, despite a few laughs, this is not a movie I would recommend seeing.

(I'm going to go on an architecture rant before I finish here. I've seen about a half dozen films featuring characters who are architects and they all have a hard time getting it right. This movie, with Steve Martin's character as the architect, is no exception. Movies always try to glamorize architects when we're not that glamorous. I have a hard time believing that an architect designing single-family homes is going to drive a high-end Mercedes. Or that he is going to need a staff of 30 (in a brick loft, of course), all of them hand-drafting (hand-drafting!!). The kicker to all this is when Adam shows up to Jane's ill-conceived kitchen addition with a roll of drawings big enough to build a mixed-use complex in Shengxen. Attention to detail is not this movie's strong suit. OK, rant over.)

Wade: 2/5 stars
Kinsey: 2/5 stars

REVIEW: Up in the Air

Plot summary for Up in the Air from moviefone.com:

Juno's Jason Reitman heads into corporate America territory once again with this adaptation of Walter Kirn's novel Up in the Air for Montecito Pictures. The plot surrounds a human resource administrator (George Clooney) whose life up in the friendly skies becomes his only world as he works to reach his ten-millionth frequent flyer mile. Jason Bateman and Vera Farmiga co-star in the Paramount Pictures production.

Critics keep referring to Up in the Air as a "movie of our time," a reflection of the issues of today and the economy. While this is partially true (Clooney's character is a "termination facilitator," coming in to fire employees when their bosses are too weak to) it seems more a study of a man very critical of relationships and the circumstances that lead to the overthrow of this conviction. The cynicism of Clooney's character Ryan Bingham is almost too hard to believe at times. His "what's in your backpack?" theory encourages people to sever all ties, both material and human and to live a life of solitude. He enjoys a scattering of "single-serving friends" (to quote Fight Club), but without allowing lasting connections. Can anyone really espouse this as their one true value?

Even with this underlying cynicism, Clooney still makes Ryan Bingham into a character that we can't help but care about. But this may have more to do with good casting by director Jason Reitman than any great character development of the screenplay. I mean, who doesn't like George Clooney? You'd have to try really hard to make Clooney unlikable. While Bingham's eventual comeuppance is obvious from the start, its even more painful than one would expect given the surprising connection you feel to the character.

Another point on the casting, Clooney and Farmiga have amazing chemistry together, bouncing lines off each other like Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell, all with subtle sexual undertones. It almost makes you wish they would co-star in a romantic comedy. Almost.

The director, Jason Reitman, has a subtle light touch, but still finds times to be inventive. For example,the ballet-like routine of Bingham's packing and maneuver through airport security is charming and fantastically entertaining.

All in all, Up in the Air is a wonderful movie, beautifully shot and acted. Definitely one to see.

Kinsey: 5/5 stars Wade: 5/5 stars

REVIEW: Fantastic Mr. Fox

Plot summary for Fantastic Mr. Fox from fandango.com:

A wily fox uses his formidable cunning to outsmart three feeble-minded farmers, who resort to extreme tactics to protect their chickens in director Wes Anderson's animated adaptation of the popular Roald Dahl children's book. For 12 years, Mr. and Mrs. Fox (voices of George Clooney and Meryl Streep) have lived a peaceful life in the wilderness with their son, Ash (voice of Jason Schwartzman). Shortly after their young nephew Kristofferson (voice of Eric Anderson) arrives for a visit, Mr. Fox's long-suppressed animal instincts begin to take over and the faithful family man resorts back to his old ways as a cunning chicken thief, endangering not only his family but the entire animal community as well. When evil farmers Boggis, Bunce, and Bean force the animals underground in a desperate attempt to capture the audacious Mr. Fox, dwindling food supplies force the frightened animals to band together in one last attempt to fight for the land that is rightfully theirs. Bill Murray, Michael Gambon, Willem Dafoe, and Owen Wilson provide additional voices.

It seems that many people have written off Wes Anderson as a perfect example of "style over substance." And it's true that he does have a specific style, a "quirk" as many describe it. While some of Anderson's films do focus too much on being visually appealing, hopefully Fantastic Mr. Fox will put an end to the perception that he doesn't know how to put a charming, meaningful story together. And I think charming is the perfect word for this film.

Definite credit needs to be given to Wes Anderson for leaping into the medium of stop-motion animation. It's a gutsy move, but it fits the Roald Dahl source material perfectly. It has a wonderful childish, cartoon feel. Anderson uses all the nuances apparent in stop-motion to his advantage, whether it's the sometimes herky-jerky movements or the ruffling of fur from fingers moving the models. When there are close-ups on the characters, that subtle fur movement even adds an extra layer of depth and feeling to the characters. Attention to detail is superb in this film, with all the characters being nattily dressed, something of a staple with Anderson's.

I keep coming back to the word charming. So many little instances that just make a guy smile, like, for example, using the word "cuss" in place of actual cuss words which leads to a heated argument where every fourth word is "cuss." Or that when a nicely-prepared plate of French toast is placed in front of the tie-wearing Mr. Fox, he suddenly and viciously tears into it like the wild animal he is.

Despite the humor, the film does have some dark undercurrents, which come from the source material. Of course the guy who created Willy Wonka is going to be slightly sinister. Characters do die, there is violence, and the three villains, Boggis, Bunce, and Bean, are definitely frightening. This film strikes the balance in everything it sets out to achieve. In our opinion, Fantastic Mr. Fox was, well, fantastic.

Kinsey: 4/5 stars
Wade: 5/5 stars

REVIEW: Coco Before Chanel

Plot summary for Coco Before Chanel from IMDb.com:

Several years after leaving the orphanage to which her father never returned for her, Gabrielle Chanel finds herself working in a provincial bar both. She's both a seamstress for the performers and a singer, earning the nickname Coco from the song she sings nightly with her sister. A liaison with Baron Balsan gives her an entree into French society and a chance to develop her gift for designing increasingly popular hats. When she falls in love with English businessman Arthur Capel further opportunities open up, though life becomes ever more complicated.

The biopic is a genre that has been mined in Hollywood since the beginning of cinema. From silent films like the Passion of Joan of Arc to Yankee Doodle Dandy to modern films like Capote and Milk, famous lives are always good candidates for screen time.

Recently we saw the French film Coco Before Chanel, chronicling the life of the famous fashion entrepreneur Coco Chanel. Now, most biopics follow a standard pattern: a difficult childhood, unexpected fame and fortune, descent into some sort of vice, followed by a glorious comeback. Thankfully, Coco Before Chanel didn't follow this pattern explicitly, almost the entirety of the movie is spent in the development of her character and confidence. Her actual success in fashion is barely shown, really only occupying the last few minutes of the film. While this was a nice change from the typical formula, Coco Before Chanel didn't especially break any exciting new ground in the realm of the biopic. One of the only things that really drew my interest was a lack of any sort of knowledge of Coco Chanel's life. She was a very interesting character with many complex relationships.

While Audrey Tautou and crew all did a nice job in this film, one major fault was the character of Coco wasn't very convincing. Throughout the movie characters referred to Coco as charming, exciting, and entertaining, but all we ever saw of Coco was Audrey Tautou moping in the corner smoking a cigarette. I often found myself confused at references to her as an "exciting companion" Also, the entire movie underplays her knack for design so well, that when she actually does become known for this (only the last bit of the film), I was a bit unprepared. Other than one brief love affair, the film only gives a skin deep examination of the character. It would've been nice to see it go a bit deeper, find the origins of her antagonistic design sense. And at times the film did seem a bit overlong, with Coco spending enormous amounts of time sitting around her friend's mansion. Definitely could have used a bit more trimming in the editing room.

Kinsey: 3/5 stars
Wade: 3/5 stars

REVIEW: An Education

The plot summary for An Education from IMDb.com:

Jenny ( Carey Mulligan) a very bright girl on the cusp of her 17th birthday, finds herself in a whirlwind romance with the much older David ( Peter Sarsgaard). Prior to meeting him, Jenny was working hard at secondary school to ensure getting to Oxford University. When she sees the lifestyle David can provide, one she never imagined could be hers, she's hooked and thoughts of Oxford are forgotten. Then, when things are looking pretty good for Jenny with the dashing ( yet a little too smooth) David, the truth hits her like a ton of bricks. Jenny goes from being a bright eyed school girl and a sophisticated young lady, all the way back to questioning if she really knows who she is at all. 'An Education' won the Audience Choice award and the Cinematography award at the 2009 Sundance Film Festival.

Life is about choices. Who we are with, what we do, where we go. It has always seemed unfair to me that the choices we have to make in our late teens/early twenties can often have the greatest impact on our lives, just when we're the silliest and least prepared to make them. I marvel that so many of us make it through this time without making a disastrous mistake. Jenny, the protagonist of An Education, has difficult choices to make herself. Does she go to Oxford as planned and go on to lead a "boring" life? Or does she live her life of "fun" with David, her much older lover? Yes, sounds like a tense coming-of-age film with drama, mistakes, and tragedy. And it is, but An Education is surprisingly funny as well, starting with some light and energetic opening titles and then leading into a humorous argument with her parents. There is the struggle of making sense of it all and the weight of decisions that will effect the rest of her life, but its presented in a manner that, while stressing their importance, still gives the feel of looking back at your young self and laughing at your own ignorance.

This movie is fantastic in that it feels like youth, exciting, romantic, scary, and magical. There is the furious joy of a first infatuation, the wonder of new experiences, realization that parents can fail and that you can disappoint. As a viewer, I felt sucked into this intoxicating feeling. The things Jenny was experiencing felt new and at the same time old and familiar. While Jenny makes the decision that alters the course of her life, I found myself thinking, "this is not the right choice, but I can't remember why..." Jenny's youth and way of thinking had convinced me, as the viewer, of the wisdom of her choice as much as she had convinced herself. In the end the lesson is learned (by Jenny and the audience) that some mistakes can be corrected, but you never get back your "first time" for life's experiences.

There has been a lot of talk about Carey Mulligan, the star of An Education, and she does a great job. But the performance that really stood out to me was Rosamund Pike. She does an excellent job playing the dimwitted friend of David. Playing dumb in an effortless manner is very challenging, but Pike is wonderful as this nitwit of a character and is completely convincing. An Education is wrought with fine acting, from Alfred Molina as Jenny's father to Peter Sarsgaard as the selfish David.

I think its safe to say that An Education may well be the best film I've seen this year, and I wouldn't be surprised if it makes into my top 5.

Kinsey: 5/5 stars
Wade: 5/5 stars