What's Your Number?

Director: Mark Mylod
Year: 2011
Rating: **

Well, here we are again with a RomCom that adheres to crappily defined and unexplored gender norms and passes ridiculous judgment on women and their sexual behavior while setting up marriage as the ultimate goal for any "sane" woman under the age of 30.

Allie (a scary skinny Anna Faris) is a 20-something marketing professional living on her own in Boston and at the tail end of a relationship with an average-at-best guy with whom she seems to have nothing in common. She changes things about herself to align more with what he likes (Incidentally, this is the 2nd romantic comedy I can immediately think of where a girl pretends she doesn't like meat for a vegetarian man but then secretly loooooves it. What is that?) and it ends up not working out anyway. And then on top of it she gets fired, for no clear plot reason other than to make her appear even more pathetic. When she reads in Marie Claire that 96% of women with more than 20 sexual partners never get married, she panics - because she's at (dun dun) 19. That night she gets so drunk she makes a bad decision about an ex-boss and hits 20.

It dawns upon her that if she can find an ex who has gotten better with time and then cultivate a relationship with him, she wouldn't have to go over 20 and then her moral and marital future would be assured and in tact. She enlists her too-hot-to-end-up-just-being-the-neighbor neighbor Colin (Chris Evans) to help her track them down, in exchange for lending him excuses and the shelter of her apartment to escape his numerous one night stands. We find out that Allie had changed herself in some way in each one of those encounters, that she made some questionable decisions regarding her selection of sexual partners, and that the tried and true "person next door" cliché is alive and well. Of course, they end up realizing that she can be herself with Colin and he doesn't judge her for her number, and that's the ultimate goal. The number of women he has slept with doesn't matter of course, because our society has hypocritical double standards about that sort of thing. Phew.

Faris has decent comic timing, but a relatively small toolbelt to pull from, and Evans relies on his abs and a cute laugh to coast through his scenes. The material isn't that deep, I'll grant you, but I can't picture a diverse career for either if they keep turning in work of this caliber. With many of the stereotypical RomCom features, including a one-on-one game of HORSE in the Boston Garden, a skinny dip in Boston Harbor, crazy mothers (Blythe Danner) and weddings-gone-awry, What's Your Number? really tries to make itself an endearing classic, but doesn't quite succeed. While there were admittedly some very funny moments, there were also some cringe-worthy ones that relied too much on the cheap laughs. Its Boston backdrop is somewhat redeeming, I admit, but this one's ultimately a renter.

Eat, Pray, Love

Director:
Year: 2010
Rating: **

You've all probably heard, read, or possibly even dreamed of this story's plot.  Elizabeth Gilbert, seemingly happy in a cookie cutter upper middle class life, realizes that she's inexplicably miserable, finds happiness only in the arms of men, and doesn't really know who she is anymore.  She gets a divorce, jumps into an ill-advised relationship, then sets off to find her "I" by spending 4 months each in Italy, India, and Indonesia, respectively.  Because naturally, when things don't go right in your life, you can count on having the freedom to find yourself abroad.  Living quite well, might I add.


Well, anyone who loved, or even tolerated, this book is going to fill surprisingly unfulfilled by the cinematic attempt.  If you felt hungry when Gilbert described the pasta and the pizza of Italy, you'll be disappointed by the cardboard of the movie.  If you felt remotely peaceful after the Indian ashram, or seductively reckless after Bali, this just isn't going to cut it.  Even the sheer sexiness factor that Javier Bardem brings to the table with his accent and sensitive character doesn't quite come close to the man on the page. 

Which is too bad.  As much as the book presents an impossible picture of socioeconomic-bound "inherent right of a single woman to fucking find herself," the film hands you an even more sanitized version that completely robs the story of redeeming factor -- for all her self-entitled, woe-is-me moaning, Gilbert connects with her audience through the power of the written word and her contagious narrative.  The sheer number of paragraphs urging women to be strong in their own right have disappeared entirely from the celluloid version, to its absolute detriment.  What we're left with is a typical Julia Roberts RomCom, going through the motions and leaving us distinctly unfulfilled. 

Sure, it's visually lush, showing suburban houses, impossible city apartments, beautiful international cityscapes, and attractive characters (idealistically cast? check out the comparison shot at right), but show is all it does.  I never quite felt it the way I did when reading the book.  Given that it's all about regaining a sense of connection, I was disappointed to find that was precisely what was sacrificed.  See this from the couch, at best, read the book if you must, but this one's a skipper.

Sex and the City II

Director: Michael Patrick King
Year: 2010
Rating: **

Well, it has happened.  Carrie Bradshaw is no more.  It's Carrie Preston now.  And in this much anticipated (?) sequel, Sex and the City has basically become Married in the Middle East.  My darling Samantha is the only one leading the single life anymore, and even she has somehow slipped into a mostly-missionary approach.

Two years have passed since we last saw "the girls," and the film spends the first few minutes catching us up.  Carrie and Big are settling in to married life and the subsequent routine of tv-and-take-out, Miranda has had just about enough of her misogynistic senior partner at the firm, Charlotte has a terrible two-year-old and a large-breasted, bra-less nanny causing her considerable angst, and Samantha has recruited just about every pill on earth to help her stave off -- and reverse! -- menopause. 

Given that Candace Bushnell plans to publish the prequel to the series in the fall of 2010, it's no surprise that this quick summary included a snippet of how the ladies first met.  In my opinion, this flashback to the 80s was the best part of the opening montage, and deserved a bit more screentime. 

The gals attend the nuptials of Stanford and Anthony, fittingly officiated by Liza, and then show suitable glimpses of their aforementioned personal lives.  We catch up briefly with Smith Jerrod and head off to Abu Dhabi for a weeklong getaway. 

I found the first half slow paced and yawn-worthy.  For a movie that has been criticized for focusing too much on the iconic fashion, I was surprised to find that not a single outfit caused me to gasp with pleasure (although some certainly did with horror ahemCharlotte'sRedSatinPants), and the lovingly lingering shoe shots were ludicrously limited.  Throughout, however, Kim Cattrall delivers some scene-stealing one liners and awards some noteworthy nicknames, doing her best to pick up the pace. 

Once abroad, the lavish setting is indeed intoxicating, but the plot flounders a bit as Miranda takes on the role of "character assigned to explain the foreign culture to uneducated Midwest viewers."  They sing lackluster karaoke,  beloved Aidan makes a drawl-worthy appearance, and as many business cards get exchanged in this whole film as at a corporate convention. 

Are they trying to be age appropriate?  Sure.  SATC2 deals with menopause, marriage, kids, and career.  For fans my age however, I found it a tad light on the city and the sex bits.  At this point, however, it's more about just going and giggling with your girlfriends, so here's hoping for the prequel.

Greenberg

Director: Noah Baumbach
Year: 2010
Rating: **

Well, this movie tries.  It tries very hard.  I was very conscious of it trying very hard.  And I was simultaneously very conscious that I was trying very hard... to like it.  I ultimately felt it was too contrived for my taste, too caught up in its own trying quest for purpose.

Roger Greenberg (Ben Stiller) has just moved back to L.A. after living in New York for a number of years and subsequently suffering a nervous breakdown.  He has taken on an extended house-sitting gig for his brother, which includes taking care of the dog.  This is almost too much for Roger, who finds himself relying a bit heavily on Florence (Greta Gerwig, indie actress -- so hot right now), the family's personal assistant.  In agonized attempts at social interaction, Roger tries to reconnect with Ivan (Rhys Ifans -- you'll know him as Hugh Grant's flatmate in Notting Hill), an old friend and ex-band mate, apparently still harboring a bit of a grudge towards Roger for ruining their only record deal, and Beth (Jennifer Jason Leigh, recognizable for playing usually-despicable characters in always-unremarkable films), an ex-girlfriend.  The dog gets sick, Roger and Florence flirt with the extent of their relationship, and an errant niece returns home to tempt him with the prospect of a spontaneous trip to Australia. 

SO indie.

There are a few laugh out loud moments in the film, including my personal favorite line: "That's like, the worst story ever.  Bye!" uttered as dismissively as it reads.  There are some poignant moments of connection and lines of introspection ("That's a huge step... finally embracing the life you never imagined") and supposedly heart breaking moments of missed connection, but I couldn't shake the idea that the directors/writers were hovering juuust behind the camera, drooling "Oh yeah, that'll get 'em.  We're so deep -- high five!" 

Honestly, I'd skip this one, folks.  I was disappointed.

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

Director: Niels Arden Oplev
Year: 2010
Rating: **

For my mom's birthday, the fam trooped off to see the Swedish version of this movie, based on the novel-that's-sweeping-the-nation by Stieg Larsson -- soon to be cashed in on remade, of course, in Hollywood.   Being the only person, apparently, who has not read the book, I was unprepared for the rather graphic and dark content within.  Its original title, Män som hatar kvinnor, ("Men Who Hate Women") would have better prepared me.

We first meet Mikael Blomkvist (played, perhaps confusingly, by Michael Nyqvist), a journalist currently under scrutiny for past works that stirred up the wrong pot.  Despite this scandal, he is hired privately to pursue the case of a long-missing favorite niece of a wealthy man residing in the countryside of Sweden.  When he starts to look into the complicated family history and runs into a number of dead ends, Lisbeth Salander (Noomi Rapace), the professional hacker who has been hired to look into his own past, gives him a hand with his case.  The two eventually meet up and delve into the work together, uncovering years of misogyny, abuse, deceit, and antisemitism.

I had a visceral reaction to the violence depicted in this film.  To me it seemed gratuitous, and I was utterly unprepared for how graphic and unsettling it would be.  For those who read the book, it may be less of an issue, but I strongly caution my admittedly small audience that this presented a major barrier to my enjoyment of the film and definitely influenced my rating.

That said, it is well made, unpredictable, relatively fast-paced, and certainly gripping.  I'm uncertain as to why Hollywood feels the need to make it their own, and can only assume that the wild success of the novel series (SERIES) (read: more to come) has something to do with it.  Swedish is utterly interesting to listen to, and Noomi Rapace offers a fascinating new face to watch on screen.  

Ultimately, though, I have to come back to my original warning: caveat spectator...  Let the viewer beware.

Valentine's Day

Director: Garry Marshall
Year: 2010
Rating: **

Following in the amazing footsteps of Love Actually, this film takes just about every celebrity you've heard of or are about to hear a lot more of and puts them together in one movie where everyone sort of, kind of ends up connecting to each other.   Although slightly less successful than the aforementioned cinematic gem, Valentine's Day is actually surprisingly enjoyable.

The movie diligently follows Reed Bennett (Ashton Kutcher), the owner of a flower shop in L.A., through his busy VDay.  He proposes to his lackluster girlfriend (Jessica Alba), engages in a series of character-building, affection-tweaking conversations with assorted minor characters, and then realizes he's actually in love with his best friend Julia (Jennifer Garner).  She plays a teacher who conveniently dates another featured actor-of-the-moment, and teaches yet another character detailed in the film named Edison (Bryce Robinson).  This towheaded kid is a scene-stealer, nasally squawking adorable lines and solemnly declaring his love for various leading ladies.

Appearing throughout in vaguely related storylines are Anne Hathaway, Topher Grace, Queen Latifah, George Lopez, Emma Roberts, Jessica Biel, Eric Dane, Patrick Dempsey, Taylor Swift, Taylor Lautner, and Shirley MacLaine.   Most compelling for me out of this brouhaha of headliners is the storyline between the characters played by Bradley Cooper and Julia Roberts.  In a cute twist towards the end, both end up in heart-warming scenes that are shockingly shocking in their outcomes; in a sometimes-predictable film, that's a stand out trait.

Garner delivers in an enviable revenge-on-your-jerk-of-a-lover scene, Robinson does his best to be as cute as Sam in Love Actually, Kutcher leaves behind his usually exorbitantly annoying persona in favor of a puppy-dog-cute friend type, and the others endow their scenes with just enough oomph to make it a fun jaunt.  Extra points for a scene with duckies at the end!

Catch this as light, mid-weekend fare if you feel the need for a harmless, chick-flicky type thing.  Why not, right?

Dear John

Director: Lasse Hallström
Year: 2010
Rating: **

Here we have, folks, yet another Nicholas Sparks movie "phenomenon" -- the first to surpass Avatar at the box office in weeks.  While previews and The Notebook had me at least partially convinced that I might enjoy this flick, the actual experience was definitively disappointing.


John (Channing Tatum) comes home for two weeks' leave from the service and meets Savannah (Amanda Seyfried) in a chance "let me be heroic and save your purse from the oceanic waves" moment at the beach.  He charms her with his unexpected awkwardness, and she wins his heart with her carefree, genuine, girl-next-door, my-hair-is-impossibly-blond-and-wavy-ness.  They fall hopelessly in love in the shockingly short wooing phase, and experience significant angst at the prospect of his returning overseas.   John leaves with them determined to keep in touch - and they do, for a year, via heartfelt, lengthy letters.

As in any good(?) Sparks Story, there are a couple unexpected twists involving a terminal disease and heartbreaking relationship drama.  While I admittedly got a little misty during a scene with his mildly-autistic father towards the end, much of this movie felt too phoned in for my taste.  Where I believed wholeheartedly the mixed, passionate emotion between the two leads of The Notebook, I only mildly cared about Channing and Amanda.  Not to say that they didn't give it a good go, but it left a little something to be desired.  I found myself being continuously distracted by the sheer distance between Seyfried's eyes, and how that kind of makes her look like an alien.  A blond alien with really long, shiny hair. 

Distinctly more entertaining was Mr. Tatum's appearance on Ellen in which he talked a bit about his pre-movie-star career.  My movie buddy and I both agreed there could have been a lot more shirtless letter writing through the entirety of the film, especially given that video like this has been leaked showing just what he's capable of...

All in all, shmeh!  Skip this.  Write your own Nicholas Sparks tear jerker -- the formula is pretty set in stone.

The Twilight Saga: New Moon

Director: Chris Weitz
Year: 2009
Rating: **

I know, I know.  I saw this.  Lay off.  It gets worse -- I kind of enjoyed it.  There are parts that are undeniably fun -- this series is the epitome of the Guilty Pleasure.  There are, however, lots of things that are wrong with this franchise and particular film... so let's chat.

On the one hand, there's lots of action and adventure with lots of attractive people and angst.  On the other, I'm still left wondering what kind of life a 17-year-old girl can lead in "mysterious" Forks, Washington that could possibly require protection from not only an entire family of vampires, but also a whole pack of werewolves.  It strikes me that Bella Swan is not really anything special or worth going to such extremes for.  She has a sort of perpetual sneer that doesn't suit... well... anyone, even Kristen Stewart. 

Lots of this movie involves racing through the woods and running through the rain, just to find out that your neighbor is, in fact, not human.  However, I thought an interesting twist was for the Volturi to discover that Bella is (spoiler!) impervious to all of their vampiric abilities, and I hope there will be more exploration of that.  Frankly, it was refreshing to find that Bella is, in fact, capable of anything.  She can't even drive her own truck, apparently, and completely loses her entire sense of self when Edward ditches her after the first 10 minutes.  That does not an impressed MFB make.  Get with it, girl!

Actually, this leads me to the question of their relationship as a whole -- at one point she apologizes to Taylor Hotner's character for bleeding.  Strike anyone else as vaguely abusive that she has learned to apologize to her boyfriend for things that aren't remotely her fault and over which she has no control?  Also, these boys have the ability to know where she is at all times and show up unannounced in the same place as she -- and she loves it!  In daylight terms, this is known as stalking... But I digress. 

As I was saying, I'm hard pressed to imagine why exactly she's so devasted by Edward's absence.  They never have any fun!  They seem to spend most of their time saving each other from imminent danger and lamenting the fact that they're so cursed by their love -- they can't even bang, for chrissake, because Stephanie Meyer is ridiculously Mormon.  Bella's best friend Jessica (Anna Kendrick) is the only remotely believable teenager, and her role was sadly limited in this sequel, to my dismay -- her one-liners are some of the best in the franchise.

That said, Robert Pattinson is ridiculously attractive.  And he has chest hair and isn't afraid to show it, unlike many Hollywood leading men... Although, I admit his dreaminess factor took a bit of a hit next to Taylor (who is 12 and hasn't grown it yet), who is so hot it should be illegal (oh wait... it is).  Despite the elusive reason for Bella's appeal, these two do a convincing job of pining for her, aided by the relatively-decent special effects and suitably angsty soundtrack.  As I said, it's a guilty pleasure, and for all the absolutely ridiculous moments described above, I still kinda enjoyed it.   Sue me.

The Men Who Stare At Goats

Director: Grant Heslov
Year: 2009
Rating: **

I saw the preview for this movie and thought "Yesssssssss!"  George Clooney's comedic showing to-date has been fantastic (O Brother..., Ocean's #s, Leatherheads, etc.), so I was pumped.  Upon viewing, this movie was therefore disappointing in that it got more laden down with the wacky plot than some of those others.

We follow Bob Wilton (Ewan McGregor), a small-town journalist, on a mid-life crisis journey of sorts -- at least that's how it starts.  He writes a story about a local wackjob who, in the process of being interviewed, mentions  an old colleague named Cassady who believed rather zealously in mental capacity... As the story fails, and things go awry with his perfect marriage, Bob sets off to the Middle East to try to get sent over enemy lines to get The Big Story, which will help him win his wife back.


Sure enough, he runs into Lyn Cassady (the Cloon), who offers a way to get him across the border into Iraq with seemingly little difficulty.  They almost immediately run into trouble, and Bob learns the hard way that Lyn really does believe he has psychic powers.  As he relates his backstory to Bob, the initially skeptic passenger becomes more and more involved as they search for the founder of Lyn's beliefs -- and things get progressively stranger.


George turns in a typically wild-eyed, perfectly coiffed performance and Ewan is believable at all points of his character's journey.  Kevin Spacey turns in a par-for-the-course turn as the conniving bad guy that he's now pretty adept at portraying, and Jeff Bridges exalts as Bill Django, the nutty cult leader.  However, the story is just a bit too far-fetched to be as satisfyingly good as I hoped it would be.  Beyond the initial situational humor and the farcical deadpan delivery of ridiculous lines, this was mostly a disappointment... to my dismay.

The Boys Are Back

Director: Scott Hicks

Year: 2009

Rating: **

Clive Owen? Check. Australian landscapes? Check. Cute children? Check. Poignant story of a broken family pulling together in the end to overcome it all? Check. And yet... and yet...

Based on the memoir of Simon Carr, this movie tells the story of a widower trying to make a go of raising his elementary-aged son through his grief over the loss of his second wife. Hanging over his head through it all is his guilt over abandoning his first son eight years before; rest assured that Harry, said firstborn, makes his rather bland appearance halfway through and sticks around for some brotherly moments and a touching ending.

While it definitely brought me close to tears at one point (there's a grieving grandma. c'mon now.), I found that it alludes to communication and emotion far more than it actually delivers. For example, Clive tells us and other characters that he talks to his son(s), but we rarely actually see it on the screen. We see much more of his hands-off, "just say yes" approach to parenting, which sadly only features the six-year-old sans his shirt, and not the rugged Mr. Owen, to my chagrin. A few more actual conversations would do this film a world of good, and flush out the characters to make me care more about their fate.

It'll make you want to go to Australia, certainly, what with the rolling vineyards, hills, and neighborly kangaroos that appear in the yard each morning, and it'll either further your existing wish to have children or quite the opposite. Indeed, Artie (the wee one) is no orphaned angel. No such saccharine here, to the film's credit. Perhaps catch it on tv on a rainy Saturday, but otherwise... get some other boys.

Julie and Julia

Director: Nora Ephron
Year: 2009
Rating: **

This light cinematic fare tells the story of Julia Child's years in Paris (and the rest of Europe) in the 50s, just as she takes her first cooking class at Le Cordon Bleu and starts to write her seminal book, Mastering the Art of French Cooking; and of Julie Powell, a blogger in New York City circa-2002, attempting to cook her way through the self-same book in 365 days. As many food channel shows do, it will probably make you hungry and potentially endow you with the belief that you, too, can cook like Julia!

To no one's surprise, La Streep nails her impersonation of Julia Child and is quite funny doing so. Although her turn as a middle-aged therapist in Prime remains my favorite comedic offering from Meryl, a line that had me chuckling in my seat was most likely a throwaway for her, hooting "I'm up!" as she whacked her alarm clock to start another day of cooking. Although her 5'6" frame is (surprisingly) convincingly towering over Stanley Tucci (playing a benevolent Paul Child), it's her voice that really recreates the essence of the real Julia. Indeed, her imitation, uttered in jest in a conversation with director Nora Ephron upon leaving a production of Shakespeare in the Park a couple summers ago, was apparently all it took to land Meryl the role. (Not that it can be all too difficult to land any role when you're Meryl Streep...) Seriously, though, she captures the ebullience of Ms. Child in every heady utterance and guffaw.

Amy Adams is fine as the blogger Julie, although I'm still slightly underwhelmed by her in general. Paris looks idyllic, and the steaming, butter-coated dishes of food look absolutely scrumptious. While this was a fun jaunt for a rainy day, you're not missing much if you just see the trailer and register, for once and for all, that Meryl Streep is insanely good at what she does.

Presque-bon appétit...

The Time Traveler's Wife

Director: Robert Schwentke
Year: 2009
Rating: **

I read this book earlier this week and found it easy to get into, subsequently less interesting, re-captivating in the middle, and then totally detached towards the end. On Saturday, flooded with torrential rain, we trooped off to see the film, hoping it might actually be more relatable and visually interesting than the novel -- what with time travel and sex featuring so prominently throughout...

The story features Clare Abshire (played by Rachel McAdams), who meets Henry (Eric Bana) when she is 6 years old and he is in his 40s, time traveling back from when she is in her 30s and married to him. He explains the sitch, disappears before her eyes, and proceeds to reappear throughout her life until they meet in real time in the 1990s. When they meet then, she has known him for years but he hasn't met her yet; they fall in love, marry, and start trying to conceive, all the while dealing with the oddity of his condition, which continues, to eventually disastrous effect.

Unfortunately, most of the interesting personality details of the characters are wiped entirely from the movie in the interest of explaining the concept and rules of Henry's ability to time travel. The intimate moments between the two lovers feel constrained and somehow devoid of true feeling up on the screen; what was alternatingly difficult and enchanting to read about somehow loses its luster in celluloid. As my companion pointed out, reading the words "I'm a time traveler" has quite a different effect than hearing an actor earnestly pronounce the same. Quite frankly, it becomes laughable.

In reading and viewing this, the suspension of disbelief has to be complete and prolonged. Unfortunately, I just don't believe that either configuration is truly noteworthy.

I Love You, Man

Director: John Hamburg
Year: 2009
Rating: **

I love Paul Rudd. I want him to be my ex-step-brother from Clueless. What can we do to hook that up, yo?

He's a cutie patootie in this movie, batting those disarmingly green eyes as Peter Klaven, a newly-engaged male who realizes he has no friends to be in the wedding who therefore sets off to find some. He is aided in this search by his gay brother, played by Andy Samburg, and cheered on by his unfortunately-coifed fiancee, played somewhat forgettably by Rashida Jones. (Who my date seems to think has "a trunk," which is essentially like saying Keira Knightley is curvy. F that.) After a few funny mishaps, he finds Sydney Fife (Jason Segel) and with him, the desired bromance. Mostly-funny moments ensue.

Favorite parts include every scene with Jon Favreau, playing the disgruntled friend's husband ("Yeah but if I do this then we're having sex with the lights on."), the nicknames Peter comes up with for Sydney out of nowhere (Joben!), and the spontaneous imitation of Andre the Giant in The Princess Bride ("Anybody want a peanut?"). (Then again, that's an easy way to my heart... But still. Good times.)

No seriously, I laughed more than I expected to, and the packed theater did as well. It's not a purchase, but definitely a renter (if anyone does that anymore?) or a catch-on-tv-er.

Doubt

Director: John Patrick Shanley
Year: 2008
Rating: **

A star for Meryl, a star for PSH; I'm over the rest of it. This was written, initially awarded, and would work so much better as a PLAY... and it shows. The acting is perfectly honed; Meryl is a wonder of contradiction, exhibiting dry humor, moments of kindness, and a chilling drive for justice all at once, and PSH re-won my heart (after that disaster of a movie called Synecdoche, New York) with his focused intensity. However, all the dialogue and build of the script would work so much better in a live, intimate setting and wouldn't feel so abbreviated and ultimately anticlimactic as it did on the big screen.

Meryl plays the strict, old-school principal of a Catholic school in the Bronx in 1964, fiercely laying down the law as Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams try to bring a little kindness into the lives of the children as the priest and eighth grade history teacher, respectively. PSH's first sermon, about Doubt and how it can bring a community together as much as faith, brings Meryl to wonder what he himself is doubting; she sets the nuns on red-alert to look for whatever might be wrong. As he extends a kind hand to the one black boy in the school, Amy questions the extent of his kindness... and the cycle of suspicion begins. With (thankfully) only a few hammer-it-over-your-head moments (a cat catching a mouse as Meryl starts her dance of accusation with PSH, for example), I suppose it was less predictable than one might expect of this type of story... but ultimately I was... how do you say... Whelmed.

Things about which I'm unclear:

1.) Why Amy Adams continues to be cast as the sweet-voiced, eye-batting innocent and being heralded as an acting champion; why not challenge her to do something different?! I'm dying to know if she can even handle anything else -- put her in a badass role, kicking the shit out of some unsuspecting slag and simultaneously making me wonder at her absolute commitment, and maybe I'll be convinced that she deserves all these nominations. I found that her choices in Doubt were pretty much exactly the same as every other film she's made in the past 3 years -- was Enchanted filming down the street and she just threw on a habit and jumped in? Cause really, I half-expected the squirrels in the courtyard to start singing the Psalms as she talked with Meryl beneath the trees.

2.) Why Viola Davis was nominated for her one scene?! She was... fine... but no more than that, in my opinion. I also found myself being extremely distracted by the rivers of snot running from her nose directly into her mouth... so perhaps I'm a less-than-focused reviewer in her case.

I'm glad I saw it before the Oscars; I feel suitably able to judge the pertinent nominated categories as a result, but if it weren't for that I think I could have gone without Doubt... without a doubt... (HA).

Revolutionary Road

Director: Sam Mendes
Year: 2008
Rating: **

Lots of buzz for this one, not entirely deserved, in my view. Each time I saw the preview, I just couldn’t quite convince myself that I wanted to sit through the angst of the claustrophobic and restrained 50s household – even IF it was portrayed by Leo and Kate, both of whom I just adore.

I think he’s better than she is; one particular argument in which he cries and yells and storms and cowers is just magnificent to behold, and it definitely left me close to tears myself and with that little knot in my stomach that lets me know I have truly engaged. My mom articulated my frustration with Kate’s character the best, I think, which is that she’s upset, and she plays being upset flawlessly, but the character doesn’t do much to take action towards feeling happier. That’s tough for me to sympathize with.

Lots of critics have wanted to contrast Mendes to Mendes, and along those lines, I personally prefer “American Beauty,” but given the different circumstances of the plots I think it’s an unfair comparison. Beyond the fact that they deal with suburban malcontent, there’s not much to weigh directly against each other. The movie is beautifully framed, however, and well acted across the board, so my taste may just be different when it comes to this particular piece.

There are definitely some tough moments, so if you’re faint of heart or distinctly to the right in your political views, brace yourself.

Milk

Director: Gus Van Sant
Year: 2008
Rating: **

Admittedly, I’ve been feeling kind of over Sean Penn of late. I think he’s a great actor, but I just didn’t mind that he was shifting into direction instead; I don’t think I’ll miss him on the big screen. The preview for this movie got me excited though, so I figured I’d play into the hype.

To be perfectly honest, his acting is good and committed and all the things it’s supposed to be, and I never found myself thinking that he was anything less than good. The story of Harvey Milk is inspiring, and it was fun to see a political story of hope echo the one playing out before our eyes in real time. I thought Emile Hirsch was fantastic but found Diego Luna to be tiresome and whiny (kind of the point?) and much preferred him in “Y Tu Mama Tambien.” Josh Brolin was alright, but never fascinating. Having never seen footage of Anita Bryant, however, I loathed her as I was supposed to, but that was perhaps the biggest stretch of emotion I felt.

All of those things combined to me giving this a mere two star rating; it was good, but not great. It was exactly what I expected it to be.

I will say that when they played a 20 second clip of the real Harvey Milk as the credits rolled, I could see that Sean really did nail his mannerisms. If we’re going to go this Oscar season with awarding those who imitate real people again, then he definitely has a huge shot. I’d be ok with him just getting a nom, because for me it was just alright.

Miss Pettigrew Lives For A Day

Director: Bharat Nalluri
Year: 2008
Rating: **

I read a great review of this before seeing the film on my own in a 250-seater, an experience which was simultaneously cool and weird, as it left me free to laugh and stretch my legs and yet forebodingly sure that someone would bludgeon me, free of consequence. My elaborate fantasies aside, said review contended that this was Frances McDormand’s best work since Fargo and a masterfully etched day-in-the-life with hardly a flaw. The closest it came to actual criticism was to note that the title was less-than-ideal (an excellent point). Sadly, it was only after returning home, bludgeon free, that I found a more accurate review that made note of this movie’s mediocrity in a way which would have allowed me to delegate this to the renter list, where it belongs.

Yes, Frances McDormand is a good actress, but there’s nothing particularly smashing about her portrayal of this oddball title character. She plays a down-on-her-luck middle aged Brit who happens upon a nannying position in the household of Amy Adams, only to find that it’s not a nanny who’s needed, but rather a mother – for Miss Adams! She sorts her way through the mess of romances at hand and each woman manages to impart some of her own kind of wisdom to the other before inevitably parting ways a day later.

Lee Pace is adorable even away from the set of Pushing Daisies, but he and Ciarán Hinds are both merely predictable accessories to the somewhat sedentary plot. Amy Adams is now firmly established as being quite good at playing the doe-eyed-damsel reminiscent of her role in Enchanted, but I’m already ready to see her branch out. The WWII era costumes are beautiful and I quite liked the music, but other than that, the movie is underdeveloped and it’s therefore unsurprisingly ridiculous that the characters end up the way they do in the amount of time allotted.

27 Dresses

Director: Anne Fletcher
Year: 2008
My Rating: **

This movie was cheesy, predictable, schmaltzy, formulaic, and therefore fabulous; make no mistake, I will be purchasing it in all its chick-flicky glory.

Katherine Heigl plays Jane, an eternal bridesmaid and woman of utterly infuriating passivity who has to stand by and watch as her beautiful-on-the-outside-but-not-on-the-inside little sister marries the guy Jane (beautiful-on-the-inside-and-on-the-outside-but-somehow-is-still-single-and-unnoticed) loves. All the while she’s being interviewed and therefore pursued by a cute reporter who she conveniently thinks she hates but who really writes her favorite wedding columns. When she finds out who he really is, they of course get into a series of hapless, squirm-in-your-seat-it’s-so-damn-cute situations and she goes on trying to hate him until they realize they’re in love and get married themselves. Oh I’m sorry did I ruin it for you? Nope – that’s impossible. You’d know the ending of this movie before the previews had even finished.

Throughout this cinematic journey, I found myself alternately grinning, surprisingly near tears, and quite literally gagging; I don’t recommend this series of reactions in any other situation ever. I also spent most of the movie being really proud of myself for accurately predicting the next line, making me think, “Wow, I’m really good at this! Maybe I should write a romantic comedy! I’ll call it 27 Pairs of Shoes. No! – Heaven. Wait - those are the same thing! Drat!”

Luckily, I tuned in again just in time to catch the many little chick flick zingers scattered throughout the script, giving it just a little bit of needed edge. Of course you have to see them in context, but as a teaser, two separate personal favorites include a “caulk” joke and a line including the phrase “Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Drunk.” Gems, I tell you!

Katherine Heigl is no Meryl but she’s adorable in this role and James Marsden still looks spindly but he’s a freakin’ dream boat, so whatever. And big deal, this movie’s formulaic – so’s the recipe for chocolate cake. I’m not ashamed to say I quite like both.

Michael Clayton

Director: Tony Gilroy
Year: 2007
My Rating: **

We bought this on-demand the night before the Oscars to try to catch up on the categories in which we were less informed; had it not been playing in my living room, I might have walked out. It was kind of confusing, featuring seemingly disconnected material and characters at the beginning, and even once the story became a little clearer it never made me really care about anyone involved.

As a suspense movie, it didn’t really have enough build. As a corrupt-institution movie, it was too unclear on which company was which to truly foster a contempt for corruption, and ultimately the plot of the actual corruption ended up feeling too limited to be truly staggering. Operating in a similarly dysfunctional, disillusioned world, at least Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead moved forward with distinct (if negative) momentum; Michael Clayton came pretty close to stalling out – not a very effective device for creating suspense or attachment to characters or plot.

The Cloon is gorgeous, even when stressing, but I’m not entirely sure why he was nominated; I have a hunch that Hollywood is loving to love him right now and is somewhat overly enchanted with those smoky eyes – understandable, but why waste an Oscar nom on it? Same goes for Tom Wilkinson – good-ish, but a waste of a nomination; I’d have preferred to see Max von Sydow celebrated for his incredible scenes in The Diving Bell.... Tilda McCrazyPants Swinton was good, but again, nothing to really write home about. I was mostly impressed with her ability to look somewhat human for once.

The final speech by Georgeous is what gave the movie its second star. Those 2 minutes were the only ones that remotely moved me past neutrality. But for a mere 120 seconds of quality, you can skip this one.

The Water Horse: Legend of the Deep

Director: Jay Russell
Year: 2007
My Rating: **

There was no way I was not seeing this movie, despite it being very clearly billed as a kids’ movie and despite it looking kind of bad. We’re Scottish! I have a dorky love of all references to that beloved country, however remote and however poorly manufactured.

The main kid is cute, the CGI animation is pretty well done, and it’s a tolerable tale of inter-specie friendship with a shot of folklore to jazz things up a bit. I was sad, however, to hear the entire cast sporting fake Scottish brogues, and to see that it was filmed in New Zealand. Scotland is plenty pretty, so they must make it tough to film there for the producers to turn up their nose at shooting at the actual Loch Ness. The factual errors bothered me (Loch Ness is NOT connected to the ocean) and the WWII gun action seemed really random and far-fetched to me (far-fetched! in a movie whose main character is a plesiosaur!) but not a single kid in the entire cinema cried from fear – so I suppose that’s a job well done.

I appreciated the realistic depiction of the disposition of the animal; it was traumatized after being released into the wild and therefore wasn’t still dotingly familiar with Angus (his old cronie). All in all, it seemed to handle the raising of and parting with pets pretty well, and tell a version of the Water Horse tale along the way. Definitely better than a lot of kids movies of late, but mostly just made me want to go to Scotland again.