MOVIE SMACKDOWN!

Temple Grandin (2010) -vs- Adam (2009)

2010-02-08T14:02:00-08:00

The Smackdown. Autism. With the diagnosis on the rise, most of us find ourselves only a few degrees of separation from this little understood condition. Two of Hollywood’s most glamorous young newlyweds spent their first year of marriage exploring the subject in depth. Claire Danes stepped into the mighty big shoes of “Temple Grandin” in HBO’s effective biopic while her husband Hugh Dancy played Hollywood’s first big-screen romantic lead with Asperger’s syndrome in “Adam.” Both films rise well above a berth in the overcrowded “Disease Of The Week” pigeonhole, but let’s see which spouse lands the knockout punch and gets cinematic autism exactly right.

In This Corner. The real Temple Grandin understands animals and autism in a uniquely instinctual and scientifically observant way; she has taught herself to be a renowned expert in both subjects. Her autism is a remarkable gift and a disability she has explored fully in books and lectures. HBO presents a beautifully rendered film about her journey. “Temple Grandin” star Claire Danes first arrived on the nation’s radar as a gawky teen in the never-topped television series “my so-called life” and has grown up beautifully before us on large and small screen. Still luminous and preternaturally gifted, her performance in this stunningly powerful, surprisingly funny, wickedly clever biopic lifts the material to the levels of excellence routinely claimed by most over-hyped HBO Films. It’s not TV; it’s HBO. This time, they’re not just whistling PR Dixie.

In That Corner. “Adam” is a romantic dramedy, a cinematic illustration of the joys and perils of living alone in a big city with autism and falling in love with Miss Not-Quite Right, the unworthy-if-terribly-convenient girl upstairs. Director-screenwriter Max Mayer knows a thing or two about Asperger’s, and he uses what he knows. Adam (A Mister Right Sundae With Asperger’s Syndrome On Top) misses crucial social cues and exhibits genius, intense interests, rare focus, and a pathologically pronounced preference for routine. Brit Hugh Dancy plays the Asperger’s afflicted Adam with a wide-eyed, slack-jawed earnestness.

The Scorecard. Danes inhabits the role fully and powerfully; she acts with her skin, matches Temple’s unmodulated voice, gives over her whole body and soul; those who haven’t seen the real Temple Grandin should give google video a little spin before watching the film to fully appreciate her characterization. It captures much more than an accurate impression would; she goes deep. We get it. And she moves us.

Christopher Monger’s and William Merritt Johnson’s very strong script is based on two of Temple Grandin’s books and doesn’t linger long in self-pity or melodrama. Instead, it strides ahead like its namesake, with an awkward rolling gait, through closed gates and locked doors and up shaky ladders. Director Mick Jackson focuses artfully and effectively on an evocative accumulation of visual details that add up to a fascinating whole, putting the audience inside a remarkable visual thinker’s mind. Sentiment and emotion are relative strangers there; our sympathies sneak in a side door as Temple grows up and learns to fit in with the wider and sometimes cruel world. Unlike the slightly overcooked Look-What-I-Can-Do imagery of “A Beautiful Mind,” Jackson uses remarkable restraint. He doesn’t show off all the amazing tricks he can do with editing; his exhilarating flurries and flashes move us and enthrall us and take us ever deeper into Grandin’s perceptions. I found myself wiping away tears at the most unusual and unlikely moments. Three remarkable actors round out the terrific ensemble; their unsentimental love and commitment shines in every unsentimentalized frame. David Strathairn plays a pivotal science teacher, Julia Ormond her mother, and Catherine O’Hara her devoted aunt. Claire Danes will be thanking a lot of these talented people at next year’s Emmys and Golden Globes, and I’ll be cheering for her.

The fictional “Adam” concentrates on his awkward pursuit of the unworthy girl upstairs, and the resulting brew is something of a mixed bag with no real narrative drive or power. It’s a Nerf softball lobbed at a slightly fuzzy target. The object of Adam’s affection is played by Rose Byrne, perfectly good elsewhere, but here falling a little flat and under-realized. Story points get piled on to fill the time, but the enterprise ultimately rings sweet and well-meaning but slightly false.

(You can read my earlier review of “Adam” –vs- “The Time Traveler’s Wife” for more smackitude.)

While “Adam” is a feature film released in actual theaters, the filmmaking was more pedestrian and less inspired than the filmmaking in “Temple Grandin” whose cast, direction, screenplay, and subject matter never wavered or faltered. Like its heroine, the film had a mission and pursued it singlemindedly and with great passion and focus. I admit that I had not spent much time considering animal handling in my past; the documentary “Food Inc.” has pretty much put me off meat for the rest of my life. That said, while watching “Temple Grandin” nothing else mattered to me but what mattered to her. Her interests were mine. I was absolutely swept away into her world. It’s filmmaking at its very very best, and I recommend you catch it on demand or on DVD. It will rattle your perceptions and make you see things in an entirely new and exciting way.

The Decision. The truth, they say, will set you free. And “Temple Grandin” tells the unbridled, unadorned, unvarnished truth. Beautifully. Powerfully. Thought-provokingly. Sorry, Hugh. Your better half got the better deal on this gambit. And TV beats the movies.

From Paris with Love (2010) -vs- Taken (2009)

2010-02-08T00:15:00-08:00

THE SMACKDOWN. Watch out when the American CIA comes to Europe in any movie made by the collaboration between French filmmakers Pierre Morel and Luc Besson because the body count will be high and the local infra-structure will certainly suffer. While both of these films let their leads hunt down and kill prodigious amounts of bad guys, one of them wanted to be "Taken" seriously while the other one merely wants to let you know that it's a comically violent gift sent you "From Paris with Love." The truth is if the CIA really had any agents who behave like Liam Neeson or John Travolta, the entire War on Terrorism would probably have been wrapped up by now. And Paris would probably be burning.

THE CHALLENGER. The slick action-comedy "From Paris with Love" throws the bulky, bearded and newly bald John Travolta into the city of romance and lets him shoot the place up while trying to thwart a possible terrorist attack. He plays a swaggering force-of-nature CIA agent named Charlie Wax who has a weakness for sappy pop music standards like "(They Long to Be) Close to You" and very little respect for airport security measures. He's teamed up with a low-level embassy CIA-wannabe named James Reese (Jonathan Rhys Meyers, with a Brooklyn accent) who is soon hopelessly in over his head with his loose cannon partner. The streets of Paris, meanwhile, become pretty damn unsafe.

THE DEFENDING CHAMPION. Morel and Besson had a big hit with "Taken," just a year ago. That's the movie where Liam Neeson wipes out hoardes of sex-enslaving Albanians who have kidnapped his daughter. The way he's willing to torture cops and robbers to get his way makes him feel like a very cool and lethally trained Dick Cheney. Neeson's Brian Mills is an ex-"Company" man who just wants to re-build a relationship with his daughter and when she is taken hostage in the middle of the night, he flies off to Paris where he roams the streets, mean and otherwise, with only one goal in mind -- to save his daughter. Well, two goals, the other being to brutally punish any of these guys who have laid a hand on her. He also shows off prodigious skill at handling cell-phones.

THE SCORECARD. Honestly, you may have seen "From Paris with Love" before if you've seen "Rush Hour 3" in that it has that same kind of schticky character-repartee. Jonathan Rhys Meyers' James Reese is the boring half of this buddy comedy, a guy who plays it by the book, and Travolta's Charlie Wax is the guy that rips the book in half and burns it. Get it? The film is basically a collection of moments where Wax behaves with reckless violence and Rhys Meyers is appalled. Still, I have to say that "Rush Hour" was never this good. "From Paris with Love" may feel familiar in the macro but the execution is pretty damn stylish.

"Taken," on the other hand, is a solo act and Liam Neeson has seldom been as good as he is in this film. He's constantly on the move, resourceful as hell, and deadly all the way. It is more than a little exploitive to try for a film that is full of "heart" and have a slaughter and torture ratio as high as this one, though, and particularly at the end, it starts to get to you.

Even though both films are full of manic action, explosions, car chases and mayhem, the tone of the two films could still not be more different. "Taken" wants you to take it seriously, to relate to the plight of the kidnapped daughter and feel the pain and rage of the unleashed killer dad. "From Paris with Love" announces from its title on ("From Russia with Love" anyone?) that it's a bit of a send-up, an homage. There's humor and heart at the beginning and the end of "Taken," but in-between it's relentless action with a scowl on its face. "From Paris with Love" isn't afraid to go for the laugh wherever and whenever it can find it, but it's just as violent.

THE DECISION. I really love a great John Travolta performance and he's great -- if over-the-top -- in "From Paris with Love." But he's not a revelation. He's borrowing bits and pieces of characer from his other films from "Pulp Fiction" to "The Taking of Pelham One-Two-Three." And he seems to play parallel to Rhys Meyers rather than off or with him. He's soloing in a buddy comedy.

Liam Neeson, in contrast, did something miraculous. He manages to make an upper-middle-age guy into an action hero, for real, something that other actors like Harrison Ford tried and fell short doing. Neeson's Brian Mills would probably lose a fight with Jason Bourne, thanks to the edge to youth, but he would hardly roll over. Mills is a new character that makes passion scary.

"From Paris with Love" is a good film, not great, with moments that are awfully well-staged and fun to watch. But the Smackdown goes to a film that unexpectedly lit audiences on fire a year ago. "Taken" remains the champion.

Quarantine (2008) -vs- Cloverfield (2008)

2010-02-07T11:16:30-08:00

The Smackdown. Sometimes, it's the reality of a scenario that scares us the most. Film-makers are turning to more and more alternate methods of delivering a film to jaded, YouTube-obsessed audiences. With the two films on offer in this Smackdown, we delve into the world of "found footage" cinema and its gradual proliferation among the mainstream today. One, "Cloverfield," takes us into New York city during a terrifying alien attack. The other, "Quarantine," (a remake of a successful Spanish film entitled "REC" from 2007) delivers the story of a group of apartment residents, some fire-fighters, police, and a news crew, who become trapped inside a block of units when they are sealed in to stop the spread of a mysterious virus. Both are filmed in the Single Camera Perspective. Both are equally gripping. Both are filled with images and moments that will stay with the viewer forever. But which is better: alien attack and mass destruction, or simple, human drama played out with feverish speed and incalculable terror?

The Challenger. "Quarantine" is a deftly directed, edited and written exercise in terror. It's low-budget and (relatively) simple in concept. A news crew, led by a female reporter (Jennifer Carpenter, of TV's "Dexter") accompanies a Los Angeles Fire Crew on a call one evening, unaware that they will soon be recording something so secret it's never been heard of before. Upon arriving at a nondescript apartment block, things take a strange turn when an old lady attacks them, in a frenzy of anger and deranged power. Soon, a few other tenants display the same madness, the same symptoms. As the news crew go to get help, the people inside the apartment block soon find themselves sealed in, cut off from the outside world. If they try and leave, they are shot at or beaten, ensuring no possible way out. All forms of communication are cut, which only serves to heighten the terror. And, gradually, more and more of them begin to present the deranged, psychotic symptoms that lead to ultra-violent behaviour.

The Defending Champion. "Cloverfield" earns the defending champion title because it garnered more commercial success and critical praise. The JJ Abrams produced sci-fi flick relied on the premise of a recovered digital tape shot by an amateur cameraman as an enormous, unstoppable alien attacks New York. Shades and echoes of 9/11 abound in the images here; buildings collapse as dust-covered New York residents flee for their lives. Director Matt Reeves captures both the heart-pounding terror and the terrifying helplessness of the city's denizens as they confront something incalculably more powerful than anything they've seen before. Rob (Michael Stahl-David) is celebrating his impending leaving for Japan when their party is interrupted by the destruction of lower Manhattan and the Statue Of Liberty. With people still feeling the raw horror of a post 9/11 New York, Rob and his friends, including de facto cameraman Hud (TJ Miller) set off across the city to rescue Rob's ex-girlfriend Beth, who has become trapped in a partially collapsed building. An alien, many stories high, has made New York its home, and while the army battles desperately in increasingly violent displays of power, nothing seems to be able to stop its destructive rampage.

The Scorecard. Both films successfully utilize the same methodology to tell their story, the first-person "found footage" camera technique used so provocatively (and successfully) in "The Blair Witch Project," and most recently in the scare-fest "Paranormal Activity." "Cloverfield" burst onto the scene in a brilliantly conceived promotional blitz; the mysterious film nobody knew about became staple internet forum fodder for months: everybody wanted to know what a cloverfield was. "Quarantine," released in the same year, suffered from a more low key approach and perhaps an unfortunate title; apparently almost nobody wanted to know why people were in quarantine. That said, those who skipped "Quarantine" did themselves a disservice. "The Blair Witch Project" may have put some people off this kind of film; its rapid camera moves and annoyingly silly conceit of never cutting, never getting alternate angles, defy convention and challenge traditional expectations. That said, I subscribe to the theory that often in film, less is more. Some of the most scary, horrifying moments of video are those showing only one angle, a blurry, hazy image hastened by missing frames or frenetic, jarring shakes. It's what we can't see that truly terrifies us, and both "Cloverfield" and "Quarantine" deliver this primal thrill to absolute perfection. Still, shaky-cam isn't everyone's cup of tea, so consider yourself forewarned.

"Quarantine" is the lower budget film, but that fact doesn't render it less effective or less powerful. In "Quarantine," the actors' performances deserve most of the credit for the films success; the editing and direction would mean little without the conviction and credibility of the very strong cast. The set design, lack of score and immersive, stunning surround soundtrack design are superb, heightening your terror by making you jump at every (any) opportunity. I mentioned Jennifer Carpenter earlier; she is absolutely terrific here, a soul-baring performance that lands her at the very top of the Scream Queen heap. The film delivers its chills most effectively in the night vision sequences towards the very end.

"Cloverfield" uses its much larger budget to widen its scope; the destruction of New York City provides evocative apocalyptic imagery with deliberate echoes of 9/11. Those images tap into our psyche, reminding us of the helpless pain and anguish of that fateful day. Some may disagree with the filmmakers' co-opting those historic images to raise the stakes, but the references are effective. Buildings crumble, and our heroic cameraman becomes the new millennium's version of Blair Witch's Running Nose Girl (the most annoying narrator ever), dust and alien sounds come from everywhere. This carefully constructed thrill ride makes one hell of a fine film. The effects are stunningly realized; the nighttime setting masks any shoddy effects work and adds to the horrifying atmosphere of dread. With a blistering soundtrack that rattles and rocks even the most hard-core home cinema, "Cloverfield" is one of the truly great (and grossly underrated) horror/sci-fi event films to come out of Hollywood recently.

The Decision: I'm not going to award the winner here today based on anything so blatant and frivolous as things like budget or effects. Both films exist in their own sub-genre of horror and sci-fi; they share only their "found footage" style. The winner today is the film which delivers the most effective psychological blows, the most terrifying moments, the most emotive, human story. While "Cloverfield" delivered massive spectacle, "Quarantine" delivered one of the most effective, shocking, nerve jangling films I've seen in ages. It stays with you. It haunts you. While not big on effects, it's certainly big on effective storytelling. "Quarantine" is shocking, astounding, and definitely must-see.

Online Surveys & Market Research

Dear John (2010) -vs- The Best Years Of Our Lives (1946)

2010-02-05T18:05:29-08:00

The Smackdown. “The Best Years Of Our Lives” stands tall as the ultimate and still unsurpassed drama about WWII’s returning soldiers, made in 1946 by William Wyler from a pitch-perfect script by Robert Sherwood. Director Lasse Hallström enters the love-and-war fray with his effort “Dear John” based on a novel by the very popular (if slightly gooey) Nicholas Sparks. The war in question is a lot more confusing than WWII, and the story is a whole lot soapier/dopier, but the eternal questions remain the same. What does war do to soldiers and their families and the women they love?

A Note: You're onto me. I have an agenda, and it's none too hidden. I admit it openly. On occasion, I have used the auspices of MovieSmackdown.com to blatantly promote great films I love. A well-meaning colleague pointed out that my choosing to smack lightweight fluff "When In Rome" against the classic "Roman Holiday" amounted to constructing an outrageously stacked deck. Here's the thing about my admittedly fixed fights; the thematic links are always obvious and unforced, and there are deprived people out there in cyberspace reading this website who've never heard of "Roman Holiday" or Audrey Hepburn or William Wyler. Reportedly, some misguided young film fans still balk at watching black and white movies. Perhaps my purple prose will inspire them to rent something truly exceptional next time. That said, I could have smacked “Dear John” with a more obvious doppelganger like “The Notebook” for instance. But I’m not doing that. Instead, I’m reaching back in the vaults for another William Wyler classic with parallel themes and aspirations. Consider yourself forewarned.

The Challenger. Hunky soldier home on leave John Tyree (Channing Tatum) meets college coed Savannah (Amanda Seyfried). They fall in love over two weeks of mostly montage and halting getting-to-know-you conversation and the two promise to stay true for the next year of John’s service. Stuff happens, and his tour of duty gets extended. Both of the slightly star-crossed young lovers fulfill what they perceive as their personal duty, and their romantic connection is tested and strained as a direct result of their selfless decisions.

The Defending Champion. Three WWII veterans return home to their small town and face all kinds of readjustment challenges. The status they achieved in the military no longer means much stateside; influential banker Al (Frederic March) drinks a little too much to smooth his transition and re-entry into his now almost-grown family, Fred (Dana Andrews) once a military big shot, finds himself struggling to find employment, and Homer (the incomparable Harold Russell) who has lost his hands, mistakes his fiance’s abiding love for pity. The film captures their experience with great delicacy and elegance.

The Scorecard. Sentiment is a tricky thing in movies. Sometimes it works even when the movie's not very good. Everyone cries at "Old Yeller" and everyone cries at "Marley & Me." I don't think the movies are in the same league exactly, but everyone's lost a pet or two, and the experience wells up in a big whoosh of sensory recall. The higher the stakes, the greater the opportunity for playing on our storehouse of emotions. War and death raise the stakes as high as they get in the movies and in our lives, and filmmakers play fast and loose with those connections we make between our lives and their films, earned or not.

There are moments in “Dear John” that make you cry. A few are genuinely terrific. I’m struggling here to avoid spoilers; it’s a pet peeve of mine when reviewers tell more of a plot than they need to do just to pad their essays. It’s a delicate thing telling about a film without ruining it for someone who hasn’t yet seen it, and I take that responsibility very seriously. Let’s just say this then; there’s a truly moving moment toward the end of the film between John and his father (Richard Jenkins) that upends all our expectations. Director Lasse Hallström pays off the very complicated father-son relationship absolutely brilliantly.

Falling in love with a soldier going off to war makes for a very romantic premise. (Keeping in touch with said soldier makes for not so compelling drama. Watching a couple letter writing and reading lacks a certain -- well – everything.) Staying in love with a soldier coming home from war makes for compelling drama.

Young Amanda Seyfried has never looked lovelier than she does in the early part of the film; she glows with health and promise and an inner light. Channing Tatum is terrific in a challenging role; his soldier is tough, mysterious, quiet, withdrawn, and carrying a big secret that’s never fully revealed, and it won’t hurt the movie’s chances at the box office that he’s photographed like a young god. You want the two prettiest people in the movie to mate and have a litter and you want to take one of the puppies home. That said, it’s a tragically underpopulated film, acting-wise. Besides the aforementioned acting talent and Henry “E.T.” Thomas who plays the pivotal role of a neighbor, the rest of the cast is filled out with empty suits, actors so completely unengaging and untalented that I wondered if they simply cast the film on location at a South Carolina PTA meeting and paid everyone in picnic food.

The story takes some melodramatic turns and misses some easy marks by a country mile. One of the key moments in the film occurs on and just following September 11; Hallström gets the 9-11 day exactly right but can’t nail that aftermath at all, saddled with scenes filled with dreadful day players and extras. The military scenes don’t ring exactly true, but they’re harrowing enough because we have our own details to fill in the gaps. All the scenes involving anyone outside the four principals suffer and fall very short of adequate.

In “The Best Years Of Our Lives,” every part is cast and played to perfection, and as a result, all the scenes work and add up to much more than the sum of their parts. The leads are mostly unglamorous types; except for Myrna Loy who tones down her Hollywood starshine significantly, most of the actors look like real people. The cinematography is absolutely stunning; there is one particular shot at the end of the movie with all the principals gathered for a wedding. The deep focus and design is breathtaking; we can see every character in the film in that one frame and know exactly how each character is feeling in that moment without a line of dialogue. The just plain wonderful Hoagy Carmichael plays charismatic pianist and barkeep Butch, Cathy O’Donnell inhabits the role of Wilma and touches greatness, and the always impeccable Myrna Loy plays Milly, another version of the perfect film wife, her stock in trade, this one her most compelling and real.

The Decision. Much as I loathe predictability in all things, this one’s not exactly hinging on the flip of a coin. Obviously, “The Best Years Of Our Lives” reigns supreme in the genre; not a single moment rings false, you’ll find not one gratuitous beat, nor wasted frame in the 172 minutes running time even sixty-four years after its release. The emotions still ring pure and true and universal, and I challenge anyone to watch it dry-eyed and unmoved.

That said, there are worse films you could find at any multiplex any day than “Dear John.” I found it manipulative, but you might not. Catching the always-watchable Richard Jenkins’ touching performance might just be worth a DVD rental, and Amanda Seyfried and Channing Tatum light up the silver screen pretty darned well.

Movie Smackdown Comix - Oscar Edition

2010-02-04T20:52:15-08:00

We call them Comix. You've seen them in most of our reviews where we take the studios' standard garden-variety publicity stills and armed only with an iMac, some Comic Life Magiq software and a serious authority issue, we present them in a way that you can't get anywhere else. Namely, we take those characters and we put words in their mouths. And really, who doesn't harbor a secret desire to take famous actors and make them say whatever you want?

What's even better is that this free speech is protected under U.S. copyright law by the "fair use" doctrine. This also means, by the way, that you're free to download, save and spread our Comix around to friends as you see fit. (Hint: click on them and see them in their full size before saving them). Underneath each Smack is a link to the Smackdown review that inspired it. And, if you like them, here is a link to a site where we keep them all collected, nice and tidy, for your viewing pleasure.

Anyway, here's our complete collection of work from the Academy Award "Best Picture" nominations. Be warned. We haven't treated the films with the special reverence that the Academy traditionally serves up. And, because we're basically film contrarians, we present them in reverse-alphabetical order. So there...

Sherry Coben reviews Up in the Air -vs- It's Complicated

Stephen Bell reviews Up -vs- Wall-E

Sherry Coben reviews A Serious Man -vs- The Fantastic Mr. Fox

Bryce Zabel comments on Precious -vs- Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire

Bryce Zabel reviews Inglourious Basterds -vs- Saving Private Ryan

Sherry Coben reviews The Hurt Locker -vs- In the Loop

Sherry Coben reviews An Education -vs- A Single Man

Beau DeMayo reviews District 9 -vs- Alien Nation

Mark Sanchez reviews The Blind Side -vs- Hoosiers

Beau DeMayo reviews Avatar -vs- Dances with Wolves

Rodney Twelftree reviews Avatar -vs- Star Trek

Like we said, these Comix are also collected on a special iWeb created-site where you can play them as a pretty cool slide-show. You really should check this out. Because it's graphic intensive and we offer these photos in high quality, this page loads a little more slowly (ten-twenty seconds) than this blog but we think they're worth the wait.

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

Online Surveys & Market Research

I UK: The BAFTA Awards

2010-02-04T09:11:10-08:00

Did you ever get the feeling that you woke up on the wrong side of the bed? I can top you. Every day, I wake up on the wrong side of the world.
A longtime (perhaps even lifetime) Anglophile, I've always preferred Britcoms to sit-coms, the BBC to ABC. Cary Grant and Hugh Grant light my proverbial fire. I wouldn't want to face a movie world without my dear Merchant-Ivory, Richard Curtis, and Mike Leigh. Without Monty Python, Blackadder, The League of Gentlemen, Ricky Gervais, Steve Coogan, Peter Cook & Dudley Moore, AbFab, Eddie Izzard, Stephen Fry, Simon Pegg, and other comedy geniuses too numerous to list here, life would be a darker and far less entertaining slog.
Still, I've made my peace with my circumstance. My ancestors left the steppes of Russia for the promise of American freedom, and I accept that. I do. But then I read this year's list of BAFTA nominees.
It's official. I do not belong here.

2010 BAFTA Awards

Winners to be announced on Sunday, February 21st.

Best Film Nominees:

Avatar (2009)

An Education (2009)

The Hurt Locker (2008)

Precious (2009)

Up in the Air (2009/I)

Alexander Korda Award for Outstanding British Film of the Year Nominees:

An Education (2009)

Fish Tank (2009)

In the Loop (2009)

Moon (2009)

Nowhere Boy (2009)

Best Actor Nominees:

Jeff Bridges for Crazy Heart (2009)

George Clooney for Up in the Air (2009/I)

Colin Firth for A Single Man (2009)

Jeremy Renner for The Hurt Locker (2008)

Andy Serkis for Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll (2010)

Best Actress Nominees:

Carey Mulligan for An Education (2009)

Saoirse Ronan for The Lovely Bones (2009)

Gabourey Sidibe for Precious (2009)

Meryl Streep for Julie & Julia (2009)

Audrey Tautou for Coco avant Chanel (2009)

Best Supporting Actor Nominees:

Alec Baldwin for It's Complicated (2009)

Christian McKay for Me and Orson Welles (2008)

Alfred Molina for An Education (2009)

Stanley Tucci for The Lovely Bones (2009)

Christoph Waltz for Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Best Supporting Actress Nominees:

Anne-Marie Duff for Nowhere Boy (2009)

Vera Farmiga for Up in the Air (2009/I)

Anna Kendrick for Up in the Air (2009/I)

Mo'Nique for Precious (2009)

Kristin Scott Thomas for Nowhere Boy (2009)

David Lean Award for Achievement in Direction Nominees:

Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker (2008)

Neill Blomkamp for District 9 (2009)

James Cameron for Avatar (2009)

Lone Scherfig for An Education (2009)

Quentin Tarantino for Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Best Screenplay (Original) Nominees:

The Hangover (2009): Jon Lucas, Scott Moore

The Hurt Locker (2008): Mark Boal

Inglourious Basterds (2009): Quentin Tarantino

A Serious Man (2009): Ethan Coen, Joel Coen

Up (2009): Bob Peterson, Pete Docter

Best Screenplay (Adapted) Nominees:

District 9 (2009): Neill Blomkamp, Terri Tatchell

An Education (2009): Nick Hornby

In the Loop (2009): Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche

Precious (2009): Geoffrey Fletcher

Up in the Air (2009/I): Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner

Best Cinematography Nominees:

Avatar (2009)

District 9 (2009)

The Hurt Locker (2008)

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

The Road (2009)

Best Editing Nominees:

Avatar (2009)

District 9 (2009)

The Hurt Locker (2008)

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Up in the Air (2009/I)

Best Production Design Nominees:

Avatar (2009)

District 9 (2009)

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (2009)

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Best Costume Design Nominees:

Bright Star (2009)

Coco avant Chanel (2009)

An Education (2009)

A Single Man (2009)

The Young Victoria (2009)

Anthony Asquith Award for Film Music Nominees:

Avatar (2009): James Horner

Crazy Heart (2009): T-Bone Burnett, Stephen Bruton

Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009): Alexandre Desplat

Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll (2010): Chaz Jankel

Up (2009): Michael Giacchino

Best Make Up/Hair Nominees:

Coco avant Chanel (2009)

An Education (2009)

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (2009)

Nine (2009)

The Young Victoria (2009)

Best Sound Nominees:

Avatar (2009)

District 9 (2009)

The Hurt Locker (2008)

Star Trek (2009)

Up (2009)

Best Achievement in Special Visual Effects Nominees:

Avatar (2009)

District 9 (2009)

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

The Hurt Locker (2008)

Star Trek (2009)

Best Film not in the English Language Nominees:

Los abrazos rotos (2009)

Coco avant Chanel (2009)

Låt den rätte komma in (2008)

Un prophète (2009)

Das weisse Band - Eine deutsche Kindergeschichte (2009)

Best Animated Feature Film Nominees:

Coraline (2009)

Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009)

Up (2009)

Orange Rising Star Award Nominees:

Jesse Eisenberg

Nicholas Hoult

Carey Mulligan

Tahar Rahim

Kristen Stewart

Carl Foreman Award for the Most Promising Newcomer Nominees:

Lucy Bailey, Andrew Thompson, Elizabeth Morgan Hemlock, David Pearson for Mugabe and the White African (2009)(Directors, Producers)

Eran Creevy for Shifty (2008)(Writer/Director)

Stuart Hazeldine for Exam (2009)(Writer/Director)

Duncan Jones for Moon (2009)(Director)

Sam Taylor Wood for Nowhere Boy (2009)(Director)

Best Short Animation Nominees:

The Gruffalo (2009) (TV)

The Happy Duckling (2008)

Mother of Many

Best Short Film Nominees:

14 (2008/II)

I Do Air (2009)

Jade (2009)

Mixtape (2009/II)

Off Season (2009)

Precious -vs- Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire

2010-02-03T17:16:32-08:00

Sorry. Just can't do this any more. Can't waste any more of my precious life energy writing it all out. So, here it is, one last time... all 38 blessed characters...
"Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
Okay, we're done here. From now on, it is the policy of this website to refer to this Oscar nominated film as "Precious."
How did it happen that a film could be called by a title that sounds this unnecessary and pretentious? After all, all of the films in the "Adapted Screenplay" category could give themselves the same treatment. Then we'd be looking at films like "Up in the Air: Based on the Novel 'Up in the Air' by Walter Kim." Or how would you have liked to see this on the big screen -- "Star Trek: Based on the TV Series 'Star Trek' by Gene Roddenberry." Ugh...

The explanation goes back to the 2009 Sundance Film Festival where "Precious" was listed under its original title, "Push: Based on the Novel by Sapphire" because there was another film that same year in competition called "Push."
Okay, fair enough. But now that they're calling it "Precious" and not "Push" all the extra verbiage is unnecessary.
So, "Precious," listen up. A lot of people like you, a lot of people not so much. You're still the little film that could of this awards season and the point is that you got nominated for an Oscar and people know who you are now. Let's not tick people off with the long-form name that's just so irritating and... what's the word I'm looking for?... the one my dictionary says means extreme meticulousness or overrefinement, as in language... oh, yeah... "Precious."

VOTE NOW: And The Academy Award Goes To...

2010-02-02T08:52:12-08:00

At the crack of dawn this morning, The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences announced their nominations for the 2010 Academy Awards, and if any of the nominees see their shadow, we get another six weeks of winter. No, wait. That’s wrong. On March 7, we get to watch them all dress up (again) to watch an overlong televised event and practice the art of gracious losing.

There were a few little surprises buried among the sure-things, and I'm almost awake enough to notice them.
Ten nominations for Best Picture probably seemed like a good idea at the time; with ratings slipping, ten noms would offer more opportunities to involve the muggles, more inclusion for popular films. Kind of a dopey year for that rationale, given that every mother’s son has seen the behemoth known as “Avatar.” Among the best pic noms, only “Blind Side” blindsided me, and even it was on my also-ran predictions. “Up” seems like a giant waste of a nom since it’s virtually assured a win in the Animated Feature Film category.

Jeff Bridges goes in as a heavy and early favorite. His work in "Crazy Heart" is solid, and it's probably high time for his overall career recognition prize. He hasn't done anything stupid in public, and he's delivered solid, quirky performances in indies and blockbusters every time at bat. Christoph Waltz and Mo’Nique can start writing their acceptance speeches today. Leading actress is a little more up for grabs; Sandra Bullock and Meryl Streep have been taking turns. We’ll see if Sandra Bullock has her Sally Field “you like me” moment in a month or so.

“Avatar” will likely sweep virtually every technical category which might soften the blow should Ms. Bigelow and “The Hurt Locker” take the bigger prizes home. Hollywood loves to show off their awareness of issues and seriousness; Bigelow's terrific and harrowing film might win itself a mass audience at long last. Mr. Cameron's boffo box office will have to be its own reward.
So. Even if you're not an Academy member, we care what you think. Which film deserves the Oscar this year? Once you've voted, tell us about any films or performances you think the Academy overlooked. Share your predictions with us in the comments below.
Here's the poll:
Online Surveys & Market Research

Because our Movie Smackdown readers are a particularly thorough lot and we want to cater to their every whim, here's the complete list of nominees with links to some of Movie Smackdown's original Smacks.

Actor in a Leading Role

    * Jeff Bridges in “Crazy Heart”

    * George Clooney in “Up in the Air”

    * Colin Firth in “A Single Man”

    * Morgan Freeman in “Invictus”

    * Jeremy Renner in “The Hurt Locker”

Actor in a Supporting Role

    * Matt Damon in “Invictus”

    * Woody Harrelson in “The Messenger”

    * Christopher Plummer in “The Last Station”

    * Stanley Tucci in “The Lovely Bones”

    * Christoph Waltz in “Inglourious Basterds”

Actress in a Leading Role

    * Sandra Bullock in “The Blind Side”

    * Helen Mirren in “The Last Station”

    * Carey Mulligan in “An Education”

    * Gabourey Sidibe in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”

    * Meryl Streep in “Julie & Julia”

Actress in a Supporting Role

    * Penélope Cruz in “Nine”

    * Vera Farmiga in “Up in the Air”

    * Maggie Gyllenhaal in “Crazy Heart”

    * Anna Kendrick in “Up in the Air”

    * Mo’Nique in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”

Animated Feature Film

    * “Coraline” Henry Selick

    * “Fantastic Mr. Fox” Wes Anderson

    * “The Princess and the Frog” John Musker and Ron Clements

    * “The Secret of Kells” Tomm Moore

    * “Up” Pete Docter

Art Direction

    * “Avatar” Art Direction: Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Kim Sinclair

    * “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” Art Direction: Dave Warren and Anastasia Masaro; Set Decoration: Caroline Smith

    * “Nine” Art Direction: John Myhre; Set Decoration: Gordon Sim

    * “Sherlock Holmes” Art Direction: Sarah Greenwood; Set Decoration: Katie Spencer

    * “The Young Victoria” Art Direction: Patrice Vermette; Set Decoration: Maggie Gray

Cinematography

    * “Avatar” Mauro Fiore

    * “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” Bruno Delbonnel

    * “The Hurt Locker” Barry Ackroyd

    * “Inglourious Basterds” Robert Richardson

    * “The White Ribbon” Christian Berger

Costume Design

   * “Bright Star” Janet Patterson

    * “Coco before Chanel” Catherine Leterrier

    * “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” Monique Prudhomme

    * “Nine” Colleen Atwood

    * “The Young Victoria” Sandy Powell

Directing

    * “Avatar” James Cameron

    * “The Hurt Locker”  Kathryn Bigelow

    * “Inglourious Basterds” Quentin Tarantino

    * “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Lee Daniels

    * “Up in the Air” Jason Reitman

Documentary (Feature)

    * “Burma VJ” Anders Østergaard and Lise Lense-Møller

    * “The Cove” Nominees to be determined

    * “Food, Inc.” Robert Kenner and Elise Pearlstein

    * “The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers” Judith Ehrlich and Rick Goldsmith

    * “Which Way Home” Rebecca Cammisa

Documentary (Short Subject)

    * “China’s Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province” Jon Alpert and Matthew O’Neill

    * “The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner” Daniel Junge and Henry Ansbacher

    * “The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant” Steven Bognar and Julia Reichert

    * “Music by Prudence” Roger Ross Williams and Elinor Burkett

    * “Rabbit à la Berlin” Bartek Konopka and Anna Wydra

Film Editing

    * “Avatar” Stephen Rivkin, John Refoua and James Cameron

    * “District 9” Julian Clarke

    * “The Hurt Locker” Bob Murawski and Chris Innis

    * “Inglourious Basterds” Sally Menke

    * “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Joe Klotz

Foreign Language Film

    * “Ajami” Israel

    * “El Secreto de Sus Ojos” Argentina

    * “The Milk of Sorrow” Peru

    * “Un Prophète” France

    * “The White Ribbon” Germany

Makeup

    * “Il Divo” Aldo Signoretti and Vittorio Sodano

    * “Star Trek” Barney Burman, Mindy Hall and Joel Harlow

    * “The Young Victoria” Jon Henry Gordon and Jenny Shircore

Music (Original Score)

    * “Avatar” James Horner

    * “Fantastic Mr. Fox” Alexandre Desplat

    * “The Hurt Locker” Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders

    * “Sherlock Holmes” Hans Zimmer

    * “Up” Michael Giacchino

Music (Original Song)

    * “Almost There” from “The Princess and the Frog” Music and Lyric by Randy Newman

    * “Down in New Orleans” from “The Princess and the Frog” Music and Lyric by Randy Newman

    * “Loin de Paname” from “Paris 36” Music by Reinhardt Wagner Lyric by Frank Thomas

    * “Take It All” from “Nine” Music and Lyric by Maury Yeston

    * “The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)” from “Crazy Heart” Music and Lyric by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett

Best Picture

    * “Avatar” James Cameron and Jon Landau, Producers

    * “The Blind Side” Nominees to be determined

    * “District 9” Peter Jackson and Carolynne Cunningham, Producers

    * “An Education” Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey, Producers

    * “The Hurt Locker” Nominees to be determined

    * “Inglourious Basterds” Lawrence Bender, Producer

    * “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Lee Daniels, Sarah Siegel-Magness and Gary Magness, Producers

    * “A Serious Man” Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, Producers

    * “Up” Jonas Rivera, Producer

    * “Up in the Air” Daniel Dubiecki, Ivan Reitman and Jason Reitman, Producers

Short Film (Animated)

    * “French Roast” Fabrice O. Joubert

    * “Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty” Nicky Phelan and Darragh O’Connell

    * “The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)” Javier Recio Gracia

    * “Logorama” Nicolas Schmerkin

    * “A Matter of Loaf and Death” Nick Park

Short Film (Live Action)

    * “The Door” Juanita Wilson and James Flynn

    * “Instead of Abracadabra” Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström

    * “Kavi” Gregg Helvey

    * “Miracle Fish” Luke Doolan and Drew Bailey

    * “The New Tenants” Joachim Back and Tivi Magnusson

Sound Editing

    * “Avatar” Christopher Boyes and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle

    * “The Hurt Locker” Paul N.J. Ottosson

    * “Inglourious Basterds” Wylie Stateman

    * “Star Trek” Mark Stoeckinger and Alan Rankin

    * “Up” Michael Silvers and Tom Myers

Sound Mixing

    * “Avatar” Christopher Boyes, Gary Summers, Andy Nelson and Tony Johnson

    * “The Hurt Locker” Paul N.J. Ottosson and Ray Beckett

    * “Inglourious Basterds” Michael Minkler, Tony Lamberti and Mark Ulano

    * “Star Trek” Anna Behlmer, Andy Nelson and Peter J. Devlin

    * “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers and Geoffrey Patterson

Visual Effects

    * “Avatar” Joe Letteri, Stephen Rosenbaum, Richard Baneham and Andrew R. Jones

    * “District 9” Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros and Matt Aitken

    * “Star Trek” Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh and Burt Dalton

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

    * "District 9" Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell

    * “An Education” Screenplay by Nick Hornby

    * “In the Loop” Screenplay by Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche

    * “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Screenplay by Geoffrey Fletcher

    * “Up in the Air” Screenplay by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner

Writing (Original Screenplay)

    * “The Hurt Locker” Written by Mark Boal

    * “Inglourious Basterds” Written by Quentin Tarantino

    * “The Messenger” Written by Alessandro Camon & Oren Moverman

    * “A Serious Man” Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen

    * “Up” Screenplay by Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson, Tom McCarthy

Boldly Not Going There

2010-02-02T06:56:00-08:00

Yes, I'm still smarting over the Academy stiffing "The Dark Knight" last year -- a film that will stand the test of time and be remembered as the game-changer that it was. Other nominees from last year like "The Reader" and "Frost/Nixon" are mostly forgotten already. Even the winner... what was it again?... oh, yeah, "Slumdog Something" with the guy who's brokering Mideast peace these days on "24" after running "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" in India.

Okay, that mishap happened. I need to move on. But they won't let me! They keep pulling me back in.

This year the Academy kicked up the number of nominees to ten which -- if they'd done it last year -- would have practically guaranteed "The Dark Knight" its deserved recognition. So that should have paved the way for "Star Trek" to get in the mix.

Let's review. First of all, "Star Trek" did something new. It took a dated concept that was on its way out the door and revitalized it. For an industry so addicted to re-makes, the film was a two-fer. It tapped into the nostalgia of a landmark TV show and it was a unique movie-going experience that hit the ground running and never let up, while teaching great lessons about friendship and legends.

Ten Reasons Why Star Trek Should Have Been Nominated
10) It does not have a bleach-blonde Sandra Bullock teaching a black man how to read.

9) It wasn't called "Star Trek: Based on the Sci-Fi TV Series 'Star Trek' by Gene Rodenberry." I mean, c'mon... how freaking pretentious is it to call your film... well, I can't even say it myself... but I'm talking about the film that should've been called "Precious" and left at that.

8) It knew its message. "Star Trek" was a buddy movie with literally Earth-shattering consequences should Spock and Kirk not form their legendary friendship. It didn't vacillate between Apartheid metaphor and weapon arms critique, before settling on showing us how disgusting all living creatures can be -- main character and aliens alike. I liked the aliens in "Star Trek." They were good-looking.

7) It doesn't take itself too seriously. Why does the Academy still think good = serious? To quote another -- achem -- snubbed film: "Why so serious?" Sure, film is about conflict. But how about telling a tale of universe-spanning proportions and connecting it to the natural going-ons of Earth people? That's what "Star Trek" did. It told a tale of ambition, identity, and friendship. And it didn't have to title itself "A Serious Star Trek."

6) Okay. I can't do a clever one about "Inglorious Basterds" and "Star Trek." But it's better... just a bit. Both films rightly earned their places on this list -- both dark horses in their own way.

5) Sure, the young girl in "An Education" got a tough life lesson in love and responsibility. But look at Kirk. An arrogant jerk with no responsibility who within three years becomes the captain of the fleet's most prized ship, well on his way to becoming the most legendary captain. He learns about humility, teamwork, maturity, and friendship in this film. Plus, the world wasn't going to be destroyed if Jenny didn't learn that she was being played in love.

4) If "Up" can make it, so can "Star Trek." Both films blow audiences away with their visual boldness. Just watch the beautiful flares and amazing landscapes that Abrams puts together, all through the topsy-turvy looking glass of his free-floating camera perspective.

3) How much further "Up in the Air" can you get than space, the Final Frontier? Listen, I know it's contemporarily relevant to talk about unemployment and joblessness. But why can't I just leave Earth and enjoy a space-faring adventure that shows the beauty of friendship and speaks of a legendary crew that has influenced pop culture for over a half-century?

2) Find one moment in "The Hurt Locker" as jaw-dropping, as breathtaking, as suspenseful as Kirk and Co.'s space jump down to the platform on Vulcan. Tense. Gorgeous. Thrilling. And unlike "The Hurt Locker," Abrams knew that the suspense needed a little release -- be it humor, action, etc. -- in order for us not to become conditioned to the same old tension over and over again. Plus, the soldiers in "Star Trek" don't whine about how hard it is to do their duty. They man up and get it done.

1) "Star Trek" characters have depth, and each shine in their own moments naturally. Most importantly, their decisions make sense as characters. They don't recruit the enemy to learn their inner secrets in an attempt to win them over. They don't ramble on in voiceover about things I didn't care about, or weren't really that relevant to the plot in the end. They're smart enough to realize if they're being played by a war-mongering general. And even its villains have a bit of depth and motivation -- however token -- to what they do. They're just not scarred generals intent on killing the colored alien folk. And although a product of another era, "Star Trek" never felt like it was pulling lines from old B-movie sci-fi. It also doesn't kill the people who watch it. Plus, a Trekker could kick any Avatard's butt.

So there you go. Again, as with "The Dark Knight," The Academy drops the ball.

Other SNUBS:

Moon. This film has been snubbed by almost every media outlet out there. It's a travesty. Sam Rockwell's performance deserved some recognition.

(500) Days of Summer. Totally snubbed. Ridiculously snubbed. Unforgivably snubbed. But hey, we got some blue aliens.

Online Surveys & Market Research

VOTE NOW: Rom-Com Smackdown in Time for Valentine's Day

2010-02-01T20:03:28-08:00

Valentine's Day (the holiday & the movie) is just around the corner, and we are overcome with thoughts of love. Even here at Movie Smackdown, we are not so heartless or cynical as you might think. We wish fervently that every new rom-com that comes to the theaters will be The One.
Our personal memories mingle seamlessly with our movie memories; classic romantic comedies make the sweetest and most thoughtful gift, longer lasting than any box of chocolates or long-stemmed roses.
Celebrate with us to find our readers' all-time favorite Romantic Comedy. Many of our favorite films didn't make the poll; we apologize most heartily if we've neglected to include yours.

Please vote; the winner will get smacked with "Valentine's Day," Garry Marshall's much-anticipated latest entry to this rich (if troubled) genre.
Here's the poll.

Online Surveys & Market Research
Now that you've voted... we'd love to have you tell us what you liked and why. Or what film you wish had been included in our poll in addition to:
Amelie, Annie Hall, Bridget Jones's Diary, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Green Card, Jerry Maguire, Love Actually, Pretty Woman, The Graduate, and When Harry Met Sally.