The Top Ten Best Films of 2007

The final few days of the year are always my personal favorites-it is the time where I get the chance to reflect on the tons and tons of films I seen in the last 365 days and compile them into a list of ten of the best ones. It is a hard task, and one that I sometimes labor over to ensure that I don't miss out on any great picks-but things always get eliminated. This year was even worse-I saw more movies in the last year than I probably did in the last two years combined, and that is only theatrically viewings (which is a little over 400). Special events like the Toronto Film Festival and the Tribeca Film Festival, as well as screenings of classic old movies at Film Forum and Brooklyn Academy of Music and Walter Reade all tended to add up. And I will not lie-I saw some duds, but I also saw some amazing works and was introduced to all kinds of new directors, actors, etc. Before getting into what I settled to be my ten best movies of the year, I'll talk about some of the honorable mentions and a year end review.

All critics are taking note of the fact that there were so many great films this year-especially tossed into the final four months-that it's really impossible to make an actual 10 best of the year-there could be a list of twenty or thirty, and they would all end up being somewhat equal. Sadly I also had to omit some films this years that I really enjoyed, and for that I'm going to have to call special attention to (in no particular order): Zodiac, Reign Over Me, Hot Fuzz, The Hawk Is Dying, The TV Set, Red Road, Snow Cake, Jindabyne, L' Iceberg, The Boss Of It All, Mr. Brooks, Eagle vs Shark, Ratatouille, Breach, Waitress, Angel-A, Joshua, Stardust, The Bothersome Man, The Nines, In the Shadow of the Moon, 3:10 to Yuma, Superbad, Eastern Promises, The Savages, Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, Lars and the Real Girl, Lady Chatterley, The Ten, Fay Grim, Vitus, Gone Baby Gone, In the Valley of Elah, Slipstream, Juno, The Mist, Grace Is Gone, Persepolis, and Charlie Wilson's War. These are all fine films-some of them great even!-but are completely overshadowed by the ten I wish to offer you. If you click on each title, you will be transported to the review I wrote on each film.

This is probably the section that I will have the most problems in, but so be it. The next four movies I do like, but not on the same level that many others seem to like them. All four of these films can be found on various critics top ten lists, but I am still a little puzzled over their appearance on them. These films on not on my top ten list-they are mediocre to good, and nothing more. I am talking (of course) about: Once, Knocked Up, I'm Not There, Atonement, and Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

The next three movies are films that are garnering several awards and accolades, while meanwhile I just scratch my head-a mixture of confusion of even a bit of anger. I did not enjoy these movies despite the acclaim-La Vie en Rose, American Gangster, and Lust, Caution.

And now my personal favorite section-the worst movies of 2007. By clicking on the title of each entry, you will be able to read my full review of it.

10. Margot at the Wedding-Noah Baumbach's follow up to the great 2005 indie flick "The Squid and the Whale" is a forced attempt to recapture the natural atmosphere that made his last film so good. The film is a muddled mess, and we follow these characters during some of their darkest moments-nothing enjoyable for the audience, the actors, or pretty much anybody involved with the making of this. I more or less felt that Baumbach was throwing in our faces the type of style that he wanted to do in his films, as opposed to Wes Anderson who is perfecting a style all on his own.

9. The Number 23-Jim Carrey continues his dry spell with this rather awful and illogical thriller about a man who becomes obsessed with the number 23 when he begins to see it everywhere, all related to a book he is reading that seems to be about his own life. Completely contrived twist at the end spoils what could have been a full one star movie!

8. Lucky You-probably the dullest romantic comedy of the year, which is saying quite a bit. "Lucky You" is made by a talented director named Curtis Hanson, who basically directs an extended version of a poker show on ESPN. Minutes drag by while we watch our hero (Eric Bana) play the game against his father, and when we aren't wishing we were dead watching that, we get to watch a lame love story between him and Drew Barrymore. It's a wonder this was released the same weekend as Spider-Man 3.

7. Across the Universe-The movie that divides everyone-you either loved it or hated it, and I found it unreleasable. "Across the Universe" manages to destroy every single wonderful Beatles song, and with sly in jokes that don't even make you grin a little bit, manages to destroy the ones they don't even sing. Filled with awful visuals, a scattered tone (sometimes it's a love story, at times its psychedelic, than it's a war statement) and never finding it's own voice, "Across the Universe" was literally a brutal experience.

6. Southland Tales-Richard Kelly's sophomore film after his extremely well received 'Donnie Darko," which I still kind of don't understand why, is the awful and extremely messy "Southland Tales." Cut from an original 160 minute cut to about 140, Kelly's movie tries to be everything, and ends up being nothing. You could try to defend it by looking for meaning to give it, but you just don't care enough to even attempt. Might contain the worst cast of the year-The Rock, Sean William Scott, Mandy Moore, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Jon Lovitz, Amy Poehlar, Cheri Otari, among others. . .

5. Primeval-a laughably bad creature film that, among all awful special effects and gore, tries to throw in a political message about Rwanda. Probably the only entry here I'd recommend if you just want to watch an unintentional comedy.

4. Norbit-the reason that Eddie Murphy lost the Oscar last year (and then stormed out of the ceremony) is because of his work in "Norbit," where he plays three characters, none of them funny, and all of them embarrassing.

3. Epic Movie-a spoof of so called epic movies-although I don't know how "Nacho Libre" or "Snakes on a Plane" ended up there-ends up being the shortest film of the year. About 65 minutes long with twenty minutes of credits, "Epic Movie" doesn't have a single funny joke in it's short time span. You're grateful that it's short. The guys who made this directed one of last year's worst films of the year "Date Movie,' and next year are directing what might be on next year's worst of list, "Meet the Spartans." But maybe I'll just learn my lesson and completely pass on that.

2. Captivity-the only movie this year that I actually wanted to walk out on, but continued to stay just so I could include it on this list. This is snuff/torture at its very worst, with Elisha Cuthbert trying to act serious as he is put into a holding cell in a madman's basement.

and the worst film of 2007 is. . .

1. Descent-Not the very good horror film of the same name from 2006. This is a film about a woman (played by Rosario Dawson), who ends up getting raped on a date in college. Months later she decided to get revenge on the guy who did him wrong. This is a completely unpleasant experience, especially what occurs in the final five minutes. The beginning is grim, the middle is dull, and the end is just so disgusting that you sit and wonder why this movie was even made, why anybody wanted to act in it, and how it even ended up in release. I never saw so many walk outs in any movie that I've ever watched, and never heard so many complaints as I left the theatre. "Descent" is the worst film of the year, by far.

Just for fun, here are a few other "winners" that you can see from the last twelve months, in order of release, more or less:

The Hitcher, Blood and Chocolate, The Messengers, Puccini for Beginners, Factory Girl, Because I Said So, Hannibal Rising, The Abandoned, Gray Matters, Wild Tigers I Have Known, The Ultimate Gift, Memory, Perfect Stranger, Year of the Dog, The Tripper, Poison Friends, Zoo, The Treatment, Georgia Rule, Hostel; Part Two, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Transformers, License to Wed, Goya's Ghosts, Arctic Tale, I Know Who Killed Me, Hot Rod, Rush Hour 3, El Cantante, Becoming Jane, Dedication, Mr. Bean's Holiday, Halloween, Self-Medicated, Ira & Abby, Silk, Fierce People, Good Luck Chuck, Reservation Road, Lions for Lambs, Love in the Time of Cholera, and August Rush.

And lastly, before I move on to the big list, some movies I've seen from 2008 that you should give a look-see when they arrive.

Nobel Son (sometime in March), The Poughkeepsie Tapes (Feb.), Taxidermia (TBA), Watching the Detectives (Feb.), The Killing of John Lennon (Jan 2), Snow Angels (March 7), You, the Living (TBA), Under the Same Moon (March 19), Nothing Is Private (TBA), With Your Permission (TBA), Gone with the Woman (TBA), Dr. Plonk (TBA), Married Life (TBA), Son of Rambow (May), and The Visitor (April).

And now, without much furthur adue, the long awaited list of The Top Ten Best Films of 2007.

Once again, it was a tough year, but I managed to lock ten movies that I don't think I could have lived without for the year. Once again, clicking on the movie title will shoot you to my review of the movie after I saw it-they are more detailed than the small little paragraph I am writing about them.

10. 12:08 East of Bucharest (Corneliu Porumboiu)-one of two Romanian entries on this year's list (hint, hint), "12:08 East of Bucharest" is an extremely funny comedy about three men that end up going on a talk show to discuss where they were during the onset of the Romanian Revolution. The first forty five minutes sets this premise up-and we get to see the men go through their daily lives. It's the final forty five minutes that's the real kicker-the actual television program where the three men, sitting side by side, discuss their positions, answer viewer phone calls, and fight among one another. You'll want to have three eyes while watching this movie-and its worth seeing three times just to focus your attention on one character during the second half. They always manage to stay in character, and they are always doing something interesting. There has been so much buzz about a revolution in Romanian cinema, and this, the other film on the list, a movie called "California Dreamin'" which I saw in Toronto, and even one of the best movies of last year "The Death of Mr. Lazarescu," all seem to prove the buzz that has been circling.

9. The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters (Seth Gordon)-my absolute favorite documentary of the year is one that isn't about politics, nature, or some kind of historical event. Instead it is about the brutal world of video game competition. Featuring one of the most bastardly guys in film history, we follow Steve Webe's glorious attempt to beat the long running Donkey Kong high score king, and hot sauce rich boy, Billy Mitchell. In the next eighty minutes we have one of the most entertaining and endearing cat and mouse chases, where we root that the little guy will bring the big man down. More gripping than any thriller your likely to see in this or any year, and with a surprise twist ending, the audience I enjoyed "The King of Kong" with (at the 2007 Tribeca Film Festival) all was united to their feet, with a round of applause at the end that I never heard to be so loud. It was just joyful watching this movie, and it's so much fun, and proves that a good doucmentary does not have to have a political agenda. It could just be a story well worth telling and showing.

8. King of California (Mike Cahill)-Michael Douglas' performance in the quirky indie comedy "King of California" goes alongside with John Cusack's work in "Grace Is Gone" as the overlooked performance of the year. While Cusack is subdued in his role, Douglas is charismatic and over the top, and sporting the best beard of the year. Getting out of the mental asylum and returning home with his daughter (played by the lovely Evan Rachael Wood, who also stars in one of the worst movies of the year, ironically), Charlie is convinced that he's found a map to treasure-the only problem is that times have changed and it looks like the treasure is buried under a Cost-Co. With a brillant musical score (that I listen to quite often), great performances, witty comic writing, and an ending of such deep poignancy that you might even shed a tear, "King of California" did not get the credit it deserved-and I blame faulty advertising, and a release during one of the busiest weekends of the year for art-house cinema. Both times I saw this movie it was a joy to watch-a playful look at what is missing from America-the innocence of exploration and of trying something new.

7. Grindhouse (Robert Rodriguez/Quentin Tarantino)-ever since the Evil Weinstein Brothers separated the two films that make up "Grindhouse"-"Planet Terror" and "Death Proof"-everybody seems so obsessed with comparing the two, forgetting the fact that last April was one of the best three hours spent in a theatre for this year. "Grindhouse" was plain fun, and I walked out of it more satisfied that I spent my eleven dollars at something grand. An epic in an odd sense of the word, it's two movies-one a zombie film and the other a slasher film with fake trailers in the middle-"Grindhouse" is a package deal, and one that I feel will be lost. There's a chance I might never see the version of "Grindhouse" that I fell in love with. I enjoyed both segments of the movie as a whole in their own way-the Robert Rodriguez film for the insane gore, bad edits, scratches, and over the top acting, and the Quentin Tarantino film for the well writting dialogue, the chemistry between the actors, Kurt Russell, and of the course, one of the best car chases ever put to film. Without comparing the two movies, "Grindhouse" was the movie experience of the year-not just a movie, but an actual event that joined my audience in joyful applause.

6. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (Andrew Dominik)-2007 was the year of the return for westerns, and it proved that the genre is not dead. I had to see "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" twice-the first to see it, and the second to really appricate it. The second time I was prepared for the massively slow length, and instead of waiting for plot I looked at the other things-the stunning cinematography by Roger Deakins, the musical score by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis, the narration by Hugh Ross (which is quite great), and the calm and childlike performance of Casey Affleck, who gave two great performances this year. It is a big thing to take in-at a massive 160 quite a bit happens in this movie-but slow on plot and heavy on character is what this film is about, and it's a damn great one.

5. 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days (Cristian Mungiu)-the winner of the Golden Palm at this year's Cannes Film Festival, I wouldn't expect you to have seen "4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days" if only for the fact that it doesn't come out until January-but it was given a week long run in Los Angeles, and you can find it playing in Toronto right now, so this counts as a film from this year. Not a film about abortion, but a film about politics and friendship, and an intense one at that. I was lucky to have seen this at this year's New York Film Festival, and it continues the terrific trend that Romania has at the moment. And it's all led by a stunning lead performance by Anamaria Marinca, who can make walking down a street seem interesting. This is not a thriller in the normal sense of the word, but you are on the edge of your seat ninety percent of the time, but acting so natural and realistic that it is scary. It's naturalism is a way that Noah Baumbach wanted with "Margot at the Wedding," but failed to do so. That naturalism was forced. This naturalism is earned. "4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days" begins its run on January 25th, and I expect it to have a run as long as "The Lives of Others," which lasted for over twenty weeks here in New York City.

4. Michael Clayton (Tony Gilroy)-the year's "smart movie" is "Michael Clayton," with George Clooney giving yet another award worthy performance as the title character, a law firm fixer who has years and years of exhaustion and questionable ethics written on his face. He gets involved with a case involving a very famous lawyer that is questioning his own ethics in a case against a big company (played by Tom Wilkinson in one of the best performances of his career), The film is complex, but never complicated-many scenes go on with long fancy words and descriptions, but its easy to follow and get the main idea. And the script is magnificently written-hooking you into it from the very first few seconds, before we even get a glimpse at what any of the characters even look like-the opening monologue is some of the best writing this year. And the ending-the final shot especially-speaks more than any other scene this year, and it doesn't contain a single word.

3. No Country for Old Men (Joel and Ethan Coen)-the Coen Brothers have had a bit of a dry spell the last few years (not with me, but with most critics and box office), but have returned to the genres and motifs that made them famous. "No Country for Old Men" is a perfect thriller-intense all the way and featuring one of the most memorable bad guys ever put to film. I'm talking of course about Javier Bardem, whose look of evil malace in the first three minutes tells you that this is a guy you don't want to mess with. When he goes after Llewelyn Moss, who finds a satchel with a ton of money inside, it becomes a completely intense and edge of your seat thrill ride for the first two acts. No music is used, and yet the sound of a lightbulb screwing out of it's socket will give you chills. Then the third act takes a turn-a complete shift in tone and even character, but the title comes into play. The ending is abrupt, but fitting. I say that you should watch the movie again if you don't like the ending, knowing that its coming this time, and approach it differently. It's perfection.

2. There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson)-featuring my choice for Best Actor at the Oscars this year, "There Will Be Blood" is a sprawling epic in the vein of "Giant," and a character study in the vein of "Citizen Kane," "A Face in the Crowd," and "All the King's Men." Daniel Day Lewis is amazing as Daniel Plainview, a greedy oilman that will step on the face of anybody that gets in his way to riches. Anderson's film is just about flawless-with a great score, a great look, great acting, and an ending that certainly will divide everyone who watches it. Day Lewis is incredible here-you fear him, are compelled by him, and are repulsed by him all at the same time-similar to what made Forest Whitaker's work in last year's "The Last King of Scotland" so great. This is the best American movie this year, by far, and the sort of masterpiece we haven't seen in quite some years.

And now. . .without interruptions. . .the best movie of 2007. Diffcult, since in reality, the last four movies on this list could all be considered a tie. But there could only be one! The culmination of the most massive film watching year for me in my short time here on Earth is. . .

1. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (Julian Schnabel)-Julian Schnabel's amazing film follows Jean-Dominique Bauby (played by Mathieu Amalric, who was in one of the best films of 2005 "King's and Queen"), a thirtysomething year old magazine editor who suffers a stroke that leaves him completely paralyzed. The only thing he could move is his left eye, and he uses this to communicate, and even write a short little book on his state of life. We follow Bauby mainly throw his left eye, and ninety percent of the movie takes places from his point of view-the screen is blurry, the camera shakes a lot, but it is the closest thing we get to being inside of a person's head than anything I've ever seen before. Characters come in and out, all people that he has wronged, including his ex-wife that still loves him despite him wanting to be with his lover at the time of the accident. We also get stunning work from Max von Sydow, as Bauby's tragic father, who cannot bear to watch his son in that condition, considering the fact that Bauby used to take care of him. All at once a horror movie, a love story, a gentle comedy, a inspriation, and a compelling drama, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" is the best movie of the year.

There Will Be Blood

Although there are still two films that I have left to see in this calender year-John Sayles "Honeydripper" and the big budget action flick "National Treasure Book of Secrets"-the latter to see just for a couple of hours of mindless entertainment-I consider "There Will Be Blood" to mark the end of quite a great fall for films. And honestly, to add a bit of torture for yours truly, it was the one I was most looking forward to see. I got lucky a few times this year, getting to see several highly anticipated films early like "No Country for Old Men," "The Savages," and "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," but I had a hard time getting into anything even related to this. Finally, two days after being released, I woke up at a quarter to nine to make the early 10:30am screening-oddly packed considering the time of day it was-and sat down comfortably, for the next three hours for be some long ones.

"There Will Be Blood" reminds me of those old epics from decades ago-the two that most prominently will come to mind are "Citizen Kane" and "Giant," the former being referenced since this is really a massive character study of one man over decades, who he is, and why he becomes what he becomes, and the latter being referenced because of the subject matter-oil! In fact this film is based on a novel called "Oil!" written by Upton Sinclair. Looking for it in the bookstore weeks before the film was released I found that the only Sinclair novel to be spotted was "The Jungle," but it should be reprinted soon enough-it might even already be out there. Daniel Day Lewis doesn't make a film very often-in fact since 2002 this is only the third, the other two being "Gangs of New York" and "The Ballad of Jack and Rose." But he has a knack for really changing into these various characters that he plays with such ease and flow that its obvious why he's one of the most respected actors around. With "There Will Be Blood" he has become my official choice for Best Actor at the Oscars next year-better than Denzel in "American Gangster" (which isn't saying much, really), James McAvoy, Viggo Mortenson, George Clooney, and even Frank Langella. In fact, Day Lewis' work here actually leaves all those actors in the dust-he doesn't waste a single scene or a single minute without getting to the core of this awful and completely unlikable character. It is a flawless performance, and the screen ignited every time he was on a screen-which is constantly during the films 158 minute running time.

Daniel Day Lewis plays Daniel Plainview, who in 1898 managed to begin an oil drilling business that would-thirteen years later-make him one of the richest men around. After an accident leaves one of his top men dead, Daniel raises the man's son as his own, making H.W. Plainview not only his son, but also his business partner. When he is visited by Paul Sunday, he is informed that there is oil buried underneath his family's farm. Going there under the ruse of hunting quail, Plainview becomes convinced himself that there is an ocean of oil underneath the ground and offers to buy the land from the Sunday's. He comes to problems with Eli Sunday (Paul Dano once again), Paul's twin brother, who wants the money that Daniel is offering to give to his church. He also wants Daniel to allow him to bless the drilling process, something that Daniel backs out on at the last minute. From this point on the drilling goes through disaster after disaster, including an accident that costs more than money to Daniel.

"There Will Be Blood" is a sprawling epic, and in a year filled with them-the other most prominently being "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford"-this might be the toughest to sell. Light on actual plot and strong on character, the movie features Plainview in every single scene here, and we chart him from 1898 to 1927 (I may be wrong on the year in the third act.) From the first twenty minutes-which is free of all dialogue whatsoever as we watch Plainview discover where to find oil for the first time-we know that he is someone that will stop at nothing to achieve his goals. When he falls into a well and breaks his leg, he still manages to get out and get his black gold. Plainview is a businessman at the core-extremely charismatic, fast talking, and he knows exactly what he is doing when he is selling his product. He claims that he is a family man-using H.W. as his partner as well as his "son"-but its clear that Plainview biggest care in the world is oil and the money that comes from the oil. His close partner Fletcher Hamilton (played by Ciarán Hinds) seems to take more care of H.W. than he does, and there is an odd sexual feeling when Daniel watches the drills going in and out of the well holes (although I may be reading a bit too much into that aspect of the film). By the end he is a shell of a man-greed has overcome him to the point where he is not even a human anymore. Watch Daniel Day Lewis closely during the final two scenes-his insanity makes the audience fear him. It's the closest thing that I can come to in a comparison between films decades ago and films now-I was reminded of a few different characters all at once-Orson Welles in "Citizen Kane," Broderick Crawford in "All the King's Men," and Andy Griffith in "A Face in the Crowd."

Aside from Daniel Day Lewis there's tons of other things to admire. The cinematography-by Robert Elswit, who I learned earlier also shot "Michael Clayton" this year, as well as "Good Night, and Good Luck." two years ago, which is just beautiful to look at-is stunning. It rivals Roger Deakins' work in the "Jesse James" film and "No Country for Old Men", as well as only I fear that Dariusz Wolski will win for his work on "Sweeney Todd"-still great work, but the other three films are far superior. Every shot is lovely-from the opening shot of the mountains to the final shot, which has just been brought to my attention as being something to compare to greatly. The music by Johnny Greenwood of Radiohead is eerie and ominous. I've listened to the score on the soundtrack CD and it really is stunning. Paul Thomas Anderson's direction is almost flawless. He always makes films on such grand scales anyway-"Boogie Nights" and "Magnolia" are both epics in a different sense of the word, but he does amazingly with this material. Reading a few pages of the first pages of the screenplay are perfectly detailed-I certainly can't write anything like that. I'll bring to mind an incredible set piece involving an accident that occurs during the drill. It features some perfect Anderson tracking shots, the wonderful Elswit cinematography, and Greenwood's score, which begins as a rather offbeat and odd banging rhythm, until an explosion kicks in the theme music of the film-found in the trailer-which is just downright creepy and even bizarre. It is a set piece that is more exciting than anything in "Spider-Man 3," "Pirates 3," and pretty much any Hollywood film that opened in the summer.

And it would be a useless review unless I recognize Paul Dano's work as both Paul and Eli Sunday-the former only appearing for a single scene. This is probably the most energetic I've ever seen him after his rather subdued and quiet performances in "The Ballad of Jack and Rose," and "Little Miss Sunshine," the former film I'm just realizing also had him working with Daniel Day Lewis. "There Will Be Blood" really ends up being a complete triumph on every level. It's one of the best films of the year (I don't want to spoil my Top 10, it could even be my number one), the best male performance of the year, and an epic that will certainly set the bar high for all period epics that come after it.

The film is playing in the New York area at the Lincoln Square Theatre, with a wider release coming in the next few weeks.

Final Grade-
"There Will Be Blood"-**** of ****

Opened Last Week-Persepolis

In all the excitement of the final week of 2007-and my Top Ten list of the year which is coming within the next four days or so-I completely forgot about one of the more delightful movies of the year which opened in NY on Christmas Day. It's also prime competition for "Ratatouille" at the Best Animated Film category at the Oscars. It's "Persepolis," which ended up being my opening night selection at the Toronto Film Festival last September. Based on the graphic novels of the same name by Marjane Satrapi, "Persepolis" follows the childhood and adolescence of her during the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Mixing gentle comedy with poignant political moments, true observations about growing up, and traditional hand-drawn animation-like they did in the old days!- "Persepolis" is a complete delight that doesn't have a moment wasted.

"Persepolis" is now playing at the Angelika Film Center as well as the Lincoln Plaza Cinemas. You can read my report from the Toronto Film Festival on the film by clicking here.

The Bucket List

"The Bucket List" is corny, overally sentimental, and even a bit paint by numbers at time-but than again that is the definition of a feel good movie. I wouldn't expect it to be anything less. But there is something that you know going into this film that is not normally there in most feel good movies-and that is the fact that it stars Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman. Suddenly it doesn't seem quite so bad to face up to. This is in fact the first Rob Reiner directed film in some years that actually starts to have us understand how he ended up being such a name in direction (directing classics like "When Harry Met Sally," "A Few Good Men," "The Princess Bride" (which I still haven't seen), and "Stand By Me," not to mention "This Is Spinal Tap," and those were all in a row. It is still flawed-my God is this movie full of flaws-but it is consistently entertaining, well acted, and you might even shed a tear or two by its end (I certainly did.) And when you walk out of it you-well, you feel pretty good-ironic since this movie focuses on two people who are months away from death.

Nicholson plays Edward Cole, a millionaire who made his money running hospitals. He is rich, full of anger, and treats his assistant Thomas like dirt-he also doesn't even call him by his actual name. After defending his position to give everyone a roommate ("I run hospitals, not health spas. Two beds to a room, no exceptions!) Edward finds out that he has something wrong with him, and of course he is put in a room with another man. It's Carter Chambers, a mechanic who has just found out that he doesn't have much time left because of the cancer eating him away. The two of them both find out they don't have much time left, and when Carter is found doodling away on something called a bucket list-a list of things that you want to accomplish in life before you kick the bucket-Edward is inspired to spice up their lives for their last remaining months. And it begins with them going skydiving, car racing, and just traveling the world and seeing everything they always wanted to-a trip that doesn't settle well with Carter's wife.

If there is one thing wrong with this movie it's the special effects, which just showcase how cheap this movie probably was to make. Scenes of the two men skydiving, and doing their car races are clearly just their faces plastered onto actual images of people doing those things. It's completely unnatural and has a fakeness to it that even films like "The Golden Compass" and "The Water Horse" can't exactly beat. In addition, shots of them in a restaurant in Paris or even walking in India look like they were just in front of a green screen, and I wondered how much it would have actually cost to have them go to these places, or at least somewhere similar to it. I would go into some made up rant about Reiner doing this on purpose to show a comparison to what is real for Carter and Edward being something unreal for us, but I really just think it was a cheap budget, and a lack at trying to make it look realistic.

Despite having its eye-rolling moments, "The Bucket List" ends up being a nice little affair. It has its share of laughs and tears, a nice fitting ending, and its well acted by just about everyone involved. Nicholson and Freeman will get the most credit, but Sean Haynes has nice supporting work as Nicholson's assistant, and Beverly Todd as Freeman's wife. You can say that Nicholson and Freeman are simply doing variations on parts they've done in the past-Nicholson as the bachelor, easy talking, can get any woman that he wants type, and Freeman as the advice giver-the guy that knows everything, and yet still can't figure anything out. It does work here, though, even though I can live without Freeman narrating every picture he's in. I'm getting the idea that they write that after he becomes involved, because there is no way that every script that he is asked to do has a narration part for this specific character. For certain the movie could have been much better-perhaps a screenplay that was worked on just a little bit more-this could have been something that perhaps James L. Brooks could have worked on. It achieves its purpose, which is to tell a nice little story-shed a tear, have a laugh, enough yourself on a weekend afternoon. "The Bucket List" is opened in New York and LA for the time being, with a wide release set for January 11th. I'm guessing this is to make it qualify for awards and at the same time stay away from the very crowded movie season at the moment-"The Bucket List" doesn't even come close to being something I'd give an award to, but it's good enough to recommend.

And on the side-the poster above is probably the worst poster I've seen for a movie all year.

Final Grade-
The Bucket List-*** of ****

The Orphanage

Opening this Friday is "The Orphanage," a quite good horror/drama directed by first timer Juan Antonio Bayona. And if he continues at this rate he will be as big a name as Guillermo del Toro (who serves as a producer for this movie, oddly enough.)

What really makes "The Orphanage" even better is knowing that this is Bayona's first film, and yet he has so many tricks up his sleeve that you'd imagine he was a master of the craft. I saw this movie at the New York Film Festival at the end of September, and here's my review from that.

"The Orphanage" opens December 28th at the AMC Empire 25, the AMC Lincoln Square and IMAX, and the Landmark Sunshine Cinema.

City Lights

I have seen a good handful of Charlie Chaplin movies-"The Gold Rush," "The Kid," "Modern Times," and several of his talking movies-"The Great Dictator," and my personal favorite, "Limelight," which contains the first and only time he appeared on a screen opposite Buster Keaton. Playing at the Film Forum from now until January 1st is Chaplin's next to last silent film "City Lights." Released in 1931-about four years after sound film was used-Chaplin still continued to make silent films, believing that the talking pictures would be the end of film. He does take advantage of the sound-the movie contains an already set musical score by Chaplin himself, as well as several sound effects. As a goof in one of the early scenes there is some dialogue, but it's just Chaplin himself making gibberish noises, something he did a second time when he did "Modern Times" five years later.

I had never seen "City Lights," and certainly jumped at the chance to go and see it on the big screen. And I never experienced joy just as much as I do when I sit in a silent comedy with a large audience-perhaps the last time was in November when I saw "Battling Butler," or even two and a half years ago when I saw "Dr. Jack," still my favorite silent comedy. But I've always said that even though Harold Lloyd-the third and lastly mentioned silent genius of the time-made me laugh more, but Charlie Chaplin made better movies. Chaplin-working independently and by himself-made his own movies-writing, producing, directing, acting, and even sometimes doing music (like this film.) Lloyd films, and even most Keaton films with a few exceptions (maybe "The General," and "The Navigator" and certainly "Sherlock Jr." which is still one of the most amazing technical works of the time) relied mostly on the various gags and stunts that they do, and did not rely very heavy on plot. Most early Chaplin, and almost all of late Chaplin, relied on plot and social commentary, and also threw in some amazing stunts and gags to take it even further. Perhaps that's why he is regarded in the extreme high regard that he is today as opposed to the others.

"City Lights" is subtitled A Comedy Romance in Pantomime, and that is certainly what is it. We follow Chaplin's signature Tramp character as he ends up meeting and falling in love with a blind woman who sells him a flower. He decides to help her out and give her some money-some for the high rent that she needs to pay, and then some more to fix her eyes. And that's where the trouble begins. There are so many different little segments after this-the most memorable (and certainly the centerpiece of the movie) involves a boxing ring and Chaplin's hard work to stay away from getting knocked out. And several other comic moments involve a character billed only as "An eccentric millionaire," who only seems to remember the Tramp whenever he is completely drunk.

"City Lights" is another Chaplin delight-even his more minor works manage to end up being something truly special. It mixes Chaplin's gentle slapstick comedy perfectly with a love story, mediation's on loneliness, and of course The Tramp himself-even though it wasn't the only character that Chaplin played, it is certainly the most memorable. There are still several days on this run at Film Forum, and I suggest you go see it when you can before New Year's Day.

Final Grade
City Lights (1931) ***1/2 of ****

Smiley Face

Opening at the IFC Center today, for a running period that is to be determined, is the stoner comedy "Smiley Face." Directed by "Mysterious Skin" director Gregg Araki, "Smiley Face" tells the story of Jane, a young woman who accidentally eats about ten cupcakes filled with pot on the day of a big audition. Suddenly inside of a comedy of errors, she just tries to get through this extended high without ruining everything. Anna Faris is there playing Jane in a performance that is consistently funny, and filled with so much energy that it is award worthy in its own way. It's hard to play comedy-sometimes it's harder to make people laugh than weep-but Faris pulls her way through this with such ease and perfection that she makes it look easy.

"Smiley Face" is getting a release on DVD on January 8th, but if you live in the New York City area you can find it starting today.

I saw the movie at the Toronto Film Festival, and you can find my full review from the festival by clicking here.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

It's that time of the year again-and it seems to come around the same week every December. The streets get colder, snow begins to fall, really good movies come out, and then of course-the movie musical of the year. This time every year has brought upon since films as "Chicago," "The Producers," and "Dreamgirls,"-some of them bigger than others, but almost all of them bringing in some kind of buzz in the weeks leading up to them. This year we get "Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street," based off the Broadway musical by Steven Sodheim. Originally going to be directed by "American Beauty" helming Sam Mendes, "Sweeney Todd" eventually fell into the hands of Tim Burton, who does seem right for the material given his past. Burton casted his five time (and now six time) vet, Johnny Depp and his wife Helena Bonham Carter, who both give very good performances despite the fact that this isn't much of a stretch for anybody involved.

Depp plays Benjamin Barker, who was arrested, banished, and taken away from his wife and baby daughter by the evil Judge Turpin (played by Alan Rickman), Barker returns (now dubbed Sweeney Todd) with revenge in his mind. After learning from the dark and mysterious, yet ever hopeful, Ms. Lovett (the worst pie-maker in all of London), that his wife killed herself and his daughter has been adopted by the judge, Sweeney is prepared to do anything for revenge. Once a barber he returns to the trade in the room above Ms. Lovett's business, and their partnership reaches extremely high bloody results.

My only real connection with the story of "Sweeney Todd" comes from a version in 1936 starring Tod Slaughter-which is different in many ways. Sweeney's bloodbath is one of revenge in this film, while in the other it was about their money. There is also no love story (however bizarre and weird the love story is in this version), and instead Ms. Lovett is a much older woman. It's a fairly good film, but doesn't match the visuals here. In fact my favorite part about this film is the visuals, and every single shot in this movie is completely and utterly breathtaking. With cinematography by Dariusz Wolski, who honestly doesn't have the best resume in the business, that is certain to get an Oscar nomination, the seedy blue and gray tinted London looks at its best here-especially with the massive comparisons to the lighter and colorful looks in Ms. Lovett's extended dream sequence (one of the funniest moments in the movie). And however violent the movie is, Burton does a good job at mixing his horror story with some dark comedy-and even all of the death scenes themselves still manage to be very funny.

The movie is not without its flaws. Depp and Carter don't exactly have the best singing voices, but they do somehow mesh with their rather offbeat characters they are playing. The first hour, mostly during the introductions of all of the characters-their motives, their relationships to each other, etc-are not exactly handled as good as I had hoped. The first half of this movie does tend to drag, and I was outside of the the action for so long before things started to peak my interest. The acting from Depp and Carter is as good as they allow it to be-which basically means that they are playing variations of characters that they have played several times before. I have never exactly been a huge fan of Johnny Depp, mainly because while several of his fans claim that he is always playing some brand new part, and has variety more than any actor out there, I just see him constantly playing some crazy and vibrantly colorful person-a crazy writer, a crazy pirate, and even a crazy candy bar maker-it all just seems to be the same. I felt that Burton's best film was "Big Fish," which was the first movie that was a little different from his normal route, but at the same time there is this obviously feeling where you just know t hat its a Burton product. And Carter-who I do enjoy in everything I see her in-is always a rather wacky person, once again not a stretch. But if you can look past the rather sometimes phoned in work by the three leads (I am counting Burton as a lead in this case), than you will get more enjoyment from this movie than I did. It is a good movie-and well worth seeing on the big screen to see the visuals in the way they were meant to-but phrases like "best movie of the year" or "masterpiece" need not apply here. It's a rather strong piece of work, but not nearly Burton's best, or the best of anybody involved.

"Sweeney Todd" is out there in several theatres around the country, and it will be getting a larger release on January 11th. It should hold out well into the new year as the award season continues.

Final Grade
"Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street"-*** of ****.

IFC Center: Naughty and Nice Christmas Double Feature

New York City's own IFC Center is doing a special week long tribute to two Christmas classics-what they are billing as "Christmas Classics: Naughty and Nice." They are the 1946 Frank Capra classic "It's a Wonderful Life," and the 2003 Terry Zwigof comedy "Bad Santa."

I decided to head on out to the IFC Center the other day and take in both of these films-I've seen "It's a Wonderful Life" a small handful of times, but missed out last year on my chance to see it on the big screen. I saw "Bad Santa" twice in theatres back in 2003, and it even managed to make it onto my Top Ten List of that year. I was intrigued by the promise of this screening being a director's cut-a version that Zwigof approved after he wasn't so happy with the unrated version of the film that came out "Badder Santa." It can be noted that I haven't seen the original released version of this film since the last time I saw it in theatres, having purchased the unrated DVD (mostly because my fourteen year old self was hoping for more nudity and sexual situations, the older me has learned that its quality I am after).

First of was "It's a Wonderful Life," and if you are a fan of this film and have never seen it in theatres I highly encourage you to check it out. I was able to watch this film in a way that I never had before-but watching something on television is always vastly different from seeing it in the theatre. Here we have the classic story of an overall good man (in this case, the sad figure of George Bailey) being beaten down by forces around him that do not want him to succeed. Jimmy Stewart is obviously the only person for this job, mainly because he has one of those faces, voices, and overall appearances that makes the audience connect with him. He's almost an everyman. As Clarence the Angel states towards the beginning-"I like his face! I like George Bailey!"

In further viewings of this film I want to pay closer attention to the divider between the two halves. The first half is a slow descent into horror-we watch as George Bailey gives up everything that he always dreamed of-his trip around Europe, college, the hearing in his left ear, etc-all for either his brother, his father, his neighbors, or that damn Buildings and Loan office that he inherited when his father died. This leads up to the second half-or part-of the film where George, about to kill himself, is visited by his guardian angel Clarence, requesting to the powers that be that he never had been born. This is the eventually rise from the dark recesses of the middle portion, and I intend on paying closer attention to these two halves on their own-how they are different in directing, acting, even visually. For some reason, no matter how many times you see a film, watching a movie on the big screen just changes your perspective on the thing itself-you are forced to make it your highest priority. This viewing of "It's a Wonderful Life"-perhaps my fifth or sixth-made me see it in a way I never had before. I believe that the movie is perfect-a feel good film that can make even a grown man weep. I had tears running down my eyes in joy during the final ten minutes of this movie, and it never did effect me in quite the same way prior to this viewing.

On the other hand, the director's cut of "Bad Santa," from 2003, may be four minutes shorter than the original version, but so much more is lost from that beautiful first cut-both physically off the print, and within the celluloid. Billy Bob Thorton got a Golden Globe Nomination for his portrayal of Willie-an "eating, drinking, shi**ing, f**king Santa Claus" as he describes himself. Along with his elf size friend Marcus, the two of them don their Santa and elf uniforms once a year, get a gig at a shopping mall somewhere, and then on Christmas Eve continue to rob the store blind. This year they get trouble from a snooping security guard (Bernie Mac), a nosy and lonely kid that befriends Willie in an odd way, and a woman that has a Santa fetish (Lauren Graham). What made the original film so fun was that it managed to balance raunchy jokes and just plain mean spirited humor along with a rather nice (if not bizarre) human storyline. While Thorton is great at remaining consistent with his character-who is on the lower levels of self-destruction-there is also this fun and dark little buddy comedy between him and the kid, played perfectly by a boy named Brett Kelly, who I haven't seen since. Although at the end Willie may not be a better person or even a changed man, its the kid who is able to finally become braver and gain a little confidence.

However in this director's cut version, almost all of that storyline is destroyed, and instead we focus on more language and crude humor. When I settled into the main opening credits-which in the original film contained a voice over narration by Thorton, to compare with the narration right before the end credits-and discovered that Zwigof took out this narration but kept the visuals-I became quite nervous. Not only were some of my favorite scenes cut-a boxing match, an advent calender running joke, and even a Christmas Eve montage where you think everything would turn out alright maybe-but in doing so, Zwigof managed to destroy the actual human side of his character. Willie may be a bad man, yes, but there are moments where he redeems himself-almost, but not quite sometimes. Yes, it's still a funny film, but if this was the actual version released I would have walked away from it with a few good lines in my head, but overall it would just be another R rated comedy. I really loved the original release, and would like to see it at some point in the future.

The films are playing at IFC Center until Christmas Day. I do suggest "It's A Wonderful Life," but only the director's cut of "Bad Santa" if you want to see how the movie would have turned out if fate did not intervene. Both films are separate admissions, so you can choose or do both if you want.

Final Grades
It's A Wonderful Life an easy **** of ****
Bad Santa Director's Cut has to live with a **1/2 of **** (and it's a shame because I liked the original cut a lot.)

Bert Wheeler and Robert Woolsey

Lately I've been getting interested in a rather forgotten comedy duo-Bert Wheeler and Robert Woolsey. In the photo above, Wheeler is the one on the left, and Woolsey is the cigar holding, glasses wearing, fast talking one. In the last week or so I've been able to see three films from them thanks to our friends at Turner Classic Movies. They are "Cracked Nuts" from 1931, "Kentucky Kernals" from 1934, and "The Nitwits" from 1935. I ended up discovering them almost by accident. In taking a look at films that would be on Turner Classic Movies in the coming days, I stumbled across on that was from 1931 (this is obviously "Cracked Nuts"). It was a one and a half star comedy, only an hour and five minutes long, and the description read "Two American idiots fight over who will be the ruler of a mythical kingdom won in a crap game." Now if that doesn't get one intrigued, I don't know what does.

I didn't know that the two stars of the film, which actually happened to be very funny, had worked together before, or even worked together several years later. The movie was about Wendell Graham (Wheeler), who wants to impress the aunt of the girl that he wants to marry. And so, to gain favor, he does what anyone would do. Decides to try and become the ruler of a small kingdom. The kingdom already had a king, one by the name of Zander Ulysses Parkhurst (and this is where Woolsey comes into the picture). So to finally become king once and for all, Wendell plans an attack using a bomb-comedy galore. Boris Karloff appeared in the movie briefly, not too long before he really hit it big in "Frankenstein."

Upon further research I learned quite a bit about the two. Wheeler and Woolsey worked for RKO Studios between 1929 and 1937, making a total of twenty-one feature films. "Cracked Nuts" isn't very well known today-but neither are the duo-but it was remade two years later into a more popular film "Duck Soup." I will admit that "Duck Soup" is funnier, but so are the Marx Brothers. But Wheeler and Woolsey are quite funny themselves-even if their films relate to formula. I've only seen three of them, but its easy to see what it is. Instead of going the more traditional fat and skinny routine-Abbott and Costello, Laurel and Hardy, etc-the two of them are physically similar. Wheeler is usually the romantic lead-mixing his comedy with a little bit of song and dance ("Kentucky Kernals" contains a rather extended musical sequence, where everyone sings a verse of the song, including Spanky McFarland.) It makes sense as he is trained from vaudeville, complete with having an act with his wife Margaret Grae. This routine contained an act in the vein of Charlie Chaplin. Woolsey on the other hand is the more detached character-thin like a pencil with a very oval face, this glasses wearing, cigar smoking character was fast with words, and it was the moments when only the two of them were on the camera that really got me laughing. He has a visual appearance like Harold Lloyd and a verbal ability like Groucho Marx. These films, and not only these but also Abott/Costello, Laurel Hardy, Marx Brothers, and even the silent comedians of the past (maybe Chaplin excluded from this example), were usually about the various gags and comedy sketches as opposed to actual plot, which is normally as loose as can be. I exclude Chaplin from this because he often made actual movies with layered stories and dimensional characters. His talking films "The Great Dictator" and "Limelight" are very funny, but also make you think-the latter is almost heartbreaking.

But am I making you want to check out anything about Wheeler and Woolsey at all? Maybe not, but at least I'm doing my part to get the word out-even if three people read this and become interested it is a start. Turner Classic Movies rarely shows their work, and I stumbled, by accident once again, onto a double feature the channel did yesterday-"Kentucky Kernals" and "The Nitwits." The first film-which I said includes Spanky McFarland as the third main character-is about a pair a magicians that end up being in charge of watching a child-Spanky Milford. They go into the South after Spanky inherits a fortune, falling right in the middle of a family feud between the Milfords and the Wakefields. And of course, Wheeler falls for a Wakefield. "The Nitwits" had a surprising amount of plot in it-focusing on a pair a cigar store workers who ended up getting involved in a musician producer's murder-and this is where I became acquainted with Woolsey's trademark "Whoa Oh!!!" noise. What does fascinate me about these last two films-and probably a reason why Turner Classic Movies decided to play them-were that they were directed by George Stevens. Stevens went on to direct "I Remember Mama," which I really love, and other goodies like "A Place in the Sun" and "Giant," the latter of which I was lucky enough to see on the big screen in the summer of 2005 at Film Forum.

I read that after 1935 Wheeler and Woolsey began to fall, like all great comedians eventually do-Keaton falling after joining with MGM and not listening to the advice of Chaplin who told him to go independent, or Lloyd falling once talking pictures came into focus. They were still funny, but nothing beat the good old days. After 1935 the last few films became rather bland-I haven't seen them, but they are not highly regarded-it seems like "The Nitwits" was the last real popular Wheeler and Woolsey film. Sadly Woolsey died in 1938 after having kidney disease, or the pair may have continued. Wheeler didn't following Stan Laurel, who refused to work after Hardy passed away, and continued working until his death in 1968.

I wish that Turner Classic Movies would show more Wheeler and Woolsey comedies, but for those out there that want to give them a look, there are three that you can find on DVD. Netflix members, take notes.

Dixiana (1930)
Half Shot at Sunrise (1930)
Hook, Line and Sinker (1930)

And samples of Wheeler and Woolsey can be found online through youtube, by clicking here.

"Cracked Nuts" from 1931-*** of ****

"Kentucky Kernals" from 1934-*** of ****

"The Nitwits" from 1935-*** of ****

The Kite Runner and Youth Without Youth

Two fine directors have released their latest projects-one of them a former master of the 60's, and 70's, and the other one a rising master. And I bet you've heard of one of them, and have seen at least two by the other. They are, of course, Francis Ford Coppola and Marc Forster. Coppola, who of course has made several landmark films like "The Godfather," "The Godfather Part II," "The Conversation," and "Apocalypse Now," hasn't made a film in eleven years since the Robin Williams starrer "Jack." He's back with the rather messy metaphysical drama "Youth Without Youth." And on the flip side, Forster, who directed "Monster's Ball," "Finding Neverland," "Stay," and my tenth favorite film of last year "Stranger Than Fiction," is back with the long awaited adaptation of the beloved novel "The Kite Runner."

I recently read "The Kite Runner" after buying a used copy of it from a man a few steps away from the IFC Center last February. I recall the incident well, as when I asked the man how much money the book cost, he replied "Five dollars." When I went into the store to break my twenty, he called after me, "Or a 40 oz. Budweiser can." I can him the five dollars. I heard so much about the book-how wonderful and amazing it was-that I wanted to make sure I had read it before seeing the film, upping my chances that I am able to read the book without an prior knowledge of what happens. This is dangerous to any film or book buff, as one is never as good as the other, even if you read the book first or watch the film first. I did the same thing earlier this year with "Feast of Love," which I might have liked as a film even I didn't read the book, and "Love in the Time of Cholera," which is just a plainly bad movie-even without the book. The days and weeks and months drove by, and I still hadn't read the book, and a week before the film was released I hastened to read the 371 pages text-not a problem, as it was an easy read.

Did I like the book, you ask? I did, very much. The last fifty pages or so were intense as anything, and even difficult to read. I was able to see the growth of the main character, Amir, and chart his physical and mental journey over the course of the thirty years that the novel goes. My only real problem was that it does lag in the middle for a while-the in-between for our character as he embarks on a new journey and as he ends another one-and that it is rather poorly written-which makes an easy read, yes, but its still sloppy. However the storytelling skills are still there, and that is exactly what I expected from Forster going into this adaptation. Besides Christopher Nolan, I don't think there is a more variety hungry director out there than Forster, who can drift from a race drama, a family drama, a metaphysical thriller, to a comedy with such ease that you'd think he's been doing this for decades. And he does a very good job behind "The Kite Runner,"-and it still works as a great story that you are at the edge of your seat waiting to see what happens next.

The film, and book for that matter, is about Amir (Zekeria Ebrahimi), a young boy living in Afganhistan in its time of peace. Without the wars and the problems that we relate it to today, before the Russians eventually overtook it in the early 80's (the inspiration for the events in the very good "Charlie Wilson's War" coming out this Friday.) Amir is happy with his father, Baba (Homayoun Ershadi), and in the novel there is a juciy father/son relationship conflict that is in the film, but you kind of have to know that its there to really chart it. They also live with their Hazara servants Ali and his son Hassan (Ahmad Khan Mahmidzada). Amir and Hassan are friends, which is dangerous because of the difference in their heritage. It leads them to be bullied by the power hungry Assef (Elham Ehsas) (who, complete with the two goons at his side reminded me a little bit too much about the Malfoy character in the "Harry Potter" books, but I suppose all villians are like that regardless of what time period.) When Assef ends up committing an act of violence on Hassan, which Amir witnesses and doesn't do anything to stop it, their friendship completely changes. Amir suddenly cannot live with himself anymore. Hassan and Amir eventually move away, and Baba and Amir move to America to escape the Russians. In America, Amir (now played by Khalid Abdalla) finds love and contentment with his father, but all that changes when he is contacted by his father's best friend back home to come back and retrieve the son of Hassan, now dead (this isn't really a spoiler as it is in the trailer and all advertisement for the film), who has been captured by the Taliban. Amir heads into this dangerous voyage to try and save the boy, but also find peace within his own mind.

Since the novel, written by Khaled Hosseini in 2003-possibly as a response to the frame of mind Americans had over Afghanistan following the September 11th attacks-is written in the first person, it is tough to translate something like that to the big screen, and I think that's where "The Kite Runner" meets most of its problems. I mentioned the father/son relationship that is one of the cores of the novel, but also I found it hard to find Amir's inner conflict following the shock that he sees concerning Hassan and Assef. In the book this was clear motivation for his eventual journey to rescue his friends son, as well as the fact that he was unable to have a child with his wife, something that is barely mentioned here but was given at least six pages to in the book. And so, since the character study portions of the novel do not fit well in the film, I have to return to my original expectations to Forster-tell a good story. And that is exactly what he does. Those who haven't read the book will certainly get strong enjoyment from this film-and flaws aside it is a good story well told, and worth telling. But to really find dimensions in the characters, and to have them leave a deeper imprint in your mind, the novel will certainly be apt at doing that. Especially a strong dramatic incident towards the end of the book which is missing from the film-the film does already run a mint 128 minutes, and this incident does come a little out of left field in the book. It might have also been a little too much. I can commend Forster for taking a stab at this, and doing quite a good job. Especially with the last scene-those who read the book will know what I'm talking about-which is a complete swell of emotion all at once-but Forster does the scene perfectly. With good storytelling, acting, and music to boot, "The Kite Runner" is a good film and nothing more. In a crowded season of several great films, this might not be at the top of the must-see list, but it is more proof that Forster will be regarded as a master one day. "The Kite Runner" can be found at the Landmark Sunshine Cinema right now, and several other locations on Friday the 21st.

And moving on from that, Francis Ford Coppola, who was once a master, might be turning into a former one, with his second dud in a row. In 1996 he directed the Robin Williams comedy/drama "Jack," about a boy of ten who ages four times his age, so he looks and feels like a forty year old man. This might not have been as painfully reviewed if Coppola wasn't at the helm-it is sometimes hard to wrap around your brain the concept that this man who directed "The Godfather" and "The Conversation" was doing this. Now he's here with "Youth Without Youth," a painfully long and executed metaphysical drama starring Tim Roth-who is always bringing good work to the table even when nobody else is. The film started promising-Coppola used a title sequence reminiscent of the classic days of cinema-and the plot is rather layered. It stars Roth as Dominic as a seventy year old professor who continues to lament the loss of his love Laura (Alexandra Maria Lara), who left him when he was young. When he is struck by lightening he is lucky to be alive, but also finds that he is young again. His doctor, played perfectly by Bruno Ganz who I like more and more with each film I see him in, is puzzled by these events and tries to find out what has happened. Dominic also now has a double, a rather suave character that smokes lots of cigarettes and can only be seen in a mirror. He also ends up becoming a completely wanted person-especially by the Nazis who want him for their own personal gain. And then suddenly, and completely out of left field, we are introduced to Veronica, a woman that looks just like his lost love, who has also been struck by lightening following a car accident, and is channeling ancient languages backwards in time. And for some reason, she will get older unless taken apart from Dominic, who wants to use her in his studies.

Before the introduction of Veronica, I kind of had a grasp of where this movie was heading. It was an interesting concept, but slowly became a confusing and muddled mess. Coppola himself stated that "[It's] the kind of movie I like to make: one that gives more as people give more of themselves to it." However when the director makes a film that distances the audiences to the point where you do not even want to give any part of you to it on the first viewing. Now Roth seems to attempt to give a layered performance here-or else he is just convinced that the screenplay contains more layers than it really does-but at times when he is delivering some of this awful dialogue I can almost see the sides of his lips trying to twitch because he can't contain his laughter. And Alexandra Maria Lara, who also delivers something considering there isn't much to take from, is a complete vision. This German beauty also starred in "Downfall" and did some great work in "Control." She's is a complete beauty. I will give credit to Coppola's cinematography, which at times is almost beautiful-especially during several of the snowy scenes towards the end. Coppola had to finance this film himself (all from the money earned on his wine-making business)- and it makes sense why-the movie has such a non-universal appeal that no studio would touch it.

Sadly, "Youth Without Youth" is a mess from start to finish-never focusing on one idea and being too scattered for me, and most other people I'm sure, to make anything out of it. It would take two hands to represent the number of walk-outs throughout this film. It can be found at the Landmark Sunshine Cinema and the Paris in NYC.

Final Grade:
The Kite Runner *** of ****
Youth Without Youth *1/2 of ****

Golden Globe Nominations Commentary

Bear with me, folks. I've never done a nominations commentary before, but I thought that for a change it would be fun. This is the first of many changes the website will be offering, the others you will see in the coming days and weeks.

But it is that time of year again-where studios are bringing in their last minute award barters, and suddenly everything is good until next month when we get the bottom of the barrel releases. And of course, as usual, I disagree with about sixty percent of the nominations, but my new IF I PICKED THE NOMINEES column won't be out until the beginning of the new year.

The nominees for Best Picture-Drama

American Gangster
Atonement
Eastern Promises
The Great Debaters
Michael Clayton
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood

First of all, I'm confused as to why there are seven nominees in this category. I have yet to see "The Great Debaters" (Dec. 25) or "There Will Be Blood" (Dec 26). "The Great Debaters" does have Denzel Washington behind and in front of the camera, but personally I am thinking this could be this years "We Are Marshall"-a final inspirational movie of the year that just pops up. Honestly, "There Will Be Blood" could be the last movie I see this year, and I'd be excited for it. The anticipation is building. As far as the other nominees-"American Gangster" is extremely underwhelming, and was not worthy of any awards at all. "Atonement" is prime Oscar bait-love story, war story, epic romance-but Oscar consideration, except for about three categories, is not exactly something I'd say its cut out for (although many will disagree). I have a similar problem with "Eastern Promises," which I thought was a terrific thriller, but not something I'd hand statues out to. "Michael Clayton' and "No Country for Old Men" are two of the best movies of the year for me-no problems there. Films that sadly missed the cut that I'd see to see up there are "The Assassionation of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford," "Gone Baby Gone," "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead," and "3:10 to Yuma."

The nominees for Best Actress-Drama.

Cate Blanchett – Elizabeth: The Golden Age
Julie Christie – Away From Her
Jodie Foster – The Brave One
Angelina Jolie – A Mighty Heart
Keira Knightley – Atonement

Now there are four nominees out of these five that I would seriously question. Blanchett was very good in "Elizabeth: The Golden Age," (just about one of the only things good about that movie), as was Foster and Jolie in their films. Knightley I felt could have been played by several different actresses, and nothing in her rather brief performance stood out to be. However Julie Christie, who should surely win out of these five, gave a very tender and beautiful performance in the under seen indie "Away from Her." But who else could have been nominated? What about Marcia Gay Harden, who delivered two under seen but wonderful performances in "Canvas" and "Rails & Ties'? What about Samantha Morton, who blew me away in "Control?" Or Laura Linney is the terrific "Jindabyne?"

Nominees for Best Actor-Drama

George Clooney – Michael Clayton
Daniel Day-Lewis – There Will Be Blood
James McAvoy – Atonement
Viggo Mortensen – Eastern Promises
Denzel Washington – American Gangster

Probably the hardest category of all-there were so many GREAT male performances this year, its hard to narrow it down to just five. But these five won't do. I can accept Clooney-perfect as the agressive lonely "fixer" in the middle of a huge case. I haven't seen "There Will Be Blood" yet, but based on trailers its safe to say that Lewis will be great. McAvoy was as good in "Atonement" as he was in "The Last King of Scotland." But Mortensen and Washington. I can accept the former more, but Washington practically slept through "American Gangster," doing everything that he normally would do in a movie-act tough, throw stuff, rarely smile. What about John Cusack, who really gave a career switch as a father who is accepting the death of his wife in Iraq in the powerful "Grace Is Gone?" What about Brad Pitt who was powerful in "Jesse James?" Or even Casey Alfleck, in a career changing year, in "Gone Baby Gone?" Or Sam Rockwell, who is always shafted, who delivered great work in "Joshua?" I swear if "Snow Angels" was released this year instead of next, we'd be hearing his name a lot more. Or lastly, Frank Langella, who was brilliant in "Starting Out in the Evening." Any of these would be fine. It's a tough year, but they did it all wrong.

Best Motion Picture-Musical or Comedy

Across the Universe
Charlie Wilson's War
Hairspray
Juno
Sweeny Todd

What? Across the Universe? A film I thought was unreleasable. "Charlie Wilson's War?" Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it, but its nothing award worthy-well, more on that later. I can perhaps accept "Hairspray," and "Juno" was absolutely wonderful. "Sweeny Todd" isn't out yet. But we missed out on several worthy comedies that the category really is supposed to be about-for me the best comedy of the year was "Superbad," which is not only funny but very very true. Many would argue that "Knocked Up" was superior, but that was more of a blase experience for me. I personally was stunned by a wonderful comedy called "King of California," Or "The Savages?" All of these are superior to all of these films, with the exception of "Juno," the only true film on this list I can call a nominee-this years "Little Miss Sunshine" of break out indie films.

Best Actress-Musical/Comedy

Amy Adams – Enchanted
Nikki Blonsky – Hairspray
Helena Bonham Carter – Sweeney Todd
Marion Cotillard – La Vie En Rose
Ellen Page – Juno

I can applaud them for recognizing Amy Adams. The Blonsky portion I can strongly question. But I really think, and even hope, that this is Ellen Page's year-a performance so quick and sassy and full of life in "Juno." She is an extremely talented young actress, from when I saw her first in "Hard Candy" back in 2006. Marion Cotillard was given front runner choice back in June, but "La Vie en Rose" quickly died down. I didn't even think it was a very good movie. What about Parker Posey, whose work in "Broken English" is the stuff of indie dreams?

Best Actor-Musical/Comedy

Johnny Depp – Sweeney Todd
Ryan Gosling – Lars and the Real Girl
Tom Hanks – Charlie Wilson's War
Philip Seymour Hoffman – The Savages
John C. Reilly – Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story

My only quip-I have only seen three of the nominees so far-is where the hell is Michael Douglas? A performance so full of energy and life in "King of California" thrown out-probably for Tom Hanks, from is very good in "Charlie Wilson's War," but not something I'd throw to the top. I am extremely curious to see "Walk Hard" next weekend. Reilly has always been a terrfic actor, comedy or drama or even musical-kind of like a James Cagny of today-so I want to see what he does with this. I was kind of crossing my fingers of Ben Kingsley, whose work as a drunken hit man in "You Kill Me" wasn't as good as "The Matador," but still worthy.

Best Supporting Actress

Cate Blanchett – I'm Not There
Julia Roberts – Charlie Wilson's War
Saoirse Ronan – Atonement
Amy Ryan – Gone Baby Gone
Tilda Swinton – Michael Clayton

A very strong category this year, only hardly any of the right nominees for picked. Blanchett seems to be a lock-her portrayal of Dylan was my favorite in the film, and she did a great job. However Saoirse Ronan is the young frontrunner of the year-this years Abagail Breslin. Amy Ryan is getting credit after some terrific past performances like in "Keane," but I'm honestly surprised by how far she's gotten with "Gone Baby Gone." She's won heaps of supporting actress awards, which doesn't make Blanchett have the lock I thought. Swinton was good in "Clayton," but not great, and Julia Roberts is clearly getting the nom because of who she is. Her brief, yet important, role in "Charlie Wilson's War" isn't anything to write home about.

Supporting Actor

Casey Affleck – The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford
Javier Bardem – No Country For Old Men
Philip Seymour Hoffman – Charlie Wilson's War
John Travolta – Hairspray
Tom Wilkinson – Michael Clayton

If Travolta were not on this list, this is the best category we have. Affleck, Bardem (who I think has it), Hoffman, and Wilkinson are all at the top of their game here, and I think Travolta's makeup garnered him the nom here more than the performance. But who to replace him? Perhaps William Hurt was made "Mr. Brooks" delightfully evil and dark. Steve Zahn, whose work in "Rescue Dawn" is the stuff that make nobodies into somebodies. Or Hal Holbrook in "Into the Wild?" Or any of the male cast in "No Country for Old Men!" Or even Robert Downy Jr. in the completely disregarded "Zodiac." But Travolta. Eh. . .

Best Animated Feature

Bee Movie
Ratatouille
The Simpsons Movie

Not much to complain about here. "Ratatouille" is my pick for actually being a great film, but the other two are fun outings. I think "Beowulf" would have been a bit richer choice, for the actual landmark in animation it went through.

Best Foreign Language Film

4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
The Kite Runner
Lust, Caution
Persepolis

I'll be seeing "The Kite Runner" tomorrow, so I'll hold off on that (even though its status as a foreign film equals my confusion last year when "Letters from Iwo Jima" won this.) Could "4 Months. . ." win this, having already won top prize at Cannes. "Persepolis" is another strong film. But I hope they steer clear of "Lust, Caution" a movie I didn't even like-but Ang Lee is friendly with award shows, and for some reason this film was highly regarded as one of his best. There have been some great foreign films this year-including the wonderful "The Band's Visit" which can't win an Oscar, or "The Bothersome Man" from Norway. I'm wondering where some other movies are, like "Gone with the Woman' from Toronto, the official entry from Norway for the Oscars. Or even the Swedish wonder "You, the Living."

I'm going to leave it at that. My nominees are coming at year's end, as well as my predictions for the Oscars when the time comes. For now, a final though: even in a great year for film, the awards always manage to screw it up.