Bye Bye Gale.

Yeah, so I'm pretty sure I'll be sobbing hysterically in 227 days, because it looks like Gale is knocked off from Scream. Courteney finished her shooting to return to her hit show Cougar Town. Now anyone who is familiar with the Scream flicks knows the finale takes up about the third and final act and usually takes place at one setting (Stu's house, the theater, and Milton's house).

From screamtrilogy.net

September is about to begin and Scream 4 will shoot for its third and final month. Eyewitness photos have been thin this week, as Bananadoc is on vacation (a rumor persists that it’s a front – he really slipped on a banana peel while photographing a major death scene and is now recuperating in hospital).

A firm outline of the remainder of filming, this public notice posted in Michigan was shared today by Before The Trailer:

Scream 4 will start filming on Tuesday Aug.31st and shoot through Friday Sept.24th (small chance we will end earlier).   We will film mostly at 19223 Clement Rd. and will film about 3 days at 19260 Clement Rd.  We will only film Monday through Friday – 14 hours each day (estimated 4pm to 6am)  We will not film on the Weekends.

ROAD CLOSURES:

The township will be dropping off barricades on Clement Rd. at 7 Mile and at Frederick St.  These will be Hard Closures and we will only allow film crew and the residents whose house is within the closure to enter.  We will park the trucks along the side of Clement and use the road between the closure to push carts of gear and move our 80 ft. lifts with lights.  We will ALWAYS have a Fire Lane available in the event of an emergency.  We will also put a Local Access Only Barricade on Clement at Main St.

Please tell me I'm reading too much into this.

Sarah Michelle Gellar in "The Air I Breathe"

Many of people know, Gellar is my favorite actress. One of her biggest and best performances is The Air I Breathe. I just rewatched it to time her, she's incredible and compelling as Sorrow and the film is jaw-dropping too. I think I refound my roots tonight. I love TAIB.

Anyway, she earned her BSA win back from Tilda Swinton. I've gone back and forth between the two, but I think Gellar is the right choice. I have so much history with the film and a deep connection to her character.

Performance time: 28 minutes and 54 seconds

THE SCREAM TRIOS PERFORMANCES TIMED!

I've spent the weekend timing the performances from the three survivors from the original three films. I used a stopwatch and only timed when they were physically seen or when they were speaking. These were the surprising results: 

SCREAM 3
Sidney: 33 minutes & 06 seconds
Gale: 28 minutes & 19 seconds
Dewey: 26 minutes & 43 seconds

SCREAM 2
Sidney: 40 minutes & 02 seconds
Gale: 22 minutes & 19 seconds
Dewey: 16 minutes and 25 seconds 

SCREAM 
Sidney: 41 minutes & 44 seconds
Gale: 14 minutes & 09 seconds
Dewey: 10 minutes & 59 seconds

These all make sense, actually if you add in all the time of the kills and back stories and such. Yeah, everyone will be shocked by the Scream 3 times, I was at first, too. The reason why I think people think Sidney has less screentime then the other two is because Gale & Dewey are in the action with all the characters that get knocked off, in the first two films that was Sidney, but they made the change since Sid was in hiding. Really Neve only lost about 7 minutes of screentime due to her contract so I guess it's not that bad  Only heaven knows what's in store for the Scream 4 times.

My Acting Wins from 1997 - 2010

My Scream Collage

I put together a collage of all the characters from Scream. I don't think I missed any besides Sidney's dad, Maureen, the detectives in Scream 2 and Steven Stone from Scream 3.

Brothers Bloom

Rachel's role, Penelope, in The Brothers Bloom is far from her Oscar-winning effort in The Constant Gardener, but she elevates her role putting herself on par with Tessa Quale. Weisz steals the show here in a fun, energetic, elaborate tale, The Brothers Bloom.

You'll be bouncing out of you seats watching this film. The script is absolutely hilarious, the director moves fast keeping the material alive, and the performances are classy and strong, but what guides The Brothers Bloom (besides Weisz, of course) is the explosive editing. It's hyperactive, but not obnoxious. It's cool , fun and hip.

Like I've stated before, Weisz steals the show. Her character Penelope is one of the most memorable and well-written characters in recent memory and Weisz is up to the challenge of taking on that role. She's the most interesting character so you immediately take a liking to her. She's so adorable as the bright, lovely character, but the great thing about her performance is underneath all that lies great sorrow.

The rest of the performances aren't too shabby either. Adrien Brody is very good and convincing but it over-towered, by the other more colorful characters. Mark Ruffalo is charming and a ridiculous ball of fun. Rinko Kikuchi has almost no lines, but still gets big laughs.

There are dazzling visuals including some gorgeous costumes and set designs. This is a very funny film. Top that with the amount of energy and entertainment throughout, you're in a for a fantastic thrill ride. Not to mention the glorious performances, especially form the magnificent Rachel Weisz. A delightful thrill ride and the best comedy of 2009; 9

Psycho 3

Psycho 3 is better than the sequel, which I liked very much, but still suffers in comparisons to the original masterpiece. Now, this sequel is much more close in spirit to the original, which is a great thing. It takes elements from the first film and fashions an almost "copycat" story, but then surprises you when you see where it goes.

Anthony Perkins also improves his performance from part two, but still nothing beats his legendary performance from the original. I hate to be comparing it so much to the first two, but with sequels it's hard not to. Perkins is gripping here with much more to work with than he was given in the sequel.

Perkins also directed the film. He does a fantastic job. This is definitely the scariest of the three, but then again the most up-to-date, too. Maybe that's why it feels spiritually guided by the original; 7.5

City Island

Some people who have lived in New York their entire lives, have never even hear of City Island. Why is that? It's a lovely small island next to The Bronx. Sounds like a great set-up for a Sundacey comedy, right? Well City Island fires on all counts. It's a smart little comedy that never seems cheesy or forced with brilliant acting and a great script.

There is a conversation about ten minutes into City Island between the four members of the Rizzo household and dinnertime. It starts from being an innocent "Parents are always right nonsense", then whacks creep in. Finally, it explodes into this huge argument with people yelling back and fourth to each other. This is just one of the many sharply written scenes in the film.

It's flat-out hilarious. Cut and dry. The cast uses the colorful script and are directed right on the perfect note, and give you laugh after laugh after laugh. The direction as I mentioned is just right. It doesn't butcher the material by exaggerating the laughs, it works calmly and has a head on its shoulders.

Andy Garcia and Julianna Margulies (who have great chemistry together) lead the marvelous cast. Garcia is wonderful with his role and is comedic gold. His best comedy work to date. Julianna Margulies can play anything from Alicia Florrick to Carol the nurse, now she takes on Joyce Rizzo. She about steals all her scenes with a hurricane of a performance.

Emily Mortimer will charm the birds out the trees with her performance here. She's so good here without the great comedic bait that the other cast members have. She's so darn cute and lovely. Alan Arkin has a bit role too and does a fine job with teaching acting while acting. All the kids here are excellent too.

During your viewing of City Island you will smile until your cheeks hurt. Not only is it very entertaining, but also has a head on its shoulders. It's so sharp with fantastic acting. Sure to be one of the years best; 9-9.5

All About My Mother

All About My Mother is the greatest foreign language film since 8 1/2, easily Almodovar's crowning achievement. Cecilla Roth headlines an ensemble of woman who weave together this film through their stunning portrayals. Perdo Almodovar fashions a beautiful, in every sense of the word, story and directs it with elegance and grace.

From the start it seduces you, draws you in and you are focused on nothing but what is going on on that screen. The story is tough to take, it's dark and heartbreaking at times, but it displays a strong message. Almodovar knows how to et the mood and tone for a picture using his unique storytelling matching it with actors who can handle the work and setting the drama meter high with his score and editing.

Cecilla Roth was robbed of an Oscar nomination for her leading role here. She gets a role dripping with juice and she milks it for all it's worth. Roth is natural and subtle as well as heartrending like when she loses her son. From the other five actresses she takes an individual journey with Penelope Cruz is the standout as a pregnant nun who is HVI positive. She's so sweet and innocent, and when people that sweet and innocent end up in those situations you can't help but cry for them.

All About My Mother explores many themes from todays modern world. One is transvestites. Almodovar handles it nicely making it so they aren't viewed as monsters or strange. Another is it's femininity. Almost every actor here is female and this film takes a stand as a feminist film. What Almodovar can't do is what Paris Hilton can't buy. There is also a shout-out from him at the end of the film that's heartwarming.

The greatest thing about this movie is how compelling it is. You catch yourself thinking about the characters and the ending. It's energy-draining, but very successful. All About My Mother is the good kind of strange. It transports you; 10

The Woodsman

Kevin Bacon strikes gold with his performance as Walter, a child molester out of jail, trying to pick up the pieces to his broken life. The Woodsman doesn't go easy on child molesters, but instead tells us a single story about a man who know what he did was wrong and is trying to move on from his unspeakable mistake. Once someone is accused of this crime, almost never that someone not be judged for it for the rest of their life.

In some ways, you feel sympathy for this man, even as we are reminded of what his attractions are and what how he acted out on them. It's omnipotent piece of writing. The direction had to match perfectly in this delicate case. The director has adds a deft touch to it, making it feel real, look real, and seem real.

Kevin Bacon delivers an intense, knockout performance. He has so much hardcore depth as Walter. Bacon is a raw form and never loses a connection with the audience. Even as he is tempted to go back to his old ways. He grasps you attention from the get-go and keeps you wondering, "what exactly is going on in Walter's head?" For my money, it's the best lead actor performance of the decade.

Bacon's real-life wife, Kyra Sedgwick, co-stars and steals some scenes herself with her sass and pure honesty. She loves him, though she isn't comfortable with what he's done (then again, who would be?) The two have amazing chemistry on screen, as well as off, I'm sure.

Through the entire film there's one big question you keep beating yourself with, "Is he going to make it through or will he end up going about his past dirty tricks?" Either way, it's a fascinating character study about a man wanting a second chance, who isn't always treated fairly. It's so strange, so creepy, so real, so effective, thanks in much part to Kevin Bacon. What a performance; 9

Cruz's performance timed in Broken Embraces.

 

I've just timed Penélope Cruz's masterful performance in "Los abrozos rotos", which translates to "Broken Embraces". Some people considered her supporting for her performance as Lena, but I think it's leading no doubt. The time came to 44 : 18 with a running time of 127 minutes. It's about 35% of the entire film. Beside's Mateo, she's the main character. The film is about his memory of her. She is in from about the 20 minute mark off and on until about the 1:30 minute mark. Even though she departs from the film with 30 minutes still to go, but the rest of the film is about what happened to her after her departure. She's clearly lead. She deserved double nominations in 2009 (for Embraces and her already nominated work in Nine). Cruz perfects the role. One of her best.

BTW: I'm not reviewing Broken Embraces after this viewing because I cannot properly digest the film and take notes and time a performance at the same time. 

Psycho II

Though, practically nothing will live up to the genius of Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece, Psycho, it's sequel is actually very satisfying and a bloody good time, even if it isn't "scary". Anthony Perkins is solid as Norman Bates the second time around. He isn't as magical as he was in 1960, but he still makes the film.

The film begins with the famous "Shower Scene" with Janet Leigh from the original. It's a powerful introduction. If only the next section of the film was as compelling. The next act is Norman trying to make it on his own after 20+ years. I didn't think we needed to see him interacting with the public. He is employed in a small diner and those scenes are cheesy and uncomfortable to watch.

I was thinking to myself, "Are they going to strain the plot like this for the next two acts? Because it really was dreadful. It seemed like it was a remake of Psycho, with little hints from the first film incessantly throughout the first act, with him being sane instead of well, insane.

The film heats back up when the screenwriter makes the intelligent decision to set the rest of the thriller at the famous Bates house an motel. We see a lot more of the house in the sequel than we did in the original. It's so haunting and creepy.

Psycho was never "scary scary". It was more psychological (pun not intended). Psycho 2 isn't that or scary, but does create a very new and believe it or not, intricate storyline. It keeps you guessing until the end, literally what's actually going on with the characters and who is who and what are their motives.

Besides Norman Bates, the other returning character from the original is Marion Crane's sister, Lila Loomis, played with great intensity by Vera Miles . She actually has a great character arc once you realize what she's actually up to.

It may fall behind the original in every aspect, but still it worth a watch. It's fun and engrossing with a cool storyline and fantastic ending; 7.5

L.A. Confidential

L.A. Confidential is an uneven film, but does succeed on many other levels. The first 20 minutes of the film are very strong, you'll be thinking your in for a good ride. Suddenly, for the next half hour of the film it's uninteresting. It becomes boring with too many characters jumping from crime to crime, character to character, story to story. They just tried to jam pack too much stuff in there. After it hits the 1 hour mark, it's back in top form and draws you quickly in again, making you become invested in the story at hand. It's when the film slows down from its hyperactivity, and strings the many storylines together into one big one. The big problem here is the pace of that 30 minute mark to 60 minute mark. It's not bad (its actually kind of fun), just makes the project weaker in that time. ALOT happens and it's very "talkie", and the film doesn't give the audience a second to breathe and comprehend what's going on.The dialogue makes it a little confusing. It also seems like there is crime after crime after crime, I thought to myself "Why should I care?" Though, I must say it's the only flaw. After that ridiculous second half-hour, it makes a complete 180 back to where it was in the beginning. The rest of the film was compelling, smart, unpredictable, and thrilling. The audience also becomes even mesmerized into the rest of the film. I must say, the twist and turns are very surprising, like knock you back in your seat surprising. L.A. Confidential has an excellent ensemble. Is ensemble the right word? Many people consider it an "ensemble piece". Meaning every character is a supporting character, such as movies like Crash, The Air I Breathe, Inglourious Basterds, ect. I'd beg to differ. The three cops that we follow, I feel would be the leading roles (Spacey, Crowe, Pierce), and everyone else would be supporting. Either way the film has excellent support from it's actors. Kevin Spacey, Im about to call him the Best Actor of the '90s, he is Oscar-Worthy in everything he does. He's so relaxed in the role and charming and cocky. He's the stand-out here. Kim Basinger won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for her work here. Is it deserved? Very. She's great here. Her character is full of mystery and all that makes you more interested in her. Basinger's nuanced performance deserves every positive recognition it got. This was one of Russell Crowe's first performances and to be honest, it's a great breakout. His solid effort avoids the cliche his character was dripping in. Guy Pierce even warms up to you though the duration. Danny DeVito has a small, but memorable role and is as every bit as good as any cast member. So quirky an fun. The tech side of the things doesn't slouch either. The film is beautifully photographed, has lovely costumes, nice sets--especially Kim Basinger's home. It's silky and slinky; beautiful. The score keeps you on the edge of your seat and sets the mood.In The end chase shootout is nail-biting. You also get to see touching couples scenes throughout. L.A. Confidential also has a humor about itself, which makes it a rockin time. There's a gag with Spacey and Pierce with Lana Turner which is hilarious. Great entertainment! Though there may be one bug rough patch, it doesn't ruin the entire film which is technically astonishing, has a suspenseful story, and is well-acted; 8.5

Frist Rabbit Hole review!

My most anticipated film of the award season has just been reviewed for the first time. I must say, Annette and Julianne...I love ya, but Kidman should steal it this year :)

My Predicted Nominations as of Now:
Best Picture (with 10 Nominees)
Best Actress: Nicole Kidman
Best Supporting Actress: Diane Wiest 
Best Adapted Screenplay

http://tiff.net/filmsandschedules/tiff/2010/rabbithole


In Shortbus and Hedwig and the Angry Inch, director John Cameron Mitchell pushed sexual limits, broke genre boundaries and did both with an all-embracing generosity. He’s made some of the sweetest naughty movies of our time. Rabbit Hole marks a major progression. Gone is the euphoric underground sensibility, replaced by more broadly accessible storytelling and impressive formal control. Taking its place among the highest quality contemporary American drama, Rabbit Hole starts from a superb script interpreted by first-rate actors doing some of their best work.

Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart play Becca and Howie Corbett, a couple trying to mourn, but unsure how to do it. They have retreated into politeness and private rituals, appearing more and more isolated in their upper middle-class home, which looks especially barren now that their young son is gone after a hit-and-run tragedy.

Unable to mourn but unready to re-enter daily life, Becca rebuffs her family, snapping at her more reckless sister and humiliating her mother (Dianne Wiest) every chance she gets. She even turns her sharp tongue on the members of the support group which she and her husband attend. As Howie makes genuine efforts to connect – including an overly earnest attempt with another mourning parent, played by Sandra Oh – Becca begins to pursue a course even she doesn’t understand. She starts to reach out to the boy who killed her son, a teenaged driver whose life was irrevocably changed by the incident. Their relationship, full of curiosity, suppressed rage and a surprising mutual recognition, forms the fascinating counterpoint to the discordant notes of a marriage in crisis.

Mitchell shapes this material with maturity and grace. Dianne Wiest gives a nuanced performance to match the best of her work. Eckhart is superb as a husband tortured by both the death of his son and the withering of his marriage. Kidman is remarkable. We expect disciplined, precise work from her, but there is new range here, and a willingness to show frayed emotions that makes this one of the finest performances of the year.

Brooke vs. Steffy & Stephanie

On Bold and the Beautiful, this storyline is starting to become trite. Brook won, go die Stephanie & Steffy.

Se7en

Se7en is the very interesting film about a serial killer using the seven deadly sins to kill his victims. That part of the plot alone should urge you to want to see the film, period. It's such an original concept. The writing goes farther than just the psycho killer stuff. It's much deeper and more emotional than that. From start to finish you never feel distant from the characters or the story.

From watching the Siskel and Ebert review I started watching this expecting to get this NC- 17 material that slid past it's R rating. I'm not sure I understand why everyone thought Se7en was incredibly disturbing. Is it? Yes. But you don't see any of the actual murders, just the aftermath. Then again, I am very used to disturbing elements in films, so I may have an immunity to it.

The performances from it's leads are the backbone for the film. Freeman and Pitt, very different roles, very different performances. Freeman's performance is nuanced, but still as effective as Pitt's, who has the showy, obnoxious role. He never fails to show us his intensity. Kevin Spacey's extended cameo here stands out as one of the best performances of 1995. With not even 10 minutes of screen time, Spacey walks away with the film.

Se7en is a suspenseful film, but I look at it more intellectually, rather the entertainment value, though it's very entertaining. It's not as scary as many people think. You're not getting a Scream or Halloween here. You don't see much of the violence...you get to imagine it in your head. And that's what's most frightening.

Mesmerizing from beginning to end. It's close to perfect, what is keeping it from being perfect? I'm not sure, it's some weird conflict at the beginning of the film. It doesn't drag you in at first, necessarily. Other than that, you must see it for it's performances and story, also the editing is so tight it's chilling; 9.5

My Scream Trilogy review as I promised....

The Scream Trilogy is the film series that redefined fear. They revived the horror genre. The one Alfred Hitchcock sunned everyone with Psycho. The one John Carpenter’s Halloween brought serial killers afloat to. Even our own Wes Craven did by scaring us in the only place we found comfort in with A Nightmare on Elm Street. Now, with the Scream trilogy, the horror genre was brought back to life continuing  the face of iconic fear.

Wes Craven, as mentioned before, is the master of suspense. When Kevin Williamson’s script was out on the prow, Craven was really the only proper choice to direct. His method of scaring the audience never fails.  He has so much control over the three stories without the feeling of “over-directing”. For many years, Freddy Kruger was hailed as Craven’s masterpiece, this trilogy is now and will be his crowning achievement.

Kevin Williamson wrote the original and the sequel, then Ehren Kruger came along to write the third when Williamson declined. However, Williamson basically outlined the story for Kruger, leaving the dialogue and details to Kruger. All three scripts are absolutely incredible and tantalizing original. The story grows as the series continues and it becomes more intricate.

Now, it’d be tough to choose between the three, which is my favorite. But, I think as the story becomes more complicated, I was more intrigued, which may be the only factor to say the films get better as we go along. That aside, the three are so close together with quality, entertainment, suspense, and as films overall. It’s difficult for a film trilogy to achieve that. Most times, sequels get worse, but here? No such thing.

The thing that really separates Scream from the average film series besides the screenplay, the  direction, the suspense level, the tech stuff, and the visuals is the acting. This is what I call true acting ensemble.

The two dazzlingly standouts are Neve Campbell and Courteney Cox. What performances. Now, it’s no surprise that Sidney, Gale, and Dewey are in all three films. So Campbell and Cox have to sustain their performances over three films. It’s extraordinary. David Arquette, I’ll check him off first. He is funny and dorky in the first two films. He really adds to the table in Scream 3. He finally “grows up” and isn’t as insecure, which is a lovely thing to see.

You see the actors grow and fall as their characters. Campbell really finds Sidney Prescott, the true essence of the character. Campbell does something tricky here. She shows us a girl who is in a horrible place in her life, who is strong and can make it in the world, but is also vulnerable and weak. It’s tricky, but she pulls it off with grace. Sidney is this tormented young woman, and Campbell never shies away from that; how she can act with her eyes can simply not be put into words, it’s that great.

Courteney Cox is fierce as Gale Weathers. She leaves her comfy zone (the control freak Monica Geller on Friends). Cox steps up the dramatic work here, especially in Scream 2. The character Gale Weathers grows from being a “wannabe” b*tch, to being a successful and rub it in your face more of a b*tch. Then in Scream 3, she changes. After her true feelings for Dewey were revealed in Scream 2, Gale was tamed and not so much of the witch she once was. I’ve mentioned her dramatic work in Scream 2 a few times. It is simply the best of her career. In Scream 1,  she was hinting that she had feelings for Dewey, but also hinting she was using him for information. In Scream 2, she finally lets lose and says ‘I don’t care,” and gives in. Right as she confesses herself, the situation diminishes. Cox is so good in the scene where she is the sound room and sees Dewey being stabbed through the mirrors (to what she thought was his death). It’s heartbreaking. 

Scream 1’s acting was the most surprising. Mainly because with the horror genre you tend not to think, “Oh, I’m in for some great acting”. It’s stereotypical. After you see the first scene with Drew Barrymore, you’ll be blown away; I was. She is so powerful in her one scene. She kind of pulls a Janet Leigh in Psycho. She was the biggest movie star, at the time, of the Scream cast. No one expected her to be the opening kill. Her acting isn’t short of Leigh’s either. For that scene to work, you needed an actor who could really hold his or her own and make it convincing. Drew was that actor. Skeet Ulrich plays effectively the infamous, Billy Loomis. Ulrich is spine chilling and creepy here, but does it with so much charisma.

In Scream 2, Jada Pinkette is hilarious, without a funny character. Her section of the film is awesome and a great follow-up to Barrymore’s from the original film. Sarah Michelle Gellar also has a small role here and makes the most of her seven-minute screentime. Laurie McCalf is also very good here. Jamie Kennedy, who survived the first film reprises his role here and it’s always a fun time when he’s on the screen.

Parker Posey is the best addition to the entire trilogy in Scream 3. She is given a very meaty comedic role and she puts her soul into the role. Without a doubt the funniest character in the trilogy. She has great chemistry with Courteney Cox and David Arquette in the love triangle. Cox, especially because essentially Posey is playing Cox’s character in Stab, which is Scream (a film within a film). I can’t picture anyone disliking Jennifer Jolie (Posey’s character). She has so much fun with the role and we have fun watching her. Patrick Dempsey gives his best film performance here in once of his first film performances. He rives his character without any noticeable fears. Part 3, gives the cast a chance to express some comedy into the series, and everyone is perfectly cast. Except for Kelly Rutherford, who won the of Christine over Kate Winslet? WTF? I mean seriously? C’mon. Jamie Kennedy has a cameo here as the deceased film geek, Randy, which is pitch-perfect.

Like I’ve stated before, the story is so original and has fun poking fun at the clichés of horror films, sequels, and trilogies. However, the second and third films have been accused of being a cliché themselves, especially Scream 3. I don’t understand this logic at all. I don’t understand that the sequels are what the original started out spoofing. People call it a flaw. A flaw I obviously don’t understand.

The Screams are also grand on the technical scale, too. The ghostface costume has become the most frightening, iconic horror film costume. It screams fear. The brilliance of it is, this mask wasn’t made specifically for the film. I was a regular Halloween costume sold in stores everywhere. That’s what makes it scarier. The great master, Wes Craven once said, “Something isn’t scary unless people can identify with it and could possibly be in the same positions as the characters on the screen. The films also include a killer score and frightening sets (especially John Milton’s house, where the climax of Scream 3 takes place).

Bob Weinstein, the producers of the Scream trilogy, now demanded a fourth installment. Why? To make a few bucks? Scream fits perfectly as a trilogy, without any loose ends and had a wonderful ending filled with metaphors and a great chase scene. Williamson is back writing. Having him back on board with Craven directing and three survivors back gives me some comfort that it won’t fail completely, but I’m scared for it’s survival. Let’s just hope for the best.

Overall, without a doubt, the best trilogy ever made. My personal favorite films; they’re fun, very scary, with excellent performances, writing and directing. What more could you want? The three easiest 10s I’ve ever given. 

The Scream Trilogy Review coming soon

I was trying to avoid writing reviews for The Scream Trilogy and Nine (my two favorite films), because I didn't want to come off fanboyish, but I have watched the Screams for the first time since the new year this past weekend. I've decided to take my time with the three reviews and write them tomorrow.

I made a collage of my favorite things!!

Happy Birthday Joan Allen!

Joan Allen has become one of my favorite actresses this summer. Today is her birthday and she still looks smokin hot.

Noms/Wins:
Best Supporting Actress: Nixon
Best Supporting Actress: The Crucible
Best Actress: The Ice Storm
Best Supporting Actress: Face/Off
Best Supporting Actress: Pleasantville
Best Actress: The Contender
Best Supporting Actress: The Bourne Supremacy
Best Actress: The Upside of Anger
Top 10s: The Bourne Ultimatum and The Notebook. 

Possible Scream 4 Ending?

This is a picture from the Scream 4 website, calling it "Hurt People".  I thought it was just a scene after an attack, until I saw this picture: http://scream-trilogy.net/wp-content/uploads/scream4hurtpeople04.jpg Sidney, Jill, and Kate holding hands. They all look roughed up. Kirby's there too. But, if it is an ending, WTF is Gale and Dewey? Also, I doubt they'd let a picture even hinting the ending to the public. I'm not sure.

Black Swan Trailer!

The first "Black Swan" trailer has been released. It's one of my most anticipated of the year and judging by the trailer, it looks like I won't be disappointed :) Oscar time!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jaI1XOB-bs

Eat Pray Love

Eat Pray Love is not the appealing romantic comedy it's being sold as. It's a dark character study of how someone loses themselves. Julia Roberts the queen of romantic comedies (another way to sell the film) is front and center as Liz, and she deserves a Best Actress nomination. Roberts really brings Liz to life in both the enchanting ways and the dark ways. It's not the typical Julia Roberts performance you'd expect. The scene early on in the film where she prays for the first time is chilling. What makes Roberts so good is the fact she's a movie star, but a movie star with talent and range. Javier Bardem and Richard Jenkins also play roles in the second and third act. They both have a magnetic connection with Roberts. Jenkins has so much fun playing his colorful character. He's the old guy you want to have long talks with. His character has a surprising arc during the last minutes of India. Bardem's Phillippe is charming, handsome, and emotional. Bardem yet creates another memorable character and a great supporting performance. The story didn't sell me at first. As Liz feels confined, I felt confined and uncomfortable in the NYC scenes. They aren't bad, but a term I've used to describe this film before: dark. But, when she goes to Italy, lets go, and frees herself, I felt freed too. From there until the credits roll, the film doesn't have that problem but it's a big problem. I personally hold the director at fault there. He could've smoothed it over. The cinematography is gorgeous, Roberts is beautiful with support from two stand-out men. What more could ya ask for? Be warned: this is a darker movie then the trailers may imply so it's not for everyone; 8.

Cougar Town Season One Released Tomorrow 8/17/10

The first complete season of Cougar Town is being released tomorrow. I love it. It's my 2nd favorite show, and favorite still on right now. Pick it up, you won't be disappointed....especially you Cox fans out  there.

New Profile Picture!!!

I've changed my profile picture from Marion Cotillard's spectacular villainess turn as Mal in "Inception" to the awesome foursome from my Scream movies on the set of the hit-or-miss sequel.

Inception's Gross Total$$$$$ (So Far)

I was worried about the incredible film, "Inception" performing at the box office. I knew it'd have a huge opening weekend (60 million), but I was worried about after that because of how confusing it was and the word of mouth. It's budget was 160 million, so I was really worried. However, I was wrong thank God. Can we call ya the Best Picture frontrunner? Major critical acclaim with making the huge bucks.

Total Lifetime Grosses

Domestic:	$240,514,000	48.9%
+ Foreign:	$251,200,000	51.1%
= Worldwide:	$491,714,000

Weird Dream

I had a strange dream that Jane Krakowski won Best Supporting Actress in 2003 for her stage performance in Nine. She won the Tony Award, I don't know how she got nominated for the stage at the Oscars though. LOL.

Anyway, she was phenomenal  as Carla, the same role the won Penelope Cruz a nomination for in 2009

Krakowski in Nine:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8-El40q3Dk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkzMvmgz9HY&feature=related

Scream 4: Courteney done; Neve and David still in the game.

According to screamtrilogy.net Courteney has wrapped filming and getting ready to start filming Cougar Town, while Neve and David are still filming. David Arquette adds, "This is going to be an amazing movie."

http://scream-trilogy.net/2010/08/courteney-gone-david-and-neve-still-in-the-game/

Maybe he was drunk or maybe he has bad taste, I don't know, but some  how I believe him :/

I hope Courteney leaving doesn't mean she's been killed off. I don't know what I'd do without my Gale :(

Nothing but the Truth

Nothing but the Truth is a stone-cold, heartbreaking, powerful film that explores many themes of not just journalism, but morals and integrity. It captivates you, even drains your energy from being so invested into the story, the characters and the mystery. It's the kind of film that makes you take a few steps back and ask what would you do?

The film is very authentic thanks to the marvelous cast. Vera Farmiga, although not the central character drives the film. She claims the intricate role and becomes the character. Her work here is uncanny. She makes a big enough impact leading the audience to think she's in the film much longer than the 18 minutes she has. Now, I love Penelope Cruz, but Vera is the true Best Supporting Actress of 2008.

Kate Beckinsale gives her best performance as the journalist, Rachel Armstrong. She steps out of her comfy zone and is the biggest shocker performance of 2008. The way she displays Rachel shows us what the woman can do under her beauty. She dwindles as the film goes on. She's terrific. The rest of the cast contributes too: Alan Alda, Angela Basset, Matt Dillion, David Schwimmer, etc.

Nothing But The Truth asks some tough questions. Not only, the central question: would you reveal or not reveal your source? But it also has many different moral questions. An example is your reaction to Matt Dillion's character. Is he being a butt or is he just doing his job. An excellent written film.

A must-see experience. It's the best film about journalism ever made; 10.

Sex & the City 2 DVD cover

I was a huge fan of Sex & the City 2 film, it's so underrated. 16% on Rotten Tomatoes? C'mon!

Anyway, the DVD cover has just been released. I love it :) I am disappointed there isn't a two disc set like there was for the first film, but you take what you can get.

http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/sex-and-the-city-2.html

The Devil Wears Prada

An excellent cast ensemble. A funny, intelligent screenplay from fine source material. Great, restrained direction. Fancy clothes. An awesome soundtrack. Fish all that up, stick in a blender and what you get? The sophisticated, "The Devil Wears Prada".  


Anne Hathaway, Meryl Streep, Stanley Tucci, and Emily Blunt headline the picture and all form together and come out with exceptional performances. A surprising uproar of an ensemble. Meryl Streep was nominated in Lead Actress at the Oscars, but this was clearly a mistake. This is Anne Hathaway's movie. She plays the part to a tee, she's beautiful, she makes you identify with Andy as she goes through this torture. Meryl Streep is fierce and cruel as the antagonist. If the studio would've pushed her in the supporting category, she'd have her overdue Oscar right here. Emily Blunt is here in her breakout role. She's the funniest out of the entire cast. Just laugh after laugh and she doesn't have to be obnoxious out it; what an awesome performance. Stanley Tucci adds yet another underrated performance to his resume.


The film uses it's source material here and creates something short of masterful. You can watch the picture over and over again because of it's fresh and hilarious story. The director does something genius here. He applies a very gentle touch; it fits. The costumes are dazzling, as well.  


The Devil Wears Prada is one of the best comedies of the decade. It's flawless; 10

My Best Friend's Wedding

In honor of Julia Roberts' new film "Eat Pray Love", I've decided to watch a few of her films, the first is "My Best Friend's Wedding".

Julia Roberts has defined herself in Hollywood. Not only is she one of the most wealthy, beautiful, sexy, coolest women in the world, she's also one of the most talented, whose talent gets treated a little unfair. She has declared herself the queen of romantic comedies, and when you hear "Romantic Comedies"....eeekk. Though she may have similar roles from time-to-time, she never fails to make her character real and inventive, as she does here in "My Best Friend's Wedding".

Roberts works her magic here again as Julianne. She's wonderful and brings Jules to life. She's given a lot to work with here thanks to the elaborate script, by Roman Bass. It was robbed of a "Best Original Screenplay" nomination at the Oscars. It carefully reveals the plot and the characters and works around the romantic comedy clichés.

There is one scene that takes place in an elevator between Cameron Diaz (who is bright and fun as Kimmy). That scene is a huge metaphor that could easily go unnoticed. It's perfect. There are some moments where you genuinely laugh out loud. To laugh like that to a movie today is rare.

Rupert Everett is has a supporting role here, but steals every scene he has. He's so colorful and charming, not to mention hilarious. Dermot Mulroney is the leading man here, though, and has great chemistry with Roberts.

In the end, it's a humorous well-written film. You see four actors have a blast in comedy- dripping roles. Also, the ending, which I won't spoil, is original and unexpected which also paints a great portrait of what really matters; 8.5

Scream 4 Stuff: Will the original trio survive?

My answer is yes. I mean, they've come too far to die now. I really don't see Wes, Kevin, or Ehren pulling that on us. They saw how people reacted to Jamie Lee Curtis dying in Halloween Resurrection.

Most people are predicting Sidney to get the ax, but I just don't see it. I hear wines "Oh how many times can someone survive a bloodbath?", "There's only been one set of shooting pictures for Neve", "It's time for her to die." Okay....shut up! I mean, seriously? One, it's a movie. Two, the Weintiens are probably trying to keep Neve, Courteney, and David out of the public eye....especially Neve. You can shoot scenes indoors. Most of the Scream series was shot indoors, anyways. Three, how? Without Sidney there is no Scream. This film would make the first three pointless if they did kill her off.

Courteney is the most well-known to the public outside the trilogy. People who may have never seen the first three will see the trailer and say, "Hmmm, Monica's in that. Let's go see it." Also, her new show Cougar Town helps too. David Arquette would be the one to go if someone did die. Dewey's been on his deathbed seriously two times now. But he won't go. I doubt any of them will die.

They better have an interesting storyline here. The original three were perfect in every way and the story was tied up nicely in 2000. I don't think I like the idea of rebooting it for some $$$$. I hope this is like Halloween H20, and focuses on both the teens and the original clang, who won't get knocked off, I think.

8 1/2 (1963)

Upon my second viewing of Fellini's 8 1/2 I found tons of answers I was searching for in the first viewing. I'm a huge "Nine" fan, so I'm over-familiar with the plot. I understand that the Broadway version was based on 8 1/2, but it's not fair to judge Nine as a 8 1/2 remake. It's like judging a Halloween remake to John Carpenter's classic. Since it was an adaptation on the Broadway show, judge it to that. Enough about Nine, now.

Fellini's work here has left me speechless. There is no words to describe this picture. Since it's a cinematic autobiography, obviously, he was going to hit it hard, but no way did I ever expect what I just saw. He uses present reality, past reality, and fantasy. It's hard to tell when he is switching from reality to fantasy. And at times, fantasy intertwines with reality making that confusing as well. But the more you see it, the more you take away from it. Fellini has so much control of the picture, it's uncanny what he did here. It's a shame he doesn't have the Directing Oscar for '64.

The story is madness. Pure madness. Like I said before everything it balances, fantasy, reality, his past. It's brilliant, it accurately shows what artists go though. It explores many themes and makes you sit up and think. The acting here is also very good. Marcello Mastroianni gives one of the best performance in the history of the cinema. Aimee is wonderful as the suffering wife. Milo, who I believe was Fellini's mistress, is so fun and heartwarming in the role. Cardinale and Falk are also good for their limited characters. Great ensemble.

Like I said, you aren't going to get the madness anywhere else but here. This isn't a film for mainstreamers, they will likely get lost in the twisted story. It's Fellini's masterpiece along with Mastroianni's career performance. The only thing that's keeping this from a perfect 10 is the confusion with the transitions from fantasy and reality; 9.5

Capote (2005)

If anyone can look me in the eye and say Philip Seymour Hoffman doesn't deserve the trophy on his mantle is delusional. He injects Truman Capote into his body and you never for one second believe you're looking at anyone but Truman Capote.

Capote is okay film. It's neither bad nor good, but thanks to the incredible performance form Hoffman and the surprising performance from Clifton Collins Jr., it's worth a view. The storytelling is all right for most of the time, but becomes a drag in some parts leaving the audience picking at the nails or staring into space. There are some well-put together scenes between Capote and Smith.

If someone told me that Clifton Collins Jr. would steal one of the most crucial scenes in the film away from Hoffman, I would've said you're crazy. Well, to my surprise he does and it's so powerful and it's the one time during the film when you're 100% mesmerized.

The rest of the cast disappoints, including Oscar nominee Catherine Keener. I understand subtlety, but I also understand staring into the camera like you're bored out your mind. She did absolutely nothing for me here.

Overall, it's worth a view for Hoffman and Collins, but it seems distant from the viewer for most of the duration of the film; 7.

Creation (2010)

Being the first half of the year, there aren't many films that are released that scream, "OSCAR!" This one wasn't belting Academy AwardConsideration from the trailer, but because it's a period piece, it was closer to Oscar radar then most films released. For an Oscar follower you have to take what you can get in the first months of the year.

The story offers very little. Almost zero entertainment. Marginal believability. Very little narrative structure. The script meanders through the life of Charles Darwin and his wife causing confusion for the film viewer with them asking themselves, "Is this film really worth it?" The storyline is a sinking ship, telling the story of Darwin's strange theories disagreeing with his wife's religious beliefs, during the growth of his madness. Sometimes, it is even hard to follow the story, which that statement itself is laughable. This type of story shouldn't be this hard to follow, but it's drowned in the weakness of it's filmmakers.

With the pleasant period piece necessities, Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly lead the film with grace and deliver some moments worth the money you paid to view the film. Unfortunately, the two actors can't salvage the poor mix of weak directing and a script left in the dark. There are many melodramatic scenes that are not executed well. Jon Amiel's direction didn't communicate with the script by John Collee which leaves the audience in the dark. There are actually some moments that are quite disturbing.

One element of the story which works is Darwin's storytelling to his daughter. It was moving and powerful, as is his performance. His performance is good, but was put on the back burner for Jennifer Connelly, who delivers a great character representation. She impresses me yet again. Though, is this character similar to Alicia Nash in A Beautiful Mind, her Oscar-Winning performance? Yes, but this isn't the film's introduction to unoriginality.

Some nice costumes, camera-work, sets matched with the fine work of the lead actors should leave more than the uninteresting, lackluster film we have before us. I say skip it, though Connelly may be worth your time; 5/10

A Cry in the Dark (1988)

A Cry in the Dark is an alright film with Meryl Streep's better than average performance. Streep has never seized to amaze me. She can play any role, in any dialect. She delivers a fine performance here. I don't think it's near her work in Sophie's Choice or Silkwood, but she still gives it her all. Other than Streep, it's not bad, but certainly not great. It lacks something that made Sophie's Choice and Kramer vs. Kramer had, Streep's other films. The neat thing about the story is that you see the other side of when people get accused of things. You see both sides of it. But, at that it repeats itself a lot. We see the same event over and over again. Overall, just an okay film with a typical great performance from Streep; 6

Face/Off (1997)

Face/Off is an action picture in every sense of the word. Too many over the top chase sequences? Check. Too-long running time? Check. Nicolas Cage? Check. Bad? No possible way. It's a seasoned original action picture with surprisingly great performance, excellent sound, editing, and visuals, and nail-biting thrills.

Nicolas Cage, possibly the king of action pictures shares the stage with john Travolta and together they have more chemistry than 3/4 of the romantic comedies today. It's a Clairice Starling/Hannibal Lecter pair. Can you imagine if Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins did what Travolta and Cage do here, switch faces? That would've been interesting.

Both deliver to my surprise, terrific performances. Travolta pretty much amazed me here. He has emotional depth for both characters he portrays. It's Oscar nomination work that never gets considered because of the nature of his film (i.e. Matt Damon in Bourne). Both men could've stolen the show in the Nicolas Cage role, and they both are sublime in it. But it is the John Ttravolta character that was the challenge. When Travolta is actually in his original character he's just as solid and great as he is in the Cage character. Cage falls a little behind with Travolta's character, but picks himself up when he confronts Joan Allen. From there on he's on Travolta's level.

Joan Allen, I fell like I talk about her in every review, delivers yet another fantastic performance. How does she do it?

Face/Off is features incredible tech stuff, fine acting, a very original (not always believable) script, and the action may carry on for a while, but it very well-done; 8.

Gosford Park (2001)

 I'm flabbergasted to see it got nominated for Best Picture. Gosford Park is a dull period piece that never comes together. It struggles with too many characters fighting for screen time making the film longer than it needs to be. But the huge flaw here is the editing. I felt like the editor was trying to distance the audience from the story. That made the film deadening. The direction didn't help the distance either. I felt so far away from these characters and what was going on.

There were two performances stand-out performances from this over-sized cast, Maggie Smith and Helen Mirren. They brought to life the words on the page and the footage in the editing room. Smith more than Mirren with her quick wits, though. They at least kept me awake.

I wanted to like this movie. It was set-up perfectly for me, but just didn't deliver. A huge disappointment; 4

The Green Zone (2010)

Matt Damon, who is one of the most reliable and consistent actors in the business, and when he's not up to game, you know something's wrong. He looks bored in the role throughout the entire film. The Green Zone is predictable, pointless, and very clichéd. This film is the reason why some people have a phobia to War films. Loud, scar action sequences leading to nothing is basically what The Green Zone is strung together on. This film also offers the idea that we went into this war under false pretenses.

There is absolutely nothing that separates this film from any other war film in recent memory, other than The Hurt Locker. The Hurt Locker attempted to change the typical war film and was successful, but then this film is released right around the time that wins Best Picture and takes away steam.

Save you money. Sure, it's "somewhat" entertaining to the modern audience who likes war films. I don't. I liked The Hurt Locker because there wasn't the normal war movie turf. This is just average film making. Sorry Matt Damon...you struck out this time; 4/10.

Inception (2010)

This really deserves every praise it's getting. One of the most anticipated films of the year, Inception, is nothing short of spectacular. When reviews were pouring in, critics were honoring it as one of the best films of the year. My anticipation level was through the roof, and while I had my doubts, it succeeded every expectation I had.

I don't even know where to begin, everything about this film is worthy of Oscar consideration. The script written by Christopher Nolan is one of the most brilliant pieces of art ever written. It's so intelligent, thought-provoking, and completely original. I like to think that I can call myself "a writer," but after seeing Inception, no person compares to Christopher Nolan's writing here.

Christopher Nolan also directs the film with such confidence. Many think he was snubbed in 2008 for a Best Director nomination, if he's snubbed again this year (which I highly doubt), the Academy will have some explaining to do. He takes this material that was masterfully written and turns it into his remarkable vision. This is a film where so much depended on the director, and he thankfully held up his end of the deal and more.

This would be a terrifying adventure for someone who doesn't pay attention to a film always. When you view the film, pretend as if there was a quiz afterward, otherwise it's easy to get lost. Nolan moves at the right pace for this film, he just asks you to meet him half-way, which a director should ask of you. You are connected more to the film that way.

The performances are also wonderful. It's one of the best, if not the best, ensembles of the year. I got the feeling every cast member came to the set with the material in their hands ready to attack it. Leonardo DiCaprio is one of the most talented actors working today and he fits Cobb to a tee. Pitching the right emotion at the right time every time. Marion Cotillard, who is always the stand-out in her films since she started starring in American films, follows the tradition here. Her character wasn't at all what I expected her to be. She's the villain figure and with that delivers a hauntingly luminous portrait of Mal (which translates to "Evil" in Latin, thank you Peter Travers). She's heart-breaking, frightening, and even charming, all in the matter of about a 20 minute performance. Ellen Page is effective as the brainy and curious girl who tries to follow in Cobb's footsteps. LeVitt gets a laugh here and there as much as he does with the dramatic scenes. Murphy steers with subtly of the brutality of being taking advantage of shortly after the death of his father.

Inception is much of a stimulation on the narrative side as it is on the technical side. The cinematography is gorgeous. The lingering sets will impress you. Heck, even the costumes match the characters well, some are even beautiful for being a contemporary piece, Mal's costumes in particular. The special effects may seem a cross with The Matrix and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, but Inception stands as it's own in originality.

With that being said, Christopher Nolan does something here some directors never get close to in their entire career, delivers a near-perfect film. Inception is more than a summer blockbuster and science fiction/ action film the trailers may imply. It's a must see; a solid 10.

Little Miss Sunshine (2006)

I don't think anyone can watch Little Miss Sunshine and think their family can be dysfunctional. Little Miss Sunshine is a sweet marvel. It's written very realistically when it comes to family, Although, the script isn't not a perfect script. Some things feel too forced and Sundace film festival-ish. Very good, funny script, but I think it tries too hard at times. Even with some cheesy plot points in the script, the direction makes it realistic (in the present). The acting is terrific from the entire ensemble. Steve Carrell steals the show here. He's used to the obnoxious comedy we see on The Office, but he dials down here and turns in a fantastic performance that should have been nominated at the Oscars instead of Arkin. Arkin does a fine job, but I feel like he is victim to a one-note role. Toni Collette and Greg Kinnear are also quite good here as well. Overall, it's a nice little comedy that leaves some good after-thought; A Solid 8.

Margot at the Wedding (2007)

Margot at the Wedding stars one of the greatest living actresses, Nicole Kidman in a stellar turn in this nice, small film.

The story is simple. Easy to follow. The mix of comedy and drama is well executed here. The laughs are fast, but effective. There's also a great deal of family drama here. The direction is a hit or miss kind of deal. The director's style is light. It never is obnoxious in your face, it's very subtle. This may bore many fans of Kidman or Jack Black compared to some of their other films. It worked on me, and I thought it worked for most of the time. But, there are some moments where you're sitting there, wondering how can character's be so cruel. Almost as if they are overwritten at times. It's very dark material, but works nine out of ten times.

Kidman drives the film in a very restrained, sarcastic performance. It's great. She's wonderful. One of her best post-Oscar performances for sure. Margot on the page was probably a very unlikeable character, but Kidman's touch on things almost makes you have sympathy for her. Jennifer Jason Leigh plays her sister, in a very fine, rich, layered performance. Jack Black tones down the obnoxious comedy here for the most part and works well with the other actors. The child actors are very good here as well, especially the actor who plays Margot's son, Zane Pais. He goes head to head with Kidman a few times and comes out on the other end smiling.

Margot at the Wedding is a dark tale of a somewhat-broken family. It's not very long, which is good for me. I dislike films that must go on and on. The story and characters feel authentic, it's written with razor-sharp comedy and contains a excellent performance from Nicole Kidman; 8.

New Nightmare (1994)

Wes Craven is a master of the suspense craft from the original Nightmare on Elm Street, to the greatest horror/thriller series every created, The Scream Trilogy, to popcorn thrillers like Red Eye.

He knows what he's doing, but what was he doing here? He wrote, directed, and acted in New Nightmare and he only nailed one of those three. The story is unclear in its switches from dreams to reality all the time and never stops and explains to us, why? On top of that, it's not scary. The entire first half of this movie it was laughably bad. I mean, what Heather is going through makes absolutely zero sense. It works in Scream 3, because Sidney actually went through the events and has to relive them with the Stab films. Here she acted in the actual films, so why should it haunt her.

The second half improves, but is still mediorce at best. It's hardly scary, at all. You don't care about the characters. The acting is horrible except for Wes Craven's awesome cameo and some Englund scenes. He slips back into the role of Freddy that should've stayed with the original film back in '82. Langenkamp is so bad, she made me laugh out loud. Without Wes's cameo, none of the characters would've been well-done.

This is so disappointing because I love the man so much, but, I'm sorry Wes. Your film is un-salvageable; 3.5 - 4.

Nixon (1994)

Nixon is a powerful, engaging film about the infamous, Richard Nixon. It relies on the performances of Tony Hopkins and Joan Allen, two of the greatest actors living, and they succeed. The directing style is brilliant, although has some rough patches that could've been smoothed over.

Anthony Hopkins approach to the role should be an example for every actor starring in a biopic. He doesn't try to impersonate Nixon. He represents Richard Nixon, which makes it a more convincing performance. You completely forget you're watching a film, instead a docudrama because Sir Anthony Hopkins is *that* good. Joan Allen should've been locked for the acting trophy for Best Supporting Actress 30 minutes into the first screening of the film in '95. One of the earlier scenes between she and her husband is uncanny. She brings to life the bitterness Pat Nixon went through.

Though, the acting would seem like the highlight of this powerful biopic, it's the editing, in my opinion. They piece together Richard Nixon's entire life, literally his entire life. And they shot frame by frame almost everything here, so the majority of the responsibility belonged to the editor, who brought authenticity to every single moment here. There are some problems though. First, some of the political drama is hard to follow unless you know what you're talking about. Especially to mainstream audiences, it would be confusing. Second, the only film I condone for being 3 hours long is Titanic. There is no reason why this, or any film needs to strain audiences for three hours. You feel like you're watching a miniseries. Just say what you want to say and be done with it.

That being said, Oliver Stone hits more than he misses, a lot more. It's near perfection; 9.

Notting Hill (1999)

Julia Roberts is the queen of Romantic Comedies. Her iconic role in Pretty Woman should give her the title alone, but she's been in tons, some good while others weren't. However, she chose a good one in Notting Hill.

Notting Hill is a sweet, good-natured romantic comedy that succeeds on every level it is trying to be. The story is well-written and more original then it may come off from the trailers. This is a film about movie stars that actually have meaningful conversations about being movie stars. Hugh Grant is also dashing in the leading man role. Roberts actually gives best "Rom-Com" performance here, aside from the Oscar-Nominated, Pretty Woman. She restrains herself and isn't loud or obnoxious, just true to the character. This is some of her most underrated work.

With beautiful shots of London and a sweeping romance, Notting Hill is an example for future romantic comedies. I only had one problem: there is a huge gap in the middle where Roberts is off in America. I understood it was important to the story, but it didn't have to last 20 minutes. This is her story as much as it Grant's, but the writers put her on the back-burner.

While the ending is predictable, it's sweet and makes you smile. Wonderful film; 8.5

Pleasantville (1998)

Pleasantville is one of the most original movies I've ever seen. It's entertaining from beginning to end and charms the life out of you. The script....I don't know where to begin with the script. It's so imaginative and heart-warming; it's just wonderful. Its containment of sexual curiosity and racial discrimination is absolutely excellent. They are two of the biggest themes here and they are done beautifully. The script is just magical. The visuals are stunning to say the least, the evolvement from color to black and white is masterful. The acting is terrific. MaGuire, Witherspoon, and Allen in particular deliver great performances. Overall, you must witness this film and everyone should be inspired by the amount of creativity piled here; 10.

Psycho (1960)

Hitchcock has stunned me from head to toe with Psycho. It's a rich, layered, terrifying film that will still sting the morning after you see it. You'll never want to stay in a hotel or get s shower ever again!

The writing is brilliant. You kind of see where it's going but then I]it pulls the rug out from under you, 40 minutes in. After that, you think you can't be fooled like that again, but it happens with the climax.

The story is so well-written, it alone is enough to pull you in. But it's Hitchcock's direction that makes you apart of the story. You travel a never-ending thrill-ride with him and he keeps you on the edge of you seat wondering 'what's going to happen next?' His direction is perfection. Flawless, filled with fire and suspicion.

Anthony Perkins is haunting in one of the best performances in the history of the cinema. He plays Norman Bates anxiously, but charming. He adds quirks to him and brings him to life. Janet Leigh is very deserving of her Oscar nomination and Golden Globe statue. It's an arguably a leading role. She's the first 45 minutes straight. I'm curious, how could the Academy take Kate Winslet out of her campaigned category to prove a point, but keep Leigh in supporting with the same screen time and role importance? Either way, it's a wonderful performance that should've picked up the statue.

Psycho really is one of the most frightening films of all-time. It's Hitchcock's masterpiece with magnificent performances; 10.

Ratatouille (2007)

Going into a Pixar film, you know you're going to be wow-ed as the credits roll. I know this to be true, but I am always surprised by it. They knocked me off my feet with Ratatouille. The script is funny and original. The direction is right on. The editing keeps it at a fast-pace. The sound is amazing. It's beautifully drawn. It's near perfection. But, because it's an "animated" film, it wasn't voted in for Best Picture of the Year at the Oscars, which it deserved. My only tiny problem is that maybe it was just 15 minutes too long? Other than that it's wonderful. There is also an interesting little section in the film, about film critics that Pixar nailed with the writing. As soon as you can embrace Ratatouille; 9.5

Salt (2010)

I don't consider myself a fan of Jolie's action flicks, but I surprisingly liked it. It's getting mixed reviews. There are some who are proclaiming it as one of the best action flicks of the year (Roger Ebert's 4 Star Review) and others who are saying it's just another mind-less action flick.

The first 45 minutes are outstanding. They were written, acted, and directed on spot, in my opinion. There was mystery, action, thrills and chills. The second half gets more into the story, usually that would be a good thing. Here, it's not. It's writing moves way too fast, becomes preposterous, confusing and just downright sloppy at times. However the director does the best that he can and salvages some of the ridiculousness that comes with the second 45 minutes, with the help of a solid, consistent performance from Angelina Jolie.

The cinematography, sets, visuals, sound all bring to the table to come out with a fine action thriller. If the script would've continued to develop it's characters and story I'd probably be giving it a higher score, but because of the second half I can't give it a glowing recommendation. Still, the entire film keeps you entertained from credits to credits; 7.

Sunshine Cleaning (2009)

Sunshine Cleaning is one of the best films of 2009. The script gives the audience a new idea that hasn't been explored much in films before. Either you like it or you don't. Though there is some originality to it, there are some problems with the script. Like "Little Miss Sunshine" in many ways, but it isn't as clichéd as that. It's premise may be a little generic, but that's easily forgettable unless you're picky. The director offers a perfect, gentle touch to the material. Through it all, Amy Adams delivers a wonderful performance in the lead role. So natural and so beautiful; just sublime. Emily Blunt gets a few one-liners herself and she's also fantastic here. Alan Arkin plays almost the exact same role he played in Little Miss Sunshine, but there's something about him here that makes him better than in LMS. The entire cast is fantastic. Overall, a semi-original dramedy that was very overlooked last year with a excellent performance from Amy Adams; 8.5

The Bourne Trilogy

The Bourne Identity is a neat thriller, that isn't always 100% realistic, but it's well-made with an interesting storyline and a underrated performance from Matt Damon. The story begins with Damon's character in the water with two bullet holes in his back. How did he get in the ocean? Who shot him? Why was he shot? Who is he? It asks many questions and the mystery of the storyline keeps you invested in what's going on on screen. You really get to the roots of the Jason Bourne character here, which is the whole point of the "Identity" part of the title. You get down in his skin and he learns who he is as you do. It's a terrific action-thriller; 8.5 – 9




The Bourne Supremacy in a few words blew me away. It's absolutely magnificent. I was worried because the first is so strong that the sequel may be disappointing. Not in any sense of the word. It's better than the first with a thick storyline, more suspense, new characters, and great action sequences. I knew the fate of one of the main characters (from Identity) before I saw this, and I didn't expect to see it until at least the third act. It happens in the first 20 minutes, which surprised me. That was the first sign that this was going to be a great, different film.

Matt Damon delivers another solid effort as Jason Bourne. He's so nonchalant in the role fits it to a tee. Joan Allen makes her first appearance in the Bourne franchise here as Pamela Landy. She's fierce, driven, and delivers a kick-arse performance. She's not given much to work with, but she overcomes that and stands smiling in the end.

Supremacy is a near-perfect action-thriller film. It's smart, especially for it's genre. There's many twists and turns, and great plot points with performances that deserve more than what they get. I only have one small complaint: there is an action sequence that lasts way to long and drags a bit. It's near the 90 minute mark and it's duration is around 10-15 minutes. It's well choreographed, but could've been cut in the editing room. Other than that, there's not much more you could ask for, and the last scene between Allen and Damon is nothing short of phenomenal; 9.5




The Bourne Ultimatum is a fast, smart, rich, fun, and sometimes confusing conclusion to one of the best film trilogies ever made. Matt Damon is back in the title role as Bourne. His performance in all three of these films is Oscar-nomination worthy, but never gets the attention it deserves because it's an "action role". Let us hope the Academy will start to see things differently this year with Leonardo DiCaprio Inception role. This would be snub number 3 for Damon.

Ultimatum won the Oscar for Editing in 2007, which may have raised some eyebrows because the Editing trophy usually goes hand in hand with the Best Picture trophy. But it is so deserved here. The tension is so high here with suspense; you're biting your nails practically every minute. There are more action sequences here then the other two films, by far, and in he wrong hands could've been overkill, but with the editor keeping it tantalizingly alive it works and creates the atmosphere for the film.

Joan Allen reprises her role as Pamela Landy. For all you Pam-fans out there, she doesn't get as much screen time as she did in the second, but when she's on screen Allen works with the material. She hits all the right notes, Joan Allen is just one of the greatest actors in America.

Though, Ultimatum is inferior to Supremacy, it's still very close to the excellence. My main problem here was it was a more intricate storyline than the other two films. It's not hard to follow, but if you don't pay attention in that first half-hour, you'll be lost. I think the narrative could've been handled more properly. Other than that….what's not to love? 9.5