God I Love You.

Found a cool article at Hollywood Elsewhere on 'Benjamin Button'. My most anticipated of the year. The film that I think will take top honors at the 2008 Academy Awards. I'm uber-excited.

Here's the brilliant trailer. Whoa.

'W.' Trailer

Here it is...



Looks atrocious.

The cinematography looks stunning, though, if I must say.

Tim Burton's Alice In Wonderland, Eh?

I'm a Tim Burton fan. I'll happily admit it. I loved Edward Scissorhands. I loved Ed Wood. Hell, the other day, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was playing on ABC Family and I couldn't look away. So, inevitably, I can't wait for Alice In Wonderland. What book has more hey-look-at-me weirdness? That's a classic? What director has more of a hey-look-I'm behind-the-camera style more so than Tim Burton?

It should be an extravaganza like Burton's last three, kind of, epics (Sweeney had all the works; Big Fish was kind of long and stuff and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory had music and costumes and yummy set designs). This will be perfect for him. A dark, detailed story with weird-o characters. He'll probably, somewhere, throw in Deep Roy in every frickin' scene. That's sort of freaky isn't it? (But I still loved it in Charlie).

He's going to have Mia Wasikowska,who the Rural Juror thinks is a future star. Maybe he can shot her up to stardom. Or maybe not.

I can't wait. I'm sorry, but it pains me I have to wait two years. It's going to be awesome. For me, at least. I'm not too cool for school. Burton, a few years ago, was probably the first director I really admired. Do I admire him as much now? Not quite. But his movies are fun and stylish..so, what the hay, let's rank them!

The top five productions...

5. Planet of the Apes..crucify me, I liked it.



4. Edward Scissorhands



3. Ed Wood



2. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory



1. Big Fish



I may get some crap for this...

Song of the Week (ed. 5)

My Morning Jacket's Into The Woods. Great song...

Monday Three-Peat: Rope, Pulp Fiction, Definitely Maybe

I actually saw all of these films in one day, as well as my second viewing of The Dark Knight. Busy, busy. Or maybe the opposite. It's been a rainy week. That'll be my excuse.

Rope **1/2
Got another Hitchcock under my belt (why am I laughing at that line?). Yet unlike Vertigo, I wasn't a huge fan of Rope. It was a good movie, and towards the end, during the interrogation, it got quite suspenseful. But the first hour of the movie was little, subtle conversation, that got a little dull. And the film is only 80 minutes long. The characters were interesting, and in their own way, led the story along. It was simple, plus effective (a rarity nowadays). It all takes place in one room the whole time, a plush apartment in the city. The basic gist is that two..idiots..decide to kill an "inferior" friend, just for the thrill of it. They hid the body in a trunk in which they have guests dine off of during a party later that day. It's a really cool plot, but not enough happened to make it really interesting, like it should have been. Still, recommended.



Definitely, Maybe ***
I enjoyed this movie, quite a bit. It was light (just what I happened to be in the mood for the night I saw it) and quite enteraining. The performances are all pretty good by the long cast, except..eh, Reynolds. He's kind of..annoying? And, this was a little disturbing, Abigail Breslin was annoying as hell during the beginning. She nearly redeems herself though, in a touching ending. Basically, Reynolds is telling his screen daughter (Breslin) about How He Met Her Mother. It basically chronicles his love-life over a decade. Cliched? Uhuh. Predictable? Yeah. Fun and entertaining? That too. It's a good movie that holds your attention and doesn't stray. If you're a rom-com fan, or if you like a good popcorn flick with romantic undertones (me..), then pick this up from the video store.



Pulp Fiction ****
I need to watch this again. Soon. I kind of loved this movie. I love it because it's structure. It's kind of random, very simple, and tied together impressively. Like, I was admiring Quentin Tarantino's talent throughout this film, because this is the first I have seen by him. The screenplay: unconventional and "cool". Direction: awesome (can't think of a better word, okay? It fits). Travolta, Jackson and especially Uma, are all great in this. I loved Uma Thurman in this. Plays a weird-o really well. Samuel L. Jackson is at times thoughtful, other times violent and hilarious. It's funny. It's bloody. It's insanely well done and thought-out. Right up my alley.

"Red Rum!"

It's amazing to me that Danny Lloyd has not a single credit to his name since his unforgettable turn as Danny Torrance in "The Shining". When filming the role, Danny was only a little older than five years old. When I was five I was...watching Sesame Street or eating sand in the playground. Danny was playing a chilling, possessed little boy opposite one of the great actors of all time, and my favorite actor, Jack Nicholson. He was under the direction of Stanley Kubrick, a man many think is the greatest director to walk the Earth.

Danny played the role with such sophistication. I mean, could a five year-old even understand the plot, the meaning, the significance that film carries? It must have been traumatic, really. A role far beyond his years. But it worked. It worked oh, so well. While watching The Shining (between underpants changes), my friend, who was watching the film with me, said that Danny gave one of the best performances he had ever seen. Stretch? Not totally.

He had the perfect blend of childish innocence and disturbing loss of mind. Freaky. One scene, he was hearing Jack and Wendy talking about him (through the Shine; see the movie) and he had this tortured expression. So sad and disappointed in himself for being so screwed up. He sat on the foot of his bed, looking into the camera, his lip quivering in sorrow. Then in, practically, the next scene, he was running around the bedroom screaming in that robotic, faraway voice, "Red Rum! Red Rum!", smearing the word on the walls with lipstick, driving poor Shelley Duvall to madness.

The voice. Whoa. The voice he would give to Tony, the imaginary character that lives in his mouth, was startling. When he was possessed. Boy, that voice stayed in your head for awhile. Even though it's been nearly months since I saw the film, I can remember that voice meticulously. You know what that is? That is the definition of unforgettable. Literally.

And it's that simple. Danny Lloyd is unforgettable in the way he plays a role so beyond his years, it's scary.

This essay is for my buddy Michael's Rug Rats Blog-A-Thon, which I think is a great idea. See Michael's fun blog...
here.

So I Saw 'The Dark Knight' Again...

Um...still awesome. What did you think?

Picked Up Four New CDs

Haven't listened to any of them extensively, except, I guess, Back To Black, which is brilliant. I should be getting another DeVotchka CD soon, as well. Wish me luck...

Belle and Sebastian's Dear Catastrophe Waitress



Modest Mouse's We Were Dead Before the Ship Even Sank



DeVotchKa's A Mad and Faithful Telling



Amy Winehouse's Back To Black

Classic Reviews - Apes and WWll Vets

So you know that little classic list I posted
a little while ago? Well, I've gotten to see two films off of it so far. One of then may just crack my top 20 all-time.

Here we go...

Planet of the Apes ***1/2

I actually am sort of a fan of the 2001 Tim Burton version. I mean, as a little kiddie, I thought it was really cool, but on a viewing two years ago, I realized it wasn't that great. So then I thought I'd watch the "real thing" and I must say, it was miles better. It's such a cool, yet sort of simple, yet you have to think about it a little, plot. Unfortunately, this is my first Heston film, but I thought he played this role pretty darn well. His life sucked. Every time an ape would come on the screen, I'd get this weird excitement. They look disgusting, really. Some have like wacko-Jacko no-nose syndrome, but others are just like, all hair, like Cousin Itt. Anyway, on a serious note, this is a surprisingly smart, purely fun film that's a staple for any sci-fi extraordinaire.



The Best Years of Our Lives ****

I didn't expect to love this film as much as I did. Three hours of war vets, bitching about how civilian life sucks. Well, the film really isn't like that (at all), but it's an extremely simple plot that stays entertaining the whole way. Two things stick out to me, and they both contribute to an incredible aspect of this film. One is the acting. Simple. All the, maybe say six, starring characters are so good and realistic. Then the screenplay. Holy crap. Never, have I watched a screenplay, on screen, that portrays such amazing character action. Little meticulous actions shape the characters so well and tap into their personalities that they are very multi-dimensional. Both of those aspects? Thye contribute into making ridiculously good characters that you get to know. It's one of those films, kind of like Forrest Gump, It's A Wonderful Life, and, recently, There Will Be Blood (those just come to mind..) that by the end you just think "Boy, we've come a long way in this film". With the characters, story, relationships, all of it. A truly amazing film.



So I'm liking the classics, so far. A lot. I'll be seeing The Apartment and Sleuth pretty soon, as well. Yay...

Song of the Week (ed. 4)

Can't get this song outta' my head...

How It Ends by Devotchka

Batman 3 Villain: Who Shall It Be?

Yeah, it's a tad early for all this, considering the second movie came out four days ago, but I've been haering this question quite a bit. You know I like to be up on all the hip topics so...what villain should it be?

I'm not a big Batman dude. Never read a comic book and Batman Begins was the first dose of Batman I got. So I'm not any expert on Batman lore, but I've done some research and I'll try my best.

Anarky, Riddler, or Hugo Strange

I can only narrow it down to three.

Anarky- "The essence of anarchy is surprise". Basically Anarky is a young, non-superpower'd(?) who lacks much skill and experience yet has his ingenuity that keeps him alive. He could be kind of a crazy, idiotic kid that poses as a threat. What makes him menacing is that he hasn't a clue what he's doing. He's realistic and scary, so...brownie points.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarky

Riddler- A classic villain, probably the most documented of the ones I'll name. He's obsessed with puzzles and clues, and all that stuff. The Nolans could think up some creepy lines and situations for a character of that type. His trademark is green. He's aparently on Nolan's shortlist and he's a pretty iconic character, thus putting more bottoms in the seats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riddler

Hugo Strange- Strange is an insane psychologist who lusts for Batman's fame and appeal. How about they work into the plot that Strange wants to take over Batman's identity? Fun, huh? He also is "a chemical genius who can turn people into lumbering, brutal giants". Interesting, yet I'd leave that bit out of the film. Little weird.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Strange

Bottom Line: Be maniacal, but don't be the Joker. Also, step outta' the box.

Who do you think should be in the film? Who should act in the roles? "McAvoy, McAvoy and, uh, McAvoy?"

'The Dark Knight' Review

The Dark Knight ****



I saw the Batman. And I was worried. A firm 9.5 on IMDb. Big-name critics like Roger Ebert bestowing four-star reviews. The box office insanity. I had my doubts it would live up to the hype. I mean, I yawned my way through the bland Batman Begins and overall, I'm not a huge Nolan fan at all. I wanted to like it. I wanted to avoid being an outsider, the loon with a pole up his buttocks that thinks a "masterpiece" is dull. But, oh no. Not so, me friends. I'll be surprised if 152 minutes flies by in 2008 like it did while I watched this film.

Entertaining, creepy, incredibly acted (and that is %100 true; ensemble award anyone?) and hey, very well directed. What more could you want? The story just keeps chugging along, never stopping for a breath. Every line of dialogue, every action, all the parts, had a purpose and they pushed the story forward.

Luckily -- this is good for dumb people like me -- the story is relatively simple. Not extremely cut-and-dry, but for the most part it revolves around Batman joining forces with Commissioner Gordon and the new DA Harvey Dent to take down the, no words describe him better, tortured and insane Joker. The tactics of the Joker are simple: no scheming, no planning, just destroy. The Joker is not just a brilliant villain, but a brilliant character. Every time he was on screen I would get excited because when he steps in frame something is going to happen. Whether he urges Batman to hit him with a motorcycle ("HIT ME!") or he's chatting with Two-Face in a nurse's get-up (personally, my favorite scene; hilarious and nightmarish)



Kudos to the writers (the Nolans). They weren't afraid. As good as it was that they didn't just hand the movie to the Joker character and let it revolve around him and not the real story at hand, they also didn't pull many punches. They let the Joker, or maybe Ledger, just tear it up, go completely WACKO. He freaks you out consistently. Every scene he's saying something bizarr-o, doing something only a freak would do. And with that, Ledger and his Joker stole the damn show.

So to make it simple, it's Batman and a litte help from his friends that try to take down the man tearing Gotham City apart. Now there is a whole finance scheme with the mob that really is mainly in the first hour of the film. That's a big subplot, but goes unnoticed as the film draws to a close. That's no trajedy, whatsoever. That's not the fun part of the movie.

As stated earlier, the performances are truly great (none quite in the same league as Ledger's but eh..). I like Bale as Batman. Matter of fact, I dig the Bale Batman. And not all do. I mean, he may come across a little bland in some ways. But he's cool, rich and pissed off. Isn't that Batman, basically? Then there's the Caped Crusader's partners in crime, Oldman and Eckhart. And I declare: after Ledger, Oldman gives the second best performance in the film. You just like him, I don't know. It's sort of a subtle performance, yet he does a good job pulling off a multi-dimensional character that has quite a crucial role in this film. Eckhart, I believe, was perfectly cast. He's sort of a politician, man of power, type thing, so leading man looks were needed. He also, simply, did well. He played a brave, gutsy character with flash, and it all worked out nicely. But, he's not that good in the last, say, hour of the film. His character, as you may know, let's just say changes, and it doesn't quite work. I don't buy him as the bad guy.



The boring ones: Gyllenhaal. Fun..? I don't know, I mean, she's a very minor upgrade from Holmes who I didn't think was that bad in Batman Begins. Maggie's fine, but the character doesn't have tons to work with. Caine and Freeman (they count as one), were both effortlessly good, yet I prefer Caine any day of the week.

Then there's Ledger. Don't think all of his hype is just hyperbole. He's simply amazing. Every mannerism, line, expression is so consistent. He really is the Joker. I saw a thread on IMDb (yes, I read the boards..just a lurker) that was the toss-up of Daniel Day-Lewis in There Will Be Blood versus Ledger as the Joker. I laughed. DDL was TWBB (omg lol). But now it isn't a laughing matter. There is a serious argument for both. At the end of the day? Probably Daniel. Ledger had a much more exhibiting performance. Flashier. Day-Lewis's performance was mainly that he was the plot, and he was pretty freaking amazing. It's close (and maybe I'll have to post about it). I didn't want to make the whole review about Ledger, because I'm reviewing a film not a performance, but Ledger was really great; show-stealing. I don't want to wonder what he could have been. He played a marvelous Joker and that's that. It's deeply sad, but I'll always remember Ledger fondly with this legendary performance.

Am I getting ahead of myself when I say that Nolan should be considered for a Best Director nom? He succeeded in making, basically a crime drama with Batman. And it worked. As realistic as it was, the crazy gadgets, and kind of the fantastic Joker character came across normal, and you never kind of laughed at the ridiculousness of it all. It's been advertised to us as a Batman flick. It is. But this film is more than that. I'll say, three scenes stick out in my mind that are true ethical dilemmas. And in a way, that adds to the suspense of this film. Smart suspense.

Also, Nolan created a great Joker (as if I haven't said that already). The character is perfect, maybe it's only flaw being he's too fun to watch at times.

So, yeah, it lives up to the hype. Best film ever? Eh, not a shot. Really good film, though? Sure.

My Most Anticipated of the Second Half Of '08

I still am yet to see Dark Knight (I'll probaqbly see it in about 6 hours), so I'll include that on the list. Okay? Here we go...

1. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
2. The Dark Knight
3. Milk
4. Burn After Reading
5. Australia
6. Revolutionary Road
7. W.
8. House of Lies (seen the trailer yet? It pumped me up...)
9. Eagle Eye
10. Star Wars: The Clone Wars

Honorable Mentions: Doubt, Frost/Nixon, Quantum of Solace, Religulous, Miracle At St. Anna

So, what this shows, is that I anticipate quite a few films (all Oscar bait and films that have good trailers).

Watchmen Trailer

Heh.

Seeing 'Dark Knight' On Monday

..And it may be impossible for it to live up to the hype.

On IMDb, apparently it's the greatest film ever made so...

'Half-Blood Prince' Stills

Wait..but I don't even care about Harry Potter..But I'll still do it. Whatever.

I's Starting To's Get Da Feelin'...

The Dark Knight...



And...



The Best Picture nomination...

Have a date...

Maybe...

Song of the Week (ed. 3)

TV On The Radio - Wolf Like Me

Psychotically good performance of Letterman...

Reelviews Gushes Over 'The Dark Knight'

Berardinelli absolutely raves about the film in his four-star review, claiming it to be the best superhero film ever (is that title that hard to gain?) and possibly the best sequel ever.

The Classic List

I need to see more Hitchcock and Wilder and Bergman and the list keeps on a goin'. So here are a few classics (as in, relatively old, by an iconic director, iconic cast, etc.), I want to see:

Harold and Maude (old enough?)
La Dolce Vita
Planet of the Apes
A Streetcar Named Desire
Dial M For Murder
Rosemary's Baby
Chinatown
Patton
Harvey
Shadow of a Doubt
8 1/2
Dr. Strangelove
The Best Years of Our Lives
Notorious
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Strangers on a Train
Barry Lyndon
Rashomon
The Treasure of the Sierra Madre
North By Northwest
Sunset Blvd.
Seven Samurai
THe Fortune Cookie
The Lost Weekend
Marnie
Rebecca
Sleuth
The Best Years of Our Lives

That's all I'll do for now. I hope to get to most of them. Any recommendations (accessible classics), just comment.

Modern Guilt by Beck - An Album Review

Modern Guilt
Beck



Overview:

Two years ago, today (not from today, but it sounds better) I fell in love with Beck. I got Midnite Vultures and its hilarity and quirkiness drew me in. I them sort of got into Odelay and Guero. Then, in 2006, The Information came along. It's a good album, yet packed too much with pointless, boring songs, suffocating the gems (like Cellphone's Dead or Soldier Jane). So The Information was a disappointment. Through all those, and Sea Change, and those infectiously ridiculous remixes, I would always come back to Midnite Vultures. Ah.

Fast forward to now, and I can safely say I haven't listened to Beck in quite some time. I've gotten immersed in Arcade Fire (..and it's oh so hot! See that play on words? See it?) and then I fell in love with Broken Social Scene. Then TV On The Radio. And some many others along the way. After Beck, music, in my life, has blossomed into something very important. It all started with Beck. You could say he's been ridiculously important and influential in terms of my musical taste. So, here it comes, Modern Guilt, the next thing to get me back into Beck.

And it has.

Not dramatically. But for me, inevitably, Beck is relevent and that's comforting. It's a very good album, I've come to see after some time to play around with it (as in listen to it..). The first listen: not good. Wasn't very impressed. I had it on as background music as I sifted through some blogs I religiously check. That's how I know a good song. It's not, like, this big method, but if I'm occupied with something else, and the music in the background distracts me, takes me away from what I'm doing, I know the songs are unusually good. The unusual goodness wasn't coming with Modern Guilt.

I didn't here the funky Beck beats. It was all moody lyrics that didn't do much for me. I listened through it again the next day. A tad better. I heard some stuff I liked, but nothing worth loving.

Then, subconciously, I would hear the beats to the songs in my head. I couldn't quite place them, but they kept coming up and then I realized: Beck. I was at the beach, and I listened to the album and it was great. Not as involved, weird-o sounds like his older work, but more vocally focused songs. They had nice beats, and Beck vocals shined, surprisingly. It's definitely a good album. Better than I expected after that first listen.

Song by Song:

Orphans- B+, A good introduction to the album

Gamma Ray- A-, Simple, fun lyrics and some cool synth in the background

Chemtrails- A, The best song on the album, plain and simple; Beck's vocals shine

Modern Guilt- B+, A light song in terms of sound, deep in terms of meaning

Youthless- B, Nice guitar riffs, but nothing much more

Walls- A-, A steady, addictive drum fill in the background makes this song

Replica- B-, Nothing much; soft and dull, in blunt terms

Soul of a Man- B, The rock n' rolliest song on the album (which is a good thing)

Profanity Prayers- C+, Forgettable and pointless

Volcano- B+, A good, heartfelt finale to a good album

Listen to:

Chemtrails



Gamma Ray



Walls



A-

Weekend Watches - The Shining, Broadcast News, Rushmore

Broadcast News ***1/2



As I stated earlier in my James Brooks post a few days ago, I always like Brooks's films. Broadcast News is no different. All well-written characters that are brought to life perfectly with good to great acting. It's a simple, uninvolved story about a news producer, anchorman, and reporter and their lives. Doesn't sound terribly exciting, does it? But it works and it's entertaining as hell.

Rushmore **



I was a tad depressed through watching this movie, because I wanted to like it and I expected to like it. I didn't like it. Like, I mean, it's Wes freakin' Anderson so automatically it's going to be having a very good screenplay and soundtrack and be terribly picturesque. But the story wasn't structured enough, and I ended up not particularly caring about Max Fischer (played perfectly by Jason Schwartzman; go him). The story never really took off, and then POOF! it was over. Might need a re-watch, because this viewing came off the heels of my mind being blown by this film...

The Shining ****



The Horror/Thriller/Suspense family is slowly becoming my favorite genre; the group more aptly known as scary movies. I love them, and this is easily my favorite. So creepy. So weird. So frightening. So messed up. (In the Joker voice) Like me! Such a good movie and this solidifies Jack Nicholson as my favorite actor. Shelley Duvall was annoying so it was fun to watch her son become possessed and her husband plummet into insanity. And also, the ending. I won't say to much about it, but that it had a lot of meaning, and I always like that. It was definately up there in WTF Film Moments. I'm excited I actually enjoyed the genius of Kubrick after fighting to stay awake during 2001.

So two very good movies (one great, really) and a film that disappointed big-time. Still, a good weekend for movies. I urge you to check out each film and mull your thoughts about each.

Ranking James L. Brooks Movies

If you're astute and saw the sidebar, it reads that I finally got around to seeing Broadcast News. Really good film; one of those that kind of just takes you away and puts you in the characters' lives. Anyway, this marks the fourth directorial effort I have seen from Brooks and I must say, I've enjoyed each. All great characters and simple stories inhabit his films. Ranking them, it goes as follows...

1. As Good As It Gets (****)



2. Terms of Endearment (***1/2)



3. Broadcast News (***1/2)



4. Spanglish (***1/2)



By looking at the ratings, it's clear that I thoroughly enjoy each. Very good director, and possibly an even better screenwriter.

Bait Spotlight #16 - House of Lies

House of Lies

Directed by Ridley Scott
Screenplay by William Monahan
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Russell Crowe and Carice Van Houten

A former journalist injured in the Iraq war is hired by the CIA to track down an Al Qaeda leader in Jordan. Based on the novel "Body of Lies" by David Ignatius.



Why It Will Win: The Ridley-Crowe collaboration has worked extremely well in the past with Gladiator and American Gangster. Also leading the cast is Leo, who is going to have an off-the-hook year. Good director, cast, and screenwriter (Monahan won and Oscar for The Departed). So that's all good, and it's a hard-hitting drama the Academy would like, yet for whatever reason, I still have my doubts.

Why It Will Not Win: I'm a little down on Ridley lately. Not since Black Hawk Down, do I believe, he's had a really good film. Even Black Hawk Down isn't near his earlier films. Russell Crowe also hasn't been nominated in seven years. I mean, maybe now he's bound to win, but who knows? Then, it's about the Iraq war. Films keep trying to go there, but never come out pretty. Ask Gavin Hood. Now, this looks to be a more capable film than Renditionm, though. Also...I just don't feel it. The plot bores me, even the cast bores me. Just doesn't jump out at me.

Nominations:
Best Film Editing

The Bottom Line: A good film that can't stand up to the stiff competition... one nom.

Bait Spotlight #15 - The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Written by Jonathan and Christopher Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Michael Caine and Maggie Gyllenhaal

Batman and James Gordon join forces with Gotham's new District Attorney, Harvey Dent, to take on a psychotic bank robber known as The Joker, whilst other forces plot against them, and Joker's crimes grow more and more deadly.



Why It Will Win: Really look at the cast. Look it over good. It's stacked. Bale, Ledger, Caine, Oldman, Maggie, Freeman, Eckhart. Really good cast. The word on the street is that Ledger shines in his role as the Joker. At first, I didn't believe he could be nominated. Now it looks likely. Also, Nolan, despite his films not being very Oscar baity, he has still managed a screenwriting nod, and his films aren't foreign to cinematography nods, either. Maybe the Academy would like to nominate a blockbuster for Best Picture. It feels like that hasn't happened in awhile. Yet, maybe that could work against it.

Why It Will Not Win: It's a superhero movie; that not being the Academy's cup of tea. Also, another acting nod besides Ledger seems unlikely (honestly, I though Bale was like a robot in Batman Begins; Caine not much better). Also, let's be blunt, will it be good enough? I mean, maybe teen boys like it, but not all the early reviews have been glowing. Best Picture? Eh..no.

Nominations:
Best Actor in a Supporting Role (Heath Ledger)
Best Makeup
Best Cinematography

The Bottom Line: I CAN'T WAIT FOR JULY 18.

Bait Spotlight #14 - WALL-E

WALL-E
Written and Directed by Andrew Stanton
Featuring the voices of Ben Burtt, John Ratzenberger and Elissa Knight

In the distant future, a small waste collecting robot that slowly begins to become sentient inadvertently embarks on a space journey that will ultimately decide the fate of mankind.



Why It Will Win: Everyone loves it. Critics, kids, adults, bloggers, IMDb assholes..robots love this film. That's surprisingly rare. Also, maybe the Academy would like to nominate an animated film considerably. It would make this movie year interesting and have the Academy be appreciated for actually nominated the best movies, no matter the genre or type. It has a good screenplay, surprisingly great direction and overall is very well-done. You can't argue that...

Why It Will Not Win: It's obvious; it's animated. As in, not real (I guess). Not since 1991 has an animated movie been nominated for Best Picture. Also, acting nominations are really unlikely because 1) it's just voice-overs and 2) it's not that there's too much dialogue and material for the voice-actors. Obvious things hold this film back, but it will still get..

Nominations:
Best Original Screenplay (a very smart screenplay it is)
Best Music, Original Score
Best Sound Editing
Best Sound Mixing
Best Animated Feature Film

The Bottom Line: No, I'm no fun. No Best Picture or Director, but I will give it some techs and a screenplay nod. Your welcome.

Bait Spotlight #13 - Australia

Australia
Directed by Baz Luhrmann
Screenplay by Luhrmann and Stuart Beattie
Starring: Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman

Set in northern Australia before World War II, an English aristocrat who inherits a sprawling ranch reluctantly pacts with a stock-man in order to protect her new property from a takeover plot. As the pair drive 2,000 head of cattle over unforgiving landscape, they experience the bombing of Darwin, Australia, by Japanese forces firsthand.



Why It Will Win: It's got Luhrmann at the helm, along with a very good cast. Already you have a recipe for a good film that the Academy enjoys. I mean, this movie will also dominate some of the technical awards, like Cinematography, Art Direction, Costume Design. So default nominations for it's Baz-Beauty will definitely come it's way. Also, I like the story. I think it's probably a little more emotional a film than Baz has done in the past, more story-driven. Kidman will also have a lot of oppurtunities for a baity performance, based on the script. Lot of emotion with her character. Plus, you have Hugh Jackman. Maybe he'll get his first nomination.

Why It Will Not Win: I hope it has enough substance. I hope it's not just a shitload of pictures that look nice. It most likely won't be..but who knows? Also, this is one of two epics that look to be contenders. This and Benjamin Button. Could two epics be up for Best Picture? No. Well, maybe. Huh. Can Nicole Kidman get back...to Virginia Woolf form? As in, being a good actress again? Can Hugh handle this role? I mean, it isn't a very deep cast, like Moulin Rouge!...

Nominations:
Best Lead Actress (Nicole Kidman)
Best Art Direction
Best Cinematography
Best Costume Design
Best Music, Original Score

The Bottom Line: Baz, will make another hit, and Kidman will turn in a great performance..but in terms of Oscar..it won't rise above tech nominations, getting 5 overall.

Bait Spotlight #12 - Vicky Christina Barcelona

Vicky Christina Barcelona
Written and Directed by Woody Allen
Starring: Javier Bardem, Scarlett Johansson, Penelope Cruz and Rebecca Hall

Two girlfriends (Hall and Johansson) on a summer holiday in Spain become enamored with the same painter (Bardem), fully unaware that his ex-wife (Cruz), with whom he has a tempestuous relationship, is about to re-enter the picture.



Why It Will Win: It has a killer cast with Johansson..uh, fun. Penelope Cruz..uh, awesome. Bardem..uh, "CALL IT." Ah. That is a damn good cast, really. They should all prosper with Woody Allen at the helm as well. Speaking of Allen, it should have a great screenplay with him as the writer. Good Allen Screenplay = Writing nom. It's that simple. Plus, some are saying this is Allen's best work in awhile. It was loved at Cannes and on IMDb it has an 8.8...not that that really matters (but it does!). Also, it's supposed to have a show-stealing performance by the impressively improving Cruz.

Why It Will Not Win: Woody Allen's recent work hasn't garnered much more than a writing nomination and then possibly an acting nom. Nothing more. Why should this film be any different. It's kind of a silly plot, without much dramatic tension. Will it be taken seriously enough to get big nods? I doubt it. Plus, it's coming out in August, not Oscar season. Will the Academy, kind of, forget about it?

Nominations:
Best Original Screenplay
Best Actress in a Supporting Role (Penelope Cruz)

The Bottom Line: It will be among the better films of the year, but won't get a ton of Academy attention. 2 noms.

Bait Spotlight #11 - Frost/Nixon

Frost/Nixon
Directed by Ron Howard
Screenplay by Peter Morgan (based off his play)
Starring: Frank Langella, Michael Sheen

A dramatic retelling of the post-Watergate television interviews between British talk-show host David Frost and former president Richard Nixon.



Why It Will Win: It has many parallels to The Queen, a film the Academy ate up. It has the same writer. It's a biopic portraying people of power in a specific timeframe. It stars Michael Sheen. It's going to have a lot of drama as the interviews unfold, and with Langella and Sheen, who are reprising their stage roles, the performances should be great. It has biopic chops and a big-time director nowadays in good old Ron Howard. He's not foreign to directing Best Pictures. Also Ron Howard is in the midst of a streak. Every other movie he makes is actually good. The last movie he made was The Da Vinci Code..so..yeah.

Why It Will Not Win: Sometimes plays have a bit of trouble in the transport from stage to screen. Yet with a capable director, this shouldn't be too hard. Also, this year has an array of other biopics, like Milk and The Soloist. Milk made it into the big line-up just because I have a gut feeling it's going to be freaking awesome, triumphing as the biopic nom and the arthouse nom. This movie has to be grrrreat to get into the Best Picure lineup.

Nominations:
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Lead Actor (Frank Langella; a role he knows how to play)
Best Supporting(?) Actor (Michael Sheen)
Best Make-up
Best Film Editing

The Bottom Line: With performance noms, a couple techs and a writing nod, Frost/Nixon will garner a healthy 5 noms.

Whacking 'The Wackness'

I'm thinking I'm going to take out The Wackness from our Bait Spotlight Series, just because I don't think it deserves to be with the big boys.

So far the reviews for it have been good, but not, like, Juno-good or Little Miss Sunshine-good. Doesn't look like it will be the funkny indie hit of the year..too bad.

Song of The Week (ed. 2)

Chemtrails by Beck

This is off his new album, Modern Guilt. I only got a chance to listen to like four tracks, and so far this is the best (..yet it isn't even Beck great).

Still..catchy.



Maybe I'll have an album review later in the week! Fun!

Bait Spotlight #10 - Burn After Reading

Burn After Reading
Written and Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen
Starring: Brad Pitt, Frances McDormand, George Clooney, Tilda Swinton, John Malkovich and JK Simmons

A disk containing the memoirs of a CIA agent ends up in the hands of two unscrupulous gym employees who attempt to sell it.



Why It Will Win: It's reminiscent of Fargo. Just the whole crime comedy, with the Coens at the helm. It also has kind of a strange, yet great cast. It'll be interesting to see who of those big five will get nominations, if any. And again, it's the Coens, hot off the No Country Best Picture win. The Academy has officially proven they dig these two. A screenplay nom seems pretty damn likely, but can it jump to even bigger categories?

Why It Will Not Win: It may be a little too..what's the word..goofy. Now, I mean, this isn't going to be Tommy Boy, but maybe it doesn't have the drama to be taken seriously enough. That's the big reason. Plus, Crime Comedies, a very narrow genre, have very little success among the Academy. Maybe Gosford Park in '01 could fall into that category, as well as Fargo, seem to be the only recent films to get considerable nominations in that genre.

Nominations:
Best Original Screenplay
Best Supporting Actor (JK Simmons; love Simmons, journeyman actor bound to nail this role.)
Best Film Editing

The Bottom Line: Should definitely be a big player in contention, but won't get near Best Picture or two many acting nominations. 3 noms.

Bait Spotlight #9 - Happy-Go-Lucky

Happy-Go-Lucky


Written and Directed by Mike Leigh
Starring: Sally Hawkins and Alexis Zegerman

Poppy is a thirty-year old Primary School teacher in contemporary North London. She has great friends, a job she loves and a full life. The movie watches her confront the harsh realities of life and deal with them head-on, never losing her sense of humour.





Why It Will Win: In an ocean of depressing, bloody films that show us the worst in people and life, Mike Leigh serves us a warm-hearted character study of a woman that always looks on the bright side. I think everyone will be a little thankful for this film. A smart and positive film it looks to be. Also, Mike Leigh is one who's recognized by the Academy with open arms. In his filmmaking, he's garnered 5 nominations, yet lacks a win. Leigh also gets his actresses nominations as well. Imelda Staunton and Brenda Blethyn both got nominated in Leigh films. Can Hawkins do the same?

Why It Will Not Win: It may not pack enough punch in terms of plot. It's a light film about..a girl..who's happy..in London. Now, I warn you, I don't know the plot details, but it could be too simple for the Academy to give it major nominations. It's certainly not epic. Also, Hawkins maybe isn't a big enough name to be the lead in an Oscar darling film. But, hey, maybe that's a good thing. Maybe they'll like a few new faces in the realm.

Nominations:
Best Original Screenplay
Best Lead Actress (Sally Hawkins)

The Bottom Line: Though not buried in nominations, HGL will get two big nominations and will certainly be on some top-ten lists come the year's end.

Bait Spotlight #8 - Changeling

Changeling

Directed by Clint Eastwood
Screenplay by J. Michael Staczynski
Starring: Angelina Jolie, John Malcovich and Gattlin Griffith





Why It Will Win: According to Cannes, it's a really good film with a great performance courtesy of Jolie. Also, Clint Eastwood is at the helm, as director. Lately, in the past few years that is, Eastwood has gotten a bunch of his films Best Picture nods. This film looks like it could follow suit. It has a plot that sets the stage for many melodramatic scenes that I think Jolie can pull off. The direction will be there, and according to Cannes the performance will be there, and I think it's a baity plot. Can it all come together?


Why It Will Not Win: Will it be one of those films that's sort of forgotten? Comes out slightly early (October) and slowly drifts into film oblivion? Possibly. Also, it doesn't have a "wow" factor, on paper. (I'm trying my hardest not to sound like an American Idol judge). Not a jaw-dropping plot like other contenders this year (The Road, Milk, etc.) and the cast, after Jolie, isn't stacked. I'm a tad worried if it will have any momentum going into January. Also, this is unfair but, the Academy may want to throw other directors "into the pot". It's that damn Eastwood every year getting his ass nominated. But if it's that good of a film, will that matter whatsoever?


Nominations:
Best Picture
Best Director
Best Original Screenplay
Best Lead Actress
Best Costume Design


The Bottom Line: So a very respectable five nominations, even the Biggie, Best Picture. By the way, if you've been keeping track, that rounds out the Best Picture pool in this blog-series with:


Changeling
Milk
Doubt
Revolutionary Road
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Bait Spotlight #7 - Milk

Milk

Directed by Gus Van Sant
Screenplay by Dustin Lance Black
Starring: Sean Penn, Josh Brolin, Emile Hirsch and James Franco



Why It Will Win: It's a biopic with a great lead actor, Sean Penn. Penn's got great acting chops and will really be able to pull off Milk. "The Biographical Portrayal of the Year", like Capote or Ray. Yet this film will also have a very artistic element with Gus Van Sant at the helm. Van Sant hasn't had Oscar success since his Direction nod for Good Will Hunting. This is his first film in awhile that appears to have Oscar potential. BIOPIC. Also the rest of the cast looks great. Two '07 snubs, Hirsch and Brolin also star. It's got the cast, hopefully the director and the interesting subject matter to be a big player in '08. The Academy may also want to nominate a film with a gay protagonist, so they can showcase their open-mindedness and acceptance of all people. Remember Crash? Penn (as a director), Hirsch and Brolin were all royally snubbed (despite the fact that I wasn't an Into The Wild fan). Those snubs could push some nominations Milk's way.

Why It Will Not Win: It may be too static and artistic, being a film from Van Sant's arsenal. His films tend to have a very signature feel to them, and who knows how the Academy will respond. Also, his films have a divide of lovers and haters. This may be one of his more accessible films, yet Elephant, Last Days and some of his more recent flicks are a tad love-it-or-hate-it. Dustin Lance Black has also only written one feature film, The Journey of Jared Price (a film I've never heard of..). Will he be able to handle such subject capably? Hopefully.

Nominations:
Best Picture
Best Director
Best Original Screenplay
Best Lead Actor (Sean Penn)
Best Supporting Actor (Josh Brolin)

Bottom Line: This will be the Biopic representative for this year's Oscars. I think it has the tools to be a great film and I can't wait to see it. 5 nods.